"The only good basis for a film or a play is a central character who's split, where there is a conflict within him and within the author about him. 'Ambivalence' is the essential word."
-- Elia Kazan
Posted by sheilaSpeaking of conflict, what are your thoughts on Kazan's role collaborating with HUAAC?
Posted by: John at June 10, 2004 4:36 PMI can see both sides, John. I really can.
The choice faced by these people is absolutely intolerable, and when I read about it I feel like I do not recognize America at all.
People's lives were ruined by "being named". And they weren't even accused of anything. I believe that the entire proceedings was an outrage, and a blot on our history.
And I freakin' HATE communism. But I love due process more.
I don't blame Kazan. I honestly don't know what I would have done in his shoes, either. I also don't blame those who never spoke to him again. Although ...
I don't know. Many of my idols were ruined by just being "named". Many of them had been Communists in the 30s. Many of them hadn't actually joined the CP, but had gone to a couple of meetings, or actually KNEW of people who were Communists. It didn't matter. It didn't matter whether they were or they were not, their lives were ruined anyway.
It's a disgrace.
I was tremendously glad when Kazan was honored at the Oscars a couple of years ago, and tremendously pleased that people could look past their own small egos (some people - like Meryl Streep, Steven Spielberg, Kathy Bates ... the couple of people who stood up to clap for him) - and applaud this man's artistic achievements.
The glowering faces of Nick Nolte and Amy Madigan, etc., pissed me the fuck off. Because how the hell do they know that in his shoes they wouldn't have done the same thing??
His choice MUST be seen in the context of the times.
So - I do not envy him. I do not blame him. And I also mourn for all of the actors and writers he ruined by naming them to the HUAC.
Long rambling answer. Forgive me.
Posted by: red at June 10, 2004 4:43 PMBut really, my true feelings?
He was a giant of an artist, and his work should be celebrated.
Regardless.
I get into a lot of shit on this blog (my own damn blog!!) for holding this view. Like: wow, I think Sean Penn is a good actor. I could not even give a shit about his behavior during the war.
So that's where I'm coming from.
Clifford Odets was a Communist during the 30s. The man's prose is beyond great, and - you read it and you feel the NEED to speak it.
Arthur Miller is a convicted left-ist. He's a genius.
If the art's good ... I really don't care about anything else. This may put me in a morally sticky place with some folks ... there's always the Leni Reifenstahl example - she always comes up!!
But in terms of Kazan, what I am really left with is how wonderful his films are, and how much those films have enriched my life.
Posted by: red at June 10, 2004 5:59 PM