Classic Movies: On the Waterfront (1954)

On the Waterfront serves as Elia Kazan’s personal response to his friends after the HUAC hearings.

Stories. Stories are not always fictional or on screen for that matter.  On the Waterfront and the story of Elia Kazan starts and ends on-screen. But, maybe for the most hated man in Hollywood during the 50s, On the Waterfront is kind of a “my story” response to his actions and to other artworks that blame him for what he did.

Hollywood and The New Menace 

“On the waterfront is a social document that can help us understand the dilemmas of  American liberalism during the McCarthy era, thus making the film one which relates  closely to society through the way it dramatizes a central ideological conflict of American culture in the 1950s.” ( Maland, 1982)

Between 1947 and 1954, the US was in a different period. There was no tolerance whatsoever, there was a growing fear of communism and socialism in the air. In a very fragile environment, politicians like Senator McCarthy were the key people who defined this era.

The McCarthyism era was fierce and intolerant towards any un-American activities. This new patriotic Americanism was defined by the trust in the system and portrayed the WW2 era enemies and their systems as the “evil” itself. After the war, however, this enemy replaced by communism and socialism.

In other words, the enemy of a peaceful, happy life was not another nation, evil characters or organizations, bad decisions, etc. But the system itself caused alienation,  mechanization, unemployment, inequality, and basically all the major problems of society. 

Any social criticism of the political environment or the social system would be an un-American activity, hence it would be a reason for a HUAC hearing.

HUAC, House Un-American  Committee led by Senator McCarthy was the main element of this fear in the society. Many people including the artists faced hearings for their ideals or their connections with socialist circles and the communist party.

The most famous example of this is Charlie Chaplin. Upon his movies empowering the working class and the movies that are critical of the government, Chaplin exiled from the US in 1947 due to his alleged ties with the communist party.

So similar to the war effort, Hollywood was ready to assist the battle against communism. 

Studio heads wanted to clear their name. They wanted HUAC to focus on the individuals (Writers/directors/actors etc.) instead of the context of the films thus, again, avoid censorship (in several WW II films, the soviet union was depicted as an ally against Fascism). 

And exactly at this conjuncture, we come to our example film, On the Waterfront (1954) by Elia Kazan.

On the Waterfront (1954)

“After he broke with the Communist Party in 1936, Kazan became what might be labeled a reform-minded liberal, sympathetic to  problems of the working classes, interested in art which depicted social problems.” (Maland, 1982)

On the Waterfront is about the corruption in Waterfront Union.  Organizations and how one of the members, Terry ( Marlon Brando), finally decides to testify against the head of the corrupted Union in the court, after several murders. 

In a way, the right thing to do in the movie is to testify against your family and friends, even though it hurts that is the right thing and it is true by the law. The union in question is testifies in front of a committee (which is very similar to the HUAC).

Terry initially refuses to cooperate with the committee because he does not want to betray his brother and his friends. Yet, he encouraged by his love interest and by a priest. This struggle and indecisiveness portrayed beautifully by the cinematography and the sound engineering by Kazan.

Kazan also shows that the system is not wrong, but the people exploit the system and they are not the same people as they before. Terry explains this while talking to his brother, showing how he changed over the years and lost his way.

While making On the Waterfront, Kazan faced three dilemmas, just like any other liberal artist of the era. How do I, as a liberal:

• Who believes that art should treat significant social topics from a progressive point of view, respond in an era where such controversy can lead me into trouble? 
• Retain my commitments to the working classes and labor unions, in a time hostile to unions? 
• Respond to the attempts of the government to limit my freedom of thought and association through loyalty oaths and investigations? 

However, even though he exposed the corruption in the union, Terry initially was shunned, because he has seen as a “snitch” by longshoreman and other workers. However, in the end, life goes on and Terry is accepted by the workers and by society.

This is kind of a movie, which Terry explains why he did snitch on people, from his perspective. With the guidance of societal values he did the “right” thing and then he accepted as well.

Although On the Waterfront, on the surface is about this it is actually a changed narrative of the film “The Hook” and Elia Kazan’s own redemption about what he did.

Elia Kazan and HUAC

Kazan and many other artists caught the eye of HUAC and pressured into exposing other Hollywood employees regarding communist influence. 

