Sociology of film : studies and documents (1946)

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 ADULT AND THE CINEMA It might, of course, be objected that the documents are marked by a high degree of 'rationalisation' in so far as any answer to questions formulated by an investigator may reflect a gap between immediate experience and its formulation in words and sentences. There is no doubt that the questions have guided the authors in writing these documents, but I do not think they have marred in any way their sincerity. Indeed the sincerity with which the questions have been answered is perhaps the most striking general note of almost all the documents. The writers felt, I believe, a profound urge to help in an investigation, the importance of which they fully realised. One must also be aware of the fact that the majority of the contributors can have felt only little attraction by the offered prizes, as the money involved was inconsiderable. What may have been much more attractive is the distinction of becoming a prize-winner. In addition one has to bear in mind that most of the contributors are what one considers as 'movie fans'. The more violent characteristics of a 'movie fan' are certainly not absent from the documents (See document i)» But, generally speaking, the contributors reveal themselves as ardent picturegoers — and nothing else. Moreover, the 'movie fan' phenomenon has not yet taken in this country such acute forms as in the U.S.A. Until now we have not made a film star into an honorary mayor of any British town. The fact that the British *movie fan' remains unorganised indicates a profound difference between the still sound civic sense of the average Britisher and his American counterpart. It would be a fascinating task to undertake a sociological analysis of the fan-mail of British actors and actresses. It would probably also show that British film stars have, to an infinitely greater degree than their American comperes, a private life of their own. Perhaps one day I shall implement the findings of this book by such an analysis. Anyway, as far as our present authors are concerned, I am fairly convinced that their views on the moral and psychological impact of films on their lives may be regarded as representative of the great majority of the cinema-going public in Great Britain though, being 'fans' they may reflect film reactions with a somewhat greater intensity or perhaps it would be safer to say with a greater degree of 'rationalisation'. For an individual who is able to write about such intimate and delicate experiences may ultimately be freer from the magic of film than the person who goes twice or three times a week to his or her local cinema without ever attempting to bring film influence to his or her consciousness. I have tried to interview 260