Destry Rides Again, Mr Smith Goes to Washington, and the Fall of the Ho

Destry Rides Again, Mr Smith Goes to Washington, and the Fall of the Hollywood Studio System Thomas Schatz cites the 1950’s as the inevitable end of the Hollywood film studio system, with the signs appearing as early as the height of the second World War (472). However, the seeds of discontent and disintegration within the system were apparent as soon as the late 1930’s, exemplified in such films as Destry Rides Again (1939, George Marshall) and Mr. Smith Goes To Washington (1939, Frank Capra). The production of these two films and the paths down which they led their star (James Stewart), directors (at least Frank Capra), and studios (Universal and Columbia, respectively) are evidence of the decline of the studio system. The haphazard production of Destry Rides Again and its subsequent success (financially, but not as an enduring classic film) are indicative of a system eating itself alive: so intent on the production of film after film made with almost the same crews and casts that lasting meaning had been all but completely forgotten in favor of financial suc cess and power within the system. This also demonstrates the decline of the fascist executive order of the studios in favor of the hard work and devotion of those directly involved on the film set as well as the increasingly important role of the talent agent as the intermediary between the talent and the studios. Frank Capra’s eventually freelance auteurship, in the wake of David O. Selznick and his â€Å"independent† film productions, particularly evident in the production of Mr. Smith Goes To Washington, was a notable indicator of the studios’ impending loss of power (Schatz 407). These and other independent and freelance artists (such as Alfred Hitchcock and Fritz Lang)... ...gton, 11 October 1939†. Variety: A Sixteen Volume Set. New York and London: Garland Publishing, Inc. 1983 Nachbar, Jack (ed). Focus on the Western. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. 1974: 132 Newman, Kim. Wild West Movies or How the West was Found, Won, Lost, Lied About, Filmed and Forgotten. London: Bloomsbury. 1990: 135 Nugent, Frank S. â€Å"Destry Rides Again, 2 December 1939†. The New York Times Film Reviews. New York: The New York Times and Arno Press. 1970 Nugent, Frank S. â€Å"Mr. Smith Goes To Washington, 20 October 1939†. The New York Times Film Reviews. New York: The New York Times and Arno Press. 1970 Schatz, Thomas. The Genius of the System. New York: Metropolitan Books. 1988: 235-251 Wright, William. Six Guns and Society: A Structural Study of the Western. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press. 1975: 48

Frederick Jackson Turner’s `Frontier Essay

The â€Å"Frontier† is a Turner wrote is â€Å"the outer wave of expansion, the meeting point between savagery and civilization.† When people left settled territory, when people went into often unexplored areas, the weight of society bore less heavily upon them. They went into areas where they had no settled established governments, no institutions like churches, courts of law, and the like. People, in a sense, left civilization behind. They had to find new ways of adjusting, new ways of peaceful coexistence at this â€Å"meeting point between savage and civilization.† This is the historical thinking popularized by Frederick Jackson Turner which laid the foundation of modern American study of American West. According to him, â€Å"The existence of an area of free land, its continuous recession, and the advance of American settlement westward explain American development.† He thought largely that the frontier experience had a lasting and permanent impact on American character and society. When American pioneers escaped and left behind the settled institutions of society, a plunging into the forests, or later into the grasslands of the Great Plains, Turner thought this promoted productive individualism. When people entered areas without established social structures, each person was pretty much on a basis of equality with each other person. On this kind of set up people learn to develop civil and democratic ways of social cooperation. They have to learn how to peacefully co-exist amongst each other. This made Turner generalize that democracy sprang from this – free land, and of free, self-reliant individuals moving out on to lands unknown learning the tricks and trade of how to get along with one another. So is this what Turner really meant by the word â€Å"frontier†? If you just take a first glance, he seemed to be spousing a kind of geographical determinism, an idea or a notion that â€Å"free land bred free individuals†; that the geography itself and the way in which people reacted to that geography produced democratic equality and a democratic form of government. Settlers in a new geographical terrain learned to innovate and find ways. Where there were not adequate lakes or rivers, they dug wells. Where the grass land plains did not allow for settled farming, they invented barbed wire to hedge in cattle, to hedge in sheep. These and other various learning experiences seem to be the result of human beings acting as innovators in response to geography. The land itself, Turner seemed to say, made human beings more self-reliant. And self-reliance is at the core of the American democratic experience, or so we have long told ourselves. But as I see it, geography might have something to do with it but not solely. The development of democracy and civilization is a far more a complicated process. I would say much of it would be social development itself. Turner might be right in identifying a certain event in history at a specific location crucial social development occurred which propels modern civilization to where it is now but what I am saying is that it can happen anywhere in the world and not just in a certain specified area. References Schultz, Stanley K. and Tishler, William P., â€Å"American History 102 (Civil War to Present)†. Copyright 2004 University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents pg 4. Retrieved February 3, 2007

Analysis Of The Poem For Whom The Bellstone - 764 Words

The ideas presented in John Donne’s poem For Whom the Bell Tolls, heavily contrast the ideas presented in Paul Simon’s song, I Am a Rock. John Donne demonstrates that we are all apart of humanity and mankind and how all humans have a connection with one another. Paul Simon contrasts this overall idea by demonstrating that people are sick of society and want to be isolated from humanity. The information presented by John Donne and Paul Simon are unique, but have very contrasting ideas as they pertain to humanity. One clear contrast between the pieces of literature, are two specific lines. In Donne’s poem, he states â€Å"No man is an island,† while Simon states in his song that â€Å"I am an island.† The island represents the isolation from†¦show more content†¦Simon uses several phrases to demonstrate the protection built to separate oneself from humanity. For example, â€Å"I’ve built walls, a fortress deep and mighty that none my peneratre.† A person can choose to build a fortress where they can be safe from attack, safe from pain, and hence never need to shed any tears. The room that is cozy as a womb becomes a tomb. The heart, given enough time, will become hard and incapable of any feeling. Simon uses an individual who is hurt, to showcase the retreat to safety. This is okay for a certain extent of time, but sadly, some stay inside. They hide in their fortress, like a turtle drawn into its armored shell. John Donne contrasts this idea using t he line â€Å"A part of the main,† and implies everyone is together and how living in solitude is not living, but only existing. John Donne’s poem demonstrates we all have a role within the world, and our contributions are never ignored, hence the last line, â€Å"It tolls for thee,† referencing funeral bells. The last line implies that the bell rings for you, the reader, and how you are acknowledged as a human being and as a member of society. Paul Simon’s song contrasts this idea with the last four lines of the song, â€Å"I am a rock, I am an island, and a rock feels no pain, and an island never cries.† The song is a declaration of an individual who was not a rock, but needed people, and had been