The Star. SATURDAY, JANUARY 17. 1903. THE FASHION IN DRAMA.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 7607, 17 January 1903, Page 4

The Star. SATURDAY, JANUARY 17. 1903. THE FASHION IN DRAMA.

Tli© dramatic fashion is changing, or, like ' the vogue for tall girls, reverting to the convention of a former period. The extraordinary success which has attended the production of " Sherlock Holmes " at the Theatre ltoyal this week ds a case in point. a It is «. reversion to a type of play which achieved popularity a few years «go, plays, to quote a single haphazard illustration, bf the calibre of " Jim, the Penman." Contemporary criticism ascribes to "Sherlock Holmes," the play, certain-ultra-tnetaphysical qualities which, while "they might well have appealed to Sherlock Holmes, the man, ate less understandable to the multitude. The dramatic critic of the day, perched in splendid magnificence upon bis isolated pedestal, hare, of course, opportunities end experiences which are forbidden to the lay playgoer, and while according all due respect to the " convincing " criticisms of the play ethically, we are diffidently pre.pared to suggest that it owes its success less to any stiaw-split mysteries' of ariisffcc suggestion, tha:i to a oartsiin bo':d quality ■of picturaiqueness. The avorago human being has a strain of undeveloped crueity which bids him whoop whenever anybody goes under, and whan it is vice which goes ;under to virtue the whoop acquires additional vigour from the 'obvious; moral support which backs it. Moreover, Sherlock Holmes, in Sir Arthur Oonan Doyle's hands, had become so much of a. personality that his translation to the mimic real life of th's ; Stage was«simply the passage of a friend from distance to contiguity. But, apart f irom this, the play, save in its conventional „ denouement, is constructively an altogether exceptional one. Drama of the best typo is that in which. situations sire evolved from the conflicting characters instead of being imposed upon In the case under consideration the characters act consistently with themselves, even to the point of the suggestive paradox which would characterise their inconsistencies as being of the most consistent kind. The play is, of course, primarily a psean' composed to the glory of Sherftjck :Holmes, and as such it necessarily possesses as little sense for literature as possible. As a one-man piece it calls for one performer, and Mr Cuyler Hastings is pro- • bably quite as fortunate in his part as in hia 1 He is helped by the traditions of tho character, and in the fortunate position of not having to subordinate himself ! to, the ensemble for the sake of artistic effect. A member of the school of quiet and subtle effects, he has grafted these >ou |to the rough-and-ready realism of the •»haracterlsation in a manner which has .'remedied to a great extent the innate viojlence of the piece. It is only when the \ ; playwrights have sought to conform to the, somewhat negligible conventions of the day, •by padding the piece *with a cheap sen•timentalism, that it offends the sense of, / -artistic truth. Sherlock Holmes making love is like Mr T. E. Taylor cooing in the tents of the publicans. Otherwise the play Is a piece of bright, strong, . fresh, astringent work, which comes as a welcome) .variant to the problem piny and the thrill fripperies of the ever-decadent tinkle of tin-whistles, ineptly known as musical ■comedy. _^^^