Variety (October 1922)

»i»r..«»^|«Bjr.j ■'-iJ^'.., 'VW.r.- Friday, October 6, 1922 LEGIT ! MX t E ''^^P^;'^^W*irt'--'^''-''^'^l^ u MANAGERIAL VIEWS DIVDE ^':■■•., OVER RING OF CRITICS" PEDDLING CUT RATE V . TICKETS ON STREET :'>^ ^^ound Table^' Coterie Discussed—Some Managers Believing ''Ring*' Exists Wpn't Be Quoted—Bad Notices Cost "Tavern," a Hit, $55,000 in Extra "! * Advertising—Some Managerial Comment ManageHal comment on the re- ports that there exists a coterie of * dramatic critltiis in New York shows wide diversitf of opinion. Those who believe there may be Huch a •'ring" refuse ro be quoted while fome of those who expressed them- pelves said there was no basis for #uch a charge. Excluding those managers whose views are not available cr who refuse to be ' quoted the weight of opinion veers to the belief that the critics are sincere in their reviews. There is some outstanding diverse comment, however. That certain critics haVe been meeting at the luncheon table for quite a while and that the gather- ing has been referred to as "the Knights of the Round Table" and 'Also in some quarters the "vicious circle," appears the main premise of the reports the critics interchange Ideas on current plays. That that would and does tend to reflect in the comment of the reviewers either in the regular criticism of a play or the follow-up comment has been assumed by some showmen. There is no concrete knowledge of Just what the "round table" ses- sions amount to. It is claimed that present with the critics are other newspapermen and authors and that If there were any movement on the t>art of the so-called group to ham- mer the productions of managers Whose theatre-politics are not in accord with that of the critics, the Injury would react on those for Whom a service was intended. That e:oes too for the intimated "politi- cal" connections. That adverse criticism can hurt the business of a play temporarily is attestefl by several managers but the latter are positive such box of- fice Influence is temporary and that a good play must get over'regard- less of the critics. Attractions pan- ned but which proved to be suc- cesses after the first weeks have called for considerable expenditure In publciity principally in extra ad- vertising. In such cases where the producers have felt adverse notice •wnH a matter of opinion on the part of the critic, the injury of is Broadway, That $50,000 excess ex- penditure took that much away from the show's rightful profit. "The follow-up comment when it is of the hammering sort Is not my Idea of fairness. When a manager aids in paying a critic's salary by the regular advertising carried, I cannot understand why they should injure a property unnecessarily. It forced extra advertising expendi- ture and in both the cases cited the critics were wrong " Arthur Hopkins said: "There is nothing to the claim that a 'ring' of critics exists. It is slender evidence that critics sit around a luncheon table together. I can see no una- nimity of opinion and often a de- cided difTeronce in views." Henry Miller said: "I believe there is a clique of writers who act in concert. Such a thing is palpably unfair. I have no very great feeling against the men who have been long and candidly known to theatregoers. They are the kind of men who at- tiend mothers* meetings. There Is no Impending danger to the theatre. Critics have attacked me for 40 years or so. and I have been able to survive quite naturally." Arch Selwyn .said: "To my mind the criticism of plays simply means NEWARK CENSOR BOARD DI5UKES TWO THUMBS Pass Over Much Matter in "Spice;" but Order Some Funny "Cuts" later comment in re-reviewing neither effective nor necessary. A view that many criticisms In the metropolitan press are not con- structive but are to be considered destructive is an opinion in some quarters. Also the matter of per sonalltles in the system of crlti fclsm is a matter of speculation. One producer predict changes In the draxdsLtic depart- ments of a numbed of New York newspapers were a forerunner of a gradual change which will wind up with a vogue of unsigned reviews. Whether the New YorH Times in- tends dropping signatures is not ^et known nor just when that publica- tion will begin publication oflprlti- dsms in the Sunday edition or|y. T George M. Cohan said: "Critics cannot hurt a success. That has been proven time after time. It Is certainly true of 'So This la Lon- don!' I started to spend money in 6xtra advertising to prove the critics were wrong and did not have to go as far as I expected. The show has the bige-st call of the comedies in the agencies. There are one or two critics whose views are certainly tinged with favoriti.sm. One in par- ticular ha.s pounded me without pause. Probably it is political. There is no other reason in sight. "Hut I do think the pounding of a show .'