To the Editor of the Crimson:

I should like to protest against the ridiculous review of the latest Hasty Pudding show which obviously served merely as the basis for a personal attack on its director. The entire review is full of contradictions which are caused, it would seem, by a desire to twist it into such an attack. The "artistry" has been successful, but the "art" has gone "too far for its own good." The "body" of the play is "Too beautiful" but the "book" is poor. By means of such contradictions, after one has read the entire review and learned that in nearly all respects the show is a good one, one is led to believe that whatever faults it does have must be laid at the door of the director.

As a member of the cast last year I can safely say that this is untrue. Mr. Lilley has made the show as nearly professional as possible. I suppose this is what is meant when your reviewer says it is "too-beautiful" and "too-perfect." This is neither a fault nor a violation of the "spirit of college theatricals."

In conclusion. I can only say that I am sorry that the Crimson took it upon itself to print such an obvious diatribe. The new show has its faults but few of them--I might almost say none of them--are the fault of its director. No, the "ungrateful criticism" is by no means a reflection on anyone but the reviewer. David C. Rivinus '40   (Ed. Note: The reviewer was unacquainted with Mr. Lilley.)