The Cine Technician (1943 - 1945)

S< ptember — October, 1044 THE CINE-TECHNICIAN 99 When a conference is a success there are plenty of ideas and enthusiasm to get things dune: the strange thing is that in its eagerness to achieve something, the conference tries tn start from scratch and ignores any existing machinery that might help. The W.F.A. conference was very much like that. All the enthusiasm for getting films made for the Labour movement was there. Excellent — but films cost money and take time to make. Let us have new films by all means, hut what about first learning to use those we have? There was no mention of the backwardness of the Trade Unions and indeed of the whole Labour movement in this respect, no mention of any attempted use of the more general of the M.o.I. films, no proof that any constructive thought had been given to criticising existing films and formulating alternative requirements. There was no thought of bringing public opinion to bear first on local cinemas, and through them perhaps m renters and even producers, by the normal ■haunels of T.U. branch and Trades Council action. There was in fact practically no constructive suggestion arising from a knowledge of exist nil circumstances — only a vague, but urgent, re (iiest for progressive films. Following the conference, on the first day of he Summer School proper, George Elvin gave is now celebrated analysis of the British film ndustry, in an attempt to provide material on which the students at the school could build their liscussions. But despite his lucid exposition of he set-up and the opportunities — or lack of them Li' getting films for the Labour movement, the liscussion again became vague, full of pious hopes md fervent resolutions. Disappointing, but not mexpected. Now the British Film Institute's Summer School it Bangor. Two weeks in all, divided into two 'arts; the first week dealt with "Visual Educa on " and the second week with " Film Appreciai;." I was there for the first week only, and an write only of that. "Visual Education" means, broadly speaking. method of teaching which uses something re than words. Drawings on the blackboard, ctures on the wall, lantern slides ami models ri all part of visual education methods, but whenvisual education is. mentioned, films naturfigure very largely in the discussion. So this irsl v I oi tiie B.F.I, course dealt, among other itters, with the production and use of all kinds ■ i rlucational films. The speakers included such ii on th'' use of visual aids in teaching as i. P. Meredith, the Lecturer in Visual Education he University College of the South-West. Dr. iwerys, of London University, Dorothy Gray son of the B.F.I. , and three of our members: Geoffrey Bell, Rod Baxter and .Maiy Field. Apart from a faint feeling that everything about Sims in education was said 20 years ago and has been repeated at intervals ever since, I should judge the course to have been a great success. The delegates, about (in. in number, were nearly all associated with some form of teaching. It was an audience that hadn't very much to say, and rather left the talking to the experts, but on tinother hand, a great many sound facts were laid before it during the week, which must have stimulated many members to reconsider the whole question ot educational films and of other visual media — with increased interest. The visual education experts spoke of the new approach to teaching suggested by visual material, on the problems of using visual materia] correctly, and on the practical aspects of still and cine-projection in the classroom. Geoffrey Bell discussed scientific films, their importance to the community and their application to classroom teaching. It was a peaceful, academic week until the Thursday morning, when Mary field's ta11; on "Children's Films." raised the monopoly question. She described the Children's Clubs run by the Odeon and G.B. circuits. These clubs show a programme of films on Saturday mornings, to about an audience of about 250.000 children. Mary Field is in charge of the production of films for these shows and is advised by a Committee consisting of nominees of bodies concerned with children's education and welfare. This Committee will be responsible for the type and content of film shown to the children, but no adults can go to the children's shows. Following tins, our old friend Mr. Rank, who had been quiescent during previous sessions, crept into the general discussion. It was an interesting experience for us to hear the case A.C.T. has put so often being ably expounded by a delegate working at the B.B.C. The discussion by no means cleared up doubts on this aspect of Mr. Rank's monopoly. but most of them must have vanished after Rod Baxter had surveyed the future during his talk on "Documentary Film" the following day. (hi balance, I think the week's course stimulated the right ideas about films, in this case mainly educational films, in the minds of the people present. But I feel that more could have been (Cue if .... and that's why I think there are too many conferences. Let's go back to the W.F.A. confet nee. In lus speech, Uderman Reeves asked lor a film fund and a free film library. There's nothing wrong with either of those points as such. Bui you can't just separate them 'iff like that from all the other