2 Female Audiences of the

1 930s
1920s and early
Melvyn Stokes
O1c of the major debates rvithin film studies in recent years has locused on tl're issue of
lmale spectatorship. Tl'ris is explicable in terrns of a cornplex synergy o[ clcvelopments,
i1,:luciilg the rise of film studies itsctrf as a discipline, increasing academic interest in
r.lirss entertainment and popular cultlrre, the politicisation ol marny French him theo-
rists in the aftermath of May 1968, the n'rodern ferninist n-tovement in Britain and the
L.L-ritcd States, ancl, particulaily in Britain developments in avant garde fiim-making.
Fgr the rrost part, however, this work has been devoted to female spectal-orship as a
ir' thcoretical construct. "I}re fumale spectatorl Mary Ann l)oane pointedly cleclared, 'is a
l;
concept, not a person.'1 Seen against the background frorn which it emerged, this theor-
etical preoccupation is relatively easy to understand. Yet it has helped to conceal (and,
in all probability, irlso to encourage) the comparative neglect of female spectatorship as
delned in social, historical and cr.rltural terms.
.c \\&at work there has been in terms of thc irnalysis of historical female spectatorship
,
has tended to follow one of two main paths. Thc first focuses on how llollywood
l
addressed women in particular pcriods (through fihns tl'rernselves, product'tie-ups' anc
',.
licensing deals, advertising, putriicity, and fan magazines) as consllnlers of conrmodities
:andior constructed images of fen'rininitl'.2 The second endeavours to investigate thc
.,J
reactions of women spectators to 6lm texts cither by contextualising their response his-
I toricallyi or by interrogating spectators on their cinematic mcrnories in what have comc
'.
to be known as 'ethnographic' surveys. While the scconcl pathway seelns to offer tltc
'prospectofgettingclosertoanunclerstandingofhowwornetthaveexperiencedcinenla.
and the rneanings they created out ofthat experience, it has so far procluced less thatr ir
handful of publications.a From tr.l-re point of view of understanding the Afiericau fenralc
response to the cinena, moreover, ethnography in particular has tlvo major lirnitations.
The studies that have so frir appeared have rnair-rly dealt rvith foreign ratl-rer th;rrr
Alrerican responses to Hollywood. They also concenti'ate, for obvious reasotts to tlrr
with tl-re avrrllbility of sour"cc n'ntcrirls, on lcnrale filrn going sitrcc al,tltrd 1940.
ln this clrlptcr-, I will i,xirntinc lvlra( av,tilablc rrr.ttcrilt]s Iltctc rttt'lo r.oltsl ttltl rt Itis
'
ltttyoI li'tttitlt'spt'tlitlorshiP lrr';ttl tittlit't
rt'tiotl:
lllc t()]0s'ttrrl r"ttlt' l()lor' lll (il('l)'l'
lltis tv.ts.l ( I lt( l.l
1,r't
i.rl: it s,t\\,, ,ur,t11 ttt,ttty ,llti t lt.lttrl.t ttt,tlt.lt , lll, 1'lrr\\rll
(,1 lllr'
r,lll(l11
"y',1(lt,
llrt lrtrllr'r
'lr'vr'l6ptttlttl
ol tttot'ir""l'tt'l"rtr'llt' ltttt"\'rllorl ol
"'rrtttrl'
, ,trr,l llr, l,,riilrilril1i,, r,l nrrIr'l,,rrrr,rl ,,'ll r{l,ill.rlton,,l llr, rrr,lrr,ltl l,'r \\|lrr, rr, ll \!.1,
ll lvlAt-E AUDIENCES OF THE 1920s ANiD EARLY 1930s
llrt'
Ig116d
i*rrcciiatelv alier the ratifcation o1 the ninetcentli amendment, giving them
lltr' vote (1920). It witnessed lhe sor:iarl and cultur:r1 changes and conflicts of the 1920s
'rttl
tl-re enormous and r,vide-rirnging efcts of the Great Depression. Trc analysis of
lrrnalc spectatorshilr in this era, therefore, rnight perhaps offer fresh perspectives or
lrolh the history of the cineraa and tl-re history oi wornen themselves.
Ihe 'Myth' of the Dominant Female Audrence
'l'lrt'
carly exponents of 'scientifc' audience research, Gcorge Gallup (who founded
r\rrrlicnce Research Inc.) and Leo Handel (of the lvlotion Picture Research Bureau), set
,ul lo challenge what they saw as a widespread myth that women made up a decisive
rr r,rir ity of cinema audiences. Surveys done try ARI ior RKo in 1937-39 discovered that
rvrrrrcn rnade up'only'51 per cent of movie-goers.s ]n Hollywood Looks At lts Audience
(l'r'r0),
Handel
-
citing surveys conducted in t\ewYork City in Decernber 1941 and
l, rrvir in April 7942, as well as ARI hndings
-
insisted that men and women attended the
rttovics'ilt about equal rates'. Handel did concede that there lvas evidence to the con-
tr,uy, l)ut he disrnissed one 1942 survey conducted by the Women's Institute of
'\rr,lrcrrce
Reactions, r'vhich found women n'raking up 65 per cent of the rnovie audience,
.r,, rrrrst icntilc and'unrepresentative'.6
l'lrt'r'c has been a tendency, on the part of present,day film scholars, to assume that
t
',rllrrP
aud Hanclel were making statements that transcended the period in which they
\v.r(' rildc. Carth lowett, lbr example, rather than regarding ARI's Indings concerning
llr,
1rl1;;11.l11io,
of women in audiences as relating to the late 30s (when the surveys were
,lrn( ), siw them as effctively destroying the'long-hekl'belief that wolnen constituted
,r ,lr',r' rrrajority of the audience.T It is highly questionable whether results from one
l,r'r
rotl, cvcrl if accurate, can be applied to another. Women may have made up 51 per
, { nl (}l thc audience towards the end of the 1930s and in the 1940s, but there is no
trr'( ( ss,rry presumption that the same is true for earlier or later times. Moreover, whiie
I l,r r r, lt'l lr inrself was har dly ever reluctant to make claims for the accuracy and 'scientific'
n,rtur( ()l I'ris work, he was careful to qualify what he said in dismissing the idea that
\yrnr('n r'ridc up 65-70 per cent of audiences generally by admitting the possibility
lllr.rrlilr rrol the probability) thtlt'this proportion held true at some time in the past'.8
li'lrr.t' thc work of callup and Flandel, the evidence we have in relation to the gen-
'r,
,f,'r rorrrlrosilion of audiences is iargely impressionistic. In 1920, a New Yorlc Tirues
':
ivrrlIr r'stirrLrtcd that 60 per cent of movie audiences were women.e ]'he trade press, in
',il1",{'(lrr('rt yt'rrs, optccl iirr even higher figures.An article inPhotoplay in 1924 set the
lfr,fl,(rIi(rrrrl
rvorlrcrrat75pclcert;oneinMovingPictureWorldin 1927thoughtthey
rrr,r,l, rr1, .rrr ;rslorrishing t3 per ccnt of cinema audiences.l0 A local survey of school-
,lrrlilr.rr irr llv;rrrsvillc, Irr<lirrnir, in 1923 produced some rare empirical evidence to sup-
Irrsl
llrl ttoliott ol r()r(' rv()lcr llrirn rrrcn attending t]re movies. It suggested, during
llt, tt llltt:', llr.tl lxrys',tllt'rttluntc itt tltc nrovics dcclinccl while that of girls increased.ll
',rr, lr i '.1 rtn,rl('s ,ttt.l :ttt vr'vs ntrty ltitvc bccrr irr;rccur-atc indiviclurlly, btrt collectively thcy
,ttl:li, .l ,ltr ttttlrrt'r:itrc lvt llltl ol t'vitk'rttt l() l)utlr(ss lht'it[';r ol ir plcrlortrirrantly lcruale
.rtlrlr n( ( \\llrcllrct u,,,ttt, tt r,'.tllV lor nt, rl ,r torrsirlt r'.rlrlr' trr,rjor ily ol llrt. i irtt.rttlt :ttr.li
'
,rr,' ,,1 llrr''o,,lr(l l(l',, lr,rrvcr,,r.nr,l\,,r{llr,rll\, lrcrrl lr',rsitrr;rorl,rrrtcllr.rrrllrr, l.rrIllr,rt
I l,,llt'tv,,,,,1 tl',, 11 .r',',trtr,,l llr.rl, l,ollr llrr,,rrrilr llr, rr orvrr ,rll( l(l.lr,. .rrr,l llr,.t ,rl,ilrly lo
:
43
j
/
7
II
44
IDENTIFYING
HoL LYWOOD',S AUDIENCES
influenceflen,theywereitsprimarymarket..Ithasbecomeanestablishedfact,,asserted
theExhibitorsHeraldandiovingPictureWorldinMarchlg2S"thatwomenfanscon-
stitute
the
n1u;o'
pt"t"t'gt of
iut'o"'gt
or at least cast the final vote in determining
the majoritY Patronage''12
'ITheassumptio"'o"thtpartofanindustrydominatedbymen'thattobeprofitable
I ,, ril;;;.1
n ui.ty,o *or,r.r, had a profor,d effect on rhe way that American cin-
I i ema rleveloped
during the 1g20s anci i93s. A high proportion of 20s lilms were tmale-
,
:Itl;;'.il.rrr.
