The Children's Hour More than just an ounce of truth... ((((SPOILERS))))) THE CHILDREN'S HOUR has gotten a rather bad rap over the years. It has gained this reputation that it is somehow a noble effort, but nonetheless a failure. That because of its subject matter and the era in which it was made, the need to gingerly handle the subject of lesbianism makes the end result seem dishonestly incomplete at best or just cowardly at worst. The fact that it is a tragedy which ends in the death of a gay character, underscores this need by some to devalue its importance and deride its power because it doesn't meet the harsher standards of political correctness.
It is probable that if the film (or more accurately Lillian Hellman's original play) were to be filmed today, much of it would be altered. Even if a new version were set in the 1960s of the movie or the 1930s of the original play, the filmmakers would face considerable pressure to make the gay characters more defiant, the homophobic characters more transparently belligerent and the presumed nature of the lesbian relationship more explicit. And that would be the wrong thing to do. Even though the film was made on the eve of an era that saw censorship beginning to crumble, it depicts a time when homosexuality was barely mentioned, let alone something to inspire defiant pride.
It has been suggested by Hellman, director William Wyler and star Shirley MacLaine that the gay angle of the story is really secondary to the story's main concern, that being the power of lies to destroy. I think this is more than a little disingenuous, a way of sidestepping the issue. Homophobia is the point of the story, whether the "lie" in the story is really a lie or not. That's why the 1936 film version, THESE THREE (also directed by Wyler), doesn't work, despite being well made and well acted. THE CHILDREN'S HOUR rings true, despite its evasive nature.
Both films deal with two women who run a small, exclusive girls school whose lives and careers are destroyed by stories told by a couple of their pupils. In THESE THREE the story is sanitized so that it deals with accusations that one of the teachers has had an affair with the other's fiancé; THE CHILDREN'S HOUR returns to the play's original plot wherein the two teachers are accused of lesbianism. THESE THREE, though melodramatically played, has little dramatic weight: unsubstantiated accusations of an affair that everybody denies ever happened, might raise eyebrows, but hardly would carry such dire consequences, especially since the two children making the claims are shown to be so unstable and unreliable. And the film's desperate attempt at a happy ending doesn't help.
Homosexuality has to be the linchpin of THE CHILDREN'S HOUR, because little else would create such irrational fear. The "lie" of the story would have to be so very threatening in 1961, otherwise it would not be credible that parents would overreact so fiercely or that the words of three upstanding citizens would be rejected over the claims of two foolish little girls. I think the film paints a fair and accurate picture of a time when homophobia wasn't considered a bigotry, but a logically parental concern. As such the film is neither pro-gay nor anti-gay, rather a consideration of a time of ignorance.
Faye Bainter's Mrs. Tilford is what we would now call homophobic, but she is not an evil person. She is foolish to the extent that she can't see how manipulative and dishonest her grandchild is, but her actions against the school and its teachers are based on the prevailing social outlook of the time. She acts out of genuine concern, not hysterical outrage. Indeed, her view of homosexuality is not all that different from that of MacLaine's Martha Dobie, one of the accused teachers. It is Martha's suicide, upon admitting her true romantic feelings toward Audrey Hepburn's Karen Wright, that disturbs many who criticize the film. Martha is no more comfortable with homosexuality than Mrs. Tilford, but her fear of homosexuality is intensified and internalized. But Martha's death is not mandated to appease the moral atmosphere of the time, as some have suggested, nor because of her own self-hatred, but because that is the unfortunate logical path the story has to take. In a tormented confession, Martha reveals the contempt and shame she has for her feelings, but this is not meant to represent the honesty of homophobia, but rather the dishonesty of traditionally accepted mores. Pride and defiance are not options to Martha; she has neither the understanding nor the strength to endure the battle between her feelings and the moral convictions that society has taught her. As a tragic figure she is more than an appropriate symbol of her time. As a character, she is beautifully and sympathetically embodied by MacLaine in one of her finest performances.
The film's message is not that homosexuality destroys Martha, but that ignorance poisons the waters. Martha's death is undeserved, but not a punishment of her lesbianism. Martha is a good person, a person who has our sympathy, not our pity. The injustice of her death confirms the film's empathy for the homosexual character. Unlike the faux happily-ever-after conclusion of THESE THREE, THE CHILDREN'S HOUR forces the viewer to question conventional morality.
The film ends on a strangely ambiguous note. Martha confesses her feelings to Karen, but Karen evolves into an enigma. Even before Martha reveals her true feelings, Karen finally rejects her fiancé (played by James Garner), by forcing him to express the doubts about their relationship that she herself has apparently being harboring all along. But she accepts Martha's confession of love, yet makes no attempt to reciprocate. The film hints, but won't confirm that the "lie with the ounce of truth" is as true about Karen as it was about Martha. Karen seems to have gone from denying her feelings toward Martha to accepting them and then repressing them. The film ends with Karen leaving Martha's funeral, apparently strong-willed and defiant, but it is not clear just why. It's not likely that Karen feels vindication over Mrs. Tilford's apology, yet it is equally unlikely that Martha's death could possibly have inspired feelings of pride and defiance. The final shots of Hepburn possess an undeniable power, perhaps foreshadowing the changes in the way society would eventually view homosexuality. Martha's martyrdom makes Karen a stronger person, whatever her sexual inclination. It's not a happily-ever-after ending, but it is a promise of better endings to come.
