Visualizing Ideology: Movies, Politics, and the Working Class
fig 27
fig 28
fig 29
fig 30

I. History

iii Looking at Labor-Capital Films

Radical Films

A small number of filmmakers countered these negative images of radicals by offering positive depictions of Socialists, their struggles, and their goals. The early film industry contained a number of directors (Ashley Miller, Augustus Thomas), writers (Julian Lamothe), actors and actresses (Francis X. Conlan, Frank Keenan, Charlie Chaplin, Viola Barry) who considered themselves socialists or were openly sympathetic to the cause (fig. 27).

A radical labor-capital film was one that proposed socialism or some other radical variant as a solution to the ills of society, or, offered an unmitigated critique of capitalism--not just individual capitalists (as was often the case with liberal labor-capital films) (fig. 28).

While there were often differences in their political shadings, the plot lines of radical films generally followed a fairly standard form. Unlike conservative films, which continually associated radicalism with violence, Radical Films focused on the brutal working conditions and oppressive exploitation of wage earners that forced reasonable people into action. Socialism was portrayed as a peaceful alternative to violence.

The Jungle (1914) tries to show audiences that people are not born Socialists; they turn to radicalism when there is no other way to end their suffering. During the course of the film we see the devastation industrial capitalism inflicts upon workers, bringing "poverty, want, prostitution for women, death, and nameless sorrows" to honest, hardworking immigrants (fig. 29, 30).

Radical Films also offered viewers solutions: The closing scene of The Jungle shows Jurgis working in a rural community that has made the socialist vision of a "Co-operative Commonwealth" -- a place where all men and women are equal -- a living reality (fig. 31).


fig 31:The Jungle

Not all radical films were quite as measured in their tone as The Jungle, nor did they all advance the same solutions. Why? (1913) offered a more nihilistic vision of the world. It portrays the hardships of working-class life through a dream sequence showing children toiling in factories, underpaid seamstresses being forced to use their own blood to make red thread for the rich, and needless deaths and injuries caused by railroad monopolies (fig. 32).


fig 32:Why? (1913)

The penultimate scene features frightened capitalists shooting angry workers who, in turn, achieve their revenge by burning down the Woolworth building and setting fire to most of lower Manhattan--akin to burning down biggest mall today.