""a
romances.l3
.Ihey
were often written by women scriptwriters,
liequently
aclapting
material from popular fiction also rvritten by women mainly for
'
women.1l
They featured female stars' who outnumberecl
their maie equivalents and
,"
seemed to
spring frorn an apparently endless pool of talent
(the' 1920 census listed
I 14,000 actresses)'15
i'-' tht
"t'idttade'
such f,lms gave place to a whole new genre: the
'
.-om".r's
film'.16
During the {rst haif o{ the 30s' according to Tino Baiio' {lms of this
type mad.e
up over u q'''"u't"' of all the movies on Filrn Daily's
'Ten Best' list'
17
The star
system ltself was primalily aimed at womell
(one theatre manager lvould
later describe
most movie hott"' ut
'Valentin'o traps')"r3 Women made up the great
, ,rirn,,
"t ",ovie
fans and the discursive apparatus attacherl to the cinema in the form
of fan magazines
and articles on the stars in newspapers'
periodicals and-women's mag-
az-ines. w&s
acldressed
mainly to them' As Kathryn H' Fuller has observed'
the construc-
tion of
this discursive apparatlls
from 1915 onwalcl amounted to a rnaior
reconligurationoftheinlagesofaudiencesandfansthathadbytheig20smadefan
magazines,themulo.p.o*ot.,.oftheimageofafenrale-dominatedmovieaudience,,l9
As the Americo"
tto-y moved from one based on production to one oriented
toward nass
consumption'
the f,lm in<lustry was also quick to appreciate the import-
anceofwomenu..on.o*.,..CharlesEckertnotedthat.statisticswidelydisseminated
11 in the late
1g20s and early 1930s' showecl'that women rnade 80 to 90 per cent of all pur-
i :irJ;^*,r,r,
,r.,.rr'Through
adverrising associated
with product
'tie-ups' and
licensirrgdeals,businessandtlrestudiosincombinationSetouttosellarangeofcom-
i modities
,o *o*"" *ouie-goers'
These include<l goods
(clothes' cosmetics) designed
'forwon-rensownuse)ut*ti-t'*moregeneralhouseholdproducts(forexample'appli-
;r,
ances).
The need to appeal to women as conslrmers in turn influenced the character of
,l the flms
being
''ud"'
'Loaern Ilms' offered wider opportunities
for showcasing
procl
;,
ucts and
story-lines
were frequently created or arnended in order to tcilitate tie-ups'rr
Whetheritinvolvedtheproductionofparticularkinclsoffilms,thedevelopnrentofthc
star system,
or the attempt to appeal to women as consumers'
a weight of evidencc
",,_."cred
that the movie industry of the 1920s and early 30s was clearly orieulctl
ouSb!v-
towards
serving
(and therefore making a pro6t from) a dominarlt female irttdience'
TheattempttomaxirrrisethelcrnalcirtrdiencealsoaflcctellocalcclnditiorrsoIexhi
i' bition.
It helpecl <leternrine tvlror flnls wcrc sltowtt
(at onc
Poirlt'
lvlolly lashcll
jj
r.
i"
;;il,.thc
,.matincc
arrtlicner,., lr.rtl t.rrsitlt'r.rrlrlt,
rrrllrrcncc .r'r nr.vic prtttltrcti.tr
i ar.tot1t'cl'.,ttlltrity.l
et'r'l;rirt slrtts"') ll rrr'rv wt'll lrtltliti.rr;llly
ltitve irt{lttcttcccl tlrt'
(
..,;,;;,,;:,i
,,y'"'"'tl'".v
u"'r' rltt't'rr r\""t'ltttti lrt lt'trtttr'Allt'tt'
ittr lltitk'ol l()l-7 irt
'l'ltr'rtltr'Nhttltt\!'ttt(tttt'tttl'lt't"t""llll'"tlirrtlt''trlr''ttltvttlltr'll'tslltr'Itirrtilr'rl(()ll)()
ittt,tt|.ttttllttrrliv.tlrrt.'trlltltrr.rllr.tr.l.ltll{.,ttl,.l'.lllll'.llr.tlllrr..tltl..,.trrv..ll.t:ltltttl.sll.,ttl.l
(",rllr,rrlllrt.ttrl,y,ll)|("llllll'lolltr'tl
'rtrrtl'tltltr'r''rtll'llt''rrrl("llt'lr)lrrtlttlrttl'lll(ll('l'l\
FEMALE AUDIENCES OF THE 1920s AND EARLY l930s
ation'. The magazine's recommendations, Alen noted, included'art works in the lob-
bies, attractive fbrics and designs for interior decoration, and subdued and flattering
lightingl
23
Early Social Studies
\Mhile the movie industry of the 1920s and 30s operated on the assumption that women
were the most significant part of its audience, it did not itself take any public steps to
confirm (or investigate further) that assumption.2a There are, however, a number of
sources from outside the industry that shed light on women's movie-going habits and
preferences during this period.
From the earliest years of the century onward, many Americans manifested an
increasing concern over the impact of movies on those who attended them. One
expression of this concern was the demand that movies should be censored. Another
was the attempt to investigate movie audiences themselves using the methodologies of
social science.2s Since childlen were thought to be especially vulnerable to such influ-
cnce, most of these earliest investigations (Portland, Oregon, in 1914; Iowa City in 1916;
Providence, Rhode lsland in 1918) focused upon them.26 ln 1926, two psychoiogists
conducted a survey into the viewing tastes of adults in rural New England.2T Although
lhcse studies seemed to suggest, in general terms, the kinds of movies audiences
(cspecialiy young audiences) liked, they did not indicate whether females differed from
tutales in their cinema-going preferences.
lfhe first real evidence that this might bc the case came from the results of a survey
in 1923 of 37,000 high-school students in 76 cities done jointly by the Russell Sage
Itrundation, the National Board of Review of Motion Pictures and Associated First
National Exhibitors. While most of tl.re differences turned up in the last part of the sur-
v()y were geographical (boys and girls in New England had as their favourite frLn Way
lrown East
[1920],
while their equivalents in eastern, central and western states pre-
lcrrcd I'he Four Horsernen oJ' the Apocalypse
[1921] ), some evidence of different gender
lrrc{erences
emerged as well. Girls in the South, for example, also voted for Way Down
Iir.rt, while boys from that section supported
'lhe
Birth of a Nation (1915). In terms of
l,rvorrrite actors, boys preferred action or Western stars (Douglas Fairbanks was their
lilsl choice); girls opted for stars of romance (Rudolph Valentino, perhaps predictably,
loPP('1[ thg poll in this category).28
A sulvcy launchcd by Alice Miller Mitchell rn 1926 into the movie-going practices of
l{),0irJ
(
hicago childt'en both confirmed and elaborated on such clifferences. Mitchell's
'.,tttt1rlc
was clrawu liotn thrce groups: children attending high schools and the last four
yr',rrs ol glatlc schools, juvcr-rilc
delinquents, and members of the Scouts. In making her
rurvt'y, slrc rclicd
1rrirnirrily
uporl written questionnaires, though she also tested the
,lr { ilr.r(y ol lhcsc ;rgirinst rrratcrial acrltrired in a number of 'fol[ow-up'interviews
and
ItlIl ,r rrrrnrlrt'r'ol
'grorrp
<listtrssions'. lccause thc survey was conducted under super-
vt'*'rl r ontlilions (lr'r:x.rrrrplc, irr elirssroolns, with lcachcls plescnt), together with the
I'r, Illr,rl llr'tlrLltt'ttwctt'itsl<t'tl tltr'it rr;uttt'sir(l ir(l(lr'('sscs,il ispossihlcthalsomechil-
rlrlrr r,'r1,,rrrrlt'tl irr w,rys llrt'y r['r'lrrt'tl un(otlt(v('tsiill rtrrtl sali', Yc't rrtiurir obviorrsly ditl
Itlllltlttrlirrrrtl.rlcrl lry1;,,'.. llri11,,r,rrr,l \v('r ( 1(l irrrlirrt,l lrrlr6wtlIr'ist'llrt'irirrrswq;s
lt tt'!lrlrl irr rv,ryr llrr'y 111,11, rv,'ll lr,rvc l, ll rv, r, ( \lr('( l('(l ol llrlrrr. l ltt'tlurslionlr,ult'
/R
,t"j
il,[
46 IDENTIFYING HOLLYWOOD'S AUDIENCES
@u e! 31c ,f b
,e, lrd e ,
rw ld rritbll
ln !( ri hi! $*r
,r.rrrr !r*
e, i4! k ,[ !r !,
i*iar, , b,
'' abQr. n.i &
rl!i! U *Y5d
e ;d,, Adri
!d. ll. h.r 6!
,@ rldl;ri td U"
e !R;.6. h{s
tlsr sv{e .l* &
r ((4,hJ rr lil
lhi*.' g rtr're-
I I IVALE AUDIENCES OF THE 1920s AND EARLy t93Os
Sr ottts)
-
althougl'r 10 per cent of each group attended with an older brother or sister.
