Documentary News Letter (1944-1945)

y^AR^ PATIENCE OR STRlfrj<OKi NOTES OF THE MOI 13 14 15 CATALOGUE OF M.O.I. FILMS MADE IN 1943 17-19 NEWS LETTER IS3 CO FILM OF THE MONTH NEW DOCUMENTARY FILMS WHAT FUTURE FOR FILM SOCIETIES? FILM LIBRARIES 20, 21 16, 21, 23 22, 23 24 VOL. 5 NO. 2 Published by Film Centre, 34 Soho Square, London w.l ONE SHILLING Mr. Rank and the Educational Film Organisations, committees, individuals are everywhere active in the preparation of documents, memoranda, plans, which will define the future of the educational film. It is clear that Mr. Rank, with religious as well as industrial interest, is not behindhand in recognising the importance of this powerful spiritual instrument. Clearly Mr. Rank has a plan. To predict its economic basis we must consider Mr. Rank as a millionaire and an amateur economist ; to predict the content of his educational films we must consider him as a millionaire, a Methodist and an amateur politician. In all these roles we must take most fully into account his sincerity, his determination and his conviction of his Tightness. Mr. Rank has a nostalgia for orthodox mid-nineteenth century economics. He believes in unbridled private enterprise under the sole surveillance of God. He does not understand why people of the twentieth century have found such divine safeguards inadequate, nor why deductions affecting post-war activity have been drawn from the fact that when a war has to be won private commercial enterprise is revealed as a luxury we cannot afford and the forerunner of private commercial monopoly. Civilisation has moved past the point where industry may be left to create its own markets and then enjoy the exclusive benefits of supplying them without reference to public needs. Yet, knowing Mr. Rank's affections for the methods and indeed for the errors of the past, for the outworn economic theories of the last century and for the tradition of financial profligacy which grew up in the British film industry in the 1930s, we feel pretty confident that he will look to the past rather than to the future in laying his plans for educational films ; that he will seek to create a market by selling projectors to schools and will then seek to supply the market by selling films to feed the projectors. It is an old, tried method and the fact that it has already failed will scarcely discourage Mr. Rank. If anyone should venture to question the content of the educational films with which he will service school projectors, then Mr. Rank will most certainly say that no one is compelled to buy his films — if they don't like them they may leave them. (For still a few more years yet we must expect to hear this ancient argument raised in defence of the right to exploit a public need for private profit.) Yet let us not minimise the superficial attractions of the kind of plan which may soon be dangled before the guardians of the public purse. Why spend the taxpayers' money, they will be asked, on the production of educational films when the film industry is prepared to make them itself and offer them for purchase by schools and local educational authorities just as if they were text-books? The saving for the taxpayer is of course illusory since the commercial producer — whatever production method is chosen — must recover his production costs from educational funds. Whether he does so by sale of copies plus profits on projector sales, or by making the films under a sponsorship contract, does not affect this principle. Moreover the argument that the State should not sponsor production, and the text-book analogy, both break down when we consider what control exists over the content of educational films which are produced simply and solely as a commercial speculation. A big film combine moving into this field with adequate finance could be sure of producing such a high proportion of the total educational film output as virtually to restrict the choice available to its own product : the educational authorities would have to accept the output of the monopoly or abandon any attempt to make full use of the educational film. The monopoly would therefore find itself in a position of dictation with regard to subject-matter and style of presentation. Films would come increasingly to represent the educational views of the commercial group concerned and subjects would be chosen, not necessarily with a view to covering the whole educational field in accordance with educational needs, but most likely with an eye to those subjects for which there was likely to be the biggest demand and therefore the greatest number of copies sold. Just as it has proved necessary publicly to control the water-supply and the postal services in order that these amenities shall be extended to the unfavourably circumstanced citizen who represents an uneconomic proposition to commercial speculators, so the whole range of educational needs, large and small, will only be met if the driving force behind the production and distribution machinery is uncommercial in motive. It will be argued that if the sponsorship of educational films is left to the Government of the day then these films inevitably will reflect its political views. The dangers of bureaucracy will be trotted out yet once again for our horrified inspection and we shall be assured that it is only during the storms of war that the ship of state needs to be under public control. The answer clearly is that education in the post-war period will be a matter as vitally important as any that faces us to-day. It will be a matter of direct public concern the development of which must be guided in the public interest by the elected representatives of the people. No private group or commercial interest must be allowed to usurp the power of direction which belongs to the community as a whole. It is true that in this as in an increasing number of other fields the powers of the Government of the day will be increased and the influences of bad government will to that extent be multiplied. This is a problem inseparable from the democratic method, and a problem which must be solved by electing a Government worthy of its wider powers and functions. The good democrat does not fear the power of the community as wielded by his elected Government. The alternative, in the field of education as in others, is to leave power in the hands of the vested interests and to risk consequences of which we scarcely need remind our readers at this particular time in history.