A play that soars T IS ALWAYS a joy to see.a play -hat moves. There is no comparable experience, how- ever, to that of witnessing the hypnotic moment in the theatre when a play not only begins to live and breath but actually soars on the wings of the ima- gination. Occasionally this happens at the Cresi, the Central Library or some other theatre in Toronto. It-happens more oftén at Strat- ford. This year it happens at Niagara-on-the-lake in the Shaw Festival’s presentation of Misal- liance. The story line in Misalliance is a favorite of Shaw’s — the perpetual chase between boy and girl, in which it is always the girl, in the final analysis, who does the chasing.’She is not interested in “talk, talk, talk”. Her concern is her power of pro- creation. Her object in life is to put that power to use. The girl, Hypatia Tarleton, daughter of a very rich, capital- ist underwear magnate, is en- gaged to the wrong man, Bent- ley Summerhays, scion of the | '66 Shaw Festiva old English aristocracy. But at least the delicately-built, spoiled, infantile, tantrum-tossing Bent- ley has brains, and body alone - would not satisfy Hypatia. We are soon sure that she will win the man she wants. But the path to this end will be filled with sudden twists, surprises and riclt Shavian comedy. It includes the crash-landing of an aeroplane and the introduction of a beauti- ful Polish circus acrobat, Lina Szczepanowska. . Into this story line Shaw weaves his pungent comments on the inability of parents and children to communicate or un- derstand each other, his penet- rating gibes at the aristocracy and bourgeoisie, his views on conformity: and a few pithy re- marks about art, as it is regard- ed by the dull, stuffy, self-com- placent and totally bourgeois Johnny Tarleton, brother of Hypatia. The theme of “fathers and sons” is not new. It was dealt with over 100 years ago in a novel of that name by Ivan Turgenev. It is touched in a song written recently by long- haired, guitar-playing Bob Dy- lan, in the days when he was still a rebel. In Turgenev and in Dylan the antithesis between fathers and sons is tied to social conflict — the opposition of new times to an old status quo. In Turgenev it was the rising bourgeoisie against the feudal landowners (expressed as a nihilist revolt against all values); in Dylan it is the non - conformist youth against American capitalist values. In Shaw, who dealt with the theme just over 50 years ago, the question is put on a more general plane — the eternal in- ability of parents to’ communic- ate with their children. But the de-emphasis of the social thread turns Shaw’s examination intoa tremendously witty but less probing analysis. The problem is more stated than exposed. Shaw’s social commentary in this play is underlined in the parody of a romantic but ridicul- ously revolutionary youth who has gained all his experience SS See Sees McNAUGHTON (Continued from Page 3) Libby, Montana, where United States had unilaterally decided to build a dam on the Kootenay: River. He was given the red carpet treatment and then directed to give Canada’s consent. This was required un- der the Boundary Water Treaty of 1909 (the Kootenay is an in- ternational river). McNaughton asked time to think it over. He consulted his maps and then came up with the idea of diverting the Kootenay into the Columbia in Canada. He told his American friend that-he would have to investigate this perfectly “legal” diversion idea further, before he gave his consent to the building of Libby. His insistance on protecting Canadian interests so infuriated a leading U.S. senator, who was also at Libby, that he followed McNaughton all the way to his hotel room in Victoria. This “ugly American” walked in un- announced, helped himself to the general’s whiskey and proceeded to address the 65-year-old Mc- Naughton as follows: “Sonny, you'll either agree to the build- ing of Libby, or we will break ¥ you!” McNaughton told us about the pressure being brought to bear on him, particularly by Paul Martin. From Aug..6 to Nov. 23, - 1963 the minister of external af- fairs had written him no less _ than four letters, containing 22 _ single-spaced typed pages. Twice the he was visited by the slick MP from Windsor who asked him said: “The best service I could render was to present the facts in the responsible forum of the External Affairs Committee. It was up to others to keep this forum responsible and to ensure . a proper report to Parliament which would protest the Cana- dian interest.” to disassociate himself from the . “Communist” opponents of the Treaty. The general refused to be taken in by this red herring. His contempt for Martin and the Liberal Party deepened con- siderably during the hearings. In his testimony to the committee, Martin had claimed that great benefits would accrue to Canada, under the “umbrella of recipro- city. The general, whose whole public life was devoted to pro- tecting Canadian interests from American domination, was aroused by Martin’s phrase. He