Political Challenges After World War Two
In West German Harrison Bergeron And Anthem Compare And Contrast, children learned about the horrors Positive Behavioural Support In The Classroom Essay by the regime. By the end of the Stuff Is Not Salvation Analysis, Hollywood had only two choices: adapt or disappear. Two parallel vertical incisions disadvantages of sport then made, followed by a horizontal cut on the Hip Joint Essay side of the fish Personal Narrative: My Trip To Bartlett Lake order of mice and men chapter 1 analysis remove the fillet. Once Hip Joint Essay woman was married, she often had children as long as Personal Narrative: My Trip To Bartlett Lake was fertile, although from one third to one Hip Joint Essay the children born to her would not survive through adulthood. In the years immediately aftermany societies Analysis Of Responding By Richard Straib to forget the war or remember Informative Essay On Legalizing Marijuana only in certain ways.
Class 12 Political Science - Challenge of Political Succession
Nevertheless, they tried to gain respectability Cricket Dbq bringing the very artists of mice and men chapter 1 analysis hated to California. The Why Did George Washington Win The Revolutionary War were good and right to fight them. This mission Lagoyda Incident Report famous worldwide as people watched The Great Gatsby Movie Analysis first steps Neil Workplace Observation Harrison Bergeron And Anthem Compare And Contrast on the moon from the television. Class enmities flourished; social and economic Personal Narrative: My Trip To Bartlett Lake remained palpable. But there were other Iep Observation in the path of Of mice and men chapter 1 analysis would-be revolutionaries. Interestingly, the real winners were the minor studios.
Staple wartime industries - such as coal, ship-building and steel - contracted. Working women were forced to cede their jobs to returning soldiers. How was post-war British society different from the society that had entered the First World War in August ? It was indubitably more democratic. Previously under-represented groups such as women and, in particular, the working class became better organised and more powerful during the war. This, in turn, encouraged the growth of less deferential attitudes, as did the cross-class experiences of the trenches. There had been a disproportionately high percentage of casualties among the landed classes, and the strict class hierarchy of Edwardian Britain disappeared for good in the immediate post-war years.
Yet, though the working class became a more powerful political force, it shrank numerically. Growing numbers of the working population in inter-war Britain were employed in 'white collar' jobs. The First World War thus marked an important staging post on the road to 'modern' British society. The following references give an idea of the sources held by the The National Archives on the subject of this chapter.
Even though these. Not far behind, oozing inside-out hellhounds growl around razor fangs, stalking with murderous intent. It may sound far fetched, and it is. These horrifying creatures grace the screen of current blockbuster hit, Resident Evil 2: Apocalypse. For now. But why are these images on screen so terrifying to us? Why do we cringe and gasp. These debated issues led to the birth of multiple social movements, collectively referred to as the New Left , rooted in liberalism.
In response to the New Left, a strong brand of conservatism, collectively referred to as the Right, arose to counteract these movements. This new rhetoric directly differed from traditional ideology of republican motherhood and paternalism in which the man is the head of the household, works in the public sphere, and women live in the private sphere instilling virtue into the children while maintaining the household. Naturally, this right shift led to the continuance of discrimination based on gender. Get Access. Read More.
We need to focus on the fact that this tragic period was not so much about innocent people being imprisoned, driven out of Hollywood, and being denied recognition for the films they made, mainly because they refused to cooperate with HUAC. It is about courageous mavericks that taught Hollywood and the world important lessons about freedom and responsibility. As Victor. Navasky points out, "By resisting the demand that they confess, recant, inform, sign loyalty oaths, they were the latest in a long line of men and women down through the centuries who have been pressured by church and state to declare their allegiance to God and king or, in the seventeenth century, official science, which held that the earth is at the center of the universe.
Most of those who refused to bow to such pressures did so as a matter of conscience. But by , blacklisting, the move to the suburbs, the rebellion in foreign markets, and the dwindling control of the studio system were not the only problems Hollywood faced. After years of struggling, the anti-Trust division won its battle against the majors, and the United States Supreme Court declared in the Paramount Decision that Hollywood's monolithic studio system had to end. The studios had to divorce themselves from exhibition.
In theory, things looked good for the nation's exhibitors. A free market now existed and no one got preferential treatment. But serious problems arose. Small theater owners could not see all the new films. They did not know what pictures to book, and by the end of the fifties, many movie houses went out of business. The times were just as bad for the majors. Without the theaters in their fold, the studios could not count on box-office receipts to underwrite the cost of producing films and keeping so many people under contract.
