Juvenile delinquency (1955)

JUVENILE DELINQUENCY 77 clittic-ult to observe the direct etieet. if uiiy, of. say. that situation in Uhirkboard Jiui<;le which dealt with an incorrigible teenage boy at- tempting rape aaainst the teacher. Incidentally, she was shown to ha,ve otl'ered s()ine provocation. I donbt whether a film of this dramatic in- tensity can fail to arouse some imitative behavior. At least, it must set loose inherent tendencies to violence, even if .when it resiches construc- tive conclusions, is conmiensurate in dranuitic i)o\ver with its graphic exposures of violence and hoodlumism. I do not think that Blackboard Jinigle has this balance, although I will say it was an intelligent, well-directed, beautifully produced pic- ture, technicallv, and in a certain sense artistically. I might express an opinion—I do seem to be using the personal pro- noun too nuich. Mr. ('liainnan—1 believe youths already involved in crime and violence will innnediately identify themselves with the ring- leaders in Blackboard Jungle. And the measure of villainy shown in the film would suggest to their minds the measure as heroic leader- ship which thev themselves imagine they have. I am not suggesting that expose about social structures or criticism about public institu- tions, such as schools, prisons, hospitals, et cetera, should not occur in screen drama, nor that some producers who choose such subjects lack a deep and proper sense of public responsibility. I do sn<»-<'-est, however, that caution and sane dramatic balance are necessary ^vhen crime and juvenile or adult sex situations are real- istically"^ posed in movies and television. And I do not think this cau- tion has been exercised during the past 2 years. Some producers argue that since the screen enjoys tlie same con- stitutional right to freedom of expression as the press, that anything that can be described in print, in books or publications, newspapers, so forth, can, with equal freedom from all restraint, be safely and justifiablv described in motion pictures. This takes no cognizance of the much more powerful impact motion ])ictures have on everyone, young and old, especially wlien they are conveyed to mass audiences, in the iiewly improved wide scieen technique, with these wonderfully amplified sound effects. Again it is sometimes argued in Hollywood for every picture deal- ing with crime, brutality, hidden sex, the movie industry turns out a dozen morally good and decent pictures. This poses to my mind a whole string of fair balance. When someone takes i)oison, the sure antidote is not found by reachino; down a bottle from a crowded shelf labeled "nonpoisouous." Imitative behavioi- undoubtedly can be inspired by films in which crime is validlv presented with "taste and restraint. This is an impoi-- tant admission to make, because we see that sometimes crime and such things are handled with restraint. Now, on May 19. 1951, Johnny Belinda, an excellent film for adult audiences, was'shown at a children's matinee in Buena Park, Calif.: it was a Saturdav afternoon. In it a deaf and dumb girl was criminally attacked by a'brute. The scene was sensitively ])Iayed by two out- standing and capable actors, Jane Wyman and Stephen McNaulty. It was absolutelv essential to the story. I believe the scene could not have been more delicatelv ])resented in view of its nature. Yet, police records and theater timetables indicated to me that shortly after witnessing that scene on the screen a young man named 64765—55 G