Puny, but How Great.nHugh Leonard: Da; A Hudson GuildnTheatre-Craig Anderson Production;nDirected by Melvin Bernhardt.nThis is a play about an Irish ArchienBunker who has infinitely larger ambitions:nto symbolize the traps of paternalnlove. Since he is also infinitely lessncharming, witty, comical and richlyndesigned than Archie—while at thensame time attempting to solve some ofnthe weightiest dilemmas of human interrelationshipsn(with the help of one-linersninfinitely duller than Archie’s)—thenend effect is boring and disheartening.nThus, Archie’s low-brow musings onnreligion, society or feelings, trivialnand shallow as they sometimes are,nsuddenly acquire a glitter of unpretentiousnessnwhich borders on art whenncast against those of Da. *nLiterature about simple but charmingnhumanness and comical grumbling hasna great tradition and countless protagonistsnwho have seeped into proverbs,nidioms, archetypal references in mostnlanguages of the Western world. HughnLeonard’s Da, an all-too-human curmudgeonnwho is both obnoxious andnprecious, is not going to make it onnsuch a scale. The playwright does notnsucceed in doing anything more thannonce again filling the stage with thensame superannuated exasperating darlingnwho has been made commonplacenby Hollywood for years. However, therenis one aspect of Mr. Leonard’s work, ornrather its reception and success, thatnshould elicit attention.nThe play prospers because of its audiences.nIts inoffensive, platitudinousnhumor draws good-natured laughs;npeople obviously enjoy its tone, ambience,ntype of entertainment. That’sncertainly a positive contribution, and nonone should deny its sociocultural value.n*An obvious abbreviation of Dad or Daddy.n34inChronicles of CulturenThe disturbing aspect is what the Manhattan-basednassemblage of critics hasnmade of it. Because of its reception bynthe public, and not on its own merits.nDa became the recipient of four TonynAwards, the New York Drama Critics’nCircle Award, the Drama Desk Awardnand the Outer Critics’ Circle Award.nHowever we approach this phenomenon,nwe must flatly state that it’s ansqualid approach to critical duties. Thensky-high elevation of mediocrity is ancultural negative, a corruption of culturalnsubstances which, in the long run,nceases to be an inconsequential trifle,nor gaffe, and threatens some of thensubtler textures of cultural life. Loweringnpublic tastes is, a. la longue, as muchnof a menace as outright praise for cynicism,nwrong ideology, immorality fornScreenncultural kicks. The endless parade ofnpoets laureate, novelists laureate, playwrightsnlaureate, film directors laureate,nwho are so vastly inferior to whatnwas once considered necessary for laurels,nis a distressing occurrence; itnproves the monopoly of certain forcesnin culture whose principle is intolerancento adverse views and which thereforenbreeds ignorance of past achievementsnin theater, movies, literature, art,nwriting and popular music. This cynicalnsellout of standards threatens culturenas a whole—and the New York criticsnare too smart not to know it. If they sellnout, it’s because most of them havenbecome servile to the Liberal Culture’snhierarchy of values, whose commandmentnis: Trash that serves us is Art bynour fiat. (ES) DnAn Anti-ERA Statement fromnManhattan and Other PoignanciesnKramer vs. Kramer; Written andnDirected by Robert Benton; ColumbianPictures.nThe Marriage of Maria Braun; Writtennand Directed by Rainer WernernFassbinder; A New Yorker FilmsnRelease.nAmerican Gigolo; Written and Directednby Paul Schrader; ParamountnPictures.nby Eric ShapearonNot since The Kid, The Champ andnAl Jolson singing “Sonny Boy” has thentheater’s darkness been so soaked withnweepiness. The old Hollywood specialtyn—the man-little boy feedback of sentimentalities—isnagain at work, and withnnnconsiderable success both as art and asnbusiness. However, there are severalninteresting innovations, Jolson’s emotion-drenchednsong was addressed to thenpetit bourgeois sense of family coziness,nto lower-east-side immigrant aesthetics.nBoth The Kid and The Champ werenburdened with that inimitable Big Studioncuteness which possessed the magicnto make their characters endearing, theirnone-dimensionality, even silliness, notwithstanding.nJustin Henry (Billy), thenlittle hero of Kramer vs. Kramer, infusesninto the movie a genuineness ofnso much richness and nuance that itnmakes him not only authentic but edifying.nFor his morning walk to the bathroom,nin which all the inexpressiblenfrustrations of a 7-year-old at dawn arenvisualized through silhouette and gait.n