Ml.st girls of all ages (apart from scouts, for whom the opposite was true) went to
rvr.'ning rather than afternoon perf-orma[ces. sixty per cent of their movie-going (or
rrt,rrly ail in the case of the girl scouts) was concentrated at the weekend. Girls, like boys,
trsrrrrlly selected which movie to see themselves, independently of their parents, and
rvt'r'c rnost influenced in their choice by reports in the daily newspapers, foliowed (in the
,,rsc of high school girls and scouts) by the title of the film or (among grade school
pgir'ls) by the posters seen in movie-theatre lobbies. But tirey were aiso much more likely
I lrrr rr boys to be influenced by the presence in a fi1m of a favourite actor.ro
'l'he
sexes also differed substantially in the kinds of Ilm they pr.eferred. whereas
llrc lroys expressed a clear preference as their first choice for westerns, followed by
,rrlvt'rrture flms, comedies and rnysteries in that order, the most popular fims chosen
lr'st by girls were romances, foliowed by comedies and westerns.3l
euite apart from
tlrt'
Problems
of delnition invoived in distinguishing between some of these descrip-
Irv. crrtegories, the general preferences concealed many cross-clrrrents. l)elinquent
grrls' lor example, liked romances and westerns better than any other types of
rrrovics; girl Scouts, by contrast, preferred comedy, mystery and tragedy as their first
r lr.itcs and were not impressed by romance pictures.3z Thstes also changed in accor-
,l,rrrtc with age. The most popular type of movie for grade school girls was the
w'stcrr; for older high school girls, it was the rornance.33 'v\lhile boys, especially
r'(,unl{cl'boys, dismissed film rornances as too'mushy', girls
-
perhaps on the defen-
rrv. irguinst male prejudice
-
rationaiised theil preference as a'practical'choice. one
yitr I rrPProved of romances 'because they show the different ways that people love one
,nr)llcr and how some are crooksl Another preferred them because they'give me an
r,[',r.l'love'. A third liked watching a romance film'because it sets a person to
Ilrrrrl<ing about the future'.3a
M itchell's survey findings undermined what she described as the'popular belief'that
,'lrh'r'chiltlren attended the movies more often than their younger counterparts. she
lrrrrrrtl that grade schools girls patronised the movies more heavily than high school
grrli,I''l'hiscouldwell beareflection,of course,of thegreaterrangeof activitiesavail,
,rl,l,' t. oldcr girls. one of the most pior-reering features of Mitchell's work was her
,rll''nlrl [o contrast the attractiveness of the movies with other forms of leisure. It
ilrr rrrltl huvc givcn considerable pause for thought to those apparently concerned by the
,rll
;,,'r
virsivc cll'ccts of movies on childrcn. In terms of ph1,sical activities,
g9.7
per cent
rrl
1',rrl
Sr'orr(s prcli'rrcd hiking to the 5.8 per cent who liked rnovies.36 For high school
p;irl'', tlrc torrrPur:rblc lgrrrcs wcre (r0.7
per cent to 23.8 per cent and for grade school
f
ir l', {' L.l
|t'r-
rt'rrt lo 29.9 pcr cout. when it canre to the choice of riding in an automo-
lrilt ol r'ltlt't lrtlrrcrl il lltc rttovics, 69.11 pcr cent o[ girl Scouts expressed a preference
l"r ,llll(, tirlirtr',, rts ()l)l)()s('(l
lrr J2. l pcr ccnt lirr nrovies. Thc cornparable lgures for high
,,,fr,,,,1
liirlsrvt'rr.(r'r.()|('r((.tl lo 17.(rPcrccnl ultt.l lrrqra(leschool students6T.4per
I r lrl ll
)r)
o
lrr'r
( ('ttl. Ilt lt't ttts ol sot irrl ;rr'livitit's, llrt' lrias wis cvc6 llorc obviotts: 84.5
I',
r r i nl ol ljr oUlr
l)r('l(,t
t('(l .rllr.ntlilrri.
l)it
lv l() llrr.(r.7
|cr.t.r,rrl
r,vlt0
ltrcli,rrcti
rDovics;
{t11l,
l,('l
rr'ttl ol lrililt s,lt,r,rl riitl',,rtr,l z'1..1
1rr'r
rcnl ol tirrrrlr.s,lrool r,,ir.ls slrrtrctl llrr.
',,r'rtl',
Itr'lltctrrr'(llrr'volr.
lol ntovtr.,,\v,t.. l.l.ii
l,r,t
((.nl ,rrt,l l,t. ll)(,t ((.nl t(.sl)(\liVt.lV).
l\lrrri.r,.rrr,rrl.,rl,ll, y'1;l',r.rrt,, (1,1.',,'11
|r.r
rr.nt to
,,),);rr.1
rlnt),rrrrl lri1ilr,,,lr,rol
liill:,
47
r
v
-t,
:*
Wvue$ttr&ls,
ttY*"trdj
$

{
{rla*Bd.F6i}xsB
d ,,e .u,r ." . {*l
Id"th.en;
"*,r!h,
,r.r. tuti
!,Fb $ ,.. a a. -d5
, '- ,{,
'-,
l !{}il
eri"-
^,.
r
"Il.
d
* i1.,,
--,.-,-..*
'ii
"w.
G r, lek :i
'l !
^e
( ..-krJq h'g
.H [. i&.:t, ,k {
#{ o",r4 *,,*rH
4Ut k! r-s*r .
"-"
ffi
",n,-+ff
',
s,H$,ffi
i
*#
im"
ffi':u#
. ktw
v&i tk d &rtu,r r tw
"t
l:]Jfu
t&L &lr@nlh,rlffi@
qs!4 d.V er
'.'lq
& ry.
&brrkHdirtortl,k. |k
drid .l@d* @*
_a b m.s,
hr.&*dIb.!FF{!,
!. tu,l.rmth tu.eraleF
& ffia*
Yd th tffi& ii k r& Ird t d i& r#&l
*- YdMt:rkre'eM.x,1
,ryldu@Flrlelrlil!k,q
'. *l d& h , *l nr lr
'
&.!h*lih*,Mdrb!6M
dlw,ikdthnmHrl rl
k.& tu ru, s. tun rb
"
d1ryBM"s&rrc,Ldry
;,li';,',,rr.
ii;+!. ,.-,.. : -, .
rilIffi
':H
From Movie Weekly, I I August 1 923.
itself had asked: 'How did the pictures make you feel? 'On sorne of tl.rc quiz papcrs,
Mitchell coldly remarked,'unpublishable terms were written aficr this tlltcstiotr.'r')
Mitchell's team discovcred that therc was an'itpproxirlatcly cqtt;tl'itvcragc rttlcrt
dance of girls ar-rtl boys at thc lrrovics, allhough
liill
Scottts, in partictllrtr', tctttlctl [o urr
lcssfieclrrcltlytltirnthcivcritq('(orrct'or lrvirt',t trcllilor llrt'ltt,tiolrlyol tlriltllcrr).Vt'r y
li'w girls w('ll
(()
tltt'lttovit': ltlolt, ltli, llrc l"'1", llr'\'llsll'lllY
'tllr'lttltrl'tt 1',tott1': 'tt1'l
lltit((oi1l,uti(.,1 l,y .r,lrrltt'
( )rrlr' ,r tnttr,rt rll ol
lirt
l', tvr'trl lo lltt trtovit r rvlllr llrt ir
l,.rr
(nl: lltt
1,,t,(rtl.ti',(r,,,1
llt,,',, rilt,,,lt,l \'rll,rl lr.ll ll')llir.r,l, r,rltoolr't',) lo'l'l')(lirrl
/
IDENTIFYING HOLLYWOOD'S AUDIENCES
(by a5.5 per cent to 35.7 per cent) preferred reading to movies. Only grade school girls,
by 52.7 per cent to 36.9 per cent, preferred going to the movies instead of reading.3T
Vy'hen it came to recollections of particular movies, Mitchell pointed out, children's
memories tended to focus especially on two categories: fllms they had seen recently or
'large, important ... superproductions' such as The Birth of a Nation, The Covered
Wagon (1923), and The Big Parade (1925). Most of the comments on individual films
she actually cited and identi{ed by sex, unfortunately, were by boys and tended to con-
cern'action' movies iike The Sea Hawk (1924). One movie that was occasionally cited
by girls was 1r ( I 927), with Clara Bow. A tale of romantic misunderstanding and upward
mobility, which Inished with saiesclerk Betty Lou (Bow) winning the hand of her boss,
department store owner Cyrus Waltham (Antonio Moreno), it appealed to one high-
school girl because
-
she improbably asserted
-'it
was so like real iife'. One of the ques-
tions in Mitchell's survey covered the 'thrills' children had had at the movies. If was one
of the flms rnentioned by girls in response to this question. At one point, Betty Lou
jumps into the water from Waltham's yacht in order (helped by Waltham himself ) to try
to save his existing lance. One girl considered this scene ('when tliey decided they both
had it') had given her the greatest thrill she had ever experienced from a 11m.38
I
Generally, while boys were most thrilied by the action sequences in Westems and war
movies, girls thought fihns of romance (full of scenes of 'loving and kissing and marry-
'' ingl as one described it) were far more thrilling.3e
While pioneering, and shedding some light on the female experience of cinema-
going, the Mitchell investigation also had a number of significant drawbacks. The sur-
vey was confined to children. (The occasional references to adult movie-going were in
the form of impressionistic observations. Mitchell, for example, wrote of the movies as
'a veritabie escape for the housewife who, passively submerged in drab realities, finds a
brief relief in Ilm dreams that might have come true'.4o) There were important gaps in
the questions asked. The investigation was restricted to one locality only. The same year
in which the results of the Mitchell survey were published, however, also sirw the publi-
cation of the Irst of two studies which
-
while also local in character
-
provided infor-
mation on the movie-going practices and preferences of women from differing
age-groups and social backgrounds.
ht 1924-5, Robert Staughton Lynd and Helen Merrell Lynd,,assisted by a team of
field workers, embarked upon the first detailed anthropologicl investigation of arr
American community. In 1935, they conducted a follow-up survey of the same city.
