Documentary News Letter (1947-1949)

92 DOCUMENTARY NEWS LETTER CORRESPONDENCE sir : Why No Labour Films? draws attention to an important field of work. Doreen Willis's article poses the problem and I hope that DNL will not let it go at that. The next two questions are, 'What is to be done?' and 'Who shall do it?'. If the decisions reached and the actions arising out of them are to be realistic it is necessary to be aware of things as they are at present and the reasons for them. 'It might have been hoped that the advent of a Labour Government would automatically have solved it by opening out new vistas of social film-making . . .' Perhaps that is what a lot of people connected with documentary films thought, but why? Nothing ever happens automatically in human society and there is very little evidence in the history of the Labour Movement to suggest that such a thing would happen. Documentary offers a new technique in education especially suitable for the subjects which concern the Labour Movement, but the Movement has shown little interest in education of any sort within itself, much less in new techniques of education. By 'education' I here mean the education of the people in the history, problems and tasks of the working-class in all its aspects, political, economic, social and cultural. The very success of such documentaries as Housing Problems and The Londoners is at present a stumbling block to the use of film by the Government and something of the reason why is hinted at in Doreen Willis's remarks about The Railwaymen when she says 'But the idea which remained in our heads long after seeing the film was horror at the low rate of wage beingoffered. . .' And what about the working conditions, which in the case of the railway workshops are not regulated by the Factory Acts? How much the same could be said of road and sea transport, iron and steel, brick making, building and textiles. Even in the case of the mines, wages and conditions are still a matter of promise rather than performance. There is still a lot to be done before honest films of these industries can show a prospect that can make a practical appeal to the man who has a home to build or a factory to maintain. Until it is, one can expect a certain amount of diffidence on the part of the authorities who should be sponsoring them. All this does suggest that there is room for short discussion films on these subjects if only their natural sponsors, the Labour Movement, could be induced to embark on them. If the makers of documentaries still regard film as a pulpit in the service of the people they must be prepared to show initiative in making it so and get down to detailed activity in conjunction with the increasing number of groups and individuals in the Labour Movement who are interested. Nor should they forget that there is considerable TU activity within their own industry whose knowledge and experience should be valuable. Any such activity will almost certainly start in London, but London is not England and they will travel faster if they get things moving in other parts of the country as soon as possible. Regarding films made or making for the AEU, ETU and NUT & GW, are they going to be shown outside their respective unions and, if so, to what extent? It may not be possible to supply REALIST FILM UNIT Producers of Instructional and Documentary Films Since 1937 Producer— Brian Smith REALIST FILM UNIT LTD t) GREAT CHAPEL STREET \YI GERHARD I958 MEMBERS OF THE FEDERATION OF DOCUMENTARY FILM UNITS separate copies for showing by other unions. In that case will invitations be given to leading members of other unions to be present as guests at every show? Are shows going to be given to Trades Councils? Over and above these questions a specially conducted drive would greatly increase demand for the regular use of film as a recognized form of TU activity. It would then be possible to introduce and build up a demand for the regular making of films for the purpose. Films designed to recruit new members and to stir to activity the great mass of dead membership (the 'card-holders' who are the bane of all the active workers) would be widely welcomed. A couple of short films pointing out the possibility of doing this might be prepared by the pooled resources of the documentary industry with the assistance of the trades unionists within its own ranks. Not so much attention has been given to the Labour Party or the Co-ops. The latter are the more likely starters. But documentary has to face up to this: it is not a large organization compared with these three (Labour, TU and Co-op) and to cover them all it would have to spread itself thinly and so it must give careful attention to how much ground it can cover and which is the most promising to tackle first. Marked success in any one of these is bound to have a deep influence over the others. As far as the Labour Movement is concerned, a great deal of the future of documentary is bound up with it and the approach to it must not be by chance and haphazard but must be carefully worked out and as carefully put into practice. Yours faithfully, A. E. SCARR In view of the manner of Mr. Scarr's interesting approach to his problem the Editorial Board feels that members of the documentary movement would wish us to point out that documentary, although by its very nature inevitably interested in matters political in so far as they affect social progress, owes exclusive allegiance to no single political party, be it Conservative. Liberal, Labour or Communist. documentary reviews — continued from p. 89 Fair Rent. Data for C.O.I. Producer: Donald Alexander. Director: Man.' Beales. Photography: Suschitsky. Distribution: Non-T. 12 mins. This film manages to pack a deal of good sense and humanity into one reel. It is the simple story of how a poor Aberdeen couple succeed in frustrating the sharp practices of their landlady, with the assistance of the Rent Tribunal. One might have expected that the need for compression would force a superficial treatment. In fact the couple emerge as real characters and their attitude to the Tribunal, to the landlady, and to their neighbours is com eyed in its changing. de\eloping and conflicting reality. Most people who see this film (and it is to be hoped that it achie\es theatrical distribution) will yet a big kick out of the defeat of the landlady. Many, like the neighbours of these Aberdomans. will begin to get ideas themselves, thus making life increasingly difficult for the profiteers in homes. I he Scottish Office is to be congratulated on dealing with this subject, and one would only wish that it had been prepared to make a longer film. It would have been interesting to see the actual procedure at a public session of the Tribunal, and it is a pity the opportunity was missed.