Fraternity-Testvériség, 1961 (39. évfolyam, 1-12. szám)
1961-08-01 / 8. szám
10 FRATERNITY discriminating in guiding their children in life’s activities. This includes, of course, the choosing of motion picture entertainment. Prior to World War II, motion pictures, unchallenged caterer to the “mass” audience, were all generally geared to family entertainment. But as films grew in stature this proved to be too confining and immature for a medium of such vast potential. Adult patrons demanded something more worthwhile in their movie-going experiences. Film producers met this demand. They recognized that more challenging and interesting subject matter and treatment had to be provided in film entertainment. So there is today a great diversity in film fare. Audiences — and especially parents — are free to select films with the same care and thoughtfulness used in selecting books, music and plays. If parents will take the trouble to inform themselves about motion pictures, they, or their children, never need be embarrassed by attending films they consider unsuitable to their tastes. Some well meaning individuals and organizations advocate laws to classify films to keep young people away from so-called “adult” films. Is this an answer? Hasn’t experience shown time and again that it is not possible to legislate mores and morals? No government classification system could take the place of parents. It is they who best know the emotions and attitudes of their children, and who can therefore determine with a greater degree of accuracy the motion pictures which are suitable for their children. Classification, wherever it has been practiced, at home or abroad, has never been shown to lessen juvenile delinquency or the rate of crime. Competent sociologists and psychologists say no conclusive evidence has ever been developed to show that motion pictures are responsible for juvenile delinquency. Classification based on specific age groups has never proved to be workable. The reason is quite obvious. Many 14 and 15-year-old children are more mature than many 17 and 18-year-olds, because of difference in environment, education and background. Maturity is not a matter of age, but is the result of many intangible factors. Further, legal classification would be misleading to many. So-called “suitable” films would not necessarily be good films in terms of quality — and parents might be led to believe that approved “suitable” films should be seen by their children. So it all comes back to the starting point — there is no substitute for parental responsibility. Despite the changes in the manners and mores of our society since the war, the U. S. film industry still produces a great many films suitable for families. For example, some 90 films last year — about one-half of total U. S. production — were rated by a recognized group of national organizations as suitable entertainment for young people and for the entire family. Family pictures available at local theatres all too often fail to receive the support of the family trade. If more groups, such as local
