ie Liveliest Art'


L1 .PO:

...

BUT ARE THE MOVIES BETTER THAN EVE

We have a whole rainbow of
gorgeous prints for you to
choose from -- all designed
to make you look and feel truly
"Younger Than Springtime!"

l
M
'.fir.
.,n. y~
' "
'

We've silk prints, 1-piece sheats and full skirted beau--
ties priced from 17.95.

Costume Dresses with matching jackets of
silk shantung from 29.95. Sizes 10-20; 12% '
to 241/.
Left is full skirted cotton print, a drip dry
wonder at 10.95.

22/

Dacron and cotton knits, all washable wonders that
drip ' dry as low as 10.95, sizes from 7.
Budget prints of rayon and nylon from 12.95.

0
I.'
%i
/cF"G
1.

Right is beautiful silk shantung
dress and jacket costume at 29.95.
Wear-ites pull-on cotton gloves,
3.00. The costume jewelry from
1.00.

l
/; i

ON FOREST

OFF CORNER OF SOUTH U.
OPPOSITE CAMPUS THEATER


Nome
:": r Y . .;.},v::::.:}":.:: {. .:gax;;; "; {:. *.: t< . r . ti : ".vs,, r {., f ti e L ,t r m , ;."y, r":
1 :."h".: r.."?"s". :... +. .ry. f:.."5:"?,"<>,<"r..ir r:'. 'o-. s"$.:.+ v ...'d - rn">e'" +<'"r ."'
.... ". .. h.\. ..ht.." a } g GrAh"....,?. ry..
'. :: ... r.. <'.":''' : W: :: ...... ..: y.. -'.'.",:::.r:.':.:+:?":??ti:?f r":":::..;.;;: y'.:;:.".: 1': ei J :t '...s -.. L ...... fiia

+ it''.Y". 4'.AY''"rlv.Y'ii'' i is~

y'errv"
.Ol
*1A
4 4 ' #4 4 4 4 *

pYYY~phave their
bLCn'ee~S own point of view
AAAAAAAAAAAA about dating...
"4
'S.
*7.
Tapered to elegant slenderness,
Fiancees are feminine, lilting and
light as a butterfly on your feet.
A date-time and gala evening
collection with great imagination and
terrific fashion at $ 95

THE LIVELIEST ART. By Ar-
thur, Knight. New York,
1957: Macmillan Co., 360
pp. (with indices). $7.50.
By BURTON BEERMAN,
'THE LIVELIEST ART" is what
its author calls the movies, in
a book devoted to a critical his-
tory of that ;art. This is an im-
portant book, for several reasons,
not the least of which is the fact
that, aimed at the intelligent
moviegoer, it is the first one of its
kind in many years to be popu-
larly available in the United
States.
There is no better time than
now for the pblication of such a
book, when more Americans are
seeing more movies than ever be-
fore; when movies, made in this
country are being shown success-
fully in almost all the countries
of the world; and when the mo-
tion-picture industry appears,
more than ever, to devote its en-
ergies on one hand to the creation
of box-office personalities, cast in
the image of the typical pre-adol-
escent mind, while it gropes with
the other hand for technical in-
novations that might function in
the name of economic expediency.
All this, while Hollywood (with
notable exception)' virtually dis-
misses both artistic considerations
and social responsibility.
The presence of television in
millions of homes, both as an out-
let for old films and as itself a
visual art, has put the need for
cultural self-preservation in al-
most everybody's lap. Without a
basic knowledge of the movies as
an art, the moviegoer stands like-
ly, in his ignorant passivity, to let
the artistic potential of the film
die that a superficial assembly-
line filmed product may flourish.
In his book, Knight takes a basic
step toward the eventual spread
of that knowledge.
SUCH A basic knowledge goes
beyond a mere listing of films
and stars and directors. The sev-
eral luxurious books that offer a
pictorial history of the movies can
hardly offer an understanding of
the art. Even more futile is the at-
tempt by some so-called critics to
dwell at length on-the esoterica of
a particular film, and to group
several such observations in a
book and pass it off as a history
of the motion picture. Those auth-
ors are inadvertantly restrained
by their own canon, and, however
individual their utterance, can
only write in terms of personal
relevance, a condition that dis-
qualifies them from creating such
a popular history.
The Liveliest 'Art succeeds
where the more superficial book
and the more specialized offering
could not. It is neither superficial
nor. too narrowly personal, but
neither does Knight succumb to
the temptation of loosely linking
an. impressive list of films, re-
plete with all manner of factual
data, on a unifying thread of crit-
ical banalities. Rather, the auth-
or attempts to underline the ar-
tistic possibilities of the movies,
and to help his reader see how a
well-made creation endures as
art, a thing of strength; while, at
the same time, he shows how dell-
cate such a work is in its making,
prone to destruction by. uncon-
trollable outside pressure.
To this end, Knight has two
themes e s p e c i a11-y recurrent
throughout the book. One is that
the film is a directorial art, that
its aesthetic strengthis contingent
on the power of a director, the
artist,."to shape and discipline his
material according to the "com-
mand of his inspiration." The oth-
er main point is the dependence
of the movie upon its audience
who, from the beginning, "dictat-
ed which themes, which forms,

