THE GROUP THEATRE [To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR.] Sin,—I
feel no doubt that inudi of Mr. Derek Versehoyle's criticism of the Group Theatre's production of W. H. Auden's Dance of Death, which appeared in the last issue of The Spectator, was fully justified, but as a whole the article revealed an approach to " theatre " certainly as narrow as Mr. Versehoyle obviously considers Mr. Auden's to be.
I feel that Mr. Verschoyle disparages Mr. Auden's theatric denomination merely because it is not his own—rather as a Hope Baptist might disparage a Wesleyan, although both profess Christ ianity—on no account consider any other doxy but your own orthodoxy. I consider this sectarian attitude destructive and negative—criticism should be constructive.
Granted the sociological ideas of the Dance of Death are inconsistent and often puerile, granted also that Mr. Rupert Doone's dancing was " peculiarly tedious," and that much . of the verse lacks " economy and precision "—accepting all this and 'more, I still feel the Group Theatre should be encouraged and not damned by critics simply because they are accustomed to seeing decayed and outworn theatric formulae hashed and rehashed till they cannot see anything else in perspective. This kind of critical myopia distorts the Vision and renders everything but the immediate surface of things invisible.
Mr. Verschoyle, because he disliked the Dance of Death, writes : " . . . if present intentions are maintained, the
GrOup Theatre will be an institution worth going a pretty long way to miss." It is clear by this that Mr. Verschoyle's particular form of myopia prevents him froth observing that the Group's future intentions are to be something more catholic thah he imagines—even including a few safe " old master- pieces "'by Shakespeare, Sheridan and Ibsen.
To dismiss the Group Theatre because one dislikes the first play it presents is surely no less foolish than to condemn bookshop for displaying a book one abhors. As for Mr. Auden, he has other things up his sleeve besides his rather adolescent Dance of Death. His most recent work, The Dog • Beneath the Skin is a very different proposition. Why don't critics sometimes look for potentialities ?—Yours truly, 85 Norfolk Square, Hyde Park, W. 2.
PETER GOFFIN.
[Mr. Verschoyle writes : Mr. Coffin misrepresents my opinions. I did not condemn The Dance of Death primarily because it belongs to a type of drama which I dislike, but because it seemed to me a peculiarly feeble and irritating specimen of its kind. I admit without shame that I do dislike the kind, but that is not because, as Mr. Goffin suggests, I am blind to experiment, but because I am bored by seeing 0 many dead and discredited theatrical modes resurrected and propped up with specious manifestoes. As for the future : the Group Theatre must of course be congratulated on dis- covering the works of Shakespeare, Sheridan and Ibsen. But its choice for performance of The Dog Beneath the Skin confirms me in my opinion that it is likely to prove " an institution worth going a pretty long way to miss."]
Previous page
