The Photoplay: A Psychological Study

by Hugo Münsterberg

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.

This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.

As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.

Genres: Film, Nonfiction, Psychology, Art, Theory

233 pages, ebook

First published December 23, 2001

About the author

Hugo Münsterberg was a German-American psychologist. He was one of the pioneers in applied psychology, extending his research and theories to industrial/organizational (I/O), legal, medical, clinical, educational and business settings.

Not to be confused with Hugo Munsterberg, an expert on Far Eastern art.

Reviews

[Lilian Kong]

I really enjoyed this proto-film scholar's theory, especially his justification of film's (the photoplay's) existence as an independent art form. His language is miraculously straightforward while managing to express very nuanced ideas - at times his language is surprisingly poetic. This really goes to show that, even though this book is from way back when, many of its principles resonate today despite how drastically film technology has changed, and thus, contemporary film scholars are still able to actively interact with his ideas! How cool.

[Greta]

Though dated, it's really remarkably sophisticated and far-sighted for 1916, an era when most film writings were technical treatises or personality puff-pieces. He discusses the aesthetic nature of film and film grammar, making an early case for film as an independent art form. Thus informed, he feels himself qualified to pontificate on what filmmakers should and shouldn't do on screen, but that's pretty typical of the era when artistic manifestos were all the rage. He would have doubtless been most annoyed by talkies. Also includes the essays Why we go to the Movies (in which he ascribes the development of the close-up to Vitagraph) and Peril to childhood in the movies, as well as an interview and speech. Don't be put off by the introduction by Allan Langdale, which makes Münsterberg sound like such a jerk that you start off not wanting to read anything that he had to say.

[Tom Hammer]

Munsterberg surveys the state of silent film in 1916. Still a relatively new phenomenon, he contrasts this new form of media to traditional theater. From our perspective in 2008, much of his analysis seems fairly obvious - yes film is different than theater. But what the book does offer, is a fresh perspective on a form of art often taken for granted. Munsterberg shares insights on why film has meaning, how meaning can take form.

Admittedly his attempts at being prophetic often fall short (film DID eventually introduce sound). But who cares! We already know what happened over the next 90 years. Sometimes it's a pleasure to look back.

[Amanda]

This is an incredibly insightful little book examining the status of film as an Art, the definition of Art in general, and the way the movies are shaped by and interpreted by the mind. From 1916, Munsterberg intuits many of the developments of cinema from the standpoint of cognition and applied psychology. Lucidly written and quite engaging.

[Whitney Borup]

Much more accessible than the Vachel Lindsay I just read. Explores emerging film art in terms of narrative structure (as opposed to spectacle). Has some great material on adaptation.