Life Sentence

In the first act of "Life Sentence" Howard Wadman has obviously enjoyed gnawing at many New Zealand weaknesses.

There is Miss McKatrick who halls from the pioneers and gushes, eyes heavenward, about "Home"; and Mr. Holiday, the bullet-headed solicitor, who sponsors the Loyalty League with its slogan. "New" Zealand for the New Zealanders" (the English newcomer presumes "you mean the Maoris?"). An opportunity for Wadman's rather Shavian wit is made to include the man who "had been a Presbyterian all his life and then suddenly began to take Christianity seriously." And again, "The talkative socialist of 20 is simply sharpening the aggressive self-assertion that will make him a good capitalist 10 years later."

But, entertaining and embarrassingly true to life as it is in the first act, it scarcely belongs to the rest of the play. The G. B. Shaw of the opening is linked with the T. S. Eliot of the close by an act almost purely of incident. This lack of unity is the play's main fault. It says much Tor the play that it is able to shine through such a variety of styles.

The plot is relatively unimportant. There is some tension leading up to the climax of incident in the second act but not sufficient to overbalance the climax of thought in the final act. Here the principal theme emerges: that a man may expiate an act of sin in three ways—by running away from it, by throwing the responsibility of his punishment on others or by sentencing himself to a life of high endeavour. This last may eventually lead him to understand that all men are lighting to live down such such baseness of thought or deed.

In the same vein, if more cynically. Somerset Maugham recommends that, it being the weakness of all mankind to think evil if not to act it, a judge should have before him not only the emblem of the Cross, but also a roll of toilet paper to remind him that he, the condemner, is not very far removed from the condemned.

In the Thespian production of the play the stage settings were ordinary, and the clothes, although appropriate to the characters, not a pleasing [unclear: whole]. Although the inconvenience of the stage may have affected the former there is no excuse for the latter. Let the decor be true to life but there is no need to be prosaic. The acting was competent but seldom outstanding. This, however, may be a fault of the play—that the people in it are mouthpieces rather than characters. In spite of this there were some tense moments and the play Certainly holds the attention of a thinking audience.