Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Truth about the "Hollywood Ten"
FrontPageMagazine.com ^ | April 18, 2005 | Art Eckstein

Posted on 04/18/2005 10:47:45 AM PDT by Liz

In 1947, the House Committee on Un-American Activities (HUAC) began a series of official inquiries into the penetration of the Hollywood film industry by the American Communist Party (CPUSA).

Major public hearings were held in 1947 and 1951, with smaller hearings throughout the mid-1950s. In the course of these inquiries, dozens of “friendly” Hollywood witnesses denounced hundreds of people as secret members of the Communist Party, while dozens of “unfriendly” witnesses refused to discuss their politics with the Committee. Those who were either publicly or privately denounced as members of the CPUSA found it almost impossible to get employment in the motion-picture industry for at least for a decade.

The most famous victims of the resulting blacklist were the original group of “unfriendly” witnesses, known as the “Unfriendly Ten” or “Hollywood Ten.” These individuals–mostly screenwriters– refused to give political information about themselves before HUAC in October 1947.1

The blacklist functioned in part officially, as demonstrated by a joint public announcement of the motion picture firms in November 1947 that henceforth no studio would knowingly employ any member of the Communist Party, or the members of any other group which advocated the overthrow of the United States government by revolution.

The blacklist also operated unofficially, through instruments such as the irresponsible red-baiting newsletter Red Channels, which named whole swaths of people as subversives. This, for example, ruined the career of the left-wing but non-Communist actress Marsha Hunt. 2

The blacklist also often functioned in secret: jobs just dried up. As a result, “fixers” emerged to get people unofficially “pardoned” by anti-Communist organizations and film industry managers, therefore making them employable again. One famous “fixer” was the fiercely anti-Communist actor Ward Bond. 3

“Fronts” arose as well in the form of people offering scripts ghost-written by blacklisted screenwriters in exchange for official credit for the script and often a cut of the payment. One famous example of such a “front” was Philip Yordan, himself a quite famous screenwriter. 4

Some film careers were totally destroyed as a result of the blacklist system. For instance, Mickey Knox, “the next John Garfield,” was a rising star of the late 1940s, turning in a star performance in the great gangster film White Heat (1949). If you have never heard of Mickey Knox, well, that is the point. Many other careers suffered severe setbacks, such as that of actor Howard Da Silva. 5

Actors and directors suffered more severely than screenwriters because they could not act or direct under assumed names, whereas screenwriters could use the “front” system, which allowed the most talented of them to continue to write. The CPUSA, however, had made its largest inroads in Hollywood among screenwriters, and many screenwriters’ careers suffered greatly or ended.

It is generally not a good idea to attack professional writers because they tend to write, and to write well, to get in the last word. This has certainly been the case with the blacklist. None of the HUAC committee or staff (which originally included Congressman Richard M. Nixon) has written memorably on the events of 1947 and 1951, let alone on the later, smaller investigations.

A few of those who appeared as “friendly witnesses” before HUAC, such as directors Edward Dmytryk and Elia Kazan, and actor Sterling Hayden. have written important memoirs, often defending their conduct and sometimes expressing self-doubt. 6

But such figures are far outnumbered by the self-justifying and bitter memoirs of those who were denounced: Norma Barzman; Walter Bernstein; Alvah Bessie; Herbert Biberman; Conrad Bromberg; Lester Cole; Lillian Hellman; Howard Koch; Ring Lardner, Jr. (and now his daughter Kate); Donald Ogden Stewart; Dalton Trumbo; and Ella Winter. 7

The publication of these works, and more fundamentally the cultural shift in Hollywood to domination by a bien peasant Left that started around 1960 and accelerated in the 1970s, has led to the lionization of the Unfriendly Ten as American “rebels” and martyred “non-conformists.”

Meanwhile, the anger within the current filmmaking elite at those who originally “named names” in the 1940s and 1950s has been unremitting. A now unalterable view of what occurred is held by people who have little knowledge of what it actually meant in the 1940s to be a Communist; that is, a Stalinist. Two examples demonstrate the current political situation.

Long read---rest at link.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Government
KEYWORDS: communists; hollywood; hollywoodleft; hollywoodten; huac
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 341-345 next last
To: jcb8199
[ Wait, where was Joe McCarthy's name? I mean, I know he was a Senator and thus not a member of the HOUSE committee, and his "witchhunt" was several years later ]

Joe found a buttload of "witches".. and burned a few before the "witches" burned him..
Its all in Ann Coulters book, "TREASON"..

Washington D.C. is NOW a coven not a government center at all..

41 posted on 04/18/2005 12:30:36 PM PDT by hosepipe (This Propaganda has been edited to include not a small amount of Hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Liz

Thanks. There's more on Stewart in his FBI file, which identifies him as "one of the principal leaders of the Communist element in the motion picture industry" from 1936 on. About that time he became chairman of the League of American Writers, the American affiliate of the International Union of Revolutionary Writers, a Comintern front.


42 posted on 04/18/2005 12:36:28 PM PDT by Fedora
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Liz
McCarthy was right! Last DVD's purchased was the series on The Bible narrated by Charlton Heston. As far as Mr. C4E and I care, Hollywood can go jump. We haven't been to a movie since I think 'The Patriot.'

