Review of Current Illustrated

The current number of the Harvard Illustrated Magazine is admirably edited. It contains three articles on University matters of contemporary interest, one on a subject of much importance to men choosing their careers, a poem, a story, and editorial, and a book review. The proper balance between topical and general themes is seldom so fortunately hit.

A portrait of Mr. Edgar H. Wells is prefixed to an extremely readable account of the re-organized Alumni Association and its aims by the general secretary himself. Mr. Wells's clear view of the possibilities of his position, along with his enthusiasm and disinterested loyalty, augurs well for the success of the undertaking. Mr. H. von Kaltenborn closes a candid review of the season's University dramatic productions with a plea for the formation of a Harvard Dramatic Society, which shall unite the best talent now scattered over a large number of club performances. The highly satisfactory performances of this week in the Elizabeth Cary Agassiz House indicate what might be done by such a union, and there is reason to hope that it is within sight. The author of the article on "Crew Prospects" writes with an assurance very impressive to the ignorant layman. The reviewer gathers that the Varsity eight is to be beaten by Cornell and Yale, but that the Freshman and the four should win at New London. We shall see. Mr. J. H. Braddock's article on the Consular Service as a field for Harvard men derives unexpected point from the Radcliffe play already referred to. It is an example of a type of article of which we might well have more in college periodicals, and is specific enough in its information to be extremely useful. Mr. von Kaltenborn appears again with a well-executed translation of Daudet's telling short story, "The Boy Spy." A sonnet on William Ernest Henley by W. G. Tinckom-Fernandez betrays an enthusiastic admiration for its subject, and uses in the sextet a phrase that finely recalls one of Henley's most exquisite productions.

To a mere member of the faculty it is pleasing to find the editorial dealing, however unfavorably, with a question of instruction instead of athletics. The writer makes pleas for a better supervision of assistants, for consultation and co-operation among members of a department with a view to more effective teaching, and for an official request for undergraduate opinion upon methods of instruction. Such criticism as that made here would be more likely to win a hearing if the writer would first fortify himself with a knowledge of the facts. Assistants are supervised, are sometimes dropped, sometimes promoted. Departments do meet and plan for the effectiveness of their work. It cannot be more than five or six years since a very large and comprehensive opportunity was given to the undergraduates to criticise the instruction provided for them, though the information thus collected proved less suggestive than had been hoped. If the editorial writer wishes to serve the University in this matter, he will do it better by letting the authorities know how the evils hinted at affect the student rather than by advising changes in that part of our system on which, by the nature of the case, he obviously is not and cannot be well informed.