Hollywood & Politics, Part 3:As Performative Activism Moves To The Forefront Hollywood Takes It To Heart in the 1960s and 1970s

 

In a previous series of articles I argued that the 'lost cause of the 1960s' which was held by activists, academics and indeed many in Hollywood have obscured the reality of what actually was going on during that decade and the reverberations felt in every aspect of American politics ever since.

Prior to the 1960s every major cause of reform in American history, from the abolition of slavery to the Progressive era to women's suffrage all the way to the civil rights movement had been hindered because of the divide between those wanted to work within the system to bring about change and those who thought doing so would damage their ideological purity and chose to demonstrate from without. Much of the causes of reform in our history were hindered as much by that divide as the powers-that-be working against it. Primarily due to the Vietnam War by the end of the decade the political side had completely been overrun by the activist side who now believed the only way to bring about change was through demonstrations, performances and violence if necessary.

How this was supposed to win over the government and the people who were 'sheep' standing in the way of this oppression is something that those activists never seemed to have considered at the time or even retroactively. In their mind America failed, not them. As we shall see in the next article much of the conservative movement rose in California itself as a backlash to what was being seen on the college campuses and neighborhoods of the state.

Given how much of activists like the Chicago Seven and the Black Panther Party believed far more in public demonstrations that were supposedly to draw attention to the cause – but far more often cause working class Americans to run to the Republican party in increasingly large numbers – it makes a certain amount of sense that Hollywood would be drawn in to this type of demonstration. As you would expect much of it became prominent as it became clear that the Vietnam War was becoming a quagmire that the President and the government had been deceiving America.

Some actors would choose more political means to make their stands. Paul Newman, considerably older than the activists in the streets, would publicly announce in March that he had voted for Eugene McCarthy in the Democratic primary. (Newman was born in New Hampshire.) While this statement would later put him on Nixon's 'Enemies List', Newman would fundamentally serve as a political figure, working in Democratic fundraisers and campaigning for them for the rest of his life. Later on he would form Newman's Own to sell goods such as popcorn and salad dressing in order to raise money for liberal causes.

Shirley MacLaine was younger and more liberal then the Hollywood establishment and would increasingly involve herself in Democratic politics during the 1960s and 1970s.  The height of her involvement came when she served as an unofficial adviser to George McGovern's presidential campaign in 1972. However her presence as head of the California delegation almost certainly did more harm than good as Theodore White described it. In regards to the 'quota system of reform' they were accused of 'overcompliance'

"They had sent to the convention from a state where minorities make up only 27 percent of the population a delegation 39 percent of whose delegates were minorities. The minorities invited the best camera work: tall, high cheek-boned maidens, their black pigtails stiff as Sitting Bull's in old monochromes, Japanese and Chinese youngsters with their delicately sculpted faces,..Blacks were 19 percent of the delegation. Mexican-Americans were 17 percent. Women were 42 percent. The white males were young, dressed in open-neck floral shirts and tight-fitting pants, middle aged white males were a decided minority. And the total of 388 delegates and alternates, 89 were on welfare…The California delegation captured a mood in West Coast Democratic politics, not its power structure."

Democratic politicians would later argue that the cameras capturing this onscreen in Miami doomed the McGovern election before he was even nominated. That the delegation didn't have many Congressional Democrats or Mayor Sam Yorty of Los Angeles horrified viewers at home.

MacLaine was prominent in the campaign including discussion of the Vice Presidential candidate which led to the disaster involving Thomas Eagleton. McGovern would rely heavily on her during the fall campaign, one of the only women he took lessons from. The McGovern campaign was run by mostly rich, educated white people at the exclusion of all others. Perhaps it is not shocking that many Hollywood stars such as Jack Nicholson actively campaigned for McGovern in California and other states. It was as successful as the rest of McGovern's campaign as Nixon won a landslide victory with 49 of 50 states, including California.

The clearest sign was that Nixon won by 'only' thirteen percent of the vote over McGovern. California was therefore ten points to the left of the nation at large. That result no doubt foreshadowed California's leftward moment in electoral politics but considering that Nixon had basically carried America and that it was the first of four election cycles where Republicans would carry four hundred or more electoral votes, understandably no one thought anything of it.

The larger consequence was that Warren Beatty, who had campaigned with Bobby Kennedy in 1968 would become friends with one of the high figures in McGovern's command Gary Hart. The friendship has lasted their entire lives and Beatty would be critical in Hart's political career going forward.

While MacLaine and Newman's efforts came to nothing they at least worked within the political system. The  same could not be said of the most famous Hollywood activist at the time Jane Fonda.

