At this point (1960) HUAC’s reign, and its prestige, was beginning to downfall. Yet, the groups 1947 Hollywood blacklist which denied actors, directors, writers, and the likes, from working in the studio system was still of great threat; almost any publicity dealing with HUAC equalled the blacklist for you with no chance to clear your name. So, what’s an organization to do when support is diminishing and bad publicity in every newspaper is growing? Rally support, of course, and what better way to do that than a one of a kind, sliced and diced, HUAC supported film. HUAC was able to see the enormous propaganda value in the student protests during the May hearings. Hence, why it ordered the news footage be handed over--giving no credit to the stations.The resulting film was Operation Abolition. This film was made an official part of HUAC’s reports and investigation and shown to millions where, surprisingly, it was met with success.
"Operation Abolition" is a 45-minute documentary film portraying certain of the events which took place on May 12, 13, and 14, 1960, in the course of hearings held in San Francisco by the House Committee on Un-American Activities. The film is also an integral part of an official report of the Committee on Un-American Activities to the House of Representatives. As such, it has the official endorsement of the committee, just as all other committee reports do.The title of the film is derived from the name which the Communist Party itself has given to its current, greatly intensified drive to have the committee abolished.-House Report No. 2228, 86th Congress, 2d Session
It is important to take note, and keep in mind, that HUAC had always faced strong opposition in California even months before the hearings came there. In the propagandist film Operation Abolition the film’s narrator, Representative Francis E. Walter--the Chairperson of HUAC--and the son of a well known anticommunist radio host, shows us the scenes that happened that May in California when the Communist Party was “able to incite and use non-communist sympathizers to perform the dirty work of the Communist Party.” The “non-communist sympathizers” Walter mentions include students--graduate and undergraduate--professors, community and church leaders, and even California Representative James Roosevelt; all who were denouncing HUAC months before the trials came to California. However, the focus, and the blame, was shifted to the students in the lens of Abolition. The film is careful to lay great emphasis that these students were provoked, maybe even inspired, by communist leaders to riot. With juxtaposing shots of the students and the subpoenaed alleged communists the film’s editing is trying to tie a connection between the two. Through out the film we also here Walter’s voiceover, a film tactic to show the voice of authority or the voice we are supposed to trust, telling us that it is the communists sneaky tactics that have duped the students into protesting.
Statements later released by the committee about the film even claim to be “kinder” to the students by saying that they were under communist influence. The idea that in the presence of believed injustice a person would act on their own accord to try to stop it is simply against American traditions in the eyes of the committee. In 1947 those working in film and who were perpetrators of such acts were written off as communist and had their name taken down on the blacklist. In 1960 the fear had spread that, not only were there communists amongst us, they were also infecting the minds of the youth, the student protesters. As the disdain for HUAC from Californians came before the trials invaded San Francisco so, too, did the commitment to preserve civil liberties.
No comments:
Post a Comment