D.L.F. PAGE: PAST AND PRESENT.

Otago Witness, Issue 2685, 30 August 1905, Page 73

D.L.F. PAGE: PAST AND PRESENT.

What, another taking the fever of criticism' "Why, ie must be very infectious. What will things come to next/ All critics, methinks. All! fai:oy xtc lei=s than six writers indulging in criticism in the Witness this wetak, and. all ranch of a sameness! Can't you critics be a httlo more original, instead of all writing about "points that caught the eye" ? Ju c> t because the D.L.F. happened to have a picnic, and one L.F., when writing a description of it to the page (either for the benefit of the L.F. who were not there, or for the sake of writing, or whatever his motive may have bean), wrote in this style of ''points that caught the eye": — "That D.L.F. So-and-so was counting how many sticks it takes to make a, fire, when he should have had the billy boiling" ; ''D.L.F. So-and-so would rather walk round a 'Tussock' and admire the scenery than be sociable and play games," etc., etc. Ah, what a pity that "points caught the eye" of a certain L.F., and he should have made it known; for it seemis as if a great many "points" have "caught the eye" of a great number of L.F. since that day— for Quago, The Chatters, Civis 11, The Cheerful Idiot, Southland Critic, and Snapper seem to have the complaint very bad. Where, oli, where is the D.L.F. Critic Club, with its honorary secretary, Taffy? Do come to light, Tpify, for there are not enough critics. Nevertheless, when we only had the D.L.F. Critic Club, with such a secretary as Taffy, the letters were more interesting. Now the page is going back in one way, for you seldom see any of the same style of letters as B. O. 8., Maisie, Dockleaf, Con, Ziska, Harry, Nut, and •ever so many more used to write. And the only reason I can see is too much criticism. Oh, no ; I don't for one moment think that there are not as good writ ens to-day as there were then. Only the writers of nowadays would rather write about "points that caught the eye," etc., than on ordinary D.L.F. matters. What a splendid description Boy gave of his trip through Central Otago when returning from Dunedin at the time of their Eoyal Highnesses the Duke and Duchess's visit. If "points that caught the eye" had been fashionable then I'm sure the description wouldn't have been half so interesting. Now, D.L.F., wake out of your stnpor of criticism and write as you used to do. Then let us see how the page wrll flourish. As I have before said, the page has gone back of late in one thing. It has gone very much ahead in other things, what with picnics, socials, debating clubs, etc. Before I finish this — well, I suppose it is

very much like criticism too, so I shan't say finish anything, but end with wishing the Dunedin and Invercargill Citib3 every success, and expiessing the hope that criticism will vanish; and as Cheerful Idiot thinks that I choose a suitable nnnip, I must £ ay that I agree with him too, for I am still

WEAEY.

[Woary's remarks are very much to tho point so far as the personal element m re<cent contribution'? is concerned, and I heartily agree with them. So far as the general tore of the page is dealt with, however, T think she is quite wrong. The many clove; essays that have appeared since the Litaraiv and Debating Clubs have been inaugurated alone elevate Ihe psge to a very high level: then, agnir, what could be better reading than the bright and pointed remaiks quoted by Quago from the addresses of speakers in different debates' Btib, quite independent of these, there are always one or two letters in each issue quite on a level with anything that was written in days gone by. I do rot wiish to be pointed in my remarks, or I mighc name a number of praFent-day writers who are rmiie on a par with any who have preceded them, gocd and all though many oldtimers wore. — DOT.]