which tecllniques the film makers
might most profitably follow.up."


gin with the inventors; and he
must come back to them,-.again
and again, as each new contribu-
tion that they make revises the
rules of the art. The director, un-
able to control these technological
inroads, must adjust his method-
or else fall back of artistic pro-
gress. It is necessary for Knight,.
when examining such outside con-;
siderations, to include the. two
types of businessmen whose exist-
ence affects the film. There is the
creative producer who, like Thom-
as Ince--the first of. them, com-
bines his gift for artistic expres-
sion with his experience and his
,knowledge of the exigencies of
business, to further more mean-
ingful endeavors of the movies.
But there also is the kind of busi-
nessman who must make an in-
dustry of an art, and knowing a
work of art demands an audience,
knowingly perverts the attraction
of that audience for his personal
gain.
The greatness of a director is
rarely determined strictly on the
basis of his introduction of an
artistic tool. It is more theman's'
ability to utilize existing methods
in some new and valuable way
that offers a key to his import-
ance. Conside D. W. Griffith in

RA

his traditional role as "The Father
Of Film Technique." He did not
invent the- various elements of
film making; instead, he took such
devices as the close-up or the
camera angle and created from
them the filmic art. It has been
the same for his successors. While
Murnau was not the first director
to take the camera on to the city
streets, it was his judicious use of
that procedure which lent to a
simple story like The Last Laugh
some of the most vital qualities
of that picture. It is Edwin S.
Porter wham we remember for
the initial use of parallel editing,
in his work The Great Train
Robbery. Yet it remained for a
contemporary director, learning
from previous experiment, to ex-
tend Porter's methods to the
limits of coherency. Such a di-
rector is Stanley Kubrick, and the
film in question is:The Killing.
Even with his deep reverence for
the director as an artist, Knight
does not completely ignore the
innovator, and pays due homage
to all of them, makers of a world's
art.
IN ONE RESPECT, Knight is too
generous. This is when he gives
See LIVELIEST, Page 15

A IRT.

u

S

Ui

ARTHUR
... and a critique

I

131.1 So. University
Ann Arbor, Mich.

to

NO 2-5539

HitI

.1'

K,


,.:


I 1

/~

OTHER STYLES at $9.95 to $16.95
TINTABLE FABRIC SHOES ALWAYS IN STOCK.
AM in


ELIGIBLE TO JOIN?
DANCING
Friday and Saturday Nightsy

* CHA CHA
* TANGO

* SWING

* SAM

1!

+

* WALTZ


/3

* FOXTROT

I