Much has already been written and said about Fonda's actions during the Vietnam War and indeed much by Fonda herself in her later years. I will not relitigate most of it here save to say my own opinions on the subject.

Historically I think the most apt comparison to Fonda's touring of Vietnam POW camps and being photographed with the Viet Cong so prominent is Henry Wallace's tour of Siberia during World War II. Both were, in the most charitable description,  demonstrations of the kind of ridiculous naivete that far left figures have made during the 20^th century towards totalitarian states. It is difficult for the impartial observer (if one can be impartial about either figure) as to which was more foolish or damaging to the cause of progressivism and liberalism in America.

On the surface Wallace's would seem to be more so: he did so as Vice President of the United States while the Soviet Union was increasingly flexing its power in Eastern Europe. Fonda was 'only' an actress. However at the time of Wallace's visit the Soviet Union was the ally of the United States. Fonda, by contrast, was visiting a nation that America considered an enemy combatant and was essentially doing propaganda for them. Fonda has recanted much of what she did during that period which is all well and good but the fact remains she acted like a privileged white person who went to a nation where men were dying in increasing numbers as if it she were going on a vacation.

I will admit that on the grand scale of travesties happening both in Vietnam and at home, Fonda's behavior is very low on my scale of horrible behavior by either the government or the protestors. I will say that I believe the only reason Fonda had the successful career that she did was because the bosses that controlled the studios during Hollywood's early years were all dead and gone. Had they been run by the Louis B Mayers or Jack Warners during the 1970s I sincerely believe Fonda would never have worked again after her first major protest.

As it was Fonda was already a figure of enormous controversy by the time she was a serious contender for Best Actress for Klute at the 1972 Academy Awards. When she was awarded the Oscar that night many were terrified about what she would say or do when she accepted. When she did after thanking everyone who applauded. She said: "There's a great deal to say and I'm not going to say it tonight. I would just like to really thank you very much." You could almost hear the sigh of relief in the theater that night.

This was particularly notable considering what was happening in the Academy Awards ceremonies during that decade.  The 1970s would be the era in which the Academy Awards would have the most political speeches and actions during its entire decade, setting  a standard that while it has occasionally been approached by later speakers has never really been since at a consistent level.

Some might think it had started the year before when George C. Scott had famously said that he would not accept an Oscar if he were to win for Patton. While it was framed under this banner retroactively in truth it was more about Scott's ego than anything else. He had already refused to accept an award when he been nominated for The Hustler nine years earlier. And two years after winning he would star and direct a film known as Rage and told the Academy he would accept a nomination. By 1982 he was attending the Academy Awards for the first time in his career and it was barely talked about.

When Fonda chose to be quiet in 1972 the Oscars might have thought they had dodged a bullet. They didn't know the very next year they would be dealing with their most notorious moment in Oscar history to date at the hands of Marlon Brando.

In the leadup to the 1973 Academy Awards Marlon Brando was the out-and-out frontrunner for the Academy Award for Best Actor in The Godfather. Brando had always been touchy about the Oscars. He had not attended for the first three nominations he'd received for Best Actor, but he had when he won for On The Waterfront.  However he had not attended the Golden Globes where had one and had been making noises. On the eve of the awards he broke his silence. He wasn't attending but he would send a proxy.

Much has been made about that night in 1973 when 'Sacheen Littlefeather' made one of the most notorious appearance in the near century of the Oscars existence. I'd actually like to talk about some of the other things on that night that have been overlooked.

The first was that going into Oscar Night Littlefeather was more nervous that she let on. She would later confess: "I felt if I got out alive, I'd be lucky." Furthermore Brando had prepared a fifteen page speech that he wanted her to read and she went to see the producer to ask about it in advance. The producer made it clear she was going to get exactly 45 seconds and if she went one moment over he was going to have someone pull her off the stage.

There's also the fact that the reception to her statement was considerably frosty and she was greeted with far more boos then applause at any point. The reaction in the theater spoke volumes to what the Oscars has always felt about political statements from the moment they became popular. In their minds, to prick the bubble of the celebratory air with the outside world was not something they particularly liked.

Nor were the majority of the writers and actors particularly impressed with Brando's actions in particular. Michael Caine, who was nominated against Brando for Sleuth, was particularly angry. He believed that if Brando truly believed in his cause he should have had the nerve and the decency to show up on stage and say it, not put a minority woman as a shield. Furthermore he pointed out that Brando had made over two million dollars for his work in The Godfather and if he cared so much "he could give some of that money to the bloody Indians instead.'

