Under the headline "Burlesque Judicially Held Not Art," "Fofo Wins $2500 for Minsky Display," the "Boston Evening Transcript" supplied its jaded readers a few weeks ago with one of the year's most stimulating bits of reporting. The woes of a Greek tragedienne, Fofo Louka, whose picture was displayed in the lobby of the Park Theater "surrounded by photographs of 'scantily attired' females," were recounted in most sympathetic fashion.

Judge Charles L. Carr whose decision in the case displayed an admirable understanding of the philosophical background of the law, shared the chivalric attitude of the "Transcript." Remarking that "this court can not shut its eyes" to the unartistic character of the burlesque profession, he sustained the contention of Miss Louka's attorney, Mr. Harris G. Booras, that her reputation might be injured by the alleged display.

Judge Carr is to be congratulated also upon his unusual grasp of the historical implication of the case. Citing the "Encyclopedia Britannica" and Mr. Bernard Sobel's "Burleycue--An Underground History of Burlesque Days" he announced that "burlesque has changed considerably since the days of Aristophanes and Sheridan." He is further to be congratulated upon his escape from picayuno technicalities in deciding that "it is unnecessary for me to determine the extent of the attire. . . If these were the ones they displayed heads and more or less of the bust. They were slightly clothed or not at all."

Finally, one must admire the unusually accurate phraseology of the judge in summarizing his findings thus: "So far as her profession went, I find that the inference would be either that she had failed to make good in her chosen field or that she had prostituted her art for money."