One of them was his dear friend Arthur Miller. Miller and Kazan were already working on a film called “The Hook”. The movie was about Trade unions on the Brooklyn waterfront and how they exploit the working people.

Although the movie was about injustice and corruption, Fox Studios sent the script to the FBI thinking that it could start and unrest among workers. Already afraid of rising socialism in the US and the ongoing war in Korea, the script is rejected by the studio.

In 1952, both Elia Kazan and Arthur Miller along with their artist friends summoned by HUAC.

Among 17 artists, everyone except one rejected to give any names to HUAC.

Even though reluctant at first, Elia Kazan eventually caved in and named 16 individuals who may have ties with the communist party. As a result of this, Arthur Miller was given a jail sentence.

He further stated during his hearings;

“Firsthand experience dictatorship and thought control left me with an abiding hatred of these. It left me with an abiding hatred of Communist philosophy and methods.” -Elia Kazan

As his giving of 16 names to HUAC, Elia Kazan deemed as a “Snitch” and a betrayer to his friends and the movie industry in general. He was shunned by the whole industry and his name tarnished.

In a 1999 press conference, on the eve of Kazan’s acceptance of a lifetime achievement Oscar, Norma Barzman said, “He ruined and destroyed their careers, their families, their lives.”

For Kazan, the story of On the Waterfront which was based on a true story, was his way of justifying his actions that were; giving out those names thus exposing them to HUAC.

“But in this allegorical justification, Kana simplifies and obscures the issues of his testimony… Murders are hardly parallel to Communist Party membership.” (Maland, 1982)

Arthur Miller’s Response

After their encounters with HUAC, the two men did not speak to each other for 12 years.

While Kazan made On the Waterfront as a continuation and the rework of their past project “The Hook”, Arthur Miller gave his response to his friend by his two world-known Broadway plays.

“The Crucible”, by Arthur Miller is about the Salem witch trials. For anyone who may not know about this real, historical event, during the 17th Century, in Salem, New England Colony many women are accused of being a witch, later trialed and executed without any proof rather than testimonies of others.

However, the most important fact about this incident is that the committee pressured women and girls to give them names, any names just to provide validity to the committee.

So, how a play that took place in the 17th Century has anything to do with Communism and the 1950s?

For Arthur Miller, HUAC was no different than the Salem witch trials. There was no evidence, no validity and the committee was just trying to get some names. Creating incredible parallelism, Arthur Miller’s play was a huge phenomenon in the US. It is still the most produced play of Arthur Miller to this day.

After seeing Kazan’s On the Waterfront, Arthur  Miller wrote another play directly as a response to On the Waterfront.

A View from the Bridge is a play about longshoreman Eddie Carbone’s desires in a foreign neighborhood in Brooklyn. His actions, like Kazan’s, violate the community’s unspoken “code of honor” and as a result, he is shunned and later punished.

In this movie, however, the government official tricks and influences Eddie to snitch on the neighborhood.

More importantly, Miller shows the insider, outsider dynamic and the value of trust.

Trust to each other and trust to friends and family.

Overall

For performance only, On the Waterfront is a beautiful movie with its camera work and the acting of Marlon Brando. Just for these two alone, it is a movie that should be watched.

Beneath the surface, however, it is just one piece of the whole Elia Kazan Arthur Miller feud. A tempered relationship by HUAC. A thought time for Hollywood and a whole drama off-screen. For the audience, however, it led to three beautiful pieces of artwork. For some On the Waterfront is also tarnished along with Kazan and his agenda in the movie, if you like classic movies, watch it yourself and make a comment below.

Other movies of this series:

The Wizard of OZ (1939)

Citizen Kane (1941)

Hiroshima Mon Amour (1959)

Sources:

“Miller, Kazan, and the Blacklast: None Without Sin”. Columbia.edu. (2021). Retrieved 13 May 2021, from http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/mydocs/culture/Miller.htm.

Maland, C. (1982). ‘On the Waterfront’ (1954): Film and the Dilemmas of American Liberalism in the McCarthy Era. American Studies In Scandinavia, 14(2), 107-127. doi: 10.22439/asca.v14i2.1206