The community they selected was Muncie, Indiana. The results of their suveys werc
published as Middletown (1929) and Middletown in Transition (1937). The first study
_'{confirmed
some of the findings of the Mitchell investigation. It noted that the atten-
i;.
dance of high school girls at the movies was 'about equal' to that of boys ancl thrrl
both girls and boys more commonly went to the movies without their
Plrcrrls
(although, in the three upper years of high school, 33 per cent ol girls attcrrclctl tlrt'
movies rnore often with their parents tlran withoul thcn.r, cornparcrl with 2l
l)cr
ccrl
of boys).al
'l'lrc
rrrovics, tlrc Lylrtls nolt'rl, hrrtl
lrtovoli.t'tl
t ttllurltl tortllit I rvilllirr llrr"lr4irltllt'lrtrvtt'
torrrrrrrrnily. A rrrlrrlrt'r' ol lrrirl.ll, , Lrsr rv,,lrr,'rr': , lttl,s lvt'rt' lirllrlirrli lo
',
lr',ttt ttI lltt'
rrr6vi..s', wltilt' llrt lor,rl N4irrislt r r.rl r\',',r,, l.rlron \v,r\ ('rlrr( \'inl' lror,lililv lo lltr' :ltrrwittli
I l:MALE AUDIENCES OF THE 1920s AND EARLY 1930s
ol rovies on sundays. In opposition to these forces (according to the L},rrds) were the
uw ners and managers of the local theatres (whom they characterised as 'a group of men
ru lrmer peanut-stand proprietor, and a sometime bicycle racer and race promoter,
,rrrtl so on
-
whose priinary concern is making money'.)a2
whether, and under what circumstances, adut women went to the cinema reflected
llrcir social position in the community at large and, if married, the social and religious
olrinions of their menfolk. one'Middletown' woman cited by the Lynds had been in the
lurhit of going to the cinema once or twice a week with her working-class husband. He
It,trl, however, subsequently been converted to religion and had become a preacher in a
tt'vivalistic sect. Neither he nor his wife any longer went to the movies, the woman
rxPlnlngd, in a curious blend of moralism and practicality, "cause our church says it's
wrong
-
and it saves money, too'. At the other extreme were a number of liberal husbands
r r tctl by the Lynds who'everyweek or so'stayed home with the children so that their wives
*trlrl go to the movies.a3 It is not at all clear who, if anyone, these women went with.aa
wlren it came to analysing the tastes of audiences, Middletown was largeiy impres-
qiorristic.
Its authors cited'the manager of the leading theater'as the only source for the
t lirirn that the most popular stars in the town were, in descending order, Harold Lloyd,
(
ihrriir swanson, Thomas Meighan, coleen Moore, Douglas Fairbanks, Mary
pickford
attrl Norma thlmadge. In terms of the movies themselves, the authors claimed, the
lat11,:sl crowds were drawn to Harold Lloyd comedies. There were comparatively few
l,orular
comedies of this type, however. Expensively-produced westerns and spectacu-
l,rls, irrcltrding The coveredwagon or The rlunchback of Notre Dame (1923),'drew heary
lr.rrscs'. Ilut the kind of movie that packed the rnotion picture houses of Middletown
'wrcl< alter week' was aiways that'rvith burning "heart interest"'.as
precisely
what was
tttr'ir n t by this was reasonably clear: it meant, in the Lynds' words, 'sex
adventure' or 'sen-
rirtiorral society' llms. At one time, four of these films were running simultaneously in
l\l r( l(l lclowr: The Daring Years (7923), sinners in silk (1924), women Wo Give (1924)
,r ttr I
'/
7rr' Price she Paid ( 1 924). on another occasion, the city's movie-goers had a choice
rrl I|rlcc: Name theMan('astoryof betrayedwomanhood', 1924),RougedLips(1923),
rttrl
'/7rr' ()ueen
of Sin (1924).46
Irr rrrost of the films of this type, worlen were the main characters. It was widely
lrt'licvctl that such fiLns had a special appeal to female spectators, who were inscribed
ittl, llrt' nroclc of addrcss of much of the publicity surrounding them. 'Giris!', a large
lllrr"llirtctl atl prcrnisccl the potcr-rtial viewers of one film, 'You will learn how to handle
'r'rrrl'()uc'wcll
tirrrr-nbcd'copyoftl-re MotionPictureMagazinein'Middletown's'public
ltlrr,rr y lrtrl an arlicle on
'nrovie
l<isses'that was clearly addressed soleiy to women.'Do
yuu r('(()llrizc your littlc liictrd, Miic Busch?', one caption enquired,
Slrt
's
lr,rrl hrls ol liisscs, brrl nt'vcr s(:crls to grow blirs. At least, you'll trgree that she's
glvitrli ir goorl itttilrtliolr ol lt petson crrjoyirrg this onc, and if someone should catch you
lrr'ttr,tllt lltt tttisllt'lor'irtttl lroltl yorr llrt're lilie lhis, wlxrl wotrltl you ckr? Struggle? But
ttr,tl'.tlt1i l,rv, ,lrvirrr'lt'ir ottt'ol lltt'lrtsl llrirrr4s l\,lorrle lllut'tlocs. (larr't
yotr jrrst hcar
l\l.rrrr, l'rr,r,orl r Irr,,rri
lioirrri l,illy l,,lliri
Il lrllrr'',lt,l trol lt.N', :ttllr,t|trl rorrr,rrrrI rrr llrr'rrr lo,r[l|r.,11 l() l(.tt,l(.rttovit'1ir,..rs irr
i
49
'r
t
4B
l
I
l
I
:
/
IDENTIFYING HOLLYWOOD'S AUDIENCES
'Nlr,ltllItrr!vn',
theyapparentlyhacllittle cl-rance of attraciir-rgargeaudierlces. l)owrrto
rlrt,;,rrt i1. Ships
(1927), an expensivc spectacuar about wl-rirling, failed at the town's
l,.,rtling theatrc, its exhibitor assertcd, because ihe whale inras the real hero in the film
,urtl conscquently'there wasn't enorLgh "hcarrt interest" for the wtltlen'.48
'['he
secoud stucly of Nlurrcie, a dccirde later, foulld that rnovic advertisements'were
interchangeable with those o1'1c)251 Many captions rvere still designed to trppeal pri-
marily to girls ('You Can't Love a Malried Man'or'\\4rat's a Baby between Sweethearts
More or Less?'). One change since 1925 had been tl-re introctr-Lction ol'Saturday mat-
ines showing a special ploglamlne for chilc!-en of botli sexes"ae In terms ol specifically
female cinen-ra-going practces, the Lylrds trind that in Mr-rrlcic,'especially in the bet-
ter-class houses, trdult fenrales predon'rirlate heavilv in the audiences and, as one pro-
clucer remarked, "set the type of picttlrc that will
'go' " ' They buttressed this clairn about
N,lnncie (which they thought was'probably reprcsentative of ot1-rer locaiities') r'vith an
estimate f'om tl-rc owner of one of Muncie's
'bettcr theatres' that his audiences 'con-
sistetl of 60 per cent wotnen over sixteen, 30 pcr cent mtilcs over sixteen, arrd 10 per cent
children'"5{)
'fhe
L,vnds, in their second investigation, fbr.rnd a comrnunity characterised by tcn-
sions atcl conllicts. Some
-
notably those revoving irrouncl generational couflict and
changes irr the way gencleled roles
-were
constructed
-
l-rad been considerably sharpened
by the cconomic clcpression.sr llut they were also tnore certain than they htrd heen in
Mitldletou,tt that tnovies r'vere crucialll, aflecting pattcrns of li{c. Everpvhelc in Muncie
in 19
j-5
tl-rey for-rnd'a sense of sharlr, free behavior betr'vcert thc sexcs f
patterned on the
ilovies]'.
'-hcy
founcl adolesccnts nrodelling therlselves on the manner and appcaltrnce
of their trrvor.rrite stars. loan
(lrawford, they asserted,'has her amateur counterparts in
thc high schooi girls who stroll with brittle conftdeDce in and out of "Barney's" soft-
drilk parl6ur,
"clicl<ing" with the "drugstore con4roys" at the tables'. Interestingly, the
Lyncls sar,l,the girls irnitating Crawf-ord on scleen as assertive and confdent, in contr;rst
to
'tongue tied'young males.5z The desire on the part of girls to resemble their movic
idols now began at a very early age: even occasional third-graders, the Lynds noted, r'r'ere
using rouge, brightly colouring their fingernails and adopting'shirley ]mple perna-
nent waves'. It also prodr,rced conflicts with parents: 'Tbe age at which one get's one's
first
"permanent"', the Lynds noted,'has becorne tr standard subject of family contro
versy in Middletown homes'.sl
The Blumer Study
Detailed infbrmation on movie-going habits and tastes, apart fror-n that contained irr
episodic locai surveys, was generally sparse ttntil tl-re early 1930s. Between lc)33 antl
1935, however, a series of eleven studics lnanced try the Paync Fttnd was publisl'red.
'l'ht
'"-studies
themselves, as Robert Sklar has pointecl out, nrere suspect lrot-rl thc vcrv Lrcqirr
ning silce their initiator, William H. Short oi the National Conrnritlcc lrl Sttrtly ,'l
'.r
Social Values in Motion Pictures, was pro-censorsrip ilnil crlnscqttctltly llrorrltlt'tl llr,
project'from tl-re beginning by his specal tlccds atltl goitls: lo t1t't lltt't',itorls
'rrr
llr'
..
