Another day...another cup of coffee...Now Orphan sponsored!!! Early morning stragglers slowly make their way to the second floor.
Richard Allen’s introduction referenced Jonathan Kahana’s book, Intelligence Work: The Politics of American Documentary, and Jennifer Zwarich’s dissertation on this topic as his entry into this world. Zwarich won the NYU dean’s award for her work. Allen noted that Zwarich is a prime example of the effects of the orphan film movement on emerging scholarship. The other presenter, Charles “Buckey” Grimm, is an independent researcher studying Department of Agriculture films. Jennifer Zwarich served as an invaluable sounding board for Grimm's own research.
Charles "Buckey" Grimm. Photo by Rick Prelinger.
Grimm’s focus was on the early history of the USDA Motion Picture Service from 1909-1930. They established their own film lab for production. Research sources included the National Archives in College Park, Maryland. Another vital source was the grandson of George R. Gurgens?, a staff cameraman with the USDA from 1912-1943, who had access to his grandfather’s artifacts. The original lab consisted of two small rooms, 8 x 12 feet each with cameras, two wooden trays, and a tin rack for developing, fixing, and printing.
In 1908 the Wright brothers negotiated with the government to employ lighter aircraft for military use. Grimm screened a rare USDA clip of a tragic test flight with Lt. Thomas Selfridge and Orville Wright. Selfridge suffered a fractured skull and died shortly thereafter, while Wright was hurt badly and required several months of recovery. In their early history, the USDA often filmed events in the DC area. These were often not their own constructed scenarios, but rather actual events. They also shot at the Panama Pacific International Exposition. Ultimately, the USDA tackled many subjects including sanitation, better farming technique, and eradication of disease.
Later, possible shooting scenarios were submitted for approval by committee. Films were not only USDA-centric, but were utilized by many branches of the government including the Forest Service, the Office of Public Roads, and the Bureau of the Animal Industry to name a few.
This lab was not necessarily set up with the knowledge of Secretary James Wilson. O.H. Benson, renown for his work with the 4H club, was recruited to bolster support for the lab. Benson covertly filmed Wilson to show him the pedagogical benefits of the new film laboratory.
One memorable title from the USDA: What Will Uncle Sam Do for Two Cents? Got some twitters out of the audience....
A short chronology…
1918- USDA develops a system of film distribution to fairs, exhibitions, and some commercial prospects
1919- USDA filmed for Forestry Service
1920- Fred W. Perkins took over and installed a full motion picture lab (He directed The Red Enemy about the different uses of trees and lumber and their effect on industry)
Jennifer Zwarich's talk was entitled "The Bureaucratic Activist: Federal Filmmakers and the Struggle for Social Change."
The discussion started with mention of Albert Fall, Secretary of the Interior under President Warren G. Harding, of “I Drink Your Milkshake” fame. He believed the moving image could bring Americans into the fold and encourage patriotism. It also fulfilled the desire for transparent government and informed citizens.
Jennifer Zwarich. Photo by Rick Prelinger.
Zwarich’s contention was that some government films did deal with social problems and effected change. These sponsored films weren’t always a self-affirming project. They actually sought social change within the system of status-quo. We see this especially with post-war “tick” films. The cartoon, The Charge of the Tick Brigade, focuses on cold-blooded tick thugs that attack and kill two cows. This more light-hearted fare was often paired with a more standard informational film for public viewings. One such example is Mollie of Pine Grove Vat. This title was often lent out due to its effectiveness with rural audiences. The mantra was to bring the world to those who wouldn’t seek out this info for themselves. Both these films were part of an aggressive tick eradication campaign.
Another “improvement” film Zwarich found was Helping Negroes to Become Better Farmers and Homemakers (1921). It was an early attempt to address the paternalistic “Negro Problem,” later canonized by the Mydral study. The film was mostly seen as part of the movable school enterprise for the rural south. It dealt with many subjects:
The boll weevil scourge
Advice for setting a table
Whitewashing a fence
Planting in your garden
Building a stable chicken coop
This particular film was from an ongoing series. All contained musical interludes and were mostly filmed in Alabama and Mississippi. Hence, the focus was on very regional concerns. Zwarich concluded her talk with a tantalizing question---Can these films also be read as repressive in some way?
Question of the Day: Is it a theater for humans, cows, or ticks?
Answer: A Suicidal Tick Theater
- Wayne L. Titus