Picture Play Magazine (Mar-Jul 1929)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

Unfettered, Soaring John Gilbert follows his own inclinations, obeys his own conscience, and thus achieves a freedom granted to no star who places his career before himself. By Margaret Reid IT has long been a subject of controversy as to the extent an actor belongs to his public, and the exact location of the line between their rights in him, and his rights to privacy. One faction maintains that an actor is wholly public property, and his private life subject to public observation. It is among this group that we find the 83 Mr. Gilbert says he cannot take his success seriously enough to let it dominate his personal life. zealous club women and diligent clergy, who would bar genius from expression unless it be exemplary in the fine art of prudery The opposing faction advocates a public whose interest in its idols be confined solely to their work and profession. For both factions the vast field of the motion-picture profession provides a delectable battle-ground. There could be found no better example of the subject under discussion than John Gilbert. Sitting, as he does, at the top of the heap, he is target for a steady fusillade of protests and praises, of acrimony and applause. The heated protest does not cause him to topple over with chagrin, nor, from the heated praise does he so much as lurch with inflated ego. Being brighter than most of his contemporaries, a man of keen intelligence and sound judgment, he is able to sift the violence from each and, accepting both at their real value, maintain his balance. To illustrate this is an article which appeared a few months ago in a widely read magazine. It was intended as a startling revelation of Gilbert, written by a nouveau riche among the intellectuals. He launched a spiteful tirade against the star, an attack leveled not at Jack's work, or the things pertaining thereto, but at his private life and personal traits. It could not, by any stretch of the imagination, have been construed as a frank analysis of an artist. It was just an open criticism of one man's character and conduct, by another who appointed himself mentor for the purpose. Among Jack's friends this article caused wrath, and almost plans for a lynching party. From all over the country he received messages of indignation that he should have been the victim of such petty malice. It so happens that the story proved a boomerang, reacting on the writer, rather than harming the object of his spleen. But more deft articles of this sort do an actor harm. Even the stanchest of his admirers are not proof against unwilling submission to the printed word, however hollow may be its charges. Obviously it is unfair to the public as well as the idol. But it is the latter who is the primary victim, and the eminence of his position renders him defenseless and incapable of retaliation. Jack Gilbert might well be a little bitter about the easy denunciation practiced by both scribes and fans. He has had his full share of the spotlight turned on his privacy, his full share of vitriol based on irate prejudice. But he has a rather penetrating knowledge of human psychology, and accepts people as they are, without demur. "An actor," he says, "must always be open to petty attack. It depends on the individual how it may affect him. "Some players place such great importance on their careers and position, that they are willing to sacrifice their own inclinations in order to please the public in private, as well as in professional life. Many think that if they marry public interest may lessen, so they remain single. Others make a point of staying in character, even off the screen, being at all times a comedian, tragedian, Lothario, or Galahad, as the case may be. These people make such an effort that they deserve to retain public esteem. Placing your career before yourself at all times is not an easy thing to do. It happens that, to me, it doesn't seem worth it. "Of course, the ideal state would be that in which the public's interest would confine itself to the work of the actor, and not bother about what he eats for breakfast. But that is not possible since the one is mingled with the other. I am keenly interested in the lives and characters of Poe, of Debussy, of Gauguin. But — and here is my Continued on page 112