The educational screen (c1922-c1956])

February, 1923 EDITORIALS Public indignation rose like a tidal-wave in a week. The movie masters, understood, and ordered or allowed their president to forbid the showing of Arbuckle F films. The tidal-wave subsided as swiftly as it came. A few months passed. The million or so tied up in Arbuckle celluloid made its owners uneasy. Why not try once more to ''put it over"? To do this, their president must reverse himself and, at such a salary, why should he not do a little thing like that when necessary? It needed only an "explanation" to the public to account for the reversal. It came — over Will Hays' signature — that sorry subterfuge of "give every man a chance" — too flimsy, too transparent, too absurd to be worth calling impertinent. As if the maintenance of such an individual as Arbuckle in his unaccustomed luxury could justify the tarnishing of millions of young minds with the inevitable thoughts that Fatty on the screen again would inspire ! What was the result of Will Hays' reversal on the Arbuckle question? Exactly, we fancy, what Mr. Hays thought it would be when he issued the edict (reluctantly?). Emphatic rejection by scores of civic and professional leaders in national life, — by dozens of civil, social, and humanitarian organizations — by the National Education Association — by organizations practically hand-in-glove with the movie industry — by Mr. Hays' own Committee on Public Relations — in short, emphatic rejection by the nation at large of the preposterous proposal. And now even Arbuckle has recognized the verdict and announces his withdrawal from the screen! It is a pitiful state of things, Mr. Hays having to be rescued by the American public in his hopeless struggle with the powers that pay him. If lack of authority snuffs out hope of Will Hays' improving the theatrical screen does it do the same for the non-theatrical field? Perhaps, but not necessarily. For it is here a question of enlightenment rather than control, of expansion rather than reform. The task is to open the eyes of the movie masters to the great future of the film outside the theatre ; it is not a matter of modifying existing production but starting a new kind. Will Hays has only to induce them to consider seriously a virgin field that has greater possibilities than the theatrical field ever possessed, and this could be done without the powers of a dictator. Important negotiations are under way between Mr. Hays and some of the foremost educational leaders of the country. Something may come of it. Great things could come of it. We shall probably know something about this by the time the Cleveland convention of the N. E. A. is over. We do not question the sincerity of Will Hays' many utterances on the "educational" opportunity of the films but it remains to be seen whether there is anything behind his remarks except his own sincerity ; whether he is speaking for the industry or merely out of his own good heart. There is no doubt that the power accumulated by the huge industry could work wonders in the higher field, if the holders of that power could see it and direct the power properly. Will Hays might be able to make them see it, and thus bring about development of the motion picture on a scale that would make past achievements seem small. There is excuse for hoping that he may, as it seems the only thing left for him to do. All success to him in the momentous eflFort. 55