New-York tribune., 1920-02-18
Sex and the Screen
A Defense of MoUies as They
Are Censored

To the Editor of The Tribune.
Sir: An item in The Tribune, un-
der the headline Churchill Denounces
Stage" has just come to our attention
From the clipping it appears thai
Thomas W. Churchill, formerly presi-
dent Of the Board of Education, de-
nounced the stage and motion pictures
in an address before the National No
ton Picture League, at the Broadway
Tabernacle. declaring that the ma
Jority of present-day plays and screen
attractions depend for their popularity
on "sensationalism and sex appeal"
The National Board Of Review,
volunteer organization reviewing abou.
SO per cent of all dramatic pictures
exhibited in this country and cooperat-
ing throughout the country with nu-
uerous groups and public officials hay
ing in charge the local regulation Of
motion pictures, IS compelled to take
issue with this sweeping statement. Il
IS admitted that tho motion picture
like the play, must deal in thrills II
1t is to make an appeal to tha popu-
lar audience. But to present thrills
upon the screen or the stage is certainly
no crime. 1t is done in direct answer
TO popular demand The great power
of the motion picture is that il supplies
thrill and romance to the great mass OF
people in whose lives the thrilling anu
the adventurous are singularly missing
The pictures relieve a suppression.
They allow peoplo whose existence is
drab TO imagine themselves as heroes
and heroines. Sensationalism may be
quite as innocuous as atter-of-fac
realism. To imply that sensationalism
IS necessarily related to indecency and
whtness for the mind of the genera
public Is erroneous in a high degree
AS for "sex appeal" the pictures are
less culpable-if, indeed, the presents
ton of sex, the great fundam ntal ii
life, is lpable-than the press and
the popular magazines. Aside from
this, to attempt to divorce sex from
drama or from any presentation OF
revelation of life is to take the motive
power away from the vehicle.
Does Mr. Churchill remember tina
probably in no great play on the Eng
lish speaking stage or OH any otheF
stage, and in no great book in any
language, has the element of sex been
entirely subordinated or left out?
The gist Of the matter is that Opin-
ions differ, and what may be objec-
tionable to Mr. Churchill may be en-
tirely unobjectionable to his neighbor
who IS as well qualified 20 hold az
opinion as Mr.. Churchill. The crit
eism Of the motion pictures is largely
based on an attempt 30 define by rule
OF thumb what is moral and what is
not moral. 1t is a mischievous desiret'
guard ones ncighbor from influences
from which ones neighbor in mos
cases does not wish to be guarded.
Mr.. Churchill is further alleged g
nave announced that an inquiry
being made in the public schools o.
New York to determine just what es
feet motion pictures have on the mlna'
of young children. In this connection
II is interesting to note that an III
vestlgatlon recently carried on by 'o
National Board of Review into tH
charge that the motion picture was ~
sponsible for a large proportion o
juvenile delinquency concluslses
proves that this is not the fact. ln
most experienced persons in the w0'
OF juvenile courts almost without
ceptlon have declared and gone
record that the screens connee''''
with the cause of juvenile error
practically nil.
WILTON BARRETT,
Secretary the National Board o.
Review.
New York, Feb. 10, 1920.