It is probable that if the film (or more accurately Lillian Hellman's original play) were to be filmed today, much of it would be altered. Even if a new version were set in the 1960s of the movie or the 1930s of the original play, the filmmakers would face considerable pressure to make the gay characters more defiant, the homophobic characters more transparently belligerent and the presumed nature of the lesbian relationship more explicit. And that would be the wrong thing to do. Even though the film was made on the eve of an era that saw censorship beginning to crumble, it depicts a time when homosexuality was barely mentioned, let alone something to inspire defiant pride.
It has been suggested by Hellman, director William Wyler and star Shirley MacLaine that the gay angle of the story is really secondary to the story's main concern, that being the power of lies to destroy. I think this is more than a little disingenuous, a way of sidestepping the issue. Homophobia is the point of the story, whether the "lie" in the story is really a lie or not. That's why the 1936 film version, THESE THREE (also directed by Wyler), doesn't work, despite being well made and well acted. THE CHILDREN'S HOUR rings true, despite its evasive nature.
Both films deal with two women who run a small, exclusive girls school whose lives and careers are destroyed by stories told by a couple of their pupils. In THESE THREE the story is sanitized so that it deals with accusations that one of the teachers has had an affair with the other's fiancé; THE CHILDREN'S HOUR returns to the play's original plot wherein the two teachers are accused of lesbianism. THESE THREE, though melodramatically played, has little dramatic weight: unsubstantiated accusations of an affair that everybody denies ever happened, might raise eyebrows, but hardly would carry such dire consequences, especially since the two children making the claims are shown to be so unstable and unreliable. And the film's desperate attempt at a happy ending doesn't help.
Homosexuality has to be the linchpin of THE CHILDREN'S HOUR, because little else would create such irrational fear. The "lie" of the story would have to be so very threatening in 1961, otherwise it would not be credible that parents would overreact so fiercely or that the words of three upstanding citizens would be rejected over the claims of two foolish little girls. I think the film paints a fair and accurate picture of a time when homophobia wasn't considered a bigotry, but a logically parental concern. As such the film is neither pro-gay nor anti-gay, rather a consideration of a time of ignorance.
Faye Bainter's Mrs. Tilford is what we would now call homophobic, but she is not an evil person. She is foolish to the extent that she can't see how manipulative and dishonest her grandchild is, but her actions against the school and its teachers are based on the prevailing social outlook of the time. She acts out of genuine concern, not hysterical outrage. Indeed, her view of homosexuality is not all that different from that of MacLaine's Martha Dobie, one of the accused teachers. It is Martha's suicide, upon admitting her true romantic feelings toward Audrey Hepburn's Karen Wright, that disturbs many who criticize the film. Martha is no more comfortable with homosexuality than Mrs. Tilford, but her fear of homosexuality is intensified and internalized. But Martha's death is not mandated to appease the moral atmosphere of the time, as some have suggested, nor because of her own self-hatred, but because that is the unfortunate logical path the story has to take. In a tormented confession, Martha reveals the contempt and shame she has for her feelings, but this is not meant to represent the honesty of homophobia, but rather the dishonesty of traditionally accepted mores. Pride and defiance are not options to Martha; she has neither the understanding nor the strength to endure the battle between her feelings and the moral convictions that society has taught her. As a tragic figure she is more than an appropriate symbol of her time. As a character, she is beautifully and sympathetically embodied by MacLaine in one of her finest performances.
The film's message is not that homosexuality destroys Martha, but that ignorance poisons the waters. Martha's death is undeserved, but not a punishment of her lesbianism. Martha is a good person, a person who has our sympathy, not our pity. The injustice of her death confirms the film's empathy for the homosexual character. Unlike the faux happily-ever-after conclusion of THESE THREE, THE CHILDREN'S HOUR forces the viewer to question conventional morality.
The film ends on a strangely ambiguous note. Martha confesses her feelings to Karen, but Karen evolves into an enigma. Even before Martha reveals her true feelings, Karen finally rejects her fiancé (played by James Garner), by forcing him to express the doubts about their relationship that she herself has apparently being harboring all along. But she accepts Martha's confession of love, yet makes no attempt to reciprocate. The film hints, but won't confirm that the "lie with the ounce of truth" is as true about Karen as it was about Martha. Karen seems to have gone from denying her feelings toward Martha to accepting them and then repressing them. The film ends with Karen leaving Martha's funeral, apparently strong-willed and defiant, but it is not clear just why. It's not likely that Karen feels vindication over Mrs. Tilford's apology, yet it is equally unlikely that Martha's death could possibly have inspired feelings of pride and defiance. The final shots of Hepburn possess an undeniable power, perhaps foreshadowing the changes in the way society would eventually view homosexuality. Martha's martyrdom makes Karen a stronger person, whatever her sexual inclination. It's not a happily-ever-after ending, but it is a promise of better endings to come.