 |
 |
Topic: The Legacy of McCarthyism
Posted By: Joseph Dorman
Date: 03 Mar 1999 4:04 PM
"Arguing the World" explores the McCarthy era and its legacy. Recently
at the Academy Awards, director Elia Kazan -- who named names at a
congressional investigation during the period -- was given an honorary
Oscar. Many in Hollywood disagreed with the decision and felt that
Kazan didn't deserve the award since, in their eyes, his cooperation
with the committee helped legitimize it along with the Hollywood
blacklisting. Playwright Arthur Miller, an uncooperative witness at
the time who went on to author The Crucible, a parable of McCarthyism,
recently wrote a piece about the Kazan controversy for "The Nation"
magazine. While questioning Kazan's decision to name names, he also
quoted a blacklisted writer of the period, who felt that those on both
sides of the divide communist and anti-communist alike, could be seen
as victims of an era in which many people were forced to make
uncomfortable decisions under immense pressures. Many who defend Kazan
point out that the names he gave were, as in most if not all cases,
already known to the committee. And they point out that it is
difficult for any of us not around during the McCarthy years to know
how we might have acted under the same pressure. Should we continue to
condemn those on both sides who we might feel didn't act according to
our own principles or is it time to put the antagonisms of the period
behind us and attempt to understand the period in its historical
context, forgiving actions we may not agree with? I believe Kazan, the
artist, should be honored and his actions must be understood as that of
someone who took a stand against communism that he felt was justified,
regardless of one's feelings about it. What do you think?
Responses:
Subject: The Legacy of McCarthyism
From: Lonn Hoklin
Date: 03 Mar 1999 2:41 PM
I think you're absolutely right. The danger of clinging to old
animosities is apparent everywhere we look--Yugoslavia, the Middle
East, Northern Ireland, to name a few. For the good of society, we need
to move on and stop trying to exact some sort of payment for every
action that has ever offended us.
Subject: Legacy of McCarthyism
From: Sara E. Martinez
Date: 03 Mar 1999 4:36 PM
I agree that we must forgive and move on. Moreover, Kazan's
masterpiece "On the waterfront" made a powerful statement about right
and wrong and the working man that should cancel out the act of naming
names. On the other hand, we must be constantly vigilant - never
again! Everyone is within the reach of modern technology and the
possibilities of a new McCarthy era are frightening. Do we want
Kenneth Starr and his ilk probing our most precious privacy where they
have no business to be? And more importantly, how do we prevent it?
Subject: Kazan
From: Brian Leonard
Date: 03 Mar 1999 4:38 PM
I agree completely with Mr. Dorman's comments regarding the idea that
everyone called before HUAC was a victim. Individuals may have their
personal beefs with Kazan, but from a historical perspective, he
certainly wasn't the real villain of this sad affair. However, the
Oscar to Kazan may be questioned on other grounds. With few
exceptions, his achievements as a film director were built on great
writing more than great directing. And he already has a major Oscar,
whereas there are many people in the film industry who have none and
deserve the honor (examples would be Sidney Lumet and, before his
untimely death, Stanley Kubrick).Mr. Dorman, you did a wonderful job
with Arguing the World. Where's your Oscar??
|
