Sociology of film : studies and documents (1946)

THE ADULT AND THE CINEMA only the Russians, under the spiritual leadership of Eisenstein,1 have to my knowledge made serious sociological-psychological investigations. And yet it would seem imperative to study the psychological and sociological aspects of colour emotions, particularly in view of the fact that most people visit the cinema from the 'cradle to the grave' and if I am not mistaken it is particularly the child's mind which is so extremely susceptible to the effect of colour. Our psychologists have studied colour emotions in industrial psychology. The entire field of the 'technicolour picture' has so far been neglected, though of course, not being a psychologist 'Quand je me suis mis quelquefois a considerer les diverses agitations des hommes et les perils et les peines ou ils s'exposent, dans la cour, dans la guerre, d'ou naissent tant de querelles, de passions, d'entreprises hardies et souvent mauvaises, etc., j'ai decouvert que tout le malheur des hommes vient d'une seule chose, qui est de ne pas savoir demeurer en repos, dans une chambre.' Here Pascal expresses admirably the despair of the city dweller. To test the justification of my thesis whether there is a fundamental difference of film behaviour between a London and a Norwich audience, I saw another film yesterday which I had previously seen in a North Paddington cinema. There the mainly proletarian audience expressed by hissing its violent disagreement with the main male character's vileness. The audience sided distinctly with the party who stood for moral justice. I insert a note on this film from the Eastern Evening News (August 7th, 1945) : 'Haymarket. — James Mason gives another excellent character study in They Were Sisters, in which he appears as a gay and heartless young man. The story traces the lives of three sisters, whose successes, tragedies and quiet happiness could easily be the lot of any average family. The sister whose character is the strength on which the others draw is played by Phyllis Calvert. Anne Crawford takes the part of the glamorous one and Dulcie Gray appears as the unfortunate. The story is taken from the novel by Dorothy Whipple, and Arthur Crabtree has directed.' Was there any contrast in the behaviour of a Norfolk audience? I believe there was. People remained completely silent (when later on there was a Walt Disney Donald Duck picture shown they laughed merrily). Perhaps the different behaviour of the two audiences may be tentatively explained in this way: The London proletarian audience expresses openly its sense of moral indignation. Here social standards exercise no restraint. Such an audience may be classified by its affinity to a child audience who hisses the 'bad man'. Note the phenomenon of participation mystique. The Norfolk audience may be (it was market day) an audience of village dwellers. There is participation mystique too, but 'the badness' as shown in the film is made so explicit that, I believe, the Norfolk audience is silently shocked because country people are not so consciously wicked as the behaviour shown on the screen. They were flabbergasted, awed. They may remain silent because they see something fancifully strange to them. There is wickedness amongst them too, but of a cruder, more natural type. The 'sophisticated' wickedness of the town dweller has not yet taken possession of them. The London proletarian audience 'knows all about it', but just because they know they condemn 'the bad man'. So I do think the results of both film visits in Norwich are in conformity with each other. 1 Cf. Eisenstein, The Film Sense. London 1943. See here the fascinating chapter on Colour and Meaning. 266