Political cinema is more usually associated with the 1930s, but a nascent
political cinema did exist in the early years of the 20th century. Contemporary
journals, such as The Bioscope, made occasional references to screenings of
political films, usually at elections. Some political organisations and
politicians had used the lantern slide lecture to enhance their political
message; showing film was a natural extension to such lectures. In 1907 the
Kinematograph Weekly referred to such a lecture for the London County Council
elections along with what was, the magazine claimed for the first time, a
screening of a film. While the name of the film is not stated, it may well have
been something along the lines of the 'political pantomimes' which were produced
as a satire on a particular political issue or event. Such pantomimes probably
began with A Prize Fight or Glove Fight Between John Bull & President Kruger
(1900), a skit on the Boer War. Other examples include Political Favourites
(1903) and The Voter's Guide (1906). There are also a handful of films dealing
with the free trade issue (for example, John Bull's Hearth, 1903; The
International Exchange, 1905; and John Bull's Foolish Hospitality, 1910). Free
trade was one of the fault lines in British politics, hence its popularity and
comparative longevity as a satirical topic.
In spite of these fledging beginnings, political propaganda did not really
develop. Films were relatively expensive to produce, and as political films
would only be used at elections, their shelf-life was limited, as was their
audience. Cinema audiences went to the cinema to be entertained and to socialise
rather then to be preached to (hence the comedy and caricature elements in the
early political films). In addition, few among the working class, who made up
the greater part of film audiences, had the vote. Furthermore, political
meetings usually took place in town halls or hired premises, which may not have
been able to obtain the licence required to show films after the 1909
Cinematograph Act.
The January 1910 election, however, did see a number of examples of such
films. A handful of enterprising political agents and politicians held
screenings, usually mixing entertainment and political films. One particular
agent in that campaign screened films outdoors, thereby avoiding the licensing
requirements. The unfortunate Member of Parliament for Hull, Sir H. Seymour
King, held a screening of entertainment films for a group of children in his
constituency just before the election. Although he won the seat, a subsequent
court case overturned the result, judging the screening a form of bribery.
The second 1910 general election (in December) does not seem to have been so
well reported in the cinema trade press. Indeed, the election's main issue, the
power of the House of Lords and the budget, does not seem to have warranted a
film. Other issues of the day, such as women's suffrage and the role of trade
unions, similarly were not capitalised upon. It took a world war for political
propaganda to really emerge, and even then it took a number of years of total
war for the political benefits of film to be fully appreciated.
World War I advanced the need for propaganda. The British government soon
responded, setting up its own propaganda machinery, and found itself supporting
filmmaking efforts, either through its military departments, such as the
Admiralty, or through its own Ministry of Information, which was set up in 1917.
Eventually the government took over the newsreel company Topical Budget,
renaming it War Office Official Topical Budget in May 1917. 'Official' films of
the war were produced, along with propaganda trailers improving morale on the
home front.
While the war had advanced the cause of propaganda, the political arena had
become more complex. The national coalition government of Lloyd George, its
eventual collapse, the rise of the Labour Party and the fear of Bolshevism
contributed to an unstable political era. Few political films seem to have been
produced immediately after the war. The most noteworthy are a hagiographic
portrayal of Lloyd George in Landmarks in the Life of Lloyd George (1919) and a
film outlining the dangers of the Soviet Union in Bolshevism (1919). The film
industry itself wished to maintain the status quo and resisted involvement in
politics. This strategy was reinforced by the censorship of the period which
made any political film difficult to distribute. However, a number of
politically-minded and independent organisations began to explore filmmaking and
distribution, among them the Progressive Film Institute and the Workers' Film
and Photo League.
While these organisations and their films are important, the focus here is
the political parties' response to film propaganda. The Conservative Party seem
to have been at the forefront of party political propaganda, producing a series
of films in support of the national governments in the 1930s. Indeed,
documentarist John Grierson was impressed by the Conservative Party's propaganda
organisation. The party had its own film production unit, the Conservative and
Unionist Film Association, and a fleet of mobile cinema vans which, during the
1935 election, showed films to over 1 1/2 million people. The 1931 election
featured films with Stanley Baldwin and his national government partner, Ramsay
MacDonald, as well as the perennial issue of free trade, now referred to as
'safeguarding'. Similar films were made for the 1935 election, alongside a comic
film featuring Stanley Holloway supporting the national government. However, the
real strength of these films was their consistency. Films continued to be
produced and shown when elections were not looming, under the series Aims of the
National Government, covering topics such as empire trade and the recovery of
the economy. Government departments too became involved in propaganda, as in the
Ministry of Health's The Great Crusade (1936), about slum clearance, and the
Ministry of Labour's Workers and Jobs (1935), promoting the new Labour
Exchanges.
Both the Labour and Liberal parties failed to capitalise on film propaganda.
The Labour Party was politically at odds with itself, a situation made even more
complicated by its effective split with the formation of the National Government
in 1931. There were also a number of independent socialist filmmakers and
companies who perhaps stole Labour's thunder in the propaganda arena. The
Liberal Party, with its loss of political power and popular support, was equally
ineffectual in political cinema.
Politicians and political parties grew more sophisticated in using moving
images to communicate, particularly in the post World War II era, when Harold
Macmillan, for one, proved himself a very astute television performer. But these
films, however crude they might seem to modern eyes, show the roots of
party political advertising, as well as providing a fascinating glimpse of
Britain's political past.
Simon Baker
|
