The film : its economic, social, and artistic problems (1948)

Page scan 000126 from The film : its economic, social, and artistic problems

Record Details:

Title:
The film : its economic, social, and artistic problems
Date:
1948
Publisher:
Basel : Holbein Publishing Company Basle
Volume:
The film : its economic, social, and artistic problems
Leaf #:
000126
Language:
English
Collection:
Books
Format:
Books
Contributor:
Niles Essanay Silent Film Museum
Sponsor:
Media History Digital Library
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Date Added:
May 02, 2025
Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

THE FILM-GOER Substitute for Reality! Properly speaking one should assume — An occasional flight from reality, a temporary forgctfulncss oi their normal atid perhaps the naive film-goer does Hfe, is for most people an urgent need. The pseudo-reality of the film offers an assume it — that all this technical, finan illusory satisfaction for their repressed social and erotic desires. But the illucial and artistic effort occurs exclusively sion passes rapidly, and afterwards the disillusion caused by real life imposes for the benefit oj the film-goer, the con itself with double strength. sumer of the merchandise film'. That this is not the case and why this is not the case has been thoroughly demonstrated. A good deal of responsibility for the standard of the film as it is today must he borne by the film-goer himself, or rather by the social conditions in which the great mass of film-goers find themselves, and from which definite psychological attitudes in the individual result. Therefore one cannot speak of guilt in an ethical sense, since this assumes the possibility of a freely responsible decision. But whoever lias spiritual freedom from the psychological pressure oj his social conditions is also free from the pressure the film production e.xerts on him. 57