During the 1919 strike, what unique aspect could actors exploit that was not available to most industrial workers?

During the 1919 strike, what unique aspect could actors exploit that was not available to most industrial workers?

• A. Their role as "weavers of dreams"
• B. Their status as commodities
• C. Their ability to produce cultural objects
• D. Their role in the "obliteration of the factory"

Answer: (B)

The unique aspect that actors could exploit during the 1919 strike, which set them apart from most industrial workers, is their status as commodities. In the entertainment industry, particularly in theatre and film, actors themselves are considered valuable assets whose performances draw audiences and generate revenue. Unlike many industrial workers who are primarily defined by the labor they provide, actors are both the labor and the product, making their ability to strike particularly potent. When actors go on strike, their absence affects the production and distribution of content directly, as they are the face of the performances. This status allows them to leverage their position for better working conditions and contracts in ways that are not as directly applicable to other labor groups, whose contributions are often more interchangeable and less recognizable as individual commodities. The other options, while they may hold some relevance to the context of the strike, do not capture the unique leverage that actors held at that time compared to typical industrial workers. For instance, the notion of being "weavers of dreams" speaks to the artistic nature of their work but doesn't convey the economic implications of their striking power. Similarly, while actors produce cultural objects, this does not directly relate to their ability to negotiate power during a strike. The "obliteration of the factory

The unique aspect that actors could exploit during the 1919 strike, which set them apart from most industrial workers, is their status as commodities. In the entertainment industry, particularly in theatre and film, actors themselves are considered valuable assets whose performances draw audiences and generate revenue. Unlike many industrial workers who are primarily defined by the labor they provide, actors are both the labor and the product, making their ability to strike particularly potent.

When actors go on strike, their absence affects the production and distribution of content directly, as they are the face of the performances. This status allows them to leverage their position for better working conditions and contracts in ways that are not as directly applicable to other labor groups, whose contributions are often more interchangeable and less recognizable as individual commodities.

The other options, while they may hold some relevance to the context of the strike, do not capture the unique leverage that actors held at that time compared to typical industrial workers. For instance, the notion of being "weavers of dreams" speaks to the artistic nature of their work but doesn't convey the economic implications of their striking power. Similarly, while actors produce cultural objects, this does not directly relate to their ability to negotiate power during a strike. The "obliteration of the factory