"Spectator". Competitions

RULES AND CONDITIONS

Entries must be typed or very clearly written on one side of the paper only. The name and address, or pseudonym, of the competitor must be on each entry and not on a separate sheet. When a word limit is set words must be counted and the number given. No entries ran be returned. Prizes may be divided at the discretion of the judge, or withheld if no entry reaches the required standard. The judge reserves the right to print or quote from any entry. The judge's decision is final, and no correspondence can be entered into on the subject of the award. Entries must. be addressed to :—The Editor, the Spectator, 99 Gower Street,

London, W.C. 1, and be marked on the envelope Competition No. ( ).

Entries must be received not later than Monday, May 16th, Collis, 96 Severn 1932. The result of this competition will appear in our issue of

May 28th, 1932. THE WINNING ENTRY.

Competition No. 58 (SET BY " DUGLI.") to his charge against the °Cardillo,. Mr. Messmer is assuming : IT is assumed that a group of English prizewinners in the to shirt Shakespeare, for instants., conforms, amt IMEIP.P. 410 tot.

exceed 500 words in length. uf Mind : Entries must be received not later than Monday. May 23rd,1932. (e) A shrewd insight Into human charaeter and nudism ; 1932. lightly dismimed as simple melodrama.

issue. styles need be a criterion of fita, literature, but the fashion 4.f a perks!.

Limerick Competition No. 28 ',J.—, ..i.. the archaic of " Piers riOWInall " ? .4 PRIZE of £1 Is. is offered each week for a new and original .tYle. V.P. I's. m.

Simpson), "America and Mr. Darrow" (Douglas Woodruff), and .1. II. C I. - The Decadence of Grand Dukes " (James Laver), The prizo is Report of Competition No. 55

(REPORT AND AWARD BY " CARD.")

A rums of £2 25. was offered for the best reply, in the form of a letter of not more than 250 words, to the Point from Letters," headed "Grave Charge," printed on page -593 of our jostle of April 23rd. Mr. Chawner's letter read: page not a better subject be found for your Competitors to exorcise their wits on than the vulgarization of our finest English Literature F I refer particularly to the turning of Shakespeare's lovely Orpheus mith his Lade into American jazz which lately disfigured your pages. And now I see that it is proposed to mutilate the Balcony scene from Romeo ttiti Juliet. Surely this sort of thing is not worthy of the high standard which the Spectator has hitherto maintained. '

The conditions of. the competition referred to were as follows : " It has been suggested that the language of Shakespeare may have to be translated into modern English if it is to be understood by the young. theatregoers of .the present day. A prize . . is offered for a rendering in modern stage dialogue of Act II, Scene 2 of Romeo and Juliet . . ."

Mr. Chawner's contention, I regret to announce, received but qualified respect from the majority of competitors.. From only three of them Aid he reap any whole-hearted support and the arguments of all three were critically beside the pomt. Mr. L. V. Upward confessed that his reasons for supporting Mr. Chawrier wero personal ones: that he had failed to obtain recognition for his entry in the earlier: contest. Mr. 11. E. Crook, with disarming naivete; made of the occasion an opportunity for attacking the Limerick, which he deneuneed 118 "a thing for mentally unwashed school- boys," without, however, providing any reasons for his choice of that Peacock would have called a no "pejorative definition." 'Edward Lear would, r fancy, have enjoyed Mr. Crook's company. arcare almost tempted to follow up the idea of this competition by asking for a Limerick on Mr. Crook). Mr. James Alfred Manning, Mr. Chawner's - third supporter, 'wrote gravely of prima facie vandalism," but was equally inexplicit. Competition No 57 (SET BY "CARD.") Approximately a hundred competitors tilted at Mr. Chawna, memorating the event. lEhOSO entries quotation is made. The prize is awarded to : E. J.

Grove, Cardiff.

COMPETITION 50. 55.

