Jezebel – The Best Pictures of 1938 (#6)

Bette Davis and Henry Fonda

Bette Davis’ Julie Marsden is a clear attempt by Warner Bros. to preempt and deflate the upcoming Gone with the Wind mania. Like Scarlett O’Hara, Julie is a headstrong woman, willing to flaunt the rigid conventions of the pre-Civil War South (New Orleans this time, instead of Atlanta). Unlike the more well-known 1939 picture, Jezebel is not an idealized tribute to the antebellum South.  Instead it uses the strict social rules of that time and place to think about the true definition of courage.

Engaged to weak-willed Preston (Henry Fonda), Julie pressures the lovesick young man to support her often scandalizing decisions. After Preston breaks an engagement with her to help her choose a dress, she commits to her most egregious escapade when she chooses a flaming red dress to wear to the Olympus Ball. This causes pearl-clutching and hand-wringing throughout her family. Unmarried women, you see, never wear anything but white to the Olympus Ball. Julie’s aunt (Fay Bainter) begs her to reconsider, but she refuses; she will teach Preston a lesson.

Davis as Julie Marsden hatching a plot...

She bullies Preston into acquiescence after he refuses to take her by questioning his manhood, courage, and honor. Isn’t he, she asks, just afraid someone will insult her and he would be forced to defend her honor in a duel? Apparently Preston is fed up with Julie’s manipulations and, when she begins to get cold feet as they approach the ball, he forces her to go in.  And when everyone stares at her, refusing to dance on the same floor as her, he forces her to continue dancing on the empty floor, wanting her to experience all the consequences of her actions first hand.

The humiliating dance

This caprice is the last straw for the long suffering Preston. His break with Julie plunges her into a depression as she realizes she treated the man she loved much worse than he deserved and, maybe more importantly, she can’t always get what she wants through sheer force of will. But whatever positive changes his departure caused in Julie, his return with a new fiancée brings out the old manipulative woman, claws and all.  Her actions however, playing one admirer off another, leads to a tragic duel.

Though this sounds like a fairly sappy love story, it is actually an unusually thoughtful film out of Hollywood. Director William Wyler uses this conventional melodramatic narrative to explore the fine line between courage and cowardice. How easy it is, Wyler tells us, to mistake one for the other. Sometimes the most courageous-looking act can be inspired by cowardice, and the most cowardly inspired by courage. All the men who scramble to defend Julie’s honor fight in pointless duels, one of the many silly ways men have been showing off their masculinity throughout history.  To refuse to fight, to refuse to take part in an inane ritual that proves nothing except its participants are slaves to appearance rather than what they know to be right, would mean being branded a coward.  Taking part in the duel would mean he is actually a coward while being considered manly and brave.

Tne insanity of dueling

It’s an interesting dichotomy that is never – and probably never can be – resolved.  Even the motivation of Julie’s final, selfless act that will probably result in her death is unclear.  Is her decision proof of her undying love for Preston or is it a way to stick it to his new fiancée and everyone else who ever doubted her?  It isn’t clear to us and, I would venture to guess, she probably doesn’t know herself.

Jezebel is both entertaining and thoughtful with a fine performance by Bette Davis. In many ways the movie is superior to the misguided tribute to the South we will see in Gone with the Wind next year. There is no glorification of the antiquated system of chivalry that demanded men fight in duels for the smallest perceived insults. Jezebel condemns any system that supersedes a man’s right to make his own decision, one of the many flaws of the antebellum South that Gone with the Wind glosses over or ignores. (Most egregiously, of course, would be its depiction of sugarcoated slavery.) Jezebel verges on greatness (though it settles for being very good) for its skillful melding of thoughtfulness and entertainment. It deserves to be remembered as more than the second film for which Davis won the Academy Award. It stands well on its own accord.

Advertisements

4 Comments

Filed under 1938, Yearly Best Pictures

4 responses to “Jezebel – The Best Pictures of 1938 (#6)

  1. I really liked your posting and especially the discussion of duelling, where you point out the double bind of supposed cowardice and courage perfectly. I was lucky enough to see ‘Jezebel’ on the big screen as part of Bette Davis’ centenary celebrations – and agree with you that it is a fine film which deserves to be remembered more in its own right rather than just because of Davis’ Oscar and the fact that it was supposed to be her consolation prize for not getting the part of Scarlett. It’s surprising in a way that such a lavish film was made in black and white, but I think it does add something in the whole red dress scene that the “red” dress is really black – as though Julie thinks she is being daring and wearing red, but seen from another angle she is wearing black and sealing her own doom.

    • I love it when someone posts a comment and makes a point that makes me slap my head and say “Why didn’t I think of that!” You are so right about the red dress and I remember thinking about it being in black and white while watching that scene. I briefly thought the movie should have been in color, so the red would have really stood out against the sea of white, but dismissed it. I thought it worked well to see the dark against the white, but I didn’t make the symbolic connection that you made here. Good point!

  2. “Though this sounds like a fairly sappy love story, it is actually an unusually thoughtful film out of Hollywood. Director William Wyler uses this conventional melodramatic narrative to explore the fine line between courage and cowardice. How easy it is, Wyler tells us, to mistake one for the other. ”

    Aye, excellent points here Jason, and certainly a distinguished choice for a best of the year list for 1938. It’s an exquisite film, Davis is superb, and historically it may well be more honest than the other film you mention here. However, I still mourn the apparent prospect here that you will (surprisingly) be snubbing one of the greatest epic films in the history of American cinema, a film that in spite of its slants and historical inacuracies still stands as one of the most fascinating character studies of all time. But there’s musch more. You’ve done your traditional bang-up job in qualifying JEZEBEL.

    • Well thank you, though I have to say I can’t wait to snub GWTW. I’ll talk about it more next month, but even admirers have to admit that it is a little bit of a mess, especially the second half. “Jezebel” may not shine technically, but I find it a much more entertaining picture.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s