Red

43 posted on 04/18/2005 12:37:30 PM PDT by Conservative4Ever (God bless America...land that I love...stand beside her and guide her...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

Something similar happened to Jeff Corey. He and his wife were invited to a political meeting by a friend, were disgusted by the rhetoric they heard, and left after just a few minutes. Years later, someone remembered seeing him there, and he was instantly blacklisted.


44 posted on 04/18/2005 12:44:20 PM PDT by RightWingAtheist (Creationism is not conservative!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: dmz
According to the article:

"... that henceforth no studio would knowingly employ any member of the Communist Party, or the members of any other group which advocated the overthrow of the United States government by revolution."

I say if Hollywood does not want to hire those who advocate the overthrow of the United States government by revolution, then they should have that right. Don't you agree?

Now, what are you talking about? Holding an unpopular idea? Crimes?

Maybe you're thinking of the Spanish Inquisition, not HUAC?

45 posted on 04/18/2005 12:45:26 PM PDT by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Liz

Joe was not perfect, but he sure was right about the commies and the left. If anything, he just underestimated their penetration and their ruthlessness.


46 posted on 04/18/2005 12:46:26 PM PDT by OriginalIntent (Liberals always lie about everything.---- The ACLU needs to be investigated and exposed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OriginalIntent

Jow was doing the right thing, but he went about it in the wrong way........the lefty media hastened his destruction.


47 posted on 04/18/2005 1:29:36 PM PDT by Liz (One of it's most compelling tenets is Catholicism's acknowledgement of individual free will.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: what's up
I don't know why Da Silva zipped his lip. Maybe he just didn't like the idea of having to defend himself to the congress against hearsay.
48 posted on 04/18/2005 2:18:07 PM PDT by wtc911 ("I would like at least to know his name.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
He wanted to instill the feeling, like a truth of nature, that seriously to criticize or challenge Soviet policy was the unfailing mark of a bad, bigoted, and probably stupid person, while support was equally infallible proof of a forward-looking mind committed to all that was best for humanity and marked by an uplifting refinement of sensibility.

While they may not be celebrating the Soviet Union these days, the anti-American leftists certainly associate themselves with the idea that they are more well informed and forward thinking.

49 posted on 04/18/2005 2:30:38 PM PDT by Dolphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

If he wasn't guilty and had cooperated he wouldn't have been blacklisted. If I was called before Congress, I think I would open my mouth and cooperate.


50 posted on 04/18/2005 3:05:51 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: dmz
How about Traitor?
51 posted on 04/18/2005 3:12:21 PM PDT by Calpernia (Breederville.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Fedora

bttt


52 posted on 04/18/2005 3:19:10 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: dmz

I suggest that you read "RADICAL HOLLYWOOD" ,by Paul Buhle and Dave Wagner (who are LIBERALS and not right wingers, BTW),to start with and educate yourself. Just because you don't know anything at all about the CRIMES which were committed by American Commies, who worked in Hollywood, doesn't mean that none were committed.


53 posted on 04/18/2005 3:24:34 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Liz
Art is political and it's always been that way. It's biased form the point of view of the person who created it. Shakespeare wrote Tudor propaganda.
54 posted on 04/18/2005 3:34:50 PM PDT by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: what's up
"If he wasn't guilty and had cooperated he wouldn't have been blacklisted......"

Holy mackrel! Guilty of what? What was he charged with? He was brought up because someone (Robert Taylor) said, "I don't know if he's a commie or not, I just don't like what he says." That's enough? Not for me.

55 posted on 04/18/2005 3:39:45 PM PDT by wtc911 ("I would like at least to know his name.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

No doubt there were some miscarriages of justice. There always are. On the other hand, the Communists murdered maybe a hundred million people over the course of the twentieth century, not counting their responsibility for numerous wars. Being a Communist was not a harmless hobby.

One's right to work in a particular job or industry sometimes depends on not abusing your position. Thus, I don't think Dan Rather had any right to work in the news business after publicly promoting and defending a forgery for partisan political purposes.

No one could expect to work in Hollywood during the early 1940s if they tried to use movies to support Hitler, and much the same applied in the 1950s to those who supported Stalin.


56 posted on 04/18/2005 3:40:13 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: PeterFinn
The Rosenbergs actually gave secrets to the Soviet Union. Many of those blacklisted just joined in the 20s and 30s when it was a much more common then it is now and forgot about it later. Politically today most of them would be moderate to liberal Democrats. Heck, Ted Kennedy is probably to the left of all those blacklisted back then!
57 posted on 04/18/2005 3:40:34 PM PDT by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

That's my point. Apparently he wasn't guilty of anything so why not talk? Especially if he's been unfairly maligned.


58 posted on 04/18/2005 3:50:47 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
What was he charged with?

You're not "charged" with anything when you go before a congressional committee. They just want info. Best to give it to them.

59 posted on 04/18/2005 3:52:11 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
'Traitor' would be giving secrets to the Soviet Union or giving their direct agents money or shelter. The rosenbergs were traitors. John Garfield and Larry Parks were not.
60 posted on 04/18/2005 3:52:40 PM PDT by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 341-345 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson