Documentary News Letter (1947-1949)

116 DOCLMKM \RY FILM NEWS Book Reviews A Pioneer Document Science in Film Edited by BLODWEN LLOYD Reviewed by JOHN MADDISON AMONG academic scientists, it is rare to find one who has really come to grips with the problems of film in teaching and research. Dr Lloyd, editor of this 'world review and reference book', illustrated with stills, is such a rarity. Her knowledge of the making, distribution and use of scientific films is broad and sympathetic. Happily, too, she has chosen, in editing this book as her Preface implies, to interpret" science in a wide 'impure' sense. Uneasy perhaps lest at this point her more austere colleagues may be looking over her shoulder, she tends rather to apologize for including science for the citizen in her area of operation. Reverence for what is called, I think, in another field, the apparatus of scholarship leads her sometimes to write pompously and to bring in the impressive but ill-defined neologism. Some of the contributors also fall into the flat official manner, which plays such odd tricks with language. But these are minor faults in an immensely stimulating and valuable work. The book is divided into two roughly equal parts ; a series of individual essays and an intermit ional scientific film directory. The essays are especially valuable because they bring together under one roof, so to speak, a mass of data, hitherto scattered about in many periodicals and reports. In the chapter, 'The Scientific Film Today', after an uncertain start, the editor herself assembles many interesting facts about the teaching film, particularly in America. One of her observations may be underlined: By the end of 1943, its (the US Government's) War Department had 10,200 training films and 11,890 training 'shorts'. Many of these are now released for use by educational and other establishments. A similar policy in Rritain would no doubt release much valuable materialfor scientific, industrial and technical training. Roger Shattuck of UNESCO in his essay 'Scientific Films and the People's' surveys the international dissemination of scientific knowledge by films. Cataloguing is an important aspect of this traffic in ideas, and we learn that UNESCO is drawing up a list of films designed to popularize science. (This, Shattuck says, should be ready by the end of 1947 — a sidelight on the tedious mechanism of book production these days.) Contemplating present UN discontents at the Palais tie Chaillot, one can only sadly agree with him that films, dealing popularly with the scientific outlook and method, arc urgently needed. Professor George Bell provides in 'Visual Physiology and the Cine-film', a summary, generally speaking authoritative, of our knowledge of such matters as screen brightnesses, and the best manner of placing screens and arranging the seats for classroom projection. In a wider context, he recalls Kleitman's experimental finding that looking at films is by no means a physiological relaxation, in a subject remaining seated for two hours or more, there is an increase in muscle tension, shown according to Kleitman. by a statistically significant rise in body temperature of -j to 1 degree Fahrenheit. Bell, incidentally and rightly I think, attacks the conservative aestheticism of Rudolf Arnheim who resents by implication the increasing illusion of reality which technical progress brings in the cinema In this part of his discussion, there is strangely enough no mention of the work of Michotte of Louvain. In his review of British films in medicine in the last ten years, Brian Stanford points to the difficulties and the advantages of medical film-making. With medically untrained actors, slight lapses of behaviour are immediately detected by a critical professional audience. (This isn't, one may add, confined to medical films.) Characteristically and endearingly, Stanford campaigns for a more ordered and functional approach to medical film production. Russell Reynolds, a veteran in the use of cineradiography, describes in detail its techniques and their applications in diagnosis and research. Two other essays are of great practical value. Denys Parsons writes sensibly on scripting and the sources of information upon which the scientific film maker may draw. Quite outstanding is Derek Stewart's 'Technique and Equipment'. This is a tightly packed, carefully marshalled conspectus of recent advances in the use and manufacture of photographic materials, light sources, lenses and camera and projector mechanisms. The book is worth having for this chapter alone. It is left to the mathematicians to remind us of what is after all the most important single fact about the cinema. In it, we have a new language of symbols. Those who have listened to Robert I airthorne rapidly throwing out the darting stimuli of new conceptions will not be surprised that his, though the briefest, is the most original and thought-provoking chapter in the book. Stressing the visual quality of many everyday symbols, Fairthorne remarks quizzically 'Even the arbitrary symbols "?" and "!" look really puzzled and surprised'. At the recent SFA meeting at the Royal Institution, I was struck again by the entrancing visual quality of his and Salt's pre-war films on the differentia] calculus. In 'Film and Mathematics", I. R. Vesselo analyses these and practically all other available mathe matical films. This is a lucid and restrained piece of writing, enjoyable to read. Customs formalities and the high cost of film merchandise are no doubt great obstacles to the inter-change of scientific films between peoples. But one of the greatest problems is perhaps that there is no easy way of finding out what films are available and where they can be got. The reference section of this book comes partly to the rescue. For it, Dr Lloyd has taken the whole world as her parish. Over a hundred closely packed pages describe persons and institutions producing and distributing films, give addresses and shrewdly provide answers to exactly the sort of questions likely to be asked. Inevitably there are gaps and false emphases; but fewer than might have been expected. There are, too, some irritating signs of hasty proof-reading. The book is nevertheless a tour de force. Dr Lloyd undoubtedly took her courage in both hands in assuming the role of the first encyclopaedist of scientific cinema. The risk was worth taking. It was good to see Dr Lloyd as a delegate to the recent international scientific film congress making new contacts, and finding, it may be hoped, new collaborators. In this work, she deserves the co-operation of scientists and film-makers everywhere. Science in Film. Published by Samson Low. 15* INTRODUCTION TO VISUAL AIDS On December 17, the National Committee for Visual Aids in Education and the newly formed Educational Foundation for Visual Aids — now jointly responsible for promoting the use of the medium in schools — took their bow before the public at the Royal Empire Society. A programme of speeches and films was presented to a large audience representing the educational world, the film industry, and other interested sections. The speakers— Mr Hardman (deputising for the Minister of Education), Alderman Wright Robinson (vice-Chairman of the National Committee), Sir Rolande Wall and Dr Harrison (of the Educational Foundation) under the Chairmanship of Mr H. H. Williams (Chairman of the National Committee) — spoke of the great prospects for \ isual aids in education now that the new machinery had been established. Six films were then shown to illustrate the start which the National Committee and the Foundation had made. The films were designed for a variety of different age groups and were all sponsored b> the Central Office of Information.