Page Two
t)e Wailv Car Jeel
Published daily daring the college
' year except Mondays and except
Thanksgiving, Christmas and
Spring Holidays.
The official newspaper of the Publi
cations Union of the University of
North Carolina, Chapel Hill, N. C.
Subscription price, $2.00 local and
$4.00 out of town, for the college
year.
Offices in the-basement of Alumni
Building.
Glenn Holder ... Editor
Will Yaeborough. Mgr. Editor
Marion Alf,xander1...Bws. Mgr.
ASSOCIATE EDITORS
John Mebane; Harry Galland
ASSISTANT EDITORS
J. Elwin Dungan J. D. McNairy
Joe Jones . B. C. Moore
J. C. Williams
CITY EDITORS
E. F. Yarborough K. C. Ramsay
Elbert Denning - -4 Sherman ; Shore
SPORTS EDITORS
Joi Eagles Crawford JVIcKethan
Henry L. Anderson
REPORTERS
Howard Lee
Holmes Davis
Louis Brooks
Charles Rose
Lawrence Harris
Mary Price .
J. P. Tyson -Browning
: Roach
Al Lansf ord
Joe Carpenter
Peggy Lintner
E. C. Daniel
W. A. Shulenberger
Frank Manheim
: Stowe Moody
Clyde Deitz
George Sheram
Robert Hodges
John Lathan
B. H. Whitton
Nathan Volkman
George Stone
Lawrence Miller
Jack Riley
T. E. Marshall
R. T. Martin
U. Jii. .trench
J. S. Weathers
Stanley Weinberg
Sunday, October 27, 1929
The Ideal
Week-end
President James Rowland
Ansrell of Yale "has lannrlnpd a
movement to compel college stu
dents to remain on their respect
ive campuses on week-ends. In
his opening address to the Yale
undergraduates, Dr. Angell de
clared that "the men who sys
tematically withdraw from New
Haven each week-end are not
yjuiy uciivmg meinseives oi me
opportunity to make valuable
friendships on the campus, but
they are subjecting themselves
to fatigue and excitement which
brings them bad jacTetTarid un
fit to do their college work on
Monday." He intimated that
University authorities might be
forced to curb such activities by
requiring one or two registra
tions every Sunday by Yale un
dergraduates. Every week-end a large per
centage of the Carolina students
betake themselves to Greensboro,
w.. iiUl KJJ UtlCO
where the female of the species
congregate in large numbers.
The campus is almost deserted
on Saturdays and Sundays when
no major athletic contests are
scheduled here.
Without doubt the scholastic
level of the University would be
improved if the undergraduates
could be persuaded or compelled
. to remain on the Hill over the
week-ends. Saturdays and Sun
days offer by far the best op
portunities of the week for study
and recreation. On the other
hand, the undergraduate mind,
released from the grind of class
attendance, is prone to shakp
itself free of scholastic incum-!
brances during the two days of
freedom, and to turn toward
more diverting forms of activity
than those concerned with books
and compositions. Social af
fairs and. recreational activities
are uppermdst in the thoughts
of Carolina men on week-ends,
quite naturally. Since oppor
tunities for such activities are
lamentably few in Chapel Hill,
it is expected that a large pro
portion of the students should
spend their week-ends in other
places which offer far greater
inducements to the recreation
-i seeker.
We doubt seriously that Presi
dent Angell's plan of compulsory
presence on the campus during
week-ends would be either prac
ticable or desirable "here. It
twould be a decided infringement
upon student prerogative, which
all undergraduates are inclined
to defend zealously. Perhaps
the better solution of the prob
lem here would be to offer more
Sunday band concerts, social af
fairs, such as houseparties and
dances, attractive programs at
local churches, even perform
ances by the Playmakers and in
tramural athletic events. And
if the narrow-minded Blue Ad
vocates could be prevented from
protesting too vociferously, Sun
day movies and entertainment
program performances would be
highly desirable. In our opinion
two days of leisurely social and
recreational activities on the
Hill, with just enough work on
the affairs of the curriculum to
prevent the mind from disrupt
ing its scholastic continuity,
comprises the ideal week-end.