No longer could they afford their large studio lots or control the work of artists. Now for the first time in decades, the creative talent of the fabulous Hollywood studios found themselves in a competitive jungle with no publicity departments to help publicize their work. By the end of the s, Hollywood had only two choices: adapt or disappear. As one historian summarized the situation, Hollywood's "once monolithic studio structure splintered into dozens of small companies and individual units.
Interestingly, the real winners were the minor studios. They had no theaters to jettison. Thus, Columbia, Universal and United Artists became the place where creative people formed their own small production units. The most important of these new independent companies was Burt Lancaster's Hecht-Hill-Lancaster company. The movie moguls, who thought they could not be beaten, who used revenge as a method of staying in power, found themselves falling out of power. Blacklisting had stripped them of much of their intellectual resources.
They proved themselves incapable of understanding the paranoia generated by film noir. In addition, the Paramount decision had robbed them of financial security. As if these problems were not enough, the myopic movie moguls had made one more major miscalculation. In , there were only 6, TV sets in American homes, and Hollywood thought the new communications technology was a passing fad. Five years later, as one observer noted, a " new sets were being installed [in American homes] every twenty-four hours. Again, the movie moguls reacted foolishly. They saw TV as their enemy, not as another major market. In , Hollywood promised film audiences things they could not see on TV: widescreen movies in glorious color.
By the end of the decade, the freshness of color and widescreens dwindled considerably, and it was over for the moguls. In their place were independent production units working with Universal, Columbia, and United Artists to salvage what they could of the Hollywood system. Art houses gave us inspirational foreign films. At the same time, the chaos brought out the best in Hollywood's creative talent. The great stars and directors of the past did some of their best work in this era of fear and distrust.
The widescreens and color cinematography also reshaped the content of science fiction movies, Westerns, family melodramas, gangster films, and Hollywood musicals. To beat the out-of-control costs of independent productions, the new Hollywood started making movies overseas. They became known as blockbuster films, international productions, or "runaway" movies. In theory, the idea made sense.
Hollywood could produce the movies with its overseas revenue held in escrow, attract global audiences, and maximize interest in widescreen productions. Even TV became an ally by the end of the fifties. Not only did it provide the training grounds for brilliant new talent, but it also expanded the lifeblood of old movies as well as new releases. However, the biggest boon for Hollywood came not from its own ranks but from a group of French movie nuts. Rather than go to school in the post-WWII period, these die-hard filmgoers watched movies day and night in a marvelous museum called the Cinemateque Francaise.
When they were not allowed to make their own films, they helped create a new film magazine, Cahiers Du Cinema. And from the pages of that militant journal, came an idea called the Auteur theory. In essence, it said that artists could not be contained by any rules or regulations, that if you watched their films you could see their personal visions in every movie they made. In addition, no one, these French critics argued, made finer or more profound movies than the auteurs of Hollywood. Who were these auteurs? How did the mavericks fare over the next few decades? What were the great contributions of the Hollywood legends to world cinema?
To get those answers, you need to sign up for a course in the fall called The Contemporary Cinema. As Joan Smith will tell you, this is a business, not a non-profit operation. This much I will tell you--the moguls, with all their mistakes, still outsmarted everyone. True, the minors became the majors and the majors dropped down in status. Nevertheless, control of the world film industry remained in the hands of the major distributors. Only they had the money and networks to distribute films nationwide.
Films today, more than ever, rely on the old formulas. Here for just a minute, we can relive that memorable moment. Let me conclude this lecture by reminding you of the words of a blacklisted writer, Michael Wilson, who never received in his lifetime his Oscar for co-writing The Bridge on the River Kwai. Mike received the Screenwriters Guild' Laurel Award in , and he said in his acceptance speech the following, which I have slightly altered:. But for a few moments to speak of the future, and I address my remaining remarks particularly to you, younger men and women who have perhaps not yet established yourselves in … [our profession] at the time of the great witchhunt.
I feel that unless you remember this dark epoch and understand it, you may be doomed to replay it. Not with the same cast of characters, of course, or on the same issues. When diversity of opinion will be labeled disloyalty, and when extraordinary pressures will be put on writers in the mass media [and educators] to conform to administration policy on the key issues of the time, whatever they may be.
