Kipling is still being read by the University, and the result may be studied in several areas of the present Advocate. O. Prescott '20 has produced an original variation on Stalky by Inserting Professor Babbitt, under the title of Hugo and Humanist, into two pages of frivolous conversation; and "Billet Ballads No. 4," by J. F. Leys, '22, is a mixture of Kipling's early Indian manner with the pseudo-English of the Saturday Evening Post. One serious flaw is common 'to' both these versious. Nothing happens in them; nothing even seems to happen.- Whereas Kippling had the gift of making his pages appear riotons, although both thought and event were often totally absent.
W. McH. Keyser's "Ride Them Hosses" is a bit of sufficiently vivid cavalry, experience. A. K. Train has discovered the possibility of producing a Punch-like essay by exploiting philosophy and animatism. Mr. Train might do a public service by popularizing 'Butler's vision of the machines that came alive, provided he would at the same time consent to suppress all but the most delicate of his puns. In S. B. Colby's essay on "Keeping an Open Mind," I notice a curious and probably involuntary defect of style, a battering succession of iambic verses.
The verse I am incapable of criticising; the reviews and the editorials are well-written. I object bitterly to "Mater Felixissima";. perhaps some proof-reader was guilty. But why is it that the various articles produce the impression of being trimmed to a fixed length? Is it due to editorial excisions, or is it a habit acquired in the process of writing compulsory themes?