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 seemed to me to be utterly incomplete. So I offer this material to psychologists as very preliminary material for further study. It would be impertinent for me to attempt an appreciation of the dream material myself. I should like only to say that several of the dream descriptions (e.g., No. 40) appear to me as quite remarkable and important, while others (e.g., No. 33) are vague. In any case, they should enable us to form an idea of the extent to which the film experience leads to dreaming (in all forms), and also of how very important it would seem to make a thorough study of nightmares as resulting from films. When I say the documents are representative I do not mean this in any way in a numerical sense. No attempt is made in this book to arrive at quantitative results. Not that I think that quantitative results are unobtainable. But I think, until we have studied the qualitative structure of film experience, any quantitative appreciation must remain vague. Nor does this mean that we have overlooked certain numerical facts our documents may be able to tell us. Here for example, is a tabulated list of some points which are perhaps not unimportant: Total Number of Protocols: 68. Men 19 c. 28 per cen Women Age Groups 49 c. 72 55 33 Under 20 years 29 42.6 33 35 20 to 25 years inclusive 15 22 53 53 26 „ 30 „ >> 6 8.8 5 3 5 5 31 » 4° „ 33 3 4.4 53 33 Over 40 years 8 11. 7 35 33 Unspecified 7 c. 10 33 33 Married m _ 8 11. 7 33 33 Single ~ 52 c. 76 35 55 Unspecified 8 11. 7 : j 53 (Nearly all in this category are very probably single but do not actually state the fact) . It is certainly significant that 72 per cent of all the contributors are women and that 42.6 per cent are under twenty years of age. The film industry is, I believe, particularly conscious of the latter 263