The educational possibilities of the film have not yet been fully
visualized, and this volume is designed to advance its usefulness in
the widest sense in the scheme of education.
“Do not train boys to learning by force and harshness, but direct them
to it by what amuses their minds,” said Plato, and this in a measure is
the theme of a section of this book dealing specifically with the use
of the cinematograph in our schools and colleges. One can imagine the
introduction of the film in class-work eliminating that Shakespearean
type of scholar who goeth “like snail, unwillingly to school.”
Emerson wrote to the effect that “the secret of education lies in
respecting the pupil.” Although he was not making allusion to the
pupil of the eye, it may be that to-day “the secret of education lies
in _attracting_ the pupil,” and the film is the important factor to
secure his or her attention.
At a scholastic conference on “New Ideals in Education,” at Bedford
College, Miss E. Holmes affirmed that the average teacher of to-day
could think of no other way of teaching than by grouping pupils into
classes and educating them by chalk and talk. That meant that the older
children had to mark time during the most critical years of their life,
making them tired of routine, and all desire to continue education died
of sheer inanition. The average teacher into whose soul had entered
the iron evil of tradition could rid himself of much routine, to the
advantage of himself and his pupils. Given a sympathetic Government and
a sympathetic local authority, teachers might do much as they pleased
in the way of striking out new paths for themselves, it is averred. The
aid of the film may be one of the “new paths” to knowledge.
It has been said elsewhere that when you introduce into our schools a
spirit of emulation, you have present the keenest spur admissible to
the youthful intellect. The screen can convey the proper spirit to the
boy and girl, whether the subject be scientific, literary, historical,
or biographical. Rousseau wrote that “Education is either from nature,
from man, or from things”--and the film is the modern medium. If
it be truly said that the eye is the window of the soul then the
possibilities of the cinematograph in our schools are without limit.
While the film can never supersede oral education, it may be most
valuable as an aid to instruction. Modern educationists would not
contemplate the idea of training the eye to the exclusion of the use of
the ear. The cinematograph may (to use a stereotyped phrase) “supply a
long-felt want.”
The children of to-day are such habitual Cinema-goers that too much
cinematograph is to be discouraged, but the film used in proper
perspective in the schools will excite and increase interest in
science, industry, art, geography, travel, history, biography and
literature.
“The eye sees what it brings the power to see,” said Carlyle, and the
inference is obvious.
A student of child psychology (blessed word) opines that a child
criminal is often the outcome of the cinema--forgetting, probably, that
child-criminals existed long before the “movies” were even thought of,
and overlooking the fact that “penny dreadfuls” used to be credited or
discredited with this in the days gone by.
Nevertheless, the film as a new force must be recognized. At a recent
Congress on Child Welfare, held in Brussels, the importance and value
of the moving picture was referred to as frequently as its dangers;
and it was agreed that the problem was not how to nullify, but how to
harness this new power.
For the sake of the children it was proposed that a form of moral
control of films should be set up. The control, it was suggested,
should be exercised by a central and special commission composed
of persons nominated by the Government and chosen from members of
elected bodies, from associations of artists and literary people, from
societies for the protection of childhood, and also from firms having
an interest in the film business, producers and importers of films.
Special exhibitions for children were advocated. This important phase
is treated upon at some length in this volume.
The film has, however, a wider sphere than in the confines of the
juvenile--that of the adolescent and the adult, summed up in the one
term of “the Public.”
“Public instruction should be the first object of Government,”
declared Napoleon (although Buonaparte never foresaw that he would be
so ignominiously filmed in divers manners for the “instruction” of
posterity). It is incredible, however, how much instruction the Public
receives from the cinemas. It is, therefore, an enormous power for good
or for evil.
It is well to review the position in this volume and not to shirk the
issue.
All manner of indictments have been levelled against the cinemas.
Writers have vied with each other in their condemnation. “The producers
have prostituted a noble, useful, and marvellous art before the money
god of the films,” it has been publicly asserted.
Much is being done to “ban” improper films, and it would be better for
the reputation of the film-world if these immoral photo-plays were
“taxed” out of existence. Such films are not “towards the education
of your daughters,” as Shakespeare writes. The Public can be its own
Censor. In the meantime educationists and social-reformers can strive
to guide public opinion.
“I have hope that society may be reformed, when I see how much
education may be reformed,” said a German writer once; and the reform
of the film will come about possibly only by the people educating the
film-producers to the view that it requires something else than the
“adults only” brand.
While this volume advocates “direct action” against this class of film
it is not intended unduly to emphasize the seamy side of the case. It
is recognized to the full that there are many splendid films being
“released” daily, and many managers are rendering a public service
by “featuring” only the best class of picture. These many admirable
productions are to be commended, and it is for the public to encourage
the producers by patronizing those houses where refinement is the rule,
to the exclusion of the other brand. Cinemas are public educators.
Mr. Arthur Weigall, author of “The Influence of the Kinematograph on
National Life,” has at various times lamented on the dullness of screen
plays, making Byron’s phrase in “Lara”--“dull the film”--almost a
modern one. There are some film-producers who still fail to understand
the mentality of a large portion of their patrons. Some films do not
appeal to the intelligence of the audience. Many patrons are wearied
of seeing what passes for melodrama. It would be a happy release if
there were fewer “releases” of this nature. It has been said that
until producers recognize that the principles of Art must come before
commercial considerations the film industry is doomed.
It is for the people to insist on the best, and only the best, being
“screened,” and the various “corporations” that are giving us mediocre
matter will be crowded out by the far-seeing producers who realize that
the Public, unlike the Law, is not “a ass.”
While the film can never supplant the printed word, it has been the
means of directing the attention of many people to the books available
at the Public Libraries. Quite recently the Rev. T. W. Pym, in an
article in the “Library Association Record,” said: “People will read
any book which they have seen on the films, whether it be Dickens or
‘George Eliot’ or any other author, whom, normally, that particular
person would not think of attempting to read.” The cinema is thus a
direct advertising medium for the Public Libraries. This phase, and
the use of the cinema as a publicity service for Public Libraries, has
been definitely outlined in the book on “Library Advertising,” and Mr.
Wrigley considerably amplifies this in the following pages.
This volume is a résumé of what has been done in film-land, and
the author advances numerous original ideas that will be read with
interest and profit by educationists generally, library authorities,
social-reformers, and cinema-goers collectively. It is not a technical
work, but the technics of the art of film production are also dealt
with. After studying this volume the reader will doubtless accept Mr.
Wrigley’s contention that “the film is the coming apostle of education.”