Page 15 - CR_01_Printer
P. 15

Letter to the Editor of "CinemaRecord".



             Reply to "The Centenary of Cinema -What Are We Celebrating?" CinemaRecord No.4
                  submitted by Chris Long, cinema history writer for the magazine "Cinema Papers".

            The preface to your last edition states that "substantiated dispute of previously recorded matter is welcomed".

            The historical evidence presented since January 1993 in my Cinema Papers series "Australia's First Films" sits
            uneasily with the 1995 "cinema centenary• celebration.  The event might  publicise our cinema heritage, but
            your anonymously written article shows that its hype is already obscuring key facts and serious research.

            No dictionary definition of "cinema" specifies projection or a screen as a prerequisite of the term.  By reproduc-
            ing dictionary extracts the article showed that the institution of cinema covers the whole art of "cinematography
            and moving pictures", of which cinema buildings form only a part.  The Oxford dictionary has defined "cinema·
            this way since 1918.

            Friese-Greene, Muybridge,  Le Prince and others experimented with movies before 1895, but only the Edison-
            Dickson kinetoscope was commercially exploited worldwide at that time.  Furthermore, it used the same 35mm
            film as the  rnodern cinema - same gauge, same perforations and about the same picture rate.  The Lumiere
            Cinematographe of 1895 did not, and it was not the first movie film projector to be commercially exploited. The
            Lathams, Skladanowsky, Jenkins and Armat hold that precedent .

            CinemaRecord states that the kinetoscope was a "primitive  cinematic equipment which  was developed as
            scientific experiments" (sic), an "amusement parlour machine" and not a form of cinema.

            The facts are these.  Over a thousand  kinetoscopes were  commercially exploited as public entertainments
            worldwide, their first  Sydney show opening on 30 November, 1894.  They were not initially coin-slot "amuse-
            ment par1our" devices, but were shown in venues solely devoted to their exhibition, with a shilling's admission
            levied at the door.  Attendance records survive confirming their mass-medium status:

            Opening Date:          Venue:                      Duration:              Attendance:
            30 Nov. 1894.          148 Pitt Street, Sydney.    Two months.             30,000.
            5  Feb. 1895           Hobart Exhibition Bldg.     One month.             12,000.
            16 Mar. 1895           Bourke Street, Melb.        Three months.          35,000.

            Our first batch of five kinetoscopes had regularly changing advertised programmes of 35mm film touring all
            capitals except Perth before 1896.
            CinemaRecord states that CATHS-V's celebrations are "focused on picture halls and the technical equipment
            that makes them function".  Our kinetoscope venues were exclusively dedicated picture halls.  Carl Hertz's
            1896 projection venue, the Melbourne Opera House, was not.

            So Victoria can claim to have "a cinema (ie. exclusive film theatre)", to quote CinemaRecord's definition, with
            a centenary on  16 March next.
            The errors of fact in the CinemaRecord article  go further.  The "start of Australian film making• was not in
            November 1896 but on  25 October, and the Flemington racing films began with  VRC Derby coverage on 31
            October.  Extracts were released on my 1991 video compile Federation Films, made for the National Film and
            Sound Archive.

            1995 is a French cinema centenary.  I regret that the committee has declined to celebrate the centenary of
            Australian cinematic innovation.

            I had to personally finance the importation of 35mm prints of the first films shown in Sydney in 1894 for their
            centenary, unaided  by the celebrations committee.  They were shown during my Brisbane Film Festival lec-
            tures in August, and  I'd be pleased to repeat the presentation for the CATHS-V membership if they're inter-
            ested.

            Working full-time in cinema research and publication,  I fear that this centennial demonstrates and unwilling-
            ness to accept the evidence of new research.  If CATHS-V's aim is "to accurately document and create  an
            archives of the history of cinemas in Victoria", the setting of a "centennial policy" overruling informed debate is
            not the way to achieve it.  Surely more informed  discussion should replace popular myths in  answering  the
            question, "what are we celebrating?"

                                                              15
   10   11   12   13   14   15   16