More interesting was how the presenters who came after Littlefeather accepted. Rock Hudson, who presented the next award, said: "It is often eloquent to be silent." Raquel Welch, before presenting the nominees for Best Actress said in a stage whisper: "I hope they haven't got a cause." But Clint Eastwood before announcing Best Picture and even then a man with very few words to waste came up with the best line: "I don't know if I should present this award on behalf of all the cowboys shot in John Ford westerns over the years."

Two years later there was even more controversy though this time a star was not the cause of it. That year the winner for Best Documentary was Hearts and Minds. Accepting Bert Schneider conveyed greetings of friendship from the Viet Cong delegation to the peace talks in Paris.  He also read a commentary that thanked the anti-war movement coming from the Viet Cong. Not only was this not received well in the theater there was a back stage furor by some of the more conservative members of the Academy that nearly became an argument.

Bob Hope, one of the co-hosts, told the liberal Shirley Maclaine that she wanted her to give a statement on behalf of the Academy to read a disclaimer. She refused and screamed at him before going out on stage. Undeterred Hope and the equally conservative John Wayne prevailed on the Republican Frank Sinatra to do so.

Sinatra read a statement that said: "We are not responsible for any political references made on the program and we are sorry they had to take place this evening." MacLaine was infuriated as was her brother. When Beatty came out to announce Best Picture he famously said: "Thank you, Frank, you old Republican." MacLaine, for her part said, "You said you were speaking for the Academy. Well, I'm a member of the Academy and you didn't ask me." MacLaine would later say: "Bob Hope is so mad at me, he's going to bomb Encino."

There was already a sense of ugliness before the awards as Dustin Hoffman would describe the Awards as 'ugly and grotesque' and likened the ceremony to a beauty pageant. This was not approved of by Hope or Sinatra. Hope made a pointed joke: "If Dustin Hoffman wins tonight, he's going to have a friend pick it up – George C. Scott." Sinatra was more unpleasant: "Contrary to what Mr. Hoffman thinks, this is not an obscene evening." Hoffman seems to have worked out his issues as he got older. The next time he was nominated for Kramer Vs. Kramer he was more than willing to show up and take as much time as necessary to give his acceptance speech."

The most controversial moment of politics came three years later when Vanessa Redgrave won for Best Supporting Actress for her work in Julia. Even before that night Redgrave was already under opposition. That same year she had produced and starred in The Palestinian, a film which followed the activities of the PLO in Lebanon. Multiple Jewish groups criticized it for its perceived anti-Israel slant. When Redgrave was nominated members of the JDL burned effigies of Redgrave and picketed the Oscar to protest against what they saw was her support for the PLO.

As is the tradition of the Oscars Best Supporting Actress was one of the first awards given on Oscar Night 1978. She chose to take that moment to challenge the structure, thanking Hollywood for:

“having refused to be intimidated by the threat of a small bunch of Zionist hoodlums – whose behavior is an insult to the stature of Jews all over the world and to the great and heroic record of struggle against fascism and oppression.”

There were gasps and boos while she spoke. Later that night, in presenting the Oscar for screenplay Paddy Chayefsky himself called her out to tremendous applause. In the interviews in the aftermath almost to a man everyone present excoriated Redgrave for using her platform in that way, some using more derogatory language then other. Alan King, who didn't attend the Oscars,  actually said: “It’s a good thing I wasn’t there. I would have gone right for the jugular.”

These political moments were the definition of performative activism and I suppose there could be a certain level of bravery for choosing to make these statements in front of a conservative Hollywood audience and somewhere between 80 and 90 million viewers. But the fact remains by and large the general public was unmoved by this and critics only thought of it as the equivalent of a streaker running through the stage at the 1974 Oscars: something to break-up the dreary monotony of what even by the 1970s was considered an over-scripted, bloated event.  None of this did anything to make a change for any of the causes that these people were advocating for, they were just drawing attention to it.  The rest of America was unmoved and Hollywood basically shrugged it off.

Even Brando's big statement became fodder for Oscar jokes during that decade. When Jason Robards didn't show up to pick up his second Oscar for Julia Hope said: "He's playing cards with George C. Scott and Marlon Brando." Two years later when Alan Splet won an Oscar for Sound Design for The Black Stallion Johnny Carson, already becoming a brilliant host said, "It never fails. First George C. Scott, then Marlon Brando, then Alan Splet."

Perhaps the real reason that no one cared what Hollywood had to say on this issue was because of something critical: during the 1970s the film industry was the only one in America that was enjoying financial health. The rest of America was in the midst of some of the worst economic times since the Great Depression with stagflation, recession and multiple oil embargoes causing America to undergo hard times.  And it would be the major reason for a former actor to rise to political prominence during this same period.

In the next article I will look at the rise of Ronald Reagan in California politics and how Hollywood took him no more seriously then the increasingly left-leaning parts of the Democratic Party,