ORIGINAL PLAYS

Southland Times, Issue 21849, 28 October 1932, Page 8

ORIGINAL PLAYS

SOUTHLAND DRAMA WORKSHOP THEATRE’S EFFORT A SUCCESSFUL VENTURE After some years of successful production of ■well-known plays, the amateur actors of Invercargill resolved to compose plays, produce them and stage them solely by their own efforts. Hence the Workshop Theatre of Invercargill. Last night was a red-letter day in the local theatrical calendar. Following on the vogue of one-act plays in the small theatres of England and of America, Invercargill adopted the One Act Play for its initial performances. The result was gratifying indeed, revealing the immense pains taken in the study of the impersonation and the staging of the plays. The intervals between the plays were rather long, but no doubt were inevitable when the smallness of the stage and the different settings of the plays are borne in mind. The staging of all the plays was particularly striking in effect, with an ample sufficiency of detail. And the acting was well conceived, with a clearly spoken delivery. “The Little Man” by Mr J. J. W. Pollard was the first production. Peter Grandissime, a rich financier of New York, helped a poor girl whose father he had known. He rescued her from an orphanage and made her life happy. He helped her for ten years and cheered her by his manly correspondence. Peter is a little man in stature but big in heart and in achievement. He mended his mother’s fortune and made his own. He had not seen Christine the orphan; but from regular correspondence he had begun to idealize her. His mother, a granddame of the old school, realized Peter’s absorption in Christine, saw what expectations Peter had in this correspondence, and being of a romantic turn of mind, thought Peter was in love at last, this modern Napoleon of efficiency. And when Christine unexpectedly came to New York to see her benefactor and guardian, Mrs Grandissime felt that her son’s happiness was about to be rounded off and completed by marriage. Christine had come because of a sudden urge, although her guardian had expressed definitely his wish that she should not come. “Disobedience is women’s greatest charm,” was the dictum of Peter’s mother. But disillusion, sudden disillusion, was Christine’s experience at meeting Peter. His mother felt for her boy, felt for the pain inflicted on him but conspired with Christine to lessen that pain for “the little man.” Mr Clark had conceived the part of Peter well, particularly in his relation to his mother. Miss Muir, so well-known to Invercargill audiences, was excellent in her interpretation, but props to let her voice drop at the end of sentences. Miss S. I. Aitken as Christine was an excitable, emotional girl,— a praiseworthy effort. Miss Webb as the maid had little to do but did it well. The second production was a comedy “Some Can’t Stick,” the work of Lionel W. Grindlay. This was a much lighter play and was produced by Miss Ivah Cran, to whom can be attributed the clearness of delivery. This comedy was the story of failure in a young aspirant to renown as a musical composer. He was engaged to a charming young lady of comfortable circumstances who we-s growing weary of waiting for i’.is success as a composer. She visited him in his poor room in the slums and insisted on his final choice of music or of her. There was created an embarrassing situation for him for just before her arrival a girl of the slums had taken shelter in his rooms. The arrival of her mother and a policeman made matter for comedy but not for success in musical composition. The young musician was in a dilemma, tom by desire for material comfort with his sweetheart and by desire for success as’a composer of sonatas. All the performers were good. Mr Alan Gilkison took the part of the struggling composer, Miss Julie Snow that of his fiancee. Miss Mary Strang that of the slum girl, Miss Ruby Sutton that of the irate and befuddled mother, and Mr- Alley that of the policeman. The whole was a pleasing performance. The third play, “The Gate Opens,” was from the pen of Miss Jessie N. Aitken and was produced on the stage by her. This struck a different note, being a tragedy. Here the staging was splendid, yet simple. The theme was the eternal conflict between idealism and materialism or between a romantic view of life and a sordid realistic view. The homy handed farmer who for thirty years had fought with a bush farm and brought it to a state of prosperity had a wife and an only son. Work, work, work had taken the spirit of joy from him and from his wife, had hardened his heart and made him despise his dreamy son. He had educated him only to find that he took little interest in the work of the farm. The father was angry at his son’s failure. He put it down to education and to the evil inspiration, “tommy rot,” of an educated boozer who from time to time came to the farm and was befriended. This down and out swagger, who knew his Plato and who saw the beauty of the world, as revealed in Nature, in bird and beast, in field and hedgerow, in mountain and stream, and in man and woman, was always talking this drivel (so the farmer called it) to the son, with the result that the son became dissatisfied with the farm and longed to follow the gleam as revealed by his besotted friend. At last he yielded to the deathbed entreaty of his friend and forsook all, sweetheart and mother and father and home to be a missionary of enlightenment to others of- the beauty of the world. This was the longest of the four plays, the most ambitious, the largest in cast of characters, and probably the most successful in the minds of the audience. Mrs Norman Macalister sustained consistently her part of a drudge of a wife, whose feelings were ignored and crushed by an unsympathetic husband. Hers was an excellent rendering of a mother who understood her boy better than did the father. Mr T. R. Pryde made a fine burly farmer, a son of the soil, who could talk nothing but of the land, its products and its call to all who were on it. Mr Alan Dunlop was the farmer’s son, a mystic dreamer bound to be a failure as a farmer. But need a farmer be so soil-stained as to be unappreciative of the beautiful world around him? One has only to think of the beautiful homesteads around Southland to realize that hard toil and appreciation of beauty may go hand in hand. Of course one knows of soilstained souls such as are depicted by Miss Aitken in this farmer. Was it necessary for the son to leave the farm? Could he not have done his duty by his parents and yet have retained that inner light, the solace of quiet minds? The fourth play was a light sketch, a tail-piece of comedy. One was reminded of Wodehouse’s “Jeeves.” Here was the perfect butler, with the imperfect master. A sparkling performance of two characters, with bright dialogue and suggestiveness. The play writers are to be congratulated on meritorious performances; the staging members of the club did their work well; and the performers were an agreeable surprise in the high quality of their art. There will be a repetition on Friday

and on Saturday evenings at the Orphans’ Club Rooms, Eamslaw street. The club is worthy of the. support of the citizens of Invercargill in being courageous enough to undertake such work and in being successful enough in their production. —T. D. PEARCE.