Reviewer Finds "Who's Who" Another of Hasty Pudding's "Best Ever" Shows--Declares Comedy Is of Very High Order

The first run of this year's yield of sap is in, and the Pudding gave its annual show last night to a capacity house of graduates, filled to capacity with the first run of sap and nice yellow cornmeal.

The play is "Who's Who". It was made by two skillful craftsmen, William Lindsay White '24, of Emporia, Kansas, and Joe de Ganahl '25, of White Plains, N. Y. It is very good.

This particular run of sap is the one hundred and twenty-ninth since a group of gay dogs foregathered in a back room to liberalize Harvard--let in everybody, keep out everybody, listen to radicals, refuse to listen to radicals, and generally register indifference. They made a sort of bootleg pudding out of cornmeal, and when all hands were well on, listened to such lively discussions as "A Phillippic' Regarding and Appertaining to the Aspects of the Verities."

Laws of Gravity Lead To "Who's Who"

Under the circumstances, Harvard became liberal. The Gold Coast was reclaimed from river swamp and turned over to the newspapers, the Pudding branched out into mock trials, rowdy burlesques of classics now no better remembered than-their parodies, ultimately into musical skits (see Owen Wister) and so by the laws of gravity to "Who's Who".

A great deal may happen in 129 years. Did, in fact. The Pudding was founded 129 years before Massachusetis Hall caught fire and an officer of the College, seeking refuge from the smoke in the upper halls, and appearing at a window, was urged to jump into a blanket. The blanket was there.

And-now the Pudding, on the eve of taking in boarders, has given "Who's Who". . . . it is very good.

Title is Good For its Purpose

Regarding the title, opinions among first-nighters are divided into two camps, the Right holding that "Who's Who" means what it says, and no more; the Left standing firm for the suspicion that the authors are having fun with the customers. Your critic's opinion is that the title is very good for its purpose.

Never mind whether it "may be compared in finish with the best of the Broadway productions"--it may not. It is a Pudding show, obliged at times to stick inside the limitations of the current ritual of honky-tonk, but for the most part fresh as no Broadway show will ever be, inspired, perspiring, untiring, and at times downright comical. At no time will it be mistaken for a page from Hans Christia nor John Murray Anderson; there are, however, moments in it when the mournful editors of Punch and Life would wish to God they had thought of that first.

Must See it To Appreciate it

That statement can be proven by citing a few of the wise cracks, or dissecting the plot, but it had best be proven by a visit to "Who's Who" itself.

The reverberating applause of Last night's performance is not to be taken as a guide. It is traditional at graduate's night that every number shall be recalled for every possible encore, every female star (and especially the entrance of the debutante chorus) shall be greeted by whinnies from the house, every exchange of fun met with labored groans, and that thereafter the graduates who will mill out into the night shall wag their beards like the old man on the walls of Troy and say that this is the best show the Pudding ever gave, or not the best, depending on the individual sap-content.

It will be recalled by old playgoers that just before Mine. Eleanors Duse was playing her first season in Little Lord Fauntleroy, Harry Pratt was playing the part of a girl in the Pudding. Studious application to his art has done a lot for Pratt, and he is now cast for the female lead in "Who's Who". He will probably not open in the Boston performances, where the Watch and Ward Society, though quite, is still looking out for the morals of the young. But he is grand.

E. N. Carson '24, is the other one. Without Pratt's je-ne-sais-quoi, Carson has about as much winsomeness and charm as any female part on any Pudding stage. If those two girls get through a whole season without backstage quarrels and mebbe a shooting or two, it will be because they8 are as beautiful in character as they are in character--which is undoubtedly the case.

Honors Are Split Three Ways

In this home of the bean and the cod where the Lodges may play with the Moynahan's and Cassldy's, it is with pleasure that the paper honors of the evening are split three ways: between Moynahan, Cassldy, and Lodge Moynahan's feet, as usual; Cassldy's height and line; Lodge's general excellence. Hodder exercises a mean mashieniblick with his part, which may not be the higher criticism, but means what it says. The chorus (let us speak now of the young ladies) has an uncommon ability to smile and smile and keep out of the way of the scenery: the gentlemen of the ensemble look good and sore about being cast for chorus men, and consequently do nicely.

Abbott and Harris have served notice on the welkin with a number of new things to whistle, and a good deal of the success of the, numbers is due to the complete fitness of the music; a good number becomes great with a good fune; no good number can be built around weak music.

Notice is hereby served on all persons within reach of the subsequent performances that they will be missing the best show the Pudding ever gave if they do not attend "Who's Who".