Reviewer Lauds Advocate as Open Discussion Forum

This review of the Advocate was written for the Crimson by John Gallishaw '17, the well-known short story writer.

Looking back over a series of Advocates, I come to the conclusion that there is a definite improvement in quality in the present number.

In the old days, the editorials dealt with matters of no great importance and were often only exercises in style. Harvard has long needed a periodical which should be a forum for open discussion. The CRIMSON, being a newspaper primarily, does not have the space for this. Clearly, then, the Advocate becomes the logical medium. It seems now to be fulfilling this function. The editorials in the November Advocate deal with vital problems and are not mere literary essays. Harvard is a great University and, like all great institutions, is subject to criticism. It is well that this criticism should come from within rather than from without. The absurdity of organized spontaneity has long been apparent. It is refreshing to see that from the student body comes a protest. Censorship will always be a bone of contention. The editorial on conditions at Widener should arouse interest which may be translated into action.

Short Stories Show Imagination

The short stories show imagination and an understanding of problems of style. Technically, of course, they are not perfect, nor is it to be expected that they should be, since they do not set out to be the work of professional writers. Yet, by and large, they are better than the stories that I remember in the old Advocates. The writers are beginning to realize that the only stories which have any pretense to importance are those which have some significance for life. Imaginatively, they are well conceived. Their style is uniformly good. These writers should all be heard from later.

The present reviewer is no critic of poetry: all verse seems to him good verse. His only standard is that poetry shall be the matching of the exact word with the exact thought. Therefore, he is unable to see in the poetry the progress which is more marked in the prose. It may be that the standard of the Advocate in poetry has always been high. It may be, off the other hand, that the technical structure of poetry is not so readily grasped as the technical structure of prose. Or, again, it may be that poetry is more a question of inspiration than of assiduity. None of the poetry seems to have the power to stir the reader tremendously, yet it will all repay his reading.

Greatest Strides in Book Reviews

It is in the Book Reviews, however, that the greatest strides seem to have been made. Particularly good is the review signed H. W. B., reviewing Arthur Machen's new book. Mr. Wheelwright is a little too harsh although his harshness may be justified in his criticism of Mr. Beebe's poems. The Book Reviews serve their purpose: to tell us the substance of the book and to influence our selection.

This number of the Advocate deserves the patronage of every member of the University. In many ways it is stimulating, but chiefly because the men who are writing for it seem to have definite ideas and the ability to express them. Altogether, it is a commendable number.