r.u6vics, to
plil
thclr to thc wallltr Yt't rro{ rrll lltc lt,'ittls ol llrt' slttrlir'r lr.t,l
I't,',
is' lt
tlrt.srrstt'irlt'1s;t:;Slrorl.()rrr'irrprrrIi,rtl,rt,Ilr't,r'tIlllttltrii,rlllr,
[]tltvcl,ll]()l( lri('llir'),
lrr'lir'vcrl((l',()l:,llil)rv,t. l,tr /,','r'lllrlrrr lrrrlrtlllllrl', lllilllrl(
'lolltr'tttorrr"llrrr(r'lllr
I I IVALE AUDIENCES OF THE 1920s AND EARLY t93Os 51
tt'r'vailing influences, such as parents, teachers and peer group pressure.5s one of the
lrv. studies Blumer did for the Payne Fund (and the only one he conducted on his own)
rv,ts tledicated to advancing this proposition. Blumer later clairned to irtrve circulated to
.r sirruple of nearly 2,000 people
-
mostly college and high school students an nvi
t.rri()n to write movie'autobiographies'of the films they had seen and their responses to
tlr.rrr. Extracts from over 300 ofthese autobiographies, as well as what he regardecl as
'll'l,ica['exanples
of a number of complete autobiographies, were published in the
lt,tl' Movies and conduct (1933). while the form used to tell people what to write
.rl,ottt in rnost of the autobiographies and the final selection of material was obviously
lr,',rvily conditioned by the argument lllumer wanted to mzke, and
-
as Kathryn Fuller
It.t: olrserved he consistently altered biographicai data when using rnutiple extracts
lrrr111 1[g seven autobiographies he pubtished in full, there are still severa reasons why
tlrrs nraterial ought to be of interest to students of female (and male) audiences and
rlr r'pliq1.s6
lrr lhc Irst piace, Blurner deveoped a replrtatior as a rigorous sociologist. After
',trr,lvirrg
under George Herbert Meade and Robert
park,
he taught sociology at
t lri,,rg. from 1928 to 1939, when he moved to the university of california.rt
It,'rli.lty. In 1955, he became president of the American Sociological society.sT
\\'lr,rt.vcr the reasons for his altering the biographical data in the survey (and they
r,r,rr, lr,rvc been as simple as the desile to further protect the anonymity of his respon-
,1, ,1,,), when Blumer claimed, as he did, that the segments he printed rvere'typical,of
tlr, rrrirtcrial gathered, there is no especial reason to doubt him.s8 In the seconil place,
rlr, ',('\ ()[ the people who wrote the extracts is usually fairly easy to establish from
tlr, rr rrrrtcr.rt. Thirdly, the material actually published by Blumer together lvith
'i,l,lrtr.nirl, recently discovered material from his survey
-
is rich and cxtensive enough
t,r
;rr'1
111i1 interrogation fiom a number of perspectives that are r-adically diffrent
lr,rrr tlr()s(' of Blumer himself or his teanr.se
\Irrr.st rtll the scholars lvho have so far addressed the issue of female spectatorship
it'tt, ,l,'ttt'soirrottcof twoways.Theyhaveinterpreteditasaconceptirnplicateclinthe
"1,.
r,rtr(,ns ol' [h-nic texts by various modes of signification that are themselves
lulr",,rlrlt'Iiorn senriotic or psychoanalytical standpoints. or they have seen it as the
'rlr1r',
r .l Il.llywoocl's (and business's) attenrpts to sell products associated with par-
tr, rrl.rr ''r,rrs.r ccrtain nrovies. very few scholars have as yet examined what women
,1,,,\r( t(,(rsrc:rllynratlcofthe flnrstheyattendedorhowtheyrespondedtothedis_
,,,rrr',,.1 (()nsurcrisnllhataccompirnieclsuchfilms.TheBlumer'autobiographies'and
, , ,l,t'. r)ll('r ir n(rrs ol br:ginning to do these things for the 1920s (the survey, while
rr lrr,lrrjis w(.r(' r)()t
lrublishctl
until 19.13, ct1ctively endecl in 1930 and almost al the
,, r,l, rr, r, rt rorrtrrirrs is lrr thc
Ireriorl
ulr to lc)29). Thcy offer: consiclerable evidence on
ir,'r' I 111111;111'1 ol lcrrl (rrlbcit rttitirtly rrpPcr nridcllc class and well-cducated) tma1e
r,r,,ilr !'or'r',(r(.tl((l nr('iuirls()lrl ()l llrcllrusthcysalv,;trrtl ol'theextcnttowhichthey
,,,',;,'
,,,,,,,, ,,,, ,1 lrt' llro';t' lilrrrs lo rttlopl qq ;1;1i11 slylcs ol tlrcss anrl prttcnls ol'bcltirv-
I lr, lllrrrrr, r '.ll \{ \ l( lrr,l,.,l.t t'or,,l,lr.,tl ol rrrlol n.tlton on l.rrrl,tsir.s ll.ti w()t(.n l.t(l
'1,
,,
1,,t,, ,l rrr r, ,l,,rn,,,.lo llrr.rrroVr,., Nlu, lr ,rl llrr,,
1,r,
,,,.1,1,,;
,rn ilt,Iir.ol \\,()ilt{.t ,,,
l),t.;
=i,, l1
l,rr',rlt,'n,,1.rrr,l
r, ,1,,,lr,lrrrr', rrr
l,r,.,lr,
l.rlrlr'\\.t\', lo l,rlrl,r,,rr,, r,,.rr, r.rtr.,l lrrr llr,,lrr lrv
!
IDENTIFYING HOLLYWOOD'S AUDIENCES
tlr, rrr.rll rlrtnitt,tlt'tl ilrstittrtionof Holly'lvood"Onecommonfantasywasforwomento
Irrr,rsiil. tlrr.rrrst.lvt.s is the actress being made love to by the male star (Blumer himself
lIil|l,] tl||r t|iltlt'ltcy to lntasise about playing the romantic lead in a film to be twice as
, r,11111r .1t()ltg, wonen thal men).60 Women, reacting to the discourse sulrounding
!t,r I r lr l I I l, rrrrrtl iu the popular media as well as to movies themselves, also often reported
ililirltrlrllll', tllilt tllcy would lrecome a Hollrarood star or at least the wife of a star'61 A
Irrilrrlrt.t 0l wornen, however, seem to have produced fantasies that, by selecting par-
Ir, trl,rr t.le rrre uts from the films they saw, allowed them to play around with (and con-
rr.rlu(.ntly to challenge?) historically-produced ideas of gender roles and appropricte
l,.rrrirk' hchaviour. some rejected, for example, the flotion of the passiv'e, suffering hero-
rrrt' prcscr-rt in many hlms that were primariiy intended to appeal to a female audience'
'
.,1,1,"
,,rle of the fragile, persecuted woman never appealed to me', one respondent
,, ,rsscrtccl; 'it was aiways as . . . the woman who had power that I saw myself.'62 Fantasies
, ol rlastery ancl female empowerment were paralleled by fantasies of female activisrn
which may well have hacl their origin in the serial melodramas, starring'action' hero-
ines such as Pearl \{hite, that many women recalled watching when they were chil-
',
t1ren.63 One female respondent, for exampe, tiequently day-dreamed of being actively
involved in war. 'The excitment
*
shall I say glamour?
-
of the war', she confessed, 'has
always appealed to me from the scfeen. Often I have pictured rnyself as a truck driver'
NUTSE, HEROINE!,64
While many women in the Blumer survey identified with female stars to the extent
of wanting to copy their appearance, hair-styles, clothes, jewes and personal m.annef-
isms, such identification was often a complicated process. In the {rst place, women had
a social identity: imitating screen stars, at times, needed considerable personal coulage'
During the 1920s, many parts of the American population disapproved of anything
linked to'flapperolatry which they associated with women who wore short skirts, usecl
too much make-up, smoke<l, and liked dancing modern dances (one religious periodi-
cal described dances of this kind as an'indulgence in fleshly lust')'6s Under these cir-
/ cumstances, to copy fashions, modes of beautification, habits and mannerisms
{
associated with the stars frequently involved a complex negotiation between what
\ *.rrrr.n wante,l and what families and communities were prepared to allow' One ol
Blumer's respondents noted that her new hair style'went over'quite well with her fam-
ily but confessed that'when i attempted to wear an ankle bracelet one evening, I learnetl
that certain adornments in the "reel" world ale not always appreciated in the rcal
world'.66
! In the second place, women reacted in a variety of complicated and mediated ways
{'
to rvhut they saw on rhe screen. They had to be sure that what they decided to imitatc
\
*ould fit their own appearance and personality. This becomes evident, for example' irr
how women in the Blumer autobiographies responded to the clothes woilr by stars otr
the screen. For some, this was a fairly straightf-orward matter: they observcc :r lavottril''
star wcaring a particular item they thought might suit them ancl set olT to httv, or
l'tt
suarle their mothers to buy, arr irnitation of it from a local clcpar-trllclrI sIorc,tt tittltt
shol-r.67 For many others, htwcvcr, il wirs uruch tnorc cottrplicitlctl. lrlslt'ittl o{ altt'tttIl
irtg t<l i6ritirtc a litv6lr'itc:rclrt.ss wlrr'rr il t,rrttc lo lrttyirtg el,,lli,'s, lltt'y lrot.ltrlvt'tl t, lt't
titrrlly l|lrrrr s.,vr,t.;rl, rrc1,,0(irrlirrli l)(.1w1.(.il llrr.irrr,t1,,t's
lt1.\(.1l('(l
ill lll()vl(r,,ttt,l lllt'tt ,rtvtt
53
[-
I
I
t
i
I
I
I
I
f I MALE AUDIENCES OF THE 1920s AND EARLY 1930s
ln(lividual sense of what would 'go'. As one girl explained, the'styles, colors, accessories,
r onrhirrations, lines and general effects'seen in the movies were so varied that it was
sirrrple to pick out the [clothes] ... they most closely resemble, and thus learn to bring
r)trl rny best points. I have a little two-piece sweater suit suggested by something I saw
orr Colleen Moore; Norma Talmadge was the inspiration for my dignified dinner dress;
ilty next formal is going to be a reproduction of something that was bewitching on Nita
Naltli.68
lvl,lry women of the 1920s, moreover, still either made or altered their ow1 clothes.