\ft('r it op«>ns—fhe romment on following dhys and in the Sun- day column.s—is all wrong. That's the thing that hurt.'^. Of coufse. bad notices cavse heartaches, but it is the follow-iip.s that do the harm, They certainly ])OMnded 'The Tav- ern' last ye.ir, too. The play got BO many i\o!lv?e:i and fjllow-ui) r.ip« " 11 re.sull<Ml in iny .s|»Mullnj» ir)i,ooo in extra advertisnig. That was about $!"jO.O()0 more than .should have been *?j>c'rit. litit I provL'd the show Was :ill right. It was \. huiu-ch.s. playing tf» a.s high as $21,000 in a week ,'!nd r...)l;iri|i? an average of $11,000 for the .'10 \ve<'*:« it wai on A fair Idea of Newark (N. J.) po- lice censoring is comprehended in the cuts ordered in "Spice of 1922" at the Broad. The book of the revue is mainly a ridicule of theatrical censoring, but this did not seem to incense the Jersey officials, who let all the anti-censor stuff stay^ In, also painted women nearly nude, three bedroom farces and much fly talk. However,-they did order Nan Hal- perln to discontinue putting her thumbs to her nose in the chorus of a kid song, though where she does it in the verso with one thumb it was unmolested; also a kissing scene that got a laugh was slashed; also a reference by Valeska Suratt, who, when asked in 'Help" whether —---p-. I whft ever had any experience, an- i^^^^jj^swers, "Oh, my God!^ In a Paris street scene, where a drunke* sailor embraces a woman of the streets, it was commended that he dress as a civilian, as the scene was "de- grading to the navy"—and it was a French sailor,"ut that. The rest of the show survived. that when a play received good no- tices, the business is good for a few days, whether the public likes it or not. If the notices are bad the busi- ness is poor for a few days—but if the public likes it the business is big within a week. I think most of the gentlemen of the press are sin- cere." , , Sam H. Harris said: 'T am agalnist flippant reviews. Productions should be given dignified critlcl.sms. I don't know there is any concert in critical circles. If I did I'd say so quite plainly.'* John Golden said: "The critics as I know them are 'square shooters,' sincere and honest in an effort to earn their none too weighty salaries. There is an Inclination to write smart stuff Instead of straight com- ment, but I have often noticed a dif- ference of opinion between the lead- ing critics. Talk of a coterie of critics Is hot air." Richard Walton Tully said: "There la no ring of critics. We are suffering from influences of foreign origin, ideas born of the war and those forms of so-called democracy originating in Europe and even Asia. The critics are honest enough. Their efforts are pointed towards better- ment, to my mind. If some of the critics didn't pan my shows, I would not think it was a good American play. Such a panning co.«'ts an at- traction about 120.000 in New York City." F. Ziegfeld, Jr.. said: "There is nothing the matter with the critics. It's the shows." NOT ALL "LIFTERS" Julian Wylis Corrects Statement Attributed to Him ; • . New York, Sept 2J, Editor Variety: I am afraid you have got me In all wrong in this week's Variety, headed "Broadway Producers Not Skilful in Lifting." This puts a wrong construction on what I said. After telling you how wonderful r considered certain shows on Broadway, you asked what I thought of a certain show and whether is was true that much of the material In that show was copied from shows in Europe. Of course, I had to agree with this, as there Is no doubt that the bulk ot the scenes In that particular show are taken from last season's revyes In Paris or London. In your article you have only used this part of our conversation, and hjve made it ap- pear that I am accusing New York producers, as a body, of stealing material from the Old World. I am very anxious for you to kindly put this right in your next Issue, as It was far from my inten- tion to "knock" Broadway produc- tioos or Broadway producers in gen- eral. I have seen a number of high class and original entertainments on Broadway in the past week which any English or French producer might be proud to have staged. Julian Wylie. ABE NOW TICKET BROKERS ■- * • Chicago, Oct. 4. A new theatre ticket ofllce, known as the Illtz agency, ha^ been started on Randolph street, and is being operated by two youths, who for- merly sold candy and checked h^ts and coats at the Apollo. JOHN 1»AUL JONES CONVICTED John Paul Jones, lately of the "Abraham Lincoln" cast, was found guilty Oct. 2 in the Court of Special .Sessions of possessing drug.s. He was remanded for sentence Monday. Jones was arrested by Narcotic Division deteotive.s List wcpk in an apartment on West 72d street near West End avenue a.