Motion Picture Herald (Jan-Feb 1939)

12 MOTION PICTURE HERALD January 14, 1939 What do you mean N November public announcement was made of an agency, entitled "Films for Democracy". The accompanying statement of policy was vague, indefinite and garnished with catch-line phrases frequently met with in utterances of radical propagandists. Various persons whose names are associated with the enterprise have been identified with left-wing activities. Irrespective of the character of its political objectives, "Films for Democracy" appeared plainly as an effort to invade the theatre screen with political haranaue, however adroitly disguised, and to capture for partisan, political purposes the vast audiences which customarily attend motion picture theatres in search of relaxation and diversion. On account of these and other considerations involving the industry's responsibility to protect its audiences against being used, without their knowledge or consent, as guinea pigs for the experiments of political theorists, Motion Picture Herald registered its disapproval of and opposition to "Films for Democracy". Specifically this opposition was based on: ( 1 ) The Herald's established policy generally in opposition to any and all attempts to use the entertainment screen for prejudiced, partisan propaganda, whether political, commercial or of any other character. (2) Indications that the carefully disguised purposes contemplated the surreptitious use of the entertainment screen for the promotion of foreign ideologies destructive of and not in support of American democracy. For purposes of clarification as to the latter consideration and in order to void any suspicions that may in point of fact be ungrounded, the Herald has published in the past three consecutive issues the following request for information: "INFORMATION, PLEASE! IN sequel to editorial expressions presented in Motion Picture Herald have come certain criticisms of what has been deemed the attitude of this publication toward "Films for Democracy", which some contend is a constructive, patriotic movement for the preservation of the traditional democracy of the United States of America. Motion Picture Herald therefore considers it appropriate to ask "Films for Democracy" clearly, officially and publicly to declare its position with respect to: 1 — The political theories commonly known as Communism. 2 — The political theories commonly known as Fascism. 3 — The political theories characteristic of both Communism and Fascism, and commonly described as Totalitarianism, tinder which the state reserves to itself complete rights over the life, liberty and pursuits of the individual, denying to the individual those rights held under the traditional American system as a natural and inalienable heritage. MARTIN OUIGLEY." Although the Herald's criticism and accompanying inferences relative to "Films for Democracy" have been assailed in unrecorded remarks by interested persons, no reply has been received to this request for a definite, clear-cut statement of position. This failure to reply, together with various collaterals, is reasonably susceptible to the following interpretation: "Films for Democracy" is unable to repudiate all foreign political philosophies, including Communism, which are a threat to American institutions because its real purposes are sympathetic in whole or in part to Communism and because it is from that sector it expects its support. If this interpretation is objected to and if an authoritative statement categorically disavowing all objectives commonly regarded as subversive is' presented, the Herald will be pleased to publish it. In the continued absence of any such categorical denial the industry and interested persons generally will remain in little doubt as to where "Films for Democracy" stands. MARTIN QUIGLEY. A Letter Motion Picture Herald: In reply to your letter enclosing a clipping referring to "Films for Democracy," I have no authority to speak for the organization, but take the opportunity to make the following statements for myself: 1 — I am absolutely opposed to "The political theories commonly known as Communism", to quote your phrase; or, to use my own, I am absolutely opposed to Communism, the Communist Party, Communists, Reds, Pinks, and that ilk, my strong views on the subject being well known to my friends. 2 — I am absolutely opposed to "The political theories commonly known as Fascism". 3 — I am absolutely opposed to "Totalitarianism", or "Authoritarianism", and to all political "isms" except Americanism. When "Films for Democracy" wrote, requesting permission to use my name as one of its sponsors, and explaining its antiNazi character, I replied that they might do so if it was clearly understood that I was both anti-Nazi (or anti-Fascist) and anti-Communist, and would have no connection with any organization whose political views differed with mine. At the dinner which took place shortly thereafter, and which I attended, I noticed that my name had been used as one of a group of "founders", this, I take it, because of my anti-Fascist and anti-Communist play, "Blood of the MartyrV based on a story by Stephen Vincent Benet. This play, first produced by the Federal Radio Theatre, was first published separately a little less than a year ago. At the dinner referred to there was speech-making of an anti-Nazi and antiFascist character. Communism was not mentioned, nor were any doctrines of a Communist character expressed. The thought developed at length was that since the commercial motion picture enterprises hesitated to attack Naziism and Fascism, fearing loss of European business, there was a place for an organization dedicated entirely to attacking those philosophies. I trust that the above answers your questions. You are at liberty to print this letter. Faithfully, PERCIVAL WILDE. Wildeacre, Sharon, Connecticut