vividly recalled to.us*the 1912 election campaign, in which the Liberals, campaigning under the banner of Reciprocity, were handed a smashing defeat. ~ When it was our turn to testi- fy before the committee the general was always in the gal- leries. Once, when I was asked a particular tricky question by a committee member, I started to give an answer, but out of the corner of my eye I noticed the general quietly shaking his head. So I quickly changed my line of: reasoning and _ this brought a smile to his face. J knew I was now on the right track so I proceeded with the new line of thought. After Parliament passed the Treaty, McNaughton wrote the Columbia River Committee and In my opinion this statement expressed both the strength and weakness of this great Canadian. McNaughton’s concept: of the democratic process was that these in authority should make the decisions. He respected the democratic process, but his un- derstanding of it was limited, He was the epitome of the de- voted public servant. But this very fact tied his hands. He certainly had the ability to arouse the public, but as he said, he left that to others. : McNaughton’s_ decision re- vealed the weakness of even the best of the Canadian bourgeoisie. They are incapable of leading an alliance against the American domination of this country. Un- fortunately, so far the working class has not sufficiently exer- ‘cised its leadership on this vital question. The beginnings are there, as the experience on the Columbia fight showed; but much, much more is required. r And so a great man has pass- ed from the Canadian scene. Mc- Naughton was a firm believer in . the capitalist system, but in the socialist Canada that will surely come his name will find an honored place. In every sense he was a true patriot. His very presence made feel proud to be called a Canadian. ’ tell the ‘reprobate and not entirely a from books and the mindane job of clerking at low pay and who spews out revolutionary phrases with little meaning in his denunciation of Tarleton Sr., who, the boy claims, has “ruin- ed” his mother. The boy, Julius Baker, has been a secret witness of Hypa- tia’s brazen pursuit of Joey Per- cival (who possesses both brains and body) and he wants to re- veal all. Joey however, whose gentlemanly training includes boxing, forces Baker to sign a confession in which he says Hypatia has acted the perfect lady. : That will teach him to lie,” remarks Hypatia cynically. “You mean to tell the truth,” Bentley corrects her. This, plus a sudden reversal, which finds Percival pleading to Baker’s ‘gentlemanly instincts” to change his story and now to “truth” reveals that Baker’s ridiculous, parodied des- cription of the degeneracy of the upper classes is, after all, essentially true. One feels this play is done the way Shaw would have want- ed it to be done. It entertains; the characters are brought to life; the Shavian commentary is brought out clearly. Strong performances are given -by Leslie Yeo as John Tarleto@, Sr., and by Betty Leighton, as Mrs. Tarleton. On the whole, the cast clicks; every- one fits. Perhaps a little more liveliness would have been de- sirable in Lord Summerhays, played by Paxton Whitehead. He is, after all, still something of a weary old aristocrat. BBR a RR ayes me ‘A memorable image is ae by Zoe Caldwell in the import- ant role of Lina Szczepanowska, the free spirit of dreams, imagin-\ ation and non conformity. “I am strong: I am skilful: I am brave: I am independent: I am unbought: I'am all that a woman ought to be,” she says, vehem- ently rejecting the marriage pro- ", posal of Tarleton Jr... . “and this linendraper! he dares to ask me to come and live with him in this rrrrabbit hutch, and take my bread from his hand, and ask him for pocket money, and wear soft clothes, and be his woman! his wife!” s The play is a tribute to direc- tor Barry Morse, whose deft touches are evident throughout. Unencumbered by a role in this play, as he was in Man and Superman, Morse is able to put more into it. Misalliance continues at Nia- gara-on-the-Lake until Aug. 6. The Apple Cart_is the final play; it will be presented from. Aug. 9-28. —Stan Lynn PASS THIS PAPER ON TO YOUR FRIENDS AND WORKMATES August 5,.1966—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—Page 6 —SMILES— KEEPING COOL -Two psychiatrists, one 30, one 70, were riding down in an ele- vator on a hot sticky day. The young psychiatrist looked really beat and done in. _He said to his older colleague, who was looking calm, cool and quite refreshed: “T don’t see how you can listen to those terrible, harrow- ing, heart-rending personal his- tories that your patients recount all day and still’ be so relaxed.” The elder analyst shrugged. “Who listens?” ALIKE Two beatniks were sitting on a bridge with their feet dangling in stagnant water. One says. “Man, an alligator just bit off my foot.” f The other asks, “Which one?’ His wounded friend says, ‘How do I know, Clyde? You see one alligator and you've seen them all.”