Page:The Dial (Volume 76).djvu/264

206 Between the extremes I have mentioned lies, for once, the work of the Theatre Guild which is usually definitely one or the other. The text and the production of both seem to me to be unsuccessful, to be uncertain of direction and mood. I suspect that an English law forbidding the representation of the figure of Christ on the stage led Shaw to use Joan instead; and having Joan he gave her a political significance in the development of nationalism which would be more appropriate to the French Revolution and which hardly furthered the main, the religious and historical, interest of the play. It is easy to understand that the martyrdom of Joan is not in itself the essence of the matter; nor is it the historical criticism implied in the character which Shaw presents. The interest is in our modern relation both to the martyr and to the assassins, and that is why the Inquisitor and the bishops are presented with such eloquent justice and are endowed with such gentle wisdom. I find in this no excuse for the epilogue which is dull in the theatre. Nor do I find in the spoken words sufficient authority for Miss Lenihan's Joan. She did many things well, but even the high courage of her scene with the Bastard seemed to lack an inner fire. And it does not matter whether Joan was surrounded by angels or attended by demons, in the mediaeval sense, or was hysterical or inspired in our sense; the truth which Shaw made no effort to escape is that Joan was possessed, and therefore was able to gain possession of the souls of others. Miss Lenihan appreciated and presented beautifully the brightness of Joan and her common sense; but it is no trick to call a Dauphin "Charlie" unless you can make him a King. It was the radiating energy, the violence of a thousand hearts beating within her bosom, that Miss Lenihan failed to give to Joan; the rest was always interesting, always intelligent; it could not be moving.

The name of Mr Cohan's play is. After his superb acting—the diversion I mentioned above is that he is not acting himself, but a character with a definite leading emotion—the thing to note in it is the actual eloquence of most of the first act and the general skill—marred by the worst of Broadway—of the production. Looking over a list of other current pieces I find that the shadow Cohan has cast on them is thick and dark.