«< a result of their seiirch for a -Boston girl who had run away from home. She was said to be with Jone.<*. The actor jumi)ed from his chilr in protest in Special Se.'-sion.s when Detective O'Brien declared he also had been selling drugs. "DUMB LUCK" TROUBLES Louis Ro.'jMi, the tjieatrlcal cos- tumer who harked fh»» Mrw.s .,\u(l I'Yyc colored show. "Dumb Luck," IS having no end of le«jl trouhlo.s a^ J result, of his "angeling" vcMitnro. Aft'T Imving the Khow .»t,tachf ,1 -n tour for mon<>ys du<\ Willi nn lOlkins his retalTKd Nugent & Uu- gerit to bring .suit for $417 Sfi. The claim l,^ for services ronrlAr^-d as ('horiJs director of Ihe .-how from Auk?. 29 to ,S»'pt- 2'» i iMf iJi Stamlord, Conn , .ind WorfcaU'i', Ma.is BILlTSILL ON CRITICS Flushing, L. .1. (My 53d Birthday). 1922. Editor Variety: I have just finished reading your Justly celebrated publication from start to flnish,^ and I find myself more impressed than by aught else in an article headed "Times Editor Said to Be for Re- fom»." In other words, the' editor of the Timea, listening to the radio messages that come from nowhere, and are broadcasted no- where, thinks that there is a conspiracy on the part of the dramatic critics to "pan" the plays produced in New York. I doubt very much if the editor of the Times has ever given this a thought, and I am quite sure that if he had he would have cast it aside for something more worth while. ^ It is intinaated in this story that nine or more dramatic critics get together In solemn conclave and decide whether or not to roast or praise a certain impending production. Therefore the editor of the Times contemplates sending a man from the editorial desk to report the opening performance, which will be carefully reviewed the subsequent Sunday "by an expert." Will you permit me to Introduce myself as perhaps the oldest living ex-dramatic critic of New York dally Journalism? I lefSt the New York Evening World, where I had succeeded Alan Dale and Jessie Wood, in 1890, and became an advance agent of a theatrical star. I had had more than two years as dramatic critic, with my name signed to each review I wrote. That is one reason why I left dramatic criticism. A certain manager had made his wife a star. The play seemed to me good, the star's work excellent, ard I said so, gladly and happily, under my own signature. It so happened that a few days later I was taken to the Post Graduate Hospital In New York, and therein was operated on. An enormous bunch of flowers was sent to me, together with a basket of fruit, and a letter signed by the star and her husband, saying: "With love and best wishes to the best dramatic critic in the world." Under such happy auspices I recovered and ultimately resumed my duties as dramatic critic of the New York Evening World. Several months later this same star, still under the management of her husband, made a new pro- duction. I thought it very unworthy of her talents, and said Ao, over my signature. The next day a letter was shown to me by my managing editor, signed by the star and her husband, stating that I was corrupt and did not know a good show when I saw one,- and that unless the lOvenlng World dismis.sed me and got a new critic there would be no further advertising from the i)articular management. The late Foster Coates was editor of the ravening World at that time, and he r.ither thought that I was honest—as he had to do a few weeks later when I said over my signature that I thought that Olga Nothersole. in "S.ipF)ho" at Wallack's theatre,/ was not an offense apainst derenoy. while Lduls De Foe, dramatic critic of the Morning World, thought it was terrible; hence the trial of Miss Nethersole, while I, sife from extradition as x witness for the de- fense by living al Tuylors Hotel. Jersey City, watched the progress of that trial with Rrcat Mallsfaction, and api»!auded the acquittal of Miss Nethersole with much aplomb. .Surely. Mr. De Foe and I never forcRrathered to discuss the merUs or demerits of "Sappho." And I don't believe for a second, after the lap.se of twenty years, that the rritir.s of the New York papers ever got together to predestine (lie fate of a F'lay. Where are they going to predestine, anyhow? All thp old plaoes of predestination are gone, according to prohibi- tion oi\\ci:i\A. Can you imaKiiie Perry Hammond and Hey wood r.roun sitting down >.t lUoIer'n and p.