1. That literature can be gratin!. fine, or otherwise, by mate ts.rmanent standard,

2. That literary velum an, Independent of the pantage of time, fashion, and period ; Dublin Derby Sweep combine to offer their joint winnings, torture which nonnoody modify esteem of emu khal. amounting in all to about £100,000, to the Chancellor of the 3. That present-day literary forms are not, and sever tan be 'varmint as alimirallie. Exchequer for any national purpose chosen by him. A with r,kre.oc to (0, .utikknt 0-1.1t.e, exist6th.t "baktve.n, w.o tot earatd.o, . by his eontendwraries as writing meat Mend... hut merely maiming 1..1.01. prize of £2 2s. is offered for an extract from the speech IR drama is the current stage lattanage a t is: Age. He Meths.,: arquired a Mgt. moo- which he accepts Or declines the offer. NO extract may fatten, partly because his figurative language has Io•VORIP less httelligible to inter generations, and partly bemuse he WIN dIstingolslasi by two tion-Illentry trualll it-s (6) A prefernav for el& thenwa from history 111111 It•EPOd. Were /Imam ”.,t The result of this comperdMn will appear in our issue of JUIP0 4th. Juliet 'matured to-day without the glamour of Shakes's:ales moue, it molti I., The result of Competition No. 56 will appear in our next 2. In the lIlizabethol n age, and stibmonently' b , eritIcimpl al appretMtion fasnonst

language and involvn hinta-y ; now relatorsy ser fot ins. Neil iter of 11 ,,,,,,

3. Who "as my that modern brevity and simplicity of expression may mu Is• regarded Mal years IMMO, ta4 all whnirable 11101I141, NMI E1000.4441s4APCS ornate laogusge

The Spectator's competitors may weevil ably be gaoled then, as toasters of therm v

English Limerick verse on some subject dealt with in the points from Commended Entrim t • current number of the Spectator. The twenty-eighth of these you charge the Spectator with " vulgarization Ili nor finest English Literal on.," competitions closes on Monday, May 23rd, 1932. Entries referring especially to Shakespeare. But, Shakespeare himself lots MG.. 110. best should be marked "Limerick No. 28." Of ITINORS for,,? doing. in Handel, Act 118, Svelte 3. whereto be pronmts " to hold,

.., as •twere, nu, mirror up to natnro ; to show . . . . the very age and hotly of the Mum

The result of the twenty-sixth of these competitions WILL ids form and pressure." The plating.1141 body of the times " Is taw Id Nal- ly announced in our next issue. garization and the lowering of spiritual values. :So, If wit " lllll Mate tie, itnitamy me. from Rousso and Juliet," may not this ver action bring home, in SOME 111P1NUIP, [It is requested that, to facilitate the work of the judges, to the ao-called civilisation of to.day tha t itys enthomnent is Imilt upon at exists entries should, when possible, be submitted on postcards.] is as present form by the mutilation of Natural beatify to all dirertiaa r Many of

Its members live upon the mutilated bodies of God's crealurns; they clothe awl adorn themselves at their expense and feed upon their remains. The beauty of

Result of Limerick Competition No. 25 woman Is hidden beneath a wealth of imitattmt tronplexion and ludr-waves ; city

and country alike are changing beneath the hand of the vandal ; smile has hetsatte

THE most popular subjeeta for Limericks this week were : " The jam ; merything is changed, false, unreal. Herein IS 1110 Spectator juntilled fit Slump in Lions," " Witchcraft in Africa " (J. H. Driberg), " The appearing to pander to the taste and fashion of the times, hoping to give to our age Stratford Jubilee" (E. M. Forster), " Order ! Order !" (Helen proof of its profanity and lack of sense of values by a process of Redertio of allettrilurn.

