Documentary News Letter (1944-1945)

CONTENTS WHAT IS TO BE DONE? NOTES OF THE MONTH FILMS FOR CHILDREN THE CHAIN AND THE LINKS THE DARTINGTON HALL FILM UNIT CANADIAN COLOUR SCHEME I 2 3,11 4 5,11 5 NEWS LETT ARMY EXPERIMENTS IN FILM PRESENTATION by J. D. For man 6 AUDIENCE RESEARCH 7, 14 FILMS OF 1945 8, 9, 10 FILMS REVIEWED 1 1 A film historian by Jean Benoit-Levy 12 BOOK REVIEWS 12, 13 FILM SOCIETIES 14 CORRESPONDENCE I IT" WSAiY VOL. 6 1946 Fifty-first Issue Published by Film Centre, 34 Soho Square, London w.l THfc. MUSEUM OF MODERN ART WHAT IS TO BE DONE? Received: \¥7"e are now entering on a period during which the Government W Information Services of all kinds, and not least the visual media, must be reconsidered, and their means and methods of operation re-shaped. This country has emerged from World War 11 with a system of information which was virtually non-existent in 1939 (although in the film field at least the foundations had already been firmly laid), and, despite the screams of the more old-fashioned sects of journalism (e.g. the Daily Express), there can be no questioning the continuance of the system. But there is now an opportunity to get rid of the more unsatisfactory aspects of information machinery, and to provide more up-to-date methods. The approaching dissolution of the Ministry of Information, and the emergence of a Central Information Office in its place, provide the opportunity; and there are signs of goodwill from all parties concerned in seeking and applying new methods. In previous issues of D.N.L. the successes and faults of the M.O.I, system over the war period has been perhaps sufficiently analysed. What is important at this stage is that the main principles of future organisation be properly assessed and analysed. In this connection John Grierson's visit to Britain at the request of the Government (to which we refer in a note of the month) is by no means irrelevant. A paper by him in which basic needs are summarised is now circulating in Government circles. This document is not for publication, but it is not, we are sure, improper to indicate that it briskly summarises the root-causes of the difficulties which have beset the information services. The basic problem is of course a problem of liaison — liaison, that is, between the necessary administration of national monies on the one hand, and the equally necessary creative work of the filmmakers on the other. During the past years, and particularly during the past six months, the gulf between these two functions (which should be complementary) has been widening. It is a gulf which must be eliminated if good work is to be achieved with speed, efficiency and economy; it must indeed be eliminated if good work is to be achieved at all. The reason for the gulf is basically that a modus vivendi has not been found between the civil servants and the creative workers or, to use a new Whitehall term, perhaps significant in itself, the "craftsmen". We are not among those who picture the scene as one of black versus white; of the saintlike artist in righteous rebellion against the reactionary civil servant. On the contrary, we believe that there are plenty of faults on both sides. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that the necessary liaison between the two functions can never be achieved unless and until the creative side works on equal terms with the administrative side on the highest levels of policy, planning and responsibility. Hitherto the film-makers (experts and creators) have not found themselves represented at policy level. Vital questions of policy, and of administration relating to policy, have been discussed and decided without their collaboration. The result, in terms of ideology, in terms of finance, and in terms of economy and efficiency, has been a dichotomy between the two elements. This in time has led to a feeling among the makers that the essential responsibilities of their job have been removed from them. It is only a short step from that feeling to a mood of irresponsibility. During the next few months, when the new C.I.O. has to be moulded (for the Prime Minister's statement was couched in terms carefully vague), it is essential that the closest attention be paid to ensuring a close liaison between administrator and creator. In this sense liaison demands an understanding of departmental information needs, of film-making itself, and of the specific financial and administrative controls essential to any work carried out with national funds. Thus the officers carrying out the liaison functions must have a knowledge not only of creative problems and techniques but also of civil service requirements. This means that the civil service on the one hand must willingly accept the creative role on a much higher level than tradition and dyed-in-the-wool concepts have hitherto permitted. On the other hand that the creative workers must be willing to shoulder the basic responsibilities of work in the public service to a degree which in the past has been if not impossible at any rate unattractive. It means, in fact, that the responsible figures inside the information set-up must, at a high level, comnand equal confidence from both creator and administrator; for which reason the word liaison is especially significant. There is no doubt that if this basic principle is accepted and applied, many of the irksome difficulties and intricacies of detail (finance, departmental delays, confused briefing and equally confused scripting, lack of planning and provision, etc.) will be all the easier of solution. The approaching demise of the M.O.I, has recently been sharply indicated by the resignation of Jack Beddington from the Directorship of the Films Division. Whatever the degree to which the documentary people may have from time to time crossed swords with Beddington during his six years at the M.O.I, there can be nothing other than unanimity in their recognition of the job he has done. Under conditions often of the utmost difficulty he has kept up a high level of production and distribution; he has commanded the