Digest of Public Opinion on Jewish Matters

[The purpose of the Digest is informative: Preference is given to papers not generally accessible to our readers. Quotation does not indicate approval-Editor.]

Louis Marshall’s qualities as a distinguished American advocate and Jewish leader are extolled in numerous articles and editorials appearing in the Jewish press on the occasion of Mr. Marshall’s seventieth birthday anniversary.

American Jewry, declares the “Day”, in celebrating Marshall’s birthday, pays tribute to “a long and honorable career of devoted and faithful leadership.” The paper adds:

“In the course of years Louis Marshall proved himself to be the recognized leader of American Jewry. His role in the action which led to the abrogation of the treaty between America and Czarist Russia, his outstanding share in the work of war relief, his historic role in the Jewish delegation to the Peace Conference in Versailles and even his decisive position in the present negotiations regarding the formation of the Jewish Agency-have brought him out as the most important figure in the communal life of the Jews in America and of Jewry throughout the world.”

The “Forward”, Socialist paper, pays tribute to Marshall in the following terms: “Marshall is a conservative. Between his convictions and ours there is a chasm. He is a religious, orthodox Jew, and in politics he is a Republican. He is, however, one of those persons whose character and activities in the interests of the Jewish people have won him countless warm friends and admirers, quite regardless of any religious or political questions. He is, first of all, a sincere, warm hearted, truthful man. Secondly, he is devoted with all his soul to various worthy movements. Such personalities as Marshall are now appreciated and respected by the workers and Socialists in all lands.”

Louis Marshall is “the natural spokesman of American Jewry,” avers the “Jewish Morning Journal,” remarking further: “The well-deserved praises which are bestowed upon him for his many and diverse achievements emphasize the devotion, zeal and ability with which he fulfilled his duties as spokesman for the Jews. The greatness of it is to be seen in the sum total: millions of Jews are living in a great Republic, enjoying rights which no one can deprive them of, and a man, distinguished as a lawyer, has been privileged to become their spokesman, at home and before the rest of the world. It is the most glorious career a Jewish leader could wish for himself and we hope it will continue for many more years of fruitful activity.”

The “Jewish Daily News”, referring to the Address, signed by thousands of leading Jews in every country of Europe and America, and presented to Mr. Marshall by a group of distinguished American Jewish leaders, says: “The signatories to the Address honored themselves by honoring Louis Marshall.”

THE HABIMA IMPRESSES NEW YORK

The first appearance Monday night in New York of the Moscow Theatre Habima in the well known Ansky play “The Dybbuk,” has created a strong impression on the theatre critics of the metropolitan press.

This troupe, composed entirely of Jewish artists and employing Hebrew exclusively as their vehicle, is spoken of thus by J. Brooks Atkinson in the “Times”:

“In spite of an eager audience, to many of whom Hebrew was not an unfamiliar tongue, the spoken words obviously did not matter particularly last evening. For the attention was naturally focussed upon a highly styled type of acting developed to a state of perfection. We have all caught hints of it in other performances directed by the innumerable Moscovians now rummaging around this country. The direction of the Moscow Art Theatre Musical Studio had been tarred a little with the same brush. But no other performance in this city has been so bold in its stylization, so daring in its treatment of details and so skillful in evoking the latest moods of a production.

“Acted in this vein, the performance describes what we may vaguely term the ‘soul’ of “The Dybbuk.” It is a method extraordinarily beautiful when it is perfectly welded and polished; it would be disastrous in less talented hands.”

This time, declares Alexander Woolcott in the “World,” the public saw the “Dybbuk” played “by a company of superb actors, playing in a manner of their own, with every throb of the voice, every flight of the hands, every fantastic turn of the body serving to intensify the tragedy much as the wild, free, paint-soaked brush of a painter is realeased when it turns to posters.”

Percy Hammond, in the “Herald-Tribune,” feels that “The Habima actors are “earnest worshipers at a shrine. Last evening they left no doubt of the actuality of the legend (the Dubbuk) in the breasts of one of the most ardent of the season’s audiences. Against a gaunt and often claptrap background their ‘hearts ran o’er’ until even the few barbarians at the Mansfield knew they were on holy ground.”

To Alan Dale the acting seemed to be “thoroughly excellent in every detail. There was genuine sincerity; there was positive forgetfulness of an audience. There were no senseless ‘exit’ speeches, no struggles for irrelevant and irreverent applause. There was the same self-oblivion noted at all the productions of the Moscow Art Theatre.”

In the “Telegram,” Frank Vreeland observes: “Individually and collectively the performance stood out. There were striking ensemble effects, those shadowy, almost phantasmagoric groupings, with pointed beards and stretching hands and leering faces, in which the Slavonic temperament delights. There were tumultuous, unbridled dances, with a seething rhythm to them.”