^edestinatlng the fate of the [.I xyA Of our fti6fll a.^TTitP "managers over a ba n an a si>lil' Atid taking .'^om'* on'> off the oditorl.al de.'^k to review .a |»lay? Why th.it guy has ((»lfl ]ha wife ever since h<» married her what he would do If he ever pot Alan Dale.s rhanee I'orget it, Mr. CKhs, ir you ever even thnnyht of It—which I doubt. Chicago Speculators Had Sur-» ) plus Last Week—Two Shows Excepted « I ^ ... Chicago, Oct. 4. Last wock saw the seal tiers send- ing boys out in front of almost every theatre in the loop, to peddle the tickets with which they were stuck. The pasteboards could be bought for a song. Al Jolson's show and Ed Wynn's were the only two where the ticket brokers were able to stay away through the heavy demand for these shows. This new way of cut rating got some of the boys from the scalpers Into trouble, and one manager had a chap arrested. The fellow got some satisfaction by saying, "the show was not worth the'50 cents he was asking for the |3 scats." What Is said to have been the most dl.«iastrous day In the history of tick^ scalping In this city came on what Is considered the best night of the week—Sunday. It Is said that the ticket brokers took a loss of anywhere from $100 to 11.000 apiece. This was due to the fine weather and high prices. LOUIS DE FOP S ESTATE ''World's'* Dramatic Critic Left an Estate of $19,000 Louis V. De Foe, for 23 years dramatic critic of the New York "World," left an estate of $22,150.J5 when .he died Mi^rch II, accordinc to a transfer tax State appraisal, filed last week In the Surrogate's Court, New York, showing that it consisted of the following:— ■ v^ Cash on deposit with the Corn Exchange Bank, $1,044.50; wearing apparel and Jewelry. 1836.60; se- curities, $20,160.20, and an agree- ment for royalty in book, "Theatre Through Its Stage Door," $100. This book, according to an aflldavlt attached to the appraisal, was pub- lished by Harper & liros. in 1919 for David Belasco, and the royalty derived for the past year was $30. Charged up against this sum, $22,150.35, are expenses of $2,902.06 ^funeral. $867.40; administration, $755; creditors, $868.66, and execu- -^rlx's commissions, $411—which makes the_net figure $19,248.29. This, under fhe directions of his will, executed July 12, 1920, pa-s^s"* over to Ethellyn B. De Foe, widow, of 250 West 88th street, Manhattan,;., she. without bonds, being also the executrix. Some relatives received small bequests. Mr. D Foe, who was laid to rest at Adrian, Mich., died a victim of pneumonia at tUe Hahnemann Hos- pital, New York. He was born at Adrian July 18, 1869. the son of James Vincent and Rebecca Phoebe Young De Foe, and.after receiving his decree from the fFnlverslty of Michigan in 1891 immediately en- tered the newspaper profession. H»; was Sunday editor of the Chicago "Tribune." leaving that paper in 1899 to Join the sUfC of "The«Morn. Ing World" as dramatic critic. H«r contributed regularly to other pub- lications. Nov. 1, 1905. he was mar- ried to Isabella Ethellyn Brewer, of New York. WAITER HABION ARRESTED Syracuse. N. Y.. Oct. 4. Charged with a violation of Sec- tion 50 of the penal law—abandon-- ing a wife about to become a mother—Walter Bergeron, known professionally as Walter Marion, was arrested In Cleveland on a war- rant sworn out by Mrs. Dorothy Stlber Bergeron of Corning, N. Y. The actor will be extradited, it is ex- pected. The young woman met her hus- band several years ago while play- ing with Byrne and Byrne, musical comedy company, owned by Corning parties. Miss Stlber was engaged as a chorus girl for the troupe In which Bergeron or Marion was a principal. They were married after a short courtship. "BUNCH AND JUDY" AT GLOBE^. Tho Charles Dillingham produc- tion of "fitinch and Judy" la t\oyf \\»\*'\\ (<* o]*Mx -iiX Uic Globe, Nei Vork, Nov. 22. f:<-orKe Wlwt.'rt "Scandals" will clo.s" :it the hou.-^e in time to open lii Ko.ston Nov. 11, probably at the ('(•Initial., leiving the (ilohe dark un- til the new production goes In.