The Taylor
Society
. Every student of economics
knows who Frederick W. Tay
lor was and what he did. His
methods of personnel manage
ment in industry are still recog
nized fifteen years after his
death by economists and busi
ness leaders as the most effi
cient ever devised. He was the
first man to look upon person
nel management as a science.
Taylor was interested in all
phases of industry in so far as
improving efficiency is con
cerned. It is said that he used
over twenty-five thousand tons
of steel in demonstrating to the
iron men the . increased effi
ciency to be gained by scientific
steel cutting. His very nature
was of the inquisitive sort. He
even eliminated nightmares by
which -he was troubled by fas
tening to his back a contraption
which made him sleep on his
sides. - (He was visited by night
mares only while he was sleep
ing on his back.) Taylor, thus
equipped by temperament, of
fered some plan for the improve
ment of everything with which
he came in contact.
It is after this man that the
Taylor Society, a national or
ganization for the promotion of
efficiency in production and of
scientific personnel ' manage
ment, is named. A local student
chapter of this society was or
ganized last year largely through
the efforts of Professor G. T.
Schwenning, of the commerce
school. Last year's activities,
according to leaders of the
group, justified the bringing
here of the chapter, and this
year's interest has been fairly
satisfactory.
However, the Taylor Society,
in bringing to the campus indus
trial leaders of national im
portance, merits the credit of
the University and deserves
large membership among the
students. It is the type of club
which is composed entirely of
members who are earnestly in
terested in the activities of
their organization.
1
Readers' Opinions
THE DRAMATIC CRITIC AN
SWERS HIS CRITICISERS
To the Editor:
May I, through your column,
express my thanks for the kind
attention of A NEW YORKER
in criticising" my column. His
letter was very interesting, and
shrieks for itself.
I should like to state, though,
that my paragraphs in the Caro
lina Magazine were not, quite
obviously, criticisms of some
current plays, as he thinks, nor
were they meant to be. (I
should hardly try to write a
criticism of a play in one short
paragraph.) They were simply
my personal impressions of what
I had seen.
Since A NEW YORKER's ex
amples of what dramatic criti
cism should be are hardly above
the level of press notices, I can
not accept them as models of
writing. And as for coinciding
THE DAILY
one's opinions with those of the
newspaper men whom A NEW
YORKER so admires, I prefer
to form my own, right or wrong.
Very sincerely yours,
MILTON GREENBLATT.
EDITOR MEBANE ANSWERS
Editor of The Daily Tar Heel:
With interest I read in the
last issue of the Tar Heel the
open forum letter addressed to
"the dramatic critic of The Car
olina - Magazine." Somewhat
hesitant at first as to whether
I should answer this letter, I
concluded that, as the writer,
"A New Yorker," was so ob
viously at5 a loss to understand
the purpose of this column on the
drama, I should, in fairness to
him, point out the fallacies in his
conclusions.
I asked Mr. Greenblatt, previ
yious to writing his column, if
he would contribute to the Maga
zine a few notes on the drama.
I further suggested that these
notes be limited to one or two
sentences each in order that the
appraisal of a number of plays
might be presented. This, Mr.
Greenblatt did. As to giving a
critical and finished review of
each of the plays mentioned, that
was out of the question; lack of
space prohibited expansive criti
cism Appraisals parallel to Mr.
Greenblatt's notes may be found
in "Judge" and "Life" in which
magazines the critics present the
name of a play or picture- and
state whether or not it is worth
attending. These statements as
to the worth of the plays are, of
course, their own opinions. Mr.
Greenblatt saw each play he
mentioned, formed his own con
clusions about them, and pres
ented his estimation to the
campus through his column. Now
whether or not "A New Yorker"
agrees with the critic as to the
worth of the plays makes little
difference ; their estimations are
solely a matter of individual
opinions. y
It might be also argued that
it is useless to present appraisals
of many plays, when, by taking
one or two, the critic could do
a much more thorough job. How
ever, as this particular treat
ment of the drama will not be
a regular feature of the Maga
zine, it was concluded that it
might be well "to set an ap
praisal on a number of those
which the critic saw during the
summer.
The writer of yesterday's let
ter attempted, I fear, to indulge
rather crudely in personalities.
He implied that Mr. Greenblatt
was in the habit of attending
third-rate vaudeville. As to his
remarks concerning various
phrases which the Magazine
critic used, I state again that
Mr. Greenblatt attempted no
polished and finished criticisms.
