The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1928-03-24
By ROBERT WOLF.

| but there was no way of endowing 1t
with life, and so it would never act
like a human being.
AS live human baby would be to
such a monster, the Russian film in
dustry is to the American. l remem-
Der a studio / knew in AMERICA
vast new beautiful building, the last
word in efficiency, privacy, system,
and hauteur-hundreds of rooms, con-
tanning everything that money would
buy, the best brand of brains, of tech
meal equipment, pictures on the walls
of Adolph Zukor and Jesse Lasky
with a reverence that here in Russia
would be shown only to pictures of
Lenin-the place hummed with activ-
! ity and energy2but nobody knew
what it was all about-not an idea In
the entire building. In its dozen
studios faultless synthetic films
reeled off on faultlessly prepared
gelatin-full of ingenuity, full of in
telligence-all dead, all perfect, and
without one reason (save the box Of
fice) to exist.
Cooperative Art.
There are a dozen reasons why the
finn should be the most successful
form of art in Russia, and why the
Russian film should be the finest
achievement among films, but / did
| not expect this development so soon.
Whatever may be true of painting,
poetry or fiction, the movie can not
wait on Individual inspiration. Here
is a type of art deliberately and CO.
operatively conceived Only an in
tense collective emotion can supply it
with an adequate impulse and there
are not many such motives in the
world today. 1t is significant that
the best American films are those of
Chaplin, which are written, directed
and acted by one man. Individual
artists of this sort are always pos
sible, in capitalist countries as we'll
as Communist ones, but for the spirit
which transforms a whole group of
people into a creative producing unit
something more is needed than an in
centive to do hackwork for the wages
of a commercial movie magnate, and
chat something more no country but
the Soviet Union can today supply.
Represents Ruling Class.
There is another popularity of the
movies-they must to unique de-
gree reflect the theology of the rul-
ing class. Poems of protest, novels
of criticism, are perfectly possible
even in hostile environment-they
are brought out by minor publishers
every day. But a movie of rebellion
| is not conceivable. 1t represents too
great capital investment. The cine
ma has got to conform to the respect
ed standards of its time.
Art-all good art since the history
of art began-has had an essentially
honest basis-in times of healthy So
cial growth it has been optimistic,
positive, patriotic-in times of social
decay it has been filled with pes
simism and revolt What will happen
to the American movie which must
lexpress the ideals of Eddie Guest and
the Shriners, when even the ruling
classes no longer really believe in
these ideals any more? Obviously it
will be the fake it has become.
Russian Films Among Best.
| have only seen five Russian NOV
ies-Potemkin, The Mother, new
comedy not yet released called The
Trial of Citizen Somebody or other
q have forgotten the name), The End
of st. Petersburg, and Moscow in Oc-
tober. All of them were pervaded by
breath Of sincerity do not remem-
Der to have seen in any other films
except Moana and Grass. Two of
them were among the half dozen or
so best films l have ever seen, those
half dozen being Variety, The Last
Laugh, the Gold Rush, A Dogs Life,
Grass, perhaps The Kid, Ballet Me-
canique, and The Beggar on Horse
certainly Potemkin and The
Mother among the first. If my jndg
ment has any relation to the realities,
two out of seven or ten is not bad
for a film industry that has been
functioning about four years.
Now for the particular merit of the
Russian films. In the first place they
have something to say, and they say
it without being shamefaced or equi-
vocal about it. All good art is propa-
ganda art-propaganda for the art
lists peculiar view of life-it is bad
only when it expresses somebody
Ielse's propaganda, not thoroughly as
simulated or generated by the artist
himself When the sentences ring
false-when we appear to be listen
ing to the echoes of someone else's
stump speech rather than to the art
lists own natural and fluent voice, it
is because there is a conflict in the
artists personality-he is not really
saying what he feels. But if we shall
have to wait for great Communist
Ipoetry--and perhaps we shall-until
we have generation that has grown
up under Communism, and exhales it
as naturally as the air it breathes, it
is precisely in the film, so much more
consciously and collectively produced.