Film 🎥 & Media Studies/Vintage Film: A Lethal Obsession: Antisemitism From Antiquity To Global Jihad (2010) – Part 9

Welcome back to my ASU Film & Media studies based on the Robert Wistrich book A Lethal Obsession: Antisemitism From Antiquity To Global Jihad. For this post, though, the focus will be more on the film Gentlemen’s Agreement (1947) a stinging narrative ahead of its time. It was a daring social statement (for that era) exposing antisemitism in upper crust social circles of New York City and suburban Connecticut. Our course instructor expected each student to view and describe their impressions of the film which were then shared on the e-board. Here is what I wrote about Gentlemen’s Agreement back then:

What stands out most in my mind about Gentlemen’s Agreement is that the entire effort is just too earnest for its own good. While I enjoyed the ‘Star’ turns by Gregory Peck, Dorothy McGuire, and John Garfield, the story would have seemed somewhat less pretentious if the Phil Greene role (Gregory Peck) wasn’t so stuffy. The story would have been more even-keeled if he showed something that resembled a sense of humor. Instead, he was mainly a one-dimensional incarnation pretending to be Jewish undercover, a poster boy for “the cause” of fighting bigotry.

Meanwhile, McGuire’s character appeared too courtly, gracious and dignified throughout much of the film, even though she originated from an upper middle-class background. In any event, Gentlemen’s Agreement is was probably as adequate for those times as it could be when the constraints of media censorship were considered. It didn’t help that the general feelings throughout the United States were viewing antisemitism as primarily a European evil.

This ingrained belief that anti-Jewish prejudices were mainly an overseas issue may have had much to do with the fact that the Holocaust and concentration camps did not even receive a passing mention. This negligence leaves a huge hole in the story that is unconscionable. So, with that important aspect lacking, director Elia Kazan did not make an adequate point regarding where these prejudices can ultimately lead…but then again, Gentlemen’s Agreement handled mostly the more subtle aspects of anti-Jewish sentiment.

The dvd special features/commentary of the film bore this out to a considerable extent when mentioning how Jews were excluded from many country clubs, private schools, housing developments, and resorts among other things. The more blatant, extreme examples of this prejudice were vividly expressed in our previous viewings of such films as The Murder Of Mary Phagan or Sunshine. However, the domination and terrorism of the Ku Klux Klan in Georgia (Mary Phagan) or the growing harshness of fascism in Eastern European countries like Hungary (Sunshine) would have seemed quite geographically and socially removed from the refined, manicured Westchester County, New York suburbs of Larchmont or New Rochelle and the swank Connecticut shore suburbs of Darien and Fairfield.

Even so, the claws can eventually snap out —such as when Phil Green’s son Tommy comes home very distraught after being tormented by classmates as they believe he is really Jewish. This quickly leads to one of the most revealing scenes of Gentleman’s Agreement when Kathy (Dorothy McGuire) tries to console him by insisting that he isn’t really Jewish because “it was all a horrible mistake.” Despite being a “liberal” the latent, deeply suppressed prejudice that Kathy harbored came out under stress.

Phony (or at least questionable) liberal leanings are also exposed by the secretary Elaines Wales (June Havoc) in another pivotal scene. This comes up when she tells Green how the Smith’s Weekly magazine was supposedly so accepting and open-minded with their hiring practices. It was a different story when she had first applied using her original, foreign sounding “Jewish” name — she was rejected for hire. This brings me to another flaw in the picture with the magazine’s publisher Mr. Minify (Albert Dekker). This character was too obviously straining to be the “heroic liberal”. His dialogue was too bombastic and practically clobbers the audience over the head with its overbearing rhetoric.

Well, I hope anyone who followed this series of posts has gleaned something of value from them. They are timely now. I may revisit this topic again soon, but will be moving onto new ones next week!