E
EXTRACT FROM
THE SKETCH,
346, Strand, W. C.2.
* 29 JLIV 1936
feteh
226
—CHINITZLER’S brilliant discussion, which
I turns on the contlict between Austrian
clericalism and Jewish nationalism, in
his intensely interesting and provocative play,
PROFESSOR BERNHARDI.“ now insugu- CRITICISMS IN CAMEO.
rates Mr. Ronald Adam's scason at the
Phenix, It is an admirable choice, for here is
something both fer heart and mind, a play
IHE STAGE.
with logie and character, with argument and
passion. From à solitary incident of no great
importance in itself, where Dr. Bernhardi, the
dlirector of a Viennese hospital, acting strictiy
within his professional rights and solely from
a sense of duty, forbids the priest from
doing what he equally conceives to be his
inalienable right and duty, we get a succession
of intellectual and personal antagonisms.
The arguments spring naturally and the
case is never prejudiced, so that in this
plane alone we have the vitality which
belongs to sincerity and to the opposition of
contrary philosophies. The prohlem is essen¬
tially one of moral values, and it is a reward
in itself that such a theme can be so finely
discussed in the theatre. It is refreshing,
100, on bur contemporarv stage, that serious
issues can be serlouslv, not solemnly, debated.
But to consider the play only as a scries of
arguments, however fertile and faseinating
in their progress, would be to do less than
justice to Schnitzler’s play. For it is
essentially human and therefore dramatic.
The action does not move only in the
sphere of mental activity, for it embraces
e lives and carcers of men, Bernhardi,
who stands at the centre, convinces both
by his integrity of soul and by the human
limitations which defeat it; and Mr.
Abraham Sofaer’s polisbed and subtle study
of this Jewish doctor, outwardly so calm
vet inwardly so passionate, as rigid in his
absolutism as the priest himself, is a masterly
portrait. AH the characters are clearly de¬
fined, and the delineations have both wit
and irony. An exception¬
ally fine performance is
contributed by Mr. Ronald
Adam himself — who, inci¬
dentallv, with Mr. Louis
Borell, is responsible for the
English adaptation-as the
unscrupulous politician,
Flint; and as the priest
Mr. Bernard Merefield con¬
veys thesuavity, thedignity,
and integrity of motive
which give the conflict its
dynamic energy. Bigotry
and stupidity, self-secking
ambition and time-serving
opportunism all find their
place and work their mis¬
chief, as well as illuminate
the blind stubbornness
wlich infects the chief pro¬
tagonists, for does not
Bernhardi ruin both him¬
self and his dearest interest
Sthe hospital—through bis
inability to compromise?
The force of this is under¬
lined in the last Act, domin¬
ated by Mr. Alan Wheatley's
cvnical and amusing sketch
of Count Winkler, with a
satirical commentary on the obstinacies of rectitude. Here is a play, in
Emersonian phrase,to make veur tops spin,“ and it is so human
that it grips the andlienee from the beginning and never loses its hold.,
EXTRACT FROM
THE SKETCH,
346, Strand, W. C.2.
* 29 JLIV 1936
feteh
226
—CHINITZLER’S brilliant discussion, which
I turns on the contlict between Austrian
clericalism and Jewish nationalism, in
his intensely interesting and provocative play,
PROFESSOR BERNHARDI.“ now insugu- CRITICISMS IN CAMEO.
rates Mr. Ronald Adam's scason at the
Phenix, It is an admirable choice, for here is
something both fer heart and mind, a play
IHE STAGE.
with logie and character, with argument and
passion. From à solitary incident of no great
importance in itself, where Dr. Bernhardi, the
dlirector of a Viennese hospital, acting strictiy
within his professional rights and solely from
a sense of duty, forbids the priest from
doing what he equally conceives to be his
inalienable right and duty, we get a succession
of intellectual and personal antagonisms.
The arguments spring naturally and the
case is never prejudiced, so that in this
plane alone we have the vitality which
belongs to sincerity and to the opposition of
contrary philosophies. The prohlem is essen¬
tially one of moral values, and it is a reward
in itself that such a theme can be so finely
discussed in the theatre. It is refreshing,
100, on bur contemporarv stage, that serious
issues can be serlouslv, not solemnly, debated.
But to consider the play only as a scries of
arguments, however fertile and faseinating
in their progress, would be to do less than
justice to Schnitzler’s play. For it is
essentially human and therefore dramatic.
The action does not move only in the
sphere of mental activity, for it embraces
e lives and carcers of men, Bernhardi,
who stands at the centre, convinces both
by his integrity of soul and by the human
limitations which defeat it; and Mr.
Abraham Sofaer’s polisbed and subtle study
of this Jewish doctor, outwardly so calm
vet inwardly so passionate, as rigid in his
absolutism as the priest himself, is a masterly
portrait. AH the characters are clearly de¬
fined, and the delineations have both wit
and irony. An exception¬
ally fine performance is
contributed by Mr. Ronald
Adam himself — who, inci¬
dentallv, with Mr. Louis
Borell, is responsible for the
English adaptation-as the
unscrupulous politician,
Flint; and as the priest
Mr. Bernard Merefield con¬
veys thesuavity, thedignity,
and integrity of motive
which give the conflict its
dynamic energy. Bigotry
and stupidity, self-secking
ambition and time-serving
opportunism all find their
place and work their mis¬
chief, as well as illuminate
the blind stubbornness
wlich infects the chief pro¬
tagonists, for does not
Bernhardi ruin both him¬
self and his dearest interest
Sthe hospital—through bis
inability to compromise?
The force of this is under¬
lined in the last Act, domin¬
ated by Mr. Alan Wheatley's
cvnical and amusing sketch
of Count Winkler, with a
satirical commentary on the obstinacies of rectitude. Here is a play, in
Emersonian phrase,to make veur tops spin,“ and it is so human
that it grips the andlienee from the beginning and never loses its hold.,