Film đŸŽ„: Religious Controversy: Susan And God (1940)

Film
Theatrical release poster for Susan And God, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, 1940)

For many people there is a serious lack of balanced perspective regarding religion. There is no middle ground – it’s all or nothing. Religious fervor is rarely confined to the person who “has seen the light”, “found Jesus”, “discovered the truth” or whatever other expressions are coined by those who sincerely believe that they now have the right to foist their newfound beliefs on others.

This is exactly the case with Susan And God, which concerns Susan Trexel (played by Joan Crawford) a shallow society matron who gets caught up in the throes of a new religious movement which she had discovered while on vacation to England. Of course, upon her return to the United States she feels the overweening need to impose this newfound belief system on her family and friends – with the force of a tidal wave!

The film was adapted from the 1937 play of hypocrisy and religiosity by Rachel Crothers (1878-1958) who was recognized as one of the most prominent female playwrights during the first half of the twentieth century. The main theme of her works concerned the changes and challenges women faced in American society during this period. She was particularly concerned with the challenges women faced in marriage, pursuing careers, the advancement of women’s rights and so forth.

Susan And God was one of the most popular of the thirty major plays that Crothers wrote during her long career and this was a strong inducement for MGM to produce it as a star vehicle for Joan Crawford, who had been a major box office draw for the studio since the late 1920s. However, Susan And God was an intriguing choice of role for Crawford, who was more highly regarded for her dramatic performances rather than comic abilities over the course of her forty-five year film career as one of the biggest female stars in Hollywood history.

Yet, Crawford’s performance in Susan And God fascinates the viewer through the phases of her religious obsession to develop sympathy for the character as she progresses through the annoying, blind silliness of her ‘devotion’ to her religious cause. Finally, she grows to a new maturity and genuine regret upon realizing the damage she has caused by brazenly meddling in the personal affairs of others.

Very soon in the narrative we get that ‘uh-oh’ feeling, bracing for the havoc that will unfold when Susan’s best friend Irene (played by Rose Hobart) remarks that: “I’m not very religious, but it seems irreverent talking about sacred things so flippantly.” Susan’s response is to cheerily dismiss this notion and describes her friends as being “hard-boiled wordings” who still need to come to God as she views him. Susan condescendingly describes another friend Charlotte (Ruth Hussey) as being “so good-natured, you’re spiritually lazy” and belittling her maturity level.

Of course, genuine spirituality and unselfish concern for the well-being of others is NOT what happens here despite Susan’s insistence on sincerely having a better understanding of what others need and how to best obtain those things for them. However, Susan’s biggest failing is the neglect of her alcoholic husband Barrie (played with long-suffering patience by Fredric March) and lonely, introverted teen-age daughter Blossom (Rita Quigley).

While Susan is a busybody sabotaging relationships with her friends set, her family is reduced to the periphery, mere playthings to serve her whims of the moment. Although her husband was initially taken in by Susan’s enthusiasm for religion and believed she had made a change for the better, Susan’s friend Irene is the one who expresses in no uncertain terms that she has to put her own house in order first before attempting to do it for anyone else.

By the final reel the we can see that circumstances are likely to turn out satisfactorily for everyone concerned as Susan learns a valuable lesson in humility and self-awareness. In any event, Susan And God foreshadowed our current era where not just an individual- but a steady, tiresome stream of pretentious politicians and social commentators with their nannyism of all persuasions claim to always know what’s best for us so they can control our lives.