Rich New Vein

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 756, 31 August 1929, Page 30

Rich New Vein

ST. lOHN IRVINE'S PLAY APPLAUDED BY CRITICS “THE SECOND MRS. FRASERIn his latest play, “The Second Mrs. Fraser,” St. John Irvine taps what is for him a rich new vein, whose yield does not so much challenge the sterner products of his genius as complement them. Here, both technically and topically ; he is on the spot; exercising all his i old skill as a dramatist in a new delightful field. Though utterly light-hearted, this comedy is no mere confection, all sugar and spice, but the wholesome (if fancy) bread of life: life as it is lived by people who read the newspapers rather than figure vaingloriously in them. He examines but does not ridicule the institution of marriage; calling attention, in the gayest, most engaging manner, to its sure foundations, and opposing the homely realities of family life to its exotic vagaries. And even if he does put a few of the younger generation through their paces, stressing the awkwardness of some of their steps and underlining their less graceful foibles, he tempers justice with mercy. Of the first Mrs. Fraser, her daugh-ter-in-law said: “Darling, you’re deli, cious!” And so she is. So delicious that we were the more surprised that Mr. Fraser should ever have allowed his affections to wander Though eomedically Scotch, he was ta this extent human: that despite hii five 3‘ears divorcement from her, he continued to take her iamiliavirtues for granted. And when his second marriage to a young harpy foundered, he turned to her as instinctively as a child in trouble turns to its mother. Then she showed him. iu her own inimitable way. that even he could not both have his cake and eat it. But she kept her own counsel; and the family leagued for and against this unorthodox rapprochement, were kept guessing. The result, we told ourselves, was a foregone conclusion. And so it proved. But it was arrived at by so ingenious a volte-face on her part, and by such deviously delightful ways by the author, that we also were kept in joyful suspense until the end. From the agreeable context stand out such good scenes as that in which the first Mrs. Fraser holds the second up to ransom; and. armed with Bradshaw, her whip-hand raised, dictates at the telephone operation orders for that enforced elopement which shall rid the only Mr. Fraser of the harpy for ever. One unseen character, a fatuous full-length masterpiece, is drawn entirely between the lines; but we recognise him as clearly as if hs were present in the flesh. There ar» scenes of pure comedy, and scenes more fraught with dramatic consequence. The theme never gets out of focus, nor does its handling ever falter. The heart of this good comedy, indeed, is ou such excellent terms with its head, its artificiality so properly enhances its naturalism, that it succeeds in reflecting life without prejudice to its first-rate theatricality.

How much this happy result is advanced by the choice and co-opera-tion of the players a visit to the Haymarket will make clear, writes a London critic of the play. In company with her author, Marie Tempest turns over and fills, with irresistible verve, new pages of her art. Her comedy gifts shine all the brighter set off as they are by feeling. Ursula Jeans plays the second Mrs. Fraser with a breadth and certitude that w.ns for her the admiration which the character she portrays is calculated to forfeit. Robert Andrews, as an Oxford undergraduate, draws the conversational longbow most amusingly, while being his mother’s own boy. Margaretta Scott and Frank Allenby are two well-conducted younger members of the Fraser clan. Graham Browne is characteristically deft and cosy as the long-suffering intervener who gets pinched in the Fraser door each time he proffers a bouquet. And, after such a storm of welcome as might excusably have upset a much less sensitive actor, Henry Ainley showed how sweet can be the uses of adversity and played the egotistical Scot like the artist he is.