In 1961 a Lillian Hellman play (circa 1930′s) was adapted to film. It raised eyebrows and hackles as it slipped into neighbourhood movie theatres across America. Polite people didn’t openly say the word lesbian as a rule back then much less make it the focus of a movie and more than one religious-right group had it banned from their town. Thing is, the movie wasn’t about lesbians – it was about how quick the public is to embrace hearsay as truth and the ensuing collective knee-jerk reaction that causes permanent damage to those accused before the facts are ever brought to light.
As actresses, Audrey Hepburn and Shirley MacLaine took a lot of flack for their portrayal of two single teachers wrongly accused of being lesbians by one of their students. The fact of their characters’ innocence made no difference to those offended by the topic. The movie itself was actually falsely labelled perverse before movie-goers had a chance to see for themselves it was neither sexually explicit nor about lesbians – ironically reinforcing the entire moral of the story.
Regardless of a person’s defense of or offense taken, the movie made a strong statement about the manipulation of public opinion: Once an accusing finger has been pointed there will be those who forever believe the accusation in spite of any evidence ultimately pointing to the contrary. It is the epitomy of the old adage – Once a bell is rung it can never be un-rung.
The Story:
Karen and Martha are longtime friends who open a school for girls. They are hard-working, good teachers and the school attracts many affluent families. Karen has a boyfriend, Martha does not but Karen and her boyfriend include Martha in everything they do. The women’s strong bond and warm personalities contribute to their success as teachers.
Enter the mean girl, Mary, who’s punished for telling a lie and gets even with her teacher by beginning a rumour that the two schoolteachers are lovers. Before the rumour can be disproved, parents pull their daughters from the school and the two women are shunned by the town.
The disgrace and violence the women endure as a result of the false accusation is sadly no different from what happens today. As a society we are every bit too quick to pass judgement now as we were 60-70-80 years ago. Especially when we feel our children may be at risk.
If this is a movie you’ve never seen, I strongly recommend it. The acting is superb and the story is gripping.
This is my head’s up to you because over the next few days I’d like to open a discussion about last month’s events at Penn State. It’s not a happy story – not for anyone – but certain contradictory facts are beginning to bubble to the surface and I’d seriously like to be able to talk about them with you.
Here’s a bit from tomorrow’s post:
December 13, 2011 at 3:46 am
I think there is a very important difference between the two issues here.
There is NO CRIME in being gay. Just the idea that the term “accusation” is used in association with “being gay” is a problem. Whether or not the two characters in the film were lovers seems to miss that point. I understand that at the time the movie was made we were emerging from the witch hunt mentality of the 1950s cold war era. It was an important film because it dealt with the ugliness of community judgments, gossip and polarization based on lies.
However, I think we can all agree that sexually abusing children is a crime.
Period. I do not know what actually happened at Penn State, so I have no opinion about the specifics there. But I DO know that sexual abuse is a crime and being gay is not.
Clear thinking is very important.
December 13, 2011 at 12:07 pm
Actually, sexual acts between same sex partners was very much against the law prior to Ms Hellman writing her play and the production of this movie. (Oscar Wilde was prosecuted in 1885 for committing homosexual behaviours under one of the indecency laws.) In fact, if I’m not mistaken, there are still U.S. states which have laws against anal and oral sex still on the books today.
But the criminality issue aside, ‘false accusation’ is not solely a legal term. Accusations come in many forms – moral, religious, patriotic – one only has to be accused of something the general public finds offensive or distasteful to effectively lose their place in society – No trial, no evidence, just the un-fact-checked word of someone to the media can destroy a person’s life because you can’t un-ring a bell.
That said, I am IN NO WAY comparing the rape of a child with consenting sex between adults – I am looking solely at public reaction and the consequences of believing the first accusation made public by the media.
I also ‘do not know what actually happened’ at Penn State. But in my lifetime I have seen my share of families destroyed by public accusations which turned out to be untrue in the end – and for that reason alone I believe this conversation needs to take place whether ‘we know’ what happened at Penn State or not.
December 14, 2011 at 3:55 am
Lies have much longer legs than truths.
December 13, 2011 at 8:59 am
Completely off topic… I think we have solved the problem of what Sarah was hiding in her red sweater during the marathon. It was a power drill!
December 13, 2011 at 9:57 am
I don’t get it, Irish (but I want to).
December 13, 2011 at 10:01 am
http://malialitman.wordpress.com/2011/12/12/nick-broomfields-account-of-you-betcha-chuck-heaths-drilling-of-pus-filled-toes/#comment-31120
December 13, 2011 at 11:57 am
Oh. Warn me next time. LOL
December 13, 2011 at 12:07 pm
ROFL
December 13, 2011 at 9:47 am
Circle your wagons, Oz. I came across a poster who dismissed Lillian Hellman because she ‘may have’ fictionalized parts of her life or borrowed others’ lives. Don’t know if she did. I like her art. There is such a thing as a fictional memoir (see Frederick Exley’s ‘A Fan’s Notes). Was that her intention? Don’t know. I like her work. Once accused always accused by Google. It’s a life sentence regardless of truth. Know how know that to be true? Here I am posting it relative to another’s post.
Funny, that poster who questioned Hellman’s art and the blogger whose blog contains the comments both recently quoted Dorothy Parker. Adored her wit. If they knew that Hellman was Parker’s literary executor, that they were great friends, might Parker, through such close association, no longer be so witty or be trusted. Parker didn’t dismiss Hellman apparently. Of course, Parker actually knew Hellman.
Mary McCarthy was Hellman’s accuser. Their longtime feud was brought on by a difference in politics, apparently, McCarthy a Trotskyite, Hellman a Stalinist. McCarthy said of Hellman’s writings, “Every word she wriotes is a lie–including ‘and’ and ‘the’.” Hellman sued for defamation. Nora Ephron wrote a play about their feud, ‘Imaginary Friends’. Their feud was prominently featured in both of their obituaries. (Slate and Wiki) The accusation goes with you to the grave and forever.
Then there’s the crucification of Joe Paterno, a man accused of not doing enough. The accusers don’t know what he did, but it wasn’t enough. For them, the accusers, he’ll be forever guilty.Who ‘s the fool?
December 14, 2011 at 5:30 am
Here’s an essay regarding truth, lies, misinformation, exaggeration, fabrication, distortion etc. and how some or all of those brought down a university and its falsely accused legendary football coach. The words moron and jackal are used. Blog posters, the finger-pointing, lynchmobster ones, feel free to apply either or both to yourselves.
http://www.walter-c-uhler.com/Reviews/dranov.html
December 18, 2011 at 10:30 am
“The Chidrens Hour” is one of my favourite movies.
You are absolutely right that it was more about rumours and gossip, and those rumours and gossip killed of Shirley McCalins character in the movie.
All too sadly, this happens in real life all the time.
People need to keep their own homophobic opinions to themselves. Here in America, it’s the loudest homophobic that is usually guilty of what they accuse others of! Especially, but not limited to, the right wingnut politicians.
Thank you for this great post!