ABSTRACT
But: 11. How can there be such a difference of opinion between the people Sovkino appointed specifically to select scripts and the people who appointed them, who appointed them precisely because these people have to know better than the board of directors what constitutes a good script. 2/. If however their opinions do differ why does the administration have the final say in artistic matters? 31. Why, when these kinds of decisions are taken, are the artistic directors so submissive like the character in the children's story: the fish who covers his mouth so that you cannot hear that he is singing. 4/. Why do accountants have the final say in cultural and artistic matters while the ones who
produce the art and culture do not have even an advisory say in accounting matters? 51. Does the phrase 'We must pay our way' mean that scripts must be written by cashiers? And what kind of writer would emerge from that kind of encounter? 6/. If a monopoly like Sovkino won't produce experimental films what are we going to do about new inventions in cinema? How much will you pay in the end to other countries for this inventiveness? 7/. If this (general) system is safeguarding us against pulp literature, why are the scripts of the films that are shown so wretched, why is scriptwriting confined to making use of corpses and why does every investigation of every film organisation reveal the staleness of the worthless scripts that are accepted?
