The screen writer (Apr-Oct 1948)

Record Details:

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 only people who can even mention the names of half a dozen screen writers are the movie reviewers and the Hollywood columnists. To the movie goer the screen playwright is a complete anonymity. It can be argued of course that the screen writer is seldom a creative artist, or the author of the original material, that his job consists merely of adapting the creations of others. But even the original authors are not known to the public as are the authors of plays or books. Their names have been carefully expurgated. The second, the more important difference, is the manner in which the dramatist of the theatre was rewarded. He was never an employee. He was an independent contractor, investing his time and talents in his plays and leasing them to an entrepreneur on a royalty basis. With the advent of pictures, or when the screen became the dramatist's stage, this royalty form of remuneration was abandoned in favor of a salary. The screen dramatist hired out his talents for a stipulated sum per week and accepted the status of an employee. The entrepreneur preferred it that way, believing it the only practical manner in which to operate. The screen writer preferred it that way, too, because in those early days the writer was only the director's appendage, and was in truth little more than an adapter. But even on this basis he received a relatively high rate of compensation compared to the pay of a newspaper man, let us say. This difference between employee and independent contractor is of extreme importance. It strikes at the very heart of the screen writer's economic status. The employee status works no longer to the best advantage of either entrepreneur or screen playwright, neither from a dollars and cents point of view or in the interest of better pictures. From a dollars and cents point of view it impels the producer to employ writer upon writer until the producer succeeds in getting a producer's script. This automatically places the producer in the position of the author, a role which he is generically unfitted to assume. Under the inspiration of a mere "showman," torn to shreds by front office criticism, rebuilt by "experience" and "story experts," the end result can inevitably be only a patchwork of rote, rule, rehash and reminiscence. When better pictures are made they will be better written by better writers. Better writers will never be employees. The very status of employee is damaging to the writer. It automatically divests him of his writer's responsibility, both to himself and to his public. When he writes it demolishes that indefinable link between writer and public. It robs him in the end of his essential individuality, his most precious asset. So for the screen writer who is only an adapter, with only his screen playwriring technique to warrant his usefulness, and who prefers to remain an employee, with the apparent security such a relationship affords, the future is not so rosy. For the screen playwright who holds the motion picture screen as his modern stage, and is an honest and creative artist, and who demands the freedoms necessary for creative writing, the future looms rosy indeed. The Credit Union Committee Reports: Our next general membership meeting will also be the organization meeting of the Screen Writers' Federal Credit Union, Inc. The United States government, which requires that all Federal credit unions shall be organized and launched into business under the supervision of its officials, will be represented by Mr. Sam Mitchell of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, which as already granted our charter. Under its liberal provisions as drawn by Mr. Mitchell, all members and employees of the Screen Writers' Guild, and their immediate families, are eligible for membership in the Screen Writers' Federal Credit Union. The principal business of the organization meeting will be the election of a board of directors, a credit committee, and a supervisory committee. Under these officials, our credit union will then become a going concern. Meanwhile, your committee is preparing a fully detailed credit union report, including the accumulated experience of studio credit unions, and the helpful advice of Mr. Sam Mitchell and Mr. Gurden Farr, President of the Executive Committee of the Credit Union National Association, over 12,000 credit unions extending from Puerto Rico to Hawaii, from British Honduras to Newfoundland. "Your Screen Writers' Federal Credit Union represents one of the most salient advances ever made in our movement," said Mr. Farr, "because it will be the pioneer in a new field of possible expansion — the first credit union to serve a professional talent group." JACK NATTEFORD, Chairman The Screen Writer, April, 194