Wlrilc they were unlikely to attempt to copy a whole outfit, they adapted various fea-
Itttcs scen on screen for their own use. 'Most dresses worn in movies are too striking or
Irrr e laborate for me to copy', one girl declared,'but where there is shown a different col-
lrrt,,r
1rrc11y
cuff, or a novel trimming, it is certain to crop out in some dress.'6e
Ncither the personality nor the tastes of women, moreover, stayed constant. There is
cvirlcrtcc from the Blumer survey that, especially during adolescence, many giris imi-
lalcrl thc on-screen conduct and mannerisms of movie actresses. This form of identifi-
raliort rloubtless made its contribution to the forming of adult identities. However, it
wrll ir
[)l'ocess
characterised by great complexity and much ongoing negotiation. Firstly,
rtururcrisms were selected from those used by particular stars in particular films. While
rrrr('
l,irls
apparently identilied with just one star and imitated her, it was rtore coln-
rrlun l() cmbrace mannerisms from a variety of stars.7o secondly, girls practised the
tiinv('tcnts and gestur:es concerned in front of the mirror to see if they suited them and
wrtrkl 'go'.7r
Thirdy, since the point of such mannerisms was to enhance the girl con-
!Frr(\l's popularity and increase her attractiveness and sense of self-esteem, the next
tle1l 1ry11s to try them out in public to see what effect they had. Those that prompted
util+rv()ur'ilble responses were rapidly jettisoned. One girl, trying to copy the wide-eyed
l,'L ,l Mabel Normand, soon realised her friends believed'there was something wrong
wlllr ny cyes'. A second, after endeavouring to imitate Garbo's characteristic walk,
ftrtlttrl pcople inquiring'if my knees are weak'.72
Wlrt'n it crme to the ways in which they identified and copied female stars
*
and to
d lr",rcr rxtcnt in how they indulged in cinematically-inspired fantasies
-
women

tFqfolr(lcrts to the Blumer survey revealed themselves as active rather than passive
f;
ryer
l.tl()rs.'l'his is alt important point in the context of the relationship between .ir"-n
{i
4llrl Arrrcricit fcntinine ideals in the I920s. During that decade, traditionaiist critics
wrrr' ,,nvirrcctl that they were seeing a radical undermining of those ideals. often, they
rrlrl('(l('(l llris rlcvclopnrcrrt with the influence of the movies. (Blumer would later
egrr'r', rl(':i( r ihirrg llrc crnotionrrl inrpact of 'love pictures' as'an attack on the mores of
rtttt ( onl('rpor:rry lili'l7r) ()pc
116vic citcd by many traditionalists as symbolising the
cvll rllcr ls ol tlrc tinr'rr;r was
()rrr
l)ortt:int l)aughters (1928).
itr tlris oriliirrirlly silt'rrt llrn (to which M(M addctl, at thc last monent, a dialogue
l till{' ,llrl wlt,tl oltt' tt'vit'wcr rclcrlctl lo as'scvcr;tl krvc sotr11s, stcnloriitrr chccring and
,l tlt{rttt\ ol slrrit'lis'), lorttt
(it;nvloll
Pl.ryctl
I)iiur;r Mt'tllirrtl,.r
lyrotl
lirrrt'firPPcr
rlrvllr',1 lo,l,rtrr ilr1l.rrr,l lril, ll.rslis, u,lt,, l.rlls irr lovt.willr tlrt'sorr ol ,t lrrilliorr:rit.r'.i'l Slrt.
li llrrtt rlt',,q;tIrrirtlr'rl,.r:' llr rnrlliotr,rirr'ir
Irlsl;qql
irrlo rrr.rrri.rlic wrllr,r lr.u,l ,lrirrkirrli
4,-
,\t
{
54 IDENTIFYING HOLLYWOOD'S AUDIENCES
blonde (Anita Page) by her greedy mother. But the new wife falls downstairs and is
killed, leaving the millionaire free to find solace with Diana.
Many contemporary critics condemned Our Dancing Daughters for its apparent
endorsement of freer relations between the sexes, petting, drinking, dancing and
smoking. Yet while some of Blumer's respondents saw the film as an encouragement to
wilder or freer behaviour, others read very different meanings into it.75 To them, the
film's narrative was essentially a morai one. The Crawford character, according to one
girl, always'played tirl She even lost her man but remained'sport enough to play firl
In the eyes of another girl, the flm underlined the message that daughters ought to trust
and confide in their mothers more.76 Some of the meanings attributecl to the film by
Blumer's correspondents, therefore, at ieast suggest the possibility that flapperdom was
less of a challenge to existing stanclards of morality and behaviour than many of its con-
servative critics believed.
Conclusion
During the 1920s and early 30s, a substantial body of evidence sr-rggested that womcn
dorninated American movie audiences
-
either numerically or becausc, by naturc ol
their influence or-r tl-reir mcnfolk anc'l chilclrer-r, they effectivcly dccidcd whiclr llrrrs
wotrlcl bc- rnosl srrcccssl'ul. Ilollywoorl rcspottdt't1 1o this uccuttrtrl;rliorr ol cvitlcllrc in ,
virriely ol wrrys, inclu,lirru plrtlrrtirrl,, llrrrs tltil wol('n wt'tt'littotvrt lo lilic (lirr
('x,unll(, llrt tli:;lirrrlivt ll,r'rrrt'ol llrr"worrrcrt's llrr'rvlri,lr.r1,1,,.rr,,1 rrr llrt r',ttly O:)
,ilt(ll)rilrolilrlillrIrrrl,ytrrr'.rrr',ol.trlrrrtttrivr',t1r|.11.1111',(rtr,lrr,lrrrliLilrrr,r),,,r/ilr(:,,ilr(l
I I MALE AUDIENCES OF THE i92Os AND EARLy 1930s
.r t.,sumerist discourse) that was aimed mainly at women.
yet,
despite the pr.iority
,r,,.rded them by Holl)'wood itselt, with all the consequences this had for the movie
rrrtltrstry in general, women audiences of this period have been practically ignored by
rr lrolars writing fiim history.
( ),e reason for this disregard may have been the lack of direct evidence from women
rr*vic-goers themselves. Much of what we do know about female cinema-going, as
Itrtlith Mayne notes, 'comes from reports of exhibitors, managers, and producers;
,trirsionally
from critics; rarely from viewers themselves,.TT This is particslarly true of
tlrt' 1920s and early 30s
-
a period that is too distant in time for the effective use of
.eth_
iloliraphic' techniques and also precedes the introduction of
,scientific,
audience
| ('r*'irrch
of the kind discussed by Susan ohmer in the fbllowing chapter. A way round
I lrt'
Ploflsrn of missing primary materials, however, is to re-examine a number of social
r, i('rcc surveys for the period concernecl to determine what they have to tell us about
rv,ilrcn's experience of, and reactions to, the movies. This chapter has examined four
rrrr lr s.urces: those carried out under the auspices of the chicago sociorogy dep;rrtmei:t
l'', Alice Miller Mitchell and Herbert Brumer, and the two,anthropotogi.al,studies
of
l\lrrrrcic, Indiana, both supervised by Robert and Helen Lynd.
Mlitchell and the Lynds shed a good deal of right on women's movie preferences and
'r,'wirrg
practices (with the Lynds, in their second survey, citing evidence emphasising
llr. rorrtinuing centrality of the female audience). The Lynds also discussecl the issrie of
llrr' irrlltrence of the movies on women's appearance and behaviour. These matters were
,rlrr, ,111q11g55.4 during the late 20s in a
payne
Fu,cl study conducted by Herbert Biumer.
I lrr'.' have, in recent years, been two principal approaches to trre questio' of female
',1'|r'(
t,rtorship. Both film theorists and anaiysts of how Holly,rvood addressed wornen as
i ,rt\llncrs have tended to see women spectators in essence as passive subjects. scholars
rtrrrrli t'lh,ographic techniques, by contrast, paralleling work on how women respond
lrr.1111'1 lrms of popuiar culture,Ts have presented them as actively involvec-l in con-
'trrr'
littH a variety of meanings through the interaction between their own social and
r rrll.r;rl iclentities and textual and extratextual cinematic practices. The Blurner
r,,rl.r i.rl suggests that, while women were to a degree positioned by the cinematic
'rl,lr',,rlr, they also responded in an active way to the films they viewed and con-
"lr
r r' l.rl rr v.riety of meanings (some of them empowering) from tr-rem. Far from what
lrr rrrtr'rrrlt'tl, therefore, the Blumer'autobiographies'can
be read against the grain to
,ilyi1i.r'l llr;rl lnrale spectatorship was funcamentally'active,
in constructing
-"urrirg.
!trrrrr tlrt' llrrric cxpcrie,ce, even if the actual meanings created were at times markedly
l' rr r,rrlit.rl lha, r,a,y co,servative critics of 'Roaring Twenties,women believecl
-
or
li',rt r'r I
Noles
I 41,r,i,7111111)o.rrrt',rrrrtillcrlrrrliclc,(illr,rii()bscrrrrr,20/21(19g9),pp.142_3.
",r'r', lrrr Ir.rrrr|lt,(llr,rrlt'slrtlirrr,"llrccrrr.olcl,ornbrrrtl
inMacy,swincl.w,,
ettrtrr.crly
lir'ttr'rvrtl l'tlilt,\tttrlit; t:l(Wirrlt't
l,)78),
ll).
I JI;l\4;rrrn.t,rr
,lirliltr,,l)csillrirr!w{)r.cn:
tl,',rrr,rr',r'rr,r'or
rlrIrr.rvs\v((rllr',iltlirrIi
r1,r,/,.r,,ry/r.(r:.,il(rg.r),1,|..1
il;r)iirn(,
\\,rl,ltrr,rrr, lrtrrtr rr[,lrtt).,lrl r,lr,t'r, l. lt.u I t.t)i(, \r.\v,,: \\,{l(.1, r.rl,l.ll.tli.lt ,rrtil
'rlrtlrtltotr,llr,l,
lri.r,/,(t'(1,)rilt.1'g,111,),r'lr.rrlollr.llr.rrol,,rrrrll,rrrr.Al,rrtr.(i,rrrrr.,,
55
,\
rii I
i
Our Dancing Daughters (Harry Beaumont, 1928).
66 I DENTI FYI NG HOLLYWOOD'S AU DI ENCES
' "Puffed sleeves before tea-time": Joan Crawford, Adrian and women atdiences', Wide
Angle 6:4 (1935), pp. 24-33;Maria La Place,'Bette Davis and the ideal of consumption:
alookatNow Voyager',WideAngle 6:4 (1985), pp.34-43;'Female representation and
consumer culture', Quarteily
Retiew of Film andVideo l1:1 (1989), special issue, Jane
Gaines and Michael Renov (eds);
Iane Gaines,'The Queen Christina tie-ins:
convergence of show window and screen', Quarterley
Review of Film and Video Ll:4
(1989), pp.45-60; Susan Ohmer,'Female spectatorship and women's magazines:
Holll.rvood, Good Housekeepirg and World Warll',Veh,et Light TraP no.25 (1990), pp.
53-68; Charlotte Herzog'"Powder puff" promotion: the fashion show-in-the-fi1m" in
Jane Gaines and Charlotte Herzog, Fabrications: Costume and the Female Body (New
York Routledge, 1990), pp.134-59. On constructions of femininity in fan magazines,
see )arre Gaines,'War, women and lipsticlc fan mags in the forties', in Heresies LB
(t986),pp. a2-7.
3 See Elizabeth Ewen,'City lights: immigrant women and the rise of the movies', Signs: A
Journal of Women in Cuhure and Society 5: 3 (Spring 1980), pp. 45-66.
4 lacqueline Bobo,'The Color Purple: black women as cultural readers', in E. Deidre
Pribram (ed.), Female Spectators: looking at
film
and television (London: Verso, 1988);
Helen Tylor, Scarlett's Women: 'Gone With the Wind' and Its Female Fans (London:
Virago, 1989); lackie Stacey, Star Gazing: Hollyruvood cinema and
female
spectatorship
(London: Routledge, 1994). The work of several contributors to this volume, including
Martin Barker and Kate Brooks, Brigid Cherry Annette Hill and Annette Kuhn draws
on ethnographic research that sheds light on female spectatorship,
5 Garth S. Iowett,'Giving
them what they want: movie audience research before 1950', in
Bruce A. Austin (ed.), Current Research in Film: Audiences, Economics an Law, Vol, 1
(Norwood, N.l.: Ablex, 1985), p. 30.
6 Leo A. Handel, Hollywood Lool<s At Its Audience: A report of
film
audience reseqrch
(Urbana, Ill.: University of Illinois Press, 1950), pp. 99-101.
7 Jowett,'Giving
them what they want', p. 30.
8 }J.arndel, Hollywood Loolcs At Its Audience, p.99.
9 W Stephen Bush, 'scenarios by the bushel', New York Times, 5 December 1920, cited in
Richard Koszarski, Ar Eteni.ng's Entertainment: the age of the silent
feature
picture
1915-1928 (Berkeley: IJnivers of California Press, 1990), p. 30'
10 Frederick James Smith,'Does decenry help or hinder?', Plrotoplay 26 (November 1924),
p. 36; Beth Brown, 'Making movies for womei, Moving Picture World,26 March 1927,
p. 34. These estimates are cited in Gaylyn Studlar,'The perils of pleasure? Fan n-ragazint
discourse as women's commodified culture in the i920s', in Richard Abel (ed.), Silent
Film (London: Ath-lone, 1996), p. 263.
11 Koszarski, An Evening's Entertainment, pp. 28-9.
12 Quoted
in Charlotte Herzog, "'Powder puff" promotion', Fabrications,p. 157.
13 Molly Haskell, From Reverence to RaPe: the treatmefit of women in the movies (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1987),p.49.
14 Andrea S. Walsh, The Women's Filnt and the Female Experience (New Yrrk: Praege r,
1984), p.30. On women scriptwrilcrs, scc Melissa Sr"rc Kort,'Shadows of thc substancr':
woncn screcrwritcrs in thc 19.0sl irr lrtrrcl
'lirlcl (c<1,\,Women urul ltilttr,Wottrttrr trtrrl
l,itttrilturct rrew scrics,4 (Ntw Ytrlk unrl l,ourku: l"lrlrnes rlnd Meicl', l9tlli), pp, 169-t'llit
FEMALE AUDTENCES
OF THE 1920s AND EARLy 1930s
ST
Lizzie Francke, script Girrs: women screenwriters
in Horlwoo, (London:
BFI, lgg4);
cari Beauchamp'
without Lying Down: Frances Marion and the
powerfur
women of
Early Hollywood (Newyork
Lisa Dredscrib
ner, 1997).
15 Dorothy M' Brown, setting a course: American women in the r92*s(Boston:
Twayne,
1957)' p'213' Arthough not a., of these *o-.r, *... l0cated in Horlwood, a large
number of them were.
16 Haskell, Frorn Reverence to Rape,pp. 153-88; wa lsh, The women\ Film ancl Femare
Experience' pp' 23-48; idem., 'The woment film" in Gary crowdus (ed.),
The
poriticar
Companion to American Film (Chicago:
Lakeview press,'rrrr,
rr.
rr_rr,'"""
Ura,
Grand Design: Ho,ywood as a Modern Business Enterprise lgi^.lg3g(New york:
Scribner, 1993), pp. 235_55.
17 [bid., p. 23s.
18 Arthur Mayer, Merely Colossal (New york
Simon and Schuster, I953), p. 178.
19 Kathryn H. Fuller, At the
picture
Show: Small-town ,
_
F a n Cu*ur e ( Washin gton, D. C. : Sm ithson,"r rrrrr,,liiil
"
:;;:i,'r!' r:;:f f; r:[{
*,
l0 Eckert,'The
Carole Lombard in Macy,s window,, p. 19
21 lbid., pp. 2-3, 6-17, ts_20.
22 Haskell, Fro m Reverence to Rape, p. 1g7 .
23 leanne Alren, 'The fiIm viewer as consumer
"
Quarterry Review of F,m studies 5:4 (Fa,
1980), p. as6.
t4 I, the previous
chapter of this book, Richard Martby contends that Ho,ywood,s
berief
in a dominant female audience was actually bur"d o, a considerable
body of
impressionistc
and anecdotal evidence, some of it systematicany
gathered.
t Robert sklar rerates the growing interest in socia ,.i.r.. to the diminishing
influence
of what he terms'the traditionar
culturar erite'. This was in turn linked to (and
may
itself have been defined by)_the declining authority of 'literary, judgements
made on
moral and social questions
by professors,.l..gyrr..r,
essayists and other cultural
figures'' 'social-science
methods',
writes sklar, inay have been no ress subjective,
opinionated and crassbound
than the erplanatorymodes
of layand ethicar essayists,
but in the 1920s their aura of modest ,.if_"orrfid.rr".,
precision
and careful procedure
geemed
to offer a clarity and persuasiveness
that all competing forms of social
ctplanation racked.' skrar, Mo vie-Made America: A curturar History of American Moties
(New
York: Vintage, t9g4), p. 134.
:: ::ortlr
rowett, 'Giving
them what they want,, pp.23_6.
'17 Harord E'is
ro,es ancr Herbert s. Conrad,'nu.a
p..t r.rces in motion pictures,,
-.
ltturnal of Social
psychology
I (1930), pp. 419*23.
tl Krrszarski,AnEvening\Entertainmeni,p.2g.Thesegeneralpreferenceswererepeatedin
the study of Evansvile school-children
.ir.a uUolr..iUia.
19 Allce Millcr Mitche,, children and Movies(chicago:
university of chicago press,
' l92e),p.127.
s
ft
'#
Ibld,, pp. 2 t, 46, I8, 2(\,42-S, Zs,3t_2,34_s,
5t_62.
flild,, pp. t{r4*5.
lhlrl,,ppr, ltltl 111,
Ihld,, p. I l.r.
lhld,, pp, etl, u.
l
5B
II]ENTIFYING HOLLYWOOD'S AU DIENCES
3s lbid., p. 22.
36 The Scouts were especially'sporty'in their tastes, being the only group amongst the
girls to express a preference (by 53.8 per cent) for baseball over the movies (29.6 per
cent). All other female groups voted decisively for the movies. Ibid., pp. 164, 163.
37 Ibid., pp. 164, 166, 165, i67. Interestingi,v, the preferences for hiking and auto-riding
over the cinema were shared by the equivalent groups of boys in roughly equal
proportions. Wrile the boy Scouts voted even more decisively than the giris for parties
over movies, differences appeared in the rnuch lower majorities for parties on the palt
ofthe (less sociable?) high school and grade schoolboys and the prefcrence for movies
in place of reading on the part of all the boys' groups' Ibid'
3g Ibid., pp. 120, I25-6. Frustratingly, there is insufficient evidence in Mitcl-re1l's book to
explore whether girls actually icientified with the character Bow (described by IvIolly
Haskeli as a'working-class flapper') was playing in the lihn. sara Evans also points out
that Bow was one of the actresses who, in her lilms 'demonstrated the proper use of
nerv products and clothes'. Haskell, Frttm Reverence to Rape' pp' 79-80; Sara M' Bvans'
Born
t'or
Liberty: A Hitory of women in America (New vrrk: Free Press, I989), p. 1 79.
39 Mitche1l, Children and Movies' pp. 124-5.
40 Interestingly, she suggestetl that some mothers were using the neighbourhood movie'as
a day [rursery', leaving sma11 children there'whi1e they run to the dressmaker or to the
dentistl Ibid.,
P.
72.
41 Robert s. Lyncl and Helen Merrell Lynd, Middletown: A srudy in American culhtre
(Nen,York: Harcourt, Ilrace and Company, 1929), pp' 257'264-5'
Ibid., pp. 268-9.
Ibid., pp. 36t,265.
One working-class woman with slr children was ir-rvited, by a fernale friend with a
reputatior for teasing men, to accompany her to the movies. she agreed, convinced it
was only a joke. \44-re[ they actually did go, with thc friend paying for her transport and
adrnission, she was 'never so surprised in my lifel Her surprise suggests that such
outings were not a common part of the movie-going culture, at least of working-class
women. As the woman herself satlly observed, the experience had been two years earlier
and'I haven't been anl,where since'. lbid., p. 264.
45 Ibid., p. 266.
4rr lbid., pp. 242,2h.6.
47 Ibid., pp.267,242.
48 ibid., p. 267.