LELANI

Tic truth k that translation of Shakespeare's work into a modem hilont does .f mean its " vulgar/ma." The result td such translation Is to protium sometIling

Awarded to S. Tonkin, 10 Paultons Square, S.W. 3. entirely different from, and wholly inferior to, the original. Nobody lemmas. tills

THE WINNING ENTRY. difference and this inferiority more clearly than lit, translator himself. Hilt work is, Tins Dos ar Bar (page 578). In fart, mtlre, the morn biting for Its consciotnness. He does not vulgarize Iii,, old ; 1.Indannted, in words of Othello's, he E110WE how eompletely vulgar is the new. He is, therefore, proving his love and

To the fifty.elght others he bellows; admiration for Sinikexpeare 111 a highly practical fashion ; It is the modern institutiom " See Naplm sod—die! which, to a perceptive lutenigeore, an; held up to at well-merited and E000-11111110110s1 •• • (Mate and monkeys I ' say I. eontempt, good-humoured only became they an, so palpably shallow and colleting at " Death.dutles won't frighten us RUM. :" S. To:stars, %then mutpared toss Immortal literature. Orr HAMLET.

I gbully avail ntymlf of the opportunity you kindly afford of answering the "Grays blares'' against the Spectator Inalle by your correspondent. You will perceive Imo toy signature that no one has a better right than Ito reply to such criticism.

I thank Mr. Chawner for his zealous defence of Shakespeare against vulgarization and mutilation : his motive Is excellent, but, for Inyseil, I RUNE mis such [Naha, as those whieh agitate the breast of your merest...mit. I rejoice, rather, that after three centuries of amazing changes I still hold the affection of my fellow-eountryinen. No, Sir, 1 am no notninty to be carefully guarded from any touch lest I shrivel Into dust I 11150, and nothing gladdens me more than to find my thoughta Interpreted into the language of the twentieth century, and, Ince Mr. Chawner, I quattisi a draught of mre enjoyment froM the rendering into American jazz of my Orphenu with hie Lute; I RID, moreover, eagerly anticipating the modern rendering or the Italeony scene from Romeo Illtd Juliet. I would remind Mr. Chawner of what our Prince said at Stratford-on-Avon 1,—" Shakespeare delighted in all eptick.movIng things." l'es, The Idea of the 00IRReIltIOR In mmtion was to" knock at" American jazs-datt at Shakespeare: a vulgar travesty of sonwthhig lovely does not injure the lovelluesa of the original, but rather enhances it. Your correspondent's " grave charge" mold only be justified by the irrevocable turning of Shakexpeare's gong into jmz—so as to forest its ever again being Ionia in the original I On the other band, it does rather belittle Orpheus 'Oh his LIde to addunc that it needs any defence against Amerlenn

. HALJ.

• •

What exactly . do you mean by vulgarization ? Day by day In English public schools passages of English poetry an, modeled into Latin Elegies and Greek iambics. Is this a vtligarizatIon of Latin and Greek literature? . If you nay "Yea." we SIND make a respectful bow to your consistency and withdraw from the argument.. la those same schools passagra of Chaucer and Shakespeare are paraphrased into modern English prose. Is this a vulgarisation of English literature ? Weal you object if competitors were asked to translati-Oiriheas wits his Lute luto modern French r If you sa1, "No," It wifi appear . that .your objection is mall!, to modern popolar American speech and to the Englishaf the modent stage. ins are, of comae, as much entitled to your opiniolue on thek as to your ophtiom 011 the Gold Standen], DISaTIIIRMORT, Fascists, or anything else. lint unless you are prep/nett to say that any other form than the original far itny imrjaate soes'er Ian vulgarization 0111, sandy

you mnnot reasonably object to tile two competItlorn you inentlon. J. H.

There is no " better subject" than "our finest English literature," whether It be 11011 as a bads for literary competition or got. Mark, Sir, my advised use of the word •• literary." Nowadaya, authorship has musty to be of the " popular " type to gain any finatwIll reward—but not In the Spectator's competitions. There the prizes aro awarded to entries disphiying real merit:judged by standard, of literary worth. Their value lien in tlw research they foster, the delving Into the best In poetry, drama and fiction that Is essential to a mccessful away in this Reid. For instance, the rendering Of a Shakespeare song as a" lass" lyric and of the Balcony scene in nuatern idiom, which no incensed Mr. (Mesmer, rentdre a careful weighing of the meaning of each word hi the OrIginalS, and result la a ktimek,Igt, far More Ibt Mate than rending,