Despite all the controversy stirred by the decision of the Academy of Motion Picture
Arts and Sciences to give director Elia Kazan an honorary Oscar for Lifetime Achievement,
Sunday’s 71st Academy Awards ceremony passed with no disruption and little
commentary.
With the Academy controlled cameras showing only quick and partial glimpses of the
audience, and awards presenters steering clear of any mention of Kazan’s naming names
during his 1952 appearance before the House Un-American Activities Committee, most of the
audience for the nationally televised show likely made no sense of the “sit in
silence” protest organized by elderly blacklisted lefties such as Bernard Gordon and
Abraham Polonsky. Nonetheless, Hollywood’s smoke and mirrors facade did not deliver
the sentimental gushing that has greeted previous lifetime achievement winners.
Critic Roger Ebert, in post-awards comments, estimated that almost two-thirds of the
audience inside LA’s Dorothy Pavilion Center joined Nick Nolte, Ed Harris, Amy
Madigan, Jim Carey, and Steven Spielberg (all viewed sitting by Academy cameras) in
refusing Kazan a warm and forgiving embrace. Organizers of the protest reported that
almost 80 percent of the audience remained seated during the presentation. Clearly the
Academy’s 39-member board (that voted unanimously to approve the award) miscalculated
in assuming the movie industry’s shameful and hypocritical blacklist war no longer
matters. And as the Academy was forced to recall, for all his great and lasting
achievements in film and theater, Kazan is still remembered as Hollywood’s greatest
stool pigeon.
For those who know Kazan only through films, he was briefly a member of the Communist
Party in the 1930s while working in New York’s Group Theater. Later, in 1947, with
Cold War politics on the rise and suspected Communists known as the Hollywood Ten called
up before HUAC, he pledged solidarity with the Ten and supported their legal defense. But
as dozens of play and screenwriters, actors, and directors continued to parade before the
committee, Kazan’s loyalties took a turn.
Appearing before HUAC in 1952, he named eight members of the Group Theater as
Communists. J. Edward Bromberg, one of those named by Kazan, died of a heart attack after
offering HUAC only unfriendly testimony. Tony Kuber, also named by Kazan, reportedly
killed himself after refusing to testify. Augmenting his views and testimony, Kazan bought
an ad in The New York Times declaring the Communist Party “a dangerous and
alien conspiracy.”
Yet as Bernard Gordon recalls, it wasn’t Kazan’s names or self-serving
rhetoric that made him so reviled among the left. Days before the awards he explained,
“Kazan validated the committee and it meant they could continue the blacklist.”
For those in the film industry, this meant at best, years without work or writing under
an assumed name. For others, it meant the end of a career in film or theater. But most
significantly, and for thousands more–labor and civil rights activists, teachers,
journalists, folksingers and peaceniks–it meant a nationwide clampdown on ideas, rights,
and organizing linked to progressive social change.
Kazan, of course, has too small a role in the anti-communist drama of the 1950s to be
blamed for undermining the American Left of his time. But as one of the most influential,
respected, and socially conscious directors of the postwar years, Kazan had enormous
artistic and political stature. He brought the now famous Method school of acting into
vogue through his work with Marlon Brando and James Dean. In 1948 he won a best director
Oscar for "Gentleman’s Agreement," a film attacking anti-semitism. His
Broadway productions of Death Of A Salesman and A Streetcar Named Desire were hailed as
masterpieces. Remembering Kazan’s influence on film and conscience in the early
1950s, actor Rod Steiger recently described the director as “our god, our father, our
teacher.” Accordingly, Kazan’s betrayal of friends before HUAC evoked shock and
bitterness.
Adding to his legacy, two years after HUAC, Kazan directed On The Waterfront, a story
of union corruption with an informer as hero. There were also rumors that Kazan had named
names after being pressured by a studio boss about the consequences of being
uncooperative. And even as the destructive effects of his testimony became more evident,
he remained unrepentant, unapologetic.
A few more acclaimed movies followed for Kazan (East Of Eden and Splendor In The
Grass), but from 1952 to 1999 his film triumphs, great as they may be, have remained
knotted to his indelible reputation as a stoolie. Elia Kazan deserves his shame.