Now perhaps the main fallacy
in the open forum letter under
discussion is that the writer
censured Mr. Greenblatt for dar
ing to disagree with the New
York critics! To say that this
bit of fault-finding is remark
ably absurd would be "putting"
it quite too mildly. May I refer
you to the last sentence of para
graph two.
It rather amused me' that,
after "A New Yorker" confess
ed that he was "insensible to the
fine points, of dramatic criti
cism" and that it was far from
him "to point out the merits" of
Journey's End, he goes so far as
to forget these statements and to
present a rather lengthy criti
cism of two plays. But perhaps
he should not be censured for
his "absent-mindedness ;" that
would be an attempt to place
him on the same level with a
much-abused type of college pro
fessor. I hope that I have pointed out.
to a certain extent. "A
- ----- y
Yorker's" errors.
JOHN MEBANE
Editor Carolina Magazine.
TAR HEEL
PANNED AGAIN!
To the Editor: .
After reading A New York
er's letter in yesterday's Tar
Heel, I feel an irresistable urge
to take up the job of razzing
the Carolina Magazine's drama
tic critic, wiith the hope, that
the magazine will benefit by my
humble efforts.
To attempt to cover the field
of 'Drama and the Arts" in one
column, as Mr. Greenblatt does,
is somewhat bold. The superfi
cial way in which he disposed
of the New York theatre in
last week's issue shows how fu
tile the attempt' was. "Street
Scene," the current Pulitzer
play, for example, the critic an
nounced as "a well written
piece of journalism." I'm sure
Elmer Rice is very, very thank
ful for Mr. Greenblatt's con
descending approval !
"Let Us Be Gay" Mr. Green
blatt considers "fairly amus
ing" ; but it would have been
better, thinks he, 'if the author!
had not tried to make her char-'
acters speak like sophisticated
English ladies and gentlemen."
For the frowning critic's bene
fit, the author not only "tries"
but succeeds - in picturing "so
phisticated English ladies and
gentlemen." Actual, live, flesh
and blood Englishmen speak as
Rachel Crothers' characters do!
The critic should go and hear
some real Englishmen speak be
fore he criticizes Miss Crothers'
delineation of them.
The criticism of "Journey's
End" and "Bird in Hand" has
been sufficiently denounced. In
his comments on three other
plays "Candle-Light," "It's a
Wise Child," and "Porgy" the
Carolina Magazine's critic dis
plays ignorance, poor judgment,
and variations from the com
mon verdict equal to those
shown in his comments on the
previously-mentioned plays.
Now that I have worked off
my ire, however, I should like to
say that I don't think the fault
was really Mr. Greenblatt's, but
the Magazine's itself, that the
Drama column was so rotten.
What in the name of the gods
is the use in reviewing plays five
hundred miles off in New York !
Very few of the students will
ever get a chance to see them;
why waste paper in reviewing
them! But if they must be re
viewed, why not devote a little
more space to the reviews? You
can't comment on twelve plays
in three-quarters of a column
without making an ass out of
yourself. The Carolina Maga
zine has tried and has succeeded.
ANOTHER DAMYANKEE.
THE THEATRE
(By Peggy Lintner)
A thoroughly enjoyable pro
gram of one act plays was pre
sented for all introspectors, aim
less wanderers and genuine the
atre goers Thursday, Friday and
Saturday evenings by the Play
makers. The fact that the audi
ence was consistently appreci
ative throughout the run of the
plays is a tribute to the organ
ization, participants and man
agement for it is evident that
those seeing the Playmakers for
the first time viewed the per
formance with a severely criti
cal eye.
Paul Green's No 'Count Boy
was a potent playlet and an im
pressionable bit of theatre. It
was like "youth's song of yearn
ing" embodied in a Negro spir
itual, the refrain of which pro
duced a sympathetic note in
even the least imaginative per
son. Phoebe Harding, in the
role of Pheelie, was technically
good but her sincerity wavered.
On the whole, she seemed
coached up to rather than down
to her role. Holmes Bryson, The
No .'Count Boy, got the feeling
of the play and did an excellent
piece of work save for slightly
College Life
Thz, moon exerts
over the, TIDE:
Sunday,
Baptist
0. I. Olive, Pastor
9 :45 a. m. Sunday School.
