In Mountain Air

"In the Tunnel" is written by an author of considerable intellect, but if he develops he will reject the present story for its impurities. Maurice Bagley's little sketch is very pleasant. Frank McGorm has style and purity, which is unusual in writers of this tradition but he, again, will consider this sketch here a little insignificant when he develops. "The Gods Descend" is the only prose in the magazine in the romantic tradition. Pleasant but laboured and offering no solution. The criticism in "Hilltop" is similar in quality, having merit but no great significance. Winchester shows Holcrofts lack of intellectual sharpness convincingly but reveals nothing besides and as a subject Holcroft's thought is minor. Robertson documents the similarity between New Zealand and early America, but effects little more than another comment on the oddity of New Zealand's literary national consciousness. As one had expected, most of the poetry in this magazine is such as chiefly disappoints one. Oliver and Wilson have not improved, and are still delicate and even more unsubstantial. In the case of Wilson, this is especially unfortunate, because his Spike poems were so much sturdier. Campbell is a considerable talent and voice, which has still not yet opened out and blossomed. Lorna Clendon has advanced considerably. It is unfortunate that Louis Johnson sent some of his inferior work to "Hilltop." As for James Baxter, who wrote extremely impressive poems until a year or so ago we probably see here the fruits of an unfortunate transitional period in which the rhythmic characteristics of the early poems are repeated without innovation, and their implicit foundations brought out with a certain sententiousness. So, while the volume represents work of certain merit it is not a success. "It has decided disadvantages as a magazine. First of all the title. It is not clear whether the editors stand on the hilltop, or climb it, or whether it is another name for the "Old Clay Patch." In any case, it is out of touch with the delicate characteristics of the contents. Furthermore, there seems to be no policy, and no cause. In the absence of; an editorial we would expect the review section to provide an indication, as it must be selective. But it seems to be quite haphazard and casual. Can a periodical exist lacking direction of any sort? Is it not rather, then, a miscellany? This is probably the best description: a cross-section fortunate in a few places but not nearly all.