TRIAL

by Robert Hannum

Any writer who has ever touched, even lightly, upon legal or political practices as subject or setting for a story has felt a sense of responsibility toward his audience beyond the usual. If his story were to convey a realistic impression and be of timely and current interest, he has been obliged to undertake careful, conscientious research for the twofold purpose of correcting any personal misconceptions and enlarging his store of accurate knowledge. Any remaining uncertainty about points unimportant enough to require further research would still not occasion a reckless or misleading statement, for such points could always be given the benefit of any possible doubt. . . and every writer has a wonderfully idealistic world ever present in his imagination from which to bestow a doubt with generous benefits.

Thus, these subjects have been presented to the public in either a glorified or an accurate light,

one

but never in a sense that is defamatory or inaccurate. In the case of a Hollywood film, the tendency is generally toward glorification, for this is believed to be more pleasant to audiences (and sometimes it is); but even those writers and producers who know that accuracy is lovable, too, have never yet been subject to the accusation that they "went too far" in any expose of legal or political activities. Considering the restraint required to keep an intelligent man silent when his business is Communication, this proves that these writers and producers must be men of remarkable self-mastery. Of such films, it proves that the worst impressions conveyed by them must still be more glorified than those of, for instance, a thorough survey by a scientific researcher or the report of an uncensored journalist.

Here is a question, then, to the moviegoers of America: What will be the result of a motion