11 :00 a. m. Morning Services :
Sermon, "The Might of Mo
tive," Mr. Olive.
7:00 p. m. Young Peoples
Union: Interdenominational
Meeting.
8:00 p. m. Evening Services:
Sermon, "A Life on My
Hands," Mr. Olive.
Chapel of the Cross
A. S. Lawrence, Rector
8 :00 a. m. Holy Communion.
10:00 a. m. Student Bible
Class : U. T. Holmes, Teacher.
11:00 a. m. Morning Service
and Sermon: Mr. Lawrence.
6:00 p. m. Meeting of St.
Hilda's Guild: The Rectory.
7:00 p. m. Y. P. S. L., Interde
nominational Meeting at the
Baptist church.
8:00 p. m. Evening Service:
Organ Solo, N. O. Kennedy,
Sermon, Mr. Lawrence, Tea
will be served at the Parish
House from 4 :30 to 6 :00 p. m.
The. United Church (Christian)
B. J. Howard, Minister
9:45 a. m. Sunday School:
insufficient restraint in the more
emotional moments. Too, one
noted that his voice and dialect
suffered by contrast with that
of Howard Bailey who took the
part of Pheelie's beau. Mr. Bai
ley understood his part well and
played in accordingly. .
Magnolia's Man, a comedy by
Gertrude Wilson Coffin, is based
on the life of a people found in
the Carolina highlands and while
it. is most appreciated by per
sons from those parts, it is
equally interesting to those un
familiar with the locality. The
play was interesting in its sim
plicity and sincerity, The humor
of the swift dialogue was more
like the sparkle of a mountain
spring than like that of white
wine however, duly appreciat
ed. Mrs. Coffin, in the role of
Mis' Tish, was vivid and except
for slight inconsistency in the
work of Muriel Wolff, who took
the part of Magnolia, the acting
was on an even plane.
The theme of Being Married.
Catherine Nolen's play of soci
ety life, is neither elegant nor
unusual. It is pleasantly simple.
merely' giving us a picture of
young people, earnest, vital.
wise and otherwise taking up
Sunday, October 27, 1929
1
.,fT!,t,.,!T,.l!f,l!!li!f!L I
wW if m
a Strond influence
and the? UNTIED
October 27
Grady Leonard, Supt., Paul
McConnell, Teacher of Men's
Bible Class.
11:00 a. m. Morning Services:
Sermon by Mr. Howard.
Methodist
C. E. Rozzelle, Pastor
9:45 a. m. Sunday School:
Young Men's Bible Class, Dr.
Bernard, Freshman Bible
Class, Mr. Phillips.
11:00 a. m. Morning Services:
Sermon, "Fact and Faith,"
Mr. Rozzelle. .
8:00 p. m. Evening Services:
Sermon, "Might, Power and
Spirit," Mr. Rozzelle.
The Epworth League will join
the other young people's so
cieties in a union meeting in
the Baptist church at 7:00
p. m.
Presbyterian
W. D. Moss, Pastor
9 :45 a. m. Sunday School.
11:00 a. m. Morning Services:
Sermon by Mr. Moss.
7:45 p. m. Evening Services:
Sermon by Mr. Moss.
8:45 p. m Young People's So
cial, Social Rooms at Presby
terian church.
marriage vows and trying gal
lantly to make a go of it. It is
estimated that they succeed, for
a noble wife makes the tradi
tional sacrifice and consents to
give up the life she craves for
the life an enterprising husband
-still new in the art of husband
ingcan offer her. And she is
sincere. She loves him. How
ever, one feels the pangs of curi
osity and could care for an in
sight into affairs a few years
hence.
Elzada Feaster, in the role of
the wife, did not quite orient
herself. Looking wistful was
her strong suit. She spoke too
quickly at times, lacked stage
presence, waxed melodramatic
and looked charming. Her work
snows promise.
Milton Wood, as Jim. the mod
el husband, was well motivated.
His restraint was marked too
marked at times The members
of the Ladies Club spoke their
lines well but were slow to fill
in the gaps and take up their
cues. Anne Melick and Howard
Bailey did the most convincing
work. They were not strained
anq seemed perfectly at home on ,
j the stage. V