Film Culture (December 1957)

fee FILM SOCIETY. SCENE Edited by Robert Hughes and Gideon Bachmann In the November issue, Elodie Osborn mentioned het society's work in presenting film programs for the children of her community. This month, Peretz Johnnes, head of the film program at the Museum of the City of New York, discusses films for children in a broader context. FILMS FOR CHILDREN If ever there is going to be an intelligent film audience, it will not be created by the adult film society, the college course in film appreciation, the cultivated film magazine, or by periodic or regular museum screenings. It is going to be done by exposing the young to the very best in the art of cinema — not once in a while or casually, but regularly and in a formal, organized way: even, if necessary, by compulsory methods, just as children are taught literature, painting, music, and dance. Few adults, if nurtured only on comic books, “True Story’ magazines, and dime detectives, will ever find Shakespeare. Similarly, few adults find their way to a full understanding and appreciation of the form and_ possibilities of film after having spent a lifetime with only the contemporary commercial cinema. From time to time, public-spirited individuals rise up in protest against what their children are exposed to in the local movie houses; and a “better film’? movement gets under way, Of a censorship committee is formed, or the motion picture industry itself sets up a ‘‘self-regulating’’ committee to clean up the films children see. The work of these groups, though limited, cannot be completely disparaged or disapproved. It has kept children from seeing some of the more sadistic of the commercial films. And if the films which the censors have approved show distorted views of life, if the values are peculiarly inhuman and often amoral, the blame cannot be put wholly on the censors. What has Hollywood given them to work with? These people are not producing films; they are merely screening out the worst — knowing that children are going to go to the movies, approved or not. The least that can be done is to sift out the most disturbing films, and this they usually do. But, by and large, the entire approach has been negative and has arisen out of fear. The purpose has been to keep the child from seeing deleterious films, rather than to show him the beauty inhering in this vastly complicated medium. Just like the comic book, the film never enters the school except during lunch or recreation hours. And the child is permitted to have it then only so he will keep quiet or out of the way. Of course there is hardly a school in the land today which does not have at least one 16 mm. projector; and there is hardly a school which does not have its ““A-V’ man and its own budget for film purchase or rental. Film is used extensively as a ‘‘teaching tool’ and some schools have gone so far as to make their own films. But these uses of film fall into the category of conventional didactics. They do not really demonstrate an interest in film. What is being done is simply a substitution of films for textbooks on every subject under the sun — except the film itself. The films are not being used for the teaching of film appreciation; quite the contrary. The situation is different in other countries, although to overestimate the amount and quality of activity abroad would be erroneous. There is of course the well-known Children’s Film Foundation in England, set up in 1951 in cooperation with the British film industry. Of the nineteen films it has produced (to my knowledge), five have dealt with robberies, five with spy rings, one with a smuggling gang, and only eight, mostly the more recent ones, have dealt with stories of “achievement.” Of greater interest in many ways than the CFF is the more recently organized Society of Film Teachers, also an English group, which has as its purpose the promotion of the teaching of film as an art form in the school system. In a membership brochure, the society asks: “Why are so many films so bad? It is because millions of film-goers pay to see them. Film is an industry as well as an att, and some of the businessmen who control it are content to turn out rubbish as long as the public pays to see it. Not until the public decides that it will pay only to see good films will there be any improvement in their general quality. This cannot happen unti! there is an improvement in the taste of film-goers — an improvement which can be brought about in school. Only when teachers understand this duty will children be protected against the morally and aesthetically (my emphasis) harmful influence of the bad films; only then will they enjoy to the full those valuable experiences which come from seeing good film; only then will the film have a chance to become an art both great and popular, as the Elizabethan drama was.” Membership is open to Americans at only seventy-five. cents a year, and the Society's journal, sent to all members, gives information of kindred film activities throughout the world. In India there is the Children’s Film Society (organized in 1955), which aims “to create and develop amongst the children and adolescents an appreciation of films.” The Dansk Skolscene (Danish School Theater), in which all Danish teachers’ organizations are represented and which has been producing theater performances for school children since 1921, extended its activity in 1937 to include film shows. Under its auspices a conference of 100 participants met in 1955 to discuss the problems of teaching film appreciation in the school. The Government Film Library, in conjunction with the teachers’ organizations and Dansk Skolscene, has worked out practical methods for incorporating courses of this nature in the school curriculum. Already six teachers in Copenhagen and two outside the city have started teaching film appreciation on various age levels. And so on around the world: France, Poland, Sweden, the USSR, Belgium. In this country, too, things are beginning to stir. More and more museums and libraries are showing and buying films specifically for children. A meeting jointly sponsored by the New York City Board of Education, the Metropolitan AudioVisual Association, and the Museum of the City of New York, will be held at the Museum on December 3 to discuss the topic “Children as Film-makers.” This meeting will try to show teachers and curriculum coordinators the value of teaching film appreciation in the schools. Shirley Clarke, a wellknown experimental film-maker, is now teaching a pilot course to fifth-grade boys at St. David’s School in New York City, and it is hoped that in the spring teachers will be permitted to observe her methods. But more important than all of these developments are the plans now being worked out by Amos Vogel of Cinema 16 to present a series of films for youngsters early in the coming year; and also the plans for the formation of the “American Center for Children’s Films,” an independent organization which will encourage the production, importation, and use of films for children, as well as the teaching of film appreciation to children of school age. Elodie Osborn in her article last month told briefly what her society has done with children’s film showings. She is indeed a pioneer. More film societies must follow her example. The film societies are the core of any intelligent film activity in this country. The film society members are the only people who have the knowledge and integrity to provide the nucleus of any further developments along this line. Films are available. Financially, there is no risk involved. The seed is there; it should be planted. PERETZ JOHNNES 2\