I'm not sure this movie functioned all that well as an entertainment, but as a pseudo-documentary, it was durned good.
Burt Lancaster is evil. His character at least. Only... he's not, he's just another functionary in a malignant institution, in this case, a facility for mentally retarded youth. As such, the rules of the system condition him to a certain kind of rationality, which may be the most humane kind available to a man in his office, but which nonetheless deals terrible blows to a young boy named Reuben.
I confess hereby, to have entered into viewing the movie a half hour in. So I all but missed the rearing of Reuben undertaken by his natural parents.
Reuben stands out in the institution no less than in civil society. I may be projecting, but I found significance in Lancaster's declaration: "We don't care much about IQs here." Whether or not IQs are a valid measure of intelligence, the concrete application seemed to be that Reuben was far from retarded. He suffered from something else.
The something else, it seemed quite clear, was the sort of tendency towards nihilistic fear that can only be expected to be found in boys who face contradictions and meaninglessness, without love.
And the institution's philosophy, under Lancaster, was rather expressly to forbid any love: love of a concrete sort, at least. Any attention which Judy Garland (as a newly hired social worker) directed towards the effectively motherless Reuben, would be, per Lancaster, a deprivation to the others; and, further, a hindrance to Reuben's own growth.
Only the State needs to ration love, or anything else for that matter; freely interacting individuals tend to find that gifts of love complement each other in a positive feedback loop.
And only the State believes that a child (or anything else) can and must be "produced" to the purpose of maximum usefulness to society, and by manner of sporadic lessons in facts rather than holistically working towards understanding. As Garland notes, she could teach Reuben music, sure, but "it's not enough." It's just another hyper-specialized skill when bestowed upon a shattered mind.
Enjoyably, the audience become privy to another element of the State's managerial nature, during the budget meeting. Lancaster argues for reasonable-sounding expenditures by the state government; the state's representatives, in turn, argue for the greater efficiency of distributing the tax levies upon citizen-subjects of greater production potential.
Enjoyable, that scene, because the viewer already knows what a sham the institution is, by nature. At one point, for instance, Reuben's reluctant father, addressing Lancaster, questions what the children even could possibly be conditioned for: "To wash dishes, or maybe tie strings around packages?" The father knows in his heart, and later acts accordingly by withdrawing Reuben, that he would far more nobly serve his child by helping to untangle his mind's knots, than to pursue the doctor's goals.
So, those reasonable budget requests, turn out in the viewer's mind to be ultimately arbitrary, and destructive in fact. The state's representatives, though, come away as the even worse human beings.
Well, heaven blessed Reuben to have a chance to see his parents, at the children's play, and, miraculously, he recites a lengthy monologue, no longer terrified to speak.
Unfortunately, the state resides in this world outside of the movie, and no less arrogates to itself tasks it has no business in.
Burt Lancaster is evil. His character at least. Only... he's not, he's just another functionary in a malignant institution, in this case, a facility for mentally retarded youth. As such, the rules of the system condition him to a certain kind of rationality, which may be the most humane kind available to a man in his office, but which nonetheless deals terrible blows to a young boy named Reuben.
I confess hereby, to have entered into viewing the movie a half hour in. So I all but missed the rearing of Reuben undertaken by his natural parents.
Reuben stands out in the institution no less than in civil society. I may be projecting, but I found significance in Lancaster's declaration: "We don't care much about IQs here." Whether or not IQs are a valid measure of intelligence, the concrete application seemed to be that Reuben was far from retarded. He suffered from something else.
The something else, it seemed quite clear, was the sort of tendency towards nihilistic fear that can only be expected to be found in boys who face contradictions and meaninglessness, without love.
And the institution's philosophy, under Lancaster, was rather expressly to forbid any love: love of a concrete sort, at least. Any attention which Judy Garland (as a newly hired social worker) directed towards the effectively motherless Reuben, would be, per Lancaster, a deprivation to the others; and, further, a hindrance to Reuben's own growth.
Only the State needs to ration love, or anything else for that matter; freely interacting individuals tend to find that gifts of love complement each other in a positive feedback loop.
And only the State believes that a child (or anything else) can and must be "produced" to the purpose of maximum usefulness to society, and by manner of sporadic lessons in facts rather than holistically working towards understanding. As Garland notes, she could teach Reuben music, sure, but "it's not enough." It's just another hyper-specialized skill when bestowed upon a shattered mind.
Enjoyably, the audience become privy to another element of the State's managerial nature, during the budget meeting. Lancaster argues for reasonable-sounding expenditures by the state government; the state's representatives, in turn, argue for the greater efficiency of distributing the tax levies upon citizen-subjects of greater production potential.
Enjoyable, that scene, because the viewer already knows what a sham the institution is, by nature. At one point, for instance, Reuben's reluctant father, addressing Lancaster, questions what the children even could possibly be conditioned for: "To wash dishes, or maybe tie strings around packages?" The father knows in his heart, and later acts accordingly by withdrawing Reuben, that he would far more nobly serve his child by helping to untangle his mind's knots, than to pursue the doctor's goals.
So, those reasonable budget requests, turn out in the viewer's mind to be ultimately arbitrary, and destructive in fact. The state's representatives, though, come away as the even worse human beings.
Well, heaven blessed Reuben to have a chance to see his parents, at the children's play, and, miraculously, he recites a lengthy monologue, no longer terrified to speak.
Unfortunately, the state resides in this world outside of the movie, and no less arrogates to itself tasks it has no business in.