49 Robert S. Lynd and Helen Merrell Lynd, Middletown in Transi.tittn: a Study in Cultural
ConJTicts (NewYork: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1937),pp'261-2'
s0 Ibid., p. 261.
51 'ltisourimpression',wrotetheLynds,'thatnotwolicneratiot'tsofAtlrcticarlshavecvct
faced eacl'r other across as wide a gap in thcir custorlrlrY attitutlcs rtrd bcltnvior as hrtv,
American parents ancl children since the World War. Ancl this disiunctiort, wc bclicvc'
has been increrrsccl by ttrt- tlcprcssion.'Lyntls, ibirl.,
|).
r,x. lrr ,r YLty
l(lr(lliv('
tliscttssiotr ol- qi'tttlt'r l
()l('s, s('( ihirl.,
1'p.
I 7rr
')'
l;. llritl.,
1r;r.
I 7(1, .(,.).
', t llri,l.,1,1,. I ll) I
FEIV1ALE AUDTENCES OF THE 1920s AND EARLy 1930s
59
54 skJar, Movie-Made America,p. I34. skrar's view of the
payne
Funcl Studies refle*s rhe
critique of them by Raymorrd Moley and the Motion Picture producers
ancl Distributors
Association. This was itsef poriticany motivated. For a recent, barancecr assessment of the
studies, see Garth s. Jowett, ran c. larvie, and Kathryn H. Fulrer, children and the Movies:
Mediq Influence and the
payne
Funtl controversy (Newyork:
cambriclge universiiy press,
1996)' For an assessment oftheir prace in the history ofauaience studies, see shearon A.
Lowery and Melvin L. DeFreur, Milestones in Mass communications
Research: MerJi(l
Efcrs (New york
and Londern: Longman, 1995), Chapter 2.
lr5 see, for example, Herbert Brumer, Movies arrtr conduct (New york:
Macmilan, 1933), p.
140.
Ibid., pp. 203-7;Jawett et al., ChildrerL antl tlte Moes, p.238.
'lmotsu
shibutani (ed.), Human Nature and cr*ectiye Behavor: papers
in Honor o.f
LlerbertBlumer(EnglewoodCliff's,NI:pre,tice_Hall,
1920),pp.v-vii;/owetternl.,
Children and the Movies, p. xv.
Bltrmer, Movies and ConrJuct, p. xi.
Sce
fowett et al., Children and the Movies, pp.242_301.
l\Iumer,MoviesandC.nduct,pp.65,66,67,6g,71,215,223,251;lowett
etal.,Chilcircn
, r t ul the Moyies, pp. 243, 250, 258, 27 6, 288, 29 5.
r, I llf uner, Moyies and ()mduct,
pp. 62, 63,66, 136, 169;
Jowett et al., Children and the
Mo v ies, pp. ?_60, 27 0, 27 5.
t,.l lllurner, Movies a.nd Conduct,p.66.
t' I 'l
admircd Miss
[pearr] white fbr her claring and courage', rernarkeci one Blumer
rcspondent.
Iowett et al., Children and Movies,p. 243. Also see ibicl., pp. 246,25I, 276
,rrrrl lJlumer, Movies and Conduct,pp. 23g_9. On the genre in general, see Ben Singer,
'licruale
Power in the Seriar-eueen
Melocrram.: the etiology of a, a,omaly,, cantent
( )ltscuro 22 (January
1990), pp. 9l_129.
t,l lllurrrer, Movies and Conduct,p.63.
rl S,',. 1;,',r*n, Setting a Course, especially pp. lg2_-1.
trtr lllrlrrcr', Movies and Conduct,p.32.
rr" llf t,rcrMovies attl condtrct,p.32. The dresses available in stores, charlotte Herzog
''r(l li'rc Gaines point out, were never exactly the same in design as the one,s worn by
rt,, s iu thc movies. Herzog and Gaines,
, ,.Fuffed
sleeves before tea-time,,,,p.25.
N.vt'r'(hclcss, rvracy's sold haf a milion imitations of the dress
Joan crawforcl wore i,r
l(tt.y l),nton (1932). Ibid.
t,li f llrrrut"r, Nlovitts ntd Contluct,p.3t-
r'u llrt'1. Als. .tt this p.irt, see [{crzog antl Gaines, "'Puffed
sleeves bcfore tea-time,,,, pp.
''ll, ll.'l'lc grl) l)ctwecn thc lrshions scer or] screen or in magazines and trre crothes
rv,rrrr'rr irtlrrrrlry w.rc,;rcc.rding
t. thcse writers, represents,turexplored
cultural spacel
ll,r,1.,
I,.
L
ll lllrrrrrlr,
Irlot,t:;
tut(l (.'otrtltrtt.
l)l).,10 3 ,24).25(l: )owclt c/ ttl.,Ohildrcn nnd Movies,ytp
'r'll, .,,'11, .,,1,,.
t lllrrrrrr,r, Alrtt,tr,: rtttrl (
rtt111111 1,111.
t,1
I/, l0,,l.it frrrvt,lI r,/ tt1.,(.'ltiIrItrtt tttttI A.lori(s,pp
' lllrilrr|r, l\lttt,tr.t tiltrl Lrrt,ltrr t,
|1,
, li
I
""
f"rrrl.r I' lr,r','.. i lrr'rt,tiltrt,,r,uttr lrtr rit.tltrtlttr \trt,.tt,tnt rttutrt rir l/rr. /,r.,t),, (rrrr,rv
'i(r
,t/
'' it
(r0
42
+7
44
60 IDENTIFYING HOLLYWOOD'S AUDIENCES
York OxfordUniversityPress, 1979), especiallypp.2l-5,309; Blumer,Motvies and
Conduct, p.l 16. On this point generally, also see another Payne Fund study: Charles C.
Peters,lulotion Pic'tures and Standards of Morality (NewYorkl Macmillan, 1933),
74 AlexanderWalker, The Shanered Silents: how the nlkies came to stay (London: Elm Tree,
1978),p.82.
75 Blumeq Movies ahil Cond..uct,pp. L524;lowett et al., Children and Movies,pp.244-5.
76 lbid.1pp,184-5.
77 l,rdirhMEnre,'The
female audience and the feminist critic', in Todd (ed.), Womm and
Film,p.29.
78 See, for example, Janice Radway, eading the Rornance; Worfien, Patriarchy anil Populat
Culture (Chapel Hill: Univers of North Carolina Press, 1984), and Ien Ang, Watching
Dallas: Soap Oper"a and the Meladramatic Imagination (London: Methuen, 1985).
3 The
Science
of
pleasure;
George
Gallup
and audience
research
in Hollywooi
the turn of the century Adorph Zukor opened a luxury motion picture
theatre in
IrlT;f;H",:f,l:::::x: *"::f i1*;*[,*",
decided to study their
fons.
In his autobiography
,The
public
k Nrrn w*n[i;r;;"#r.*rl#:il
rxy.custom
to take a seat about six rows from the #
watchino rh. r,--.
^r+L-
_ ,,
,nt...I
spent a good deal of watching the faces .f ,h. ,:9:"1:l
*.n ,"*n* *"r;.;;;r:::
?il:,#.,ii
lT:,T:,11 :ee,
hel.and
,feel,
the ..uoioo ,l lulr, _aoaru*a
and comedv,l
m the nickelodeon
period to rhe present *, ;.;;";;;ffi
ffiill;:f.TI;
[,:."T1.j}"":_i1::o]"::::*1,?,rhe
primary
rno,,,",,o,,
for studying audience
rnsremains
the same as itwas forZukor:,.
d;rd.p;;;;ffi;;:"i;:r#::
ITlj**;.:,:.::" I:.,.1".,,yu1trr
studies
-tiJ,.,.u.tio.,,
has, however
dramatically
over time.
ythil.
Zrk ;,J;;;
;;'**::,ff*ffi;;
contact' modern researchers
use survey to collect inl0rmation
on the specific
of a rnovie that are believed to
jnfluence
,"t",-or*n*es.
contemporary
also singles out fearures .irhe audience,
"i;;d;*
Zukor saw as a mass now categorised
in socio_economic
terms.
the contrast between zukol's era and our ovm may sugget that audience reeearch
f ::llti:xll,:_i:limpressionistic;;;;?il;j".d,,..,111,0. hods, but the history of audience research ;" u"rp".Ja;"_*,
;/il,#;":Tffiil
L*.J:L::::*i:,.:i::
* ,h: s3.o, ;;;";;",,
and the structured ques.
nires of today the I 940s mark a critici juncture
r, ;;;;;ffi::*
"}ff;
f l,:T",t:::
jl.;Tl.r.*no
.*.,.
.;;;;;';.ientinc,
studies or viewer
me, based on carefully
constructed
questionnaires
rrJ;;;;;ffirtr:ff;
market research techniques
used today, incruding.".i
*a story tests and derno_
urveys, crystaltrised
during this period, ehhough
,h.r"-;;;.";.;;;;
lll:::r,:,::*ilijp,1 f. lot
ultl the rs+os ;;ithe mm industry
adopted
empirical
methods for studying its customers.2
'' ---- f,u,r'auuu
r
.uuprcc
rnding how and why the film industry
made this shift forms the basis for this
}rf l,l;l
:il
;;, ffi:'i'
th e wc,rk ;' ;
il;ii:"f;l
#:X'J 3.:[:
I throus^.rrt rhr r.,^_r.r
^.,1,:*:-l
becorne synonymous
with public
opiniJn
throughout
rhe worlcr. Although
r,. i* rr.*t'r.rn,i"'ir:'rlr'rJnffi
;I#;
'#il,J:::J1,11.::.,-:..11,_ctvertising.
ln reie, ntier hin p"riti.,r p,t r,,la
\
{,Pt"
!l
.!.
)
rol ld ly earahtirhect,
end while he co$ti;ud
; ;; ;;,.ilrffi;'Jrlll
lfi