Bates, Robin. "Audiences on the Verge of a Fascist Breakdown: Male Anxieties and Late 1930s French Film." Cinema Journal 36.3 (1997): 25-55.

This article by Bates brings into question the general trends of French film in the late 1930s. By offering a comparison of 3 films—Marcel Carné’s Quai des brumes (1938), Maurice Tourneur’s Katia (1938) and Renoir’s La Règle du jeu (1939)—Bates delves into the role that film played for “viewers on the verge of cataclysmic change,” i.e. those at the brink of World War II (25). She uses various sources, such as reviews, letters, and even censorship rulings, in order to prove that film audiences respond more favorably to works that ease their concerns and angrily to those that exacerbate and confront these anxieties. Bates also analyzes the “crisis of masculinity,” a term coined by Ginette Vincendeau. She argues that in the atmosphere of pre-World War II Europe, as deeply powerful males like Hitler, Franco and Mussolini grew in influence, the French people began to grow disheartened and lose confidence in their male leaders. Thus, these three films reflect this idea of weak masculine characters.

Bates’ argument is relevant to my thesis because it proposes a different infusion of politics into the film. Bates mentions Theweleit’s description of archetypes, categorizing the character of Christine into the type of “pure white countess” (27). One could even argue that these archetypes are taken to the fullest extent in the film to be used for a scathing critique of the haute bourgeoisie. Her argument that the portrayal of males and male-female relations in film drastically changed in the late 1930s as a result of the pre-War political situation supports my argument. Bates’ article also provides in-depth analyses of the three films and includes key reactions to the films at the time of their premieres, again showing the effects of the films on not just French, but also European society.

Wellhofer, Spencer. “Democracy and Fascism: Class, Civil Society, and Rational Choice in Italy.” The American Political Science Review. Vol. 97, No. 1, Feb. 2003, 91-106. JSTOR. American Politicial Science Association. University of Pennslvania Library, Philadelphia. 4 April 2008 <http://www.jstor.org/stable/3118223>

Spencer Wellhofers discussion on the emergence of fascism considers the requirements for fascism to succeed. He examines the ways in which fascism appeared in Italy within four years. Fascism set into Italy in different ways than it did in Germany. Fascists did not have to rely heavily on the support of those in rural areas in Germany, as it is primarily an industrial country. However, in Italy Mussolini had to have the unity of those living on the countryside.
It did not take long for fascists to take power in Italy and the transition appeared easy. Many Italians have conveyed these resentments through various art and media outlets, including film.

Federico Fellini, one of the most well-known Italian filmmakers tackled the issue of fascism by incorporating experiences of his own into his films. Fellini displays fascism as an issue in a small town in Italy, where the citizens are either completely ignorant to fascism’s capability, or they are not interested in it at all and feel that it is hardly a serious threat to their day-to-day living. In small towns, Italians were heavily influenced by the leaders of their communities, and oftentimes it was these leaders and who were pressured into retaining their professionalism by joining the fascist party. (see The Fascist Experience; Italian Society and Culture 1922-1945 by Edward R. Tannenbaum)

Wheatcroft, Geoffrey. “Sham and Bluster; An epic history helps explain why the Italians never took fascism entirely seriously.” The Washington Post 9 April 2006. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/06/AR2006040601748.html>

Geoffrey Wheatcroft picks apart R.J.B. Bosworth’s book Life under the Fascist Dictatorship, 1915-1945 in his article “Sham and Buster; An epic history helps explain why the Italians never took fascism entirely seriously”. In his analysis of the book, he resolves to call Italian fascism something of a farce. In comparison to Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia, totalitarian rule in Italy was laid-back. He credits this to the Italian proclivity towards not taking politics seriously. This tendency makes Italy’s history with fascism almost humorous. Bosworth’s book points out Mussolini’s failures after declaring war on France and England, Italy’s failure to recognize Libya’s vast oil fields after ruling the country for decades and how one fascist leader became one of the first fatalities in the war after his plane was brought down by an Italian anti-aircraft weapon. Hitler once said the Italians never had their hearts in fascism and “the excessive warmth of family relations there overwhelms all the rest.” Wheatcroft regards Italy as a timid, insignificant force in their run-in with fascism.

Geoffrey Wheatcroft has pulled out points from R.J.B. Bosworth’s non-fiction and embellished them with conclusions of his own. His sentiments draw parallels to Federico Fellini’s Amarcord. Fellini’s film uses humor in a way to mock and ridicule fascist ideals. The film was in fact very critical of fascism, whether intentional or not, and the humor plays with fascism’s absurdity. Wheatcroft instead ridicules Italy’s dabble with fascism. Many Italians failed to take fascism too seriously, and in a way, this had to do with the absurdity of it. Wheatcroft also discusses the nonchalant attitude of Italians towards politics. Similarly, Fellini’s film focuses much attention on the everyday, care-free attitudes of a small, isolated community of Italians.