I so loathe the female characters of the thirties which basically means I loathe the men who created them. Even if women created them, the women creators were going to have to follow the accepted portrayal of women of that time. They were such caricature cardboard cutouts. So weak, so pathetic, so simple. Right when I thought the movie "Jennie Gerhardt" was going to insert some truth and honesty into the picture they balked and gave me the same old crap every other thirties movie was shoveling.
The eponymous Jennie Gehardt was played by Sylvia Sidney. The movie began with her as a poor young woman scrubbing floors alongside her mother. If I knew one thing, I knew she was too pretty to stay poor. She would move up the socio-economic ladder one way or another. This is not a sexist observation, this is a 1930's trope observation.
Jennie was noticed by Senator Brander (Edward Arnold). He was an older portly man so you knew this wouldn't be a romance, but he had money and could help her, which he did. Brander was a nice enough guy and he had no illusions about his relationship with Jennie. She was with him out of gratefulness and he was fine with that so long as she didn't verbalize it. She gave herself to him one night after he pulled some strings to get her siblings out of jail (they got caught stealing coal). You could tell that she didn't truly want to have sex with him, but she felt indebted to him. And if he was to be credited with one thing, it was that he wanted to marry her.
Brander never got the chance to marry Jennie because he died in a train crash on the way back from Washington D. C. That was more catastrophic than it would seem because Jennie was pregnant. She was going to have to leave her home because her father was going to definitely kick her out once he found out.
She went to Cincinnati to stay with her cousin Ada (Greta Meyer) and raise her baby girl Vesta. While there she landed a job as a maid for the Kane family. She kept her child a secret from them because they didn't need to know anyway.
Here's where I thought the movie would pull the curtains back on relationships between men and women, especially rich powerful men and working class women.
Lester Kane (Donald Cook), son of Thomas Kane, was salivating over Jennie. He wanted her in the worst way and he was going to have her. He cornered her in a linen closet at one point and began harassing her. He told her he wanted to see her to which she responded she couldn't. She looked very distressed as though she knew what was about to occur.
Lester grabbed her and said, "You and I may as well understand each other right now. I like you. You like me?" as though he needed the reassurance.
This was an unanswerable question. If Jennie said yes, she was going to have to start doing more than just cleaning house for the Kane family. If she said no, she may have lost her job.
She didn't answer, she just looked away worriedly. You could see her brain churning as she processed all of the different outcomes of this scenario and their consequences.
"Say it," Lester commanded.
"I don't know," Jennie answered, which was probably the safest answer she could give.
"Do you?" he asked again.
"I don't know," Jennie responded one more time.
"Look at me," Lester ordered in a voice that was part loverboy part master so that she could see that he wasn't playing.
She looked at Lester then looked away and said, "Yes I do," in a resigned manner. It was clear she knew that there was no way out of the situation. She had a baby at home she had to feed, Lester had her hemmed up in a locked closet, if she was going to get out of there anytime soon AND keep her job she was going to have to give in to Lester's desires.
He then turned her to himself and forcibly kissed her--something that I've seen dozens of times in movies of this era. It seemed to me that "Jennie Gerhardt" was trying to show how these relationships between powerful men and their subordinates really happen. It's not sentimental women who fall in love with powerful men, or scheming women who want a man for his money, it's men who subdue the women with the physical, social, and economic power they wield.
I was beginning to like this movie even though I hated Lester.
Lester wasn't done with Jennie. Not by a longshot. The next time he saw her she was on her way home. He encroached upon her asking why she'd been avoiding him. He let her know that she wasn't going to be able to avoid him forever, and he was right.
"I'm driving you home," he matter of factly stated.
"Oh no. Please," Jennie pleaded.
"Afraid your family won't like me?" he asked, though he couldn't care less.
"Yes, I..." she began to say.
"Alright we'll drive somewhere else," he chimed in before she could finish. He wasn't going to be rejected.
"I don't want to go anywhere else," she cried.
"Well, if you're not going to get into that carriage I'll have to pick you up and put you in," he said with a touch of playfulness, but mostly seriousness.
Jennie made a move as though she were going to walk away when Lester quite literally picked her up. Jennie didn't resist. I'm sure she realized that resistance was futile.
Lester took her to his boathouse. Jennie followed along meekly and despondently. Lester was going to have her and he didn't care how disinterested and sad she looked.
"There's no use fighting against this. It's stronger than either of us," Lester said. He was referring to the attraction between them, but the truth was that the power structure that was set up to allow him to do what he was doing was stronger than either of them.
"You belong to me," he continued with the confidence of a bullfighter. He didn't need her consent because he was a rich white male, and when did they ever need consent?
"We mustn't see each other anymore," Jennie continued to adjure him.
"There's no use saying that, I'm going to keep on seeing you," he told her.
"Please listen to me. I can't do what you want. I don't want to. I couldn't even if I wanted to. You don't know how things are," Jennie said, seemingly trying to offer anything that he would accept as a reasonable reason for rejection.
Lester responded, "You told me not so long ago that you cared for me. Have you changed your mind?" No doubt he was referring to that day in the closet.
He didn't wait for an answer. He gently grabbed her chin and said, "You haven't, have you," in more statement form than question. And like that, she was all his, but this time she was willingly his. Jennie DID like Lester, he only needed to take charge to tear down her natural defenses and inhibitions for her to realize how much she truly liked him. They kissed while an orchestra played music of passion, then the movie cut away to scenes of a window blowing in the wind then the open skies with wind driven clouds.
I was disgusted and disappointed. Hollywood had the chance to reveal a hidden aspect of thousands of relationships, yet they opted for romance. I could spit on this movie and it would be an improvement.
It only got worse as the two became happy secret lovers. It wasn't proper for Lester to date the help, so they saw each other surreptitiously. "How many servants have fallen in love with their employers, yet had to keep it hidden?" is what Hollywood was asking by showing this drivel, when the real question was "how many servants have been preyed upon by their employers but haven't had a voice with which to retaliate or expose said employer?"
Jennie fell deeply in love with Lester and continued to be his secret lover. What's more, when Lester got her a home for him to play house with her in, she had to leave her child with her cousin Ada lest Lester find out about her and leave her. At one point Jennie's daughter asked, "Are you my mother?" because she saw so little of her. Jennie's love for Lester overshadowed her love for her own child. Her child played second fiddle to her paramour. She was willing to partially abandon her own child just to keep a man. It was beyond reprehensible, yet Hollywood tried to make it romantic.
I hated Jennie's guts and I shouldn't have. Jennie should've been the sympathetic figure in all of this yet she wasn't. Very easily, with a word or two, Jennie could've, and should've, been the victim--the victim of a broken and tilted power structure, but instead they made it seem she was a victim of social mores. If only rich people would do away with their prejudices, then Jennie and Lester could be happy together in the open. That was the message they pushed and it couldn't have been more off the mark. This movie was a travesty written, directed, and produced by blind individuals who were too stupid or too unwilling to see the truth in it all.
Free on YouTube.
The eponymous Jennie Gehardt was played by Sylvia Sidney. The movie began with her as a poor young woman scrubbing floors alongside her mother. If I knew one thing, I knew she was too pretty to stay poor. She would move up the socio-economic ladder one way or another. This is not a sexist observation, this is a 1930's trope observation.
Jennie was noticed by Senator Brander (Edward Arnold). He was an older portly man so you knew this wouldn't be a romance, but he had money and could help her, which he did. Brander was a nice enough guy and he had no illusions about his relationship with Jennie. She was with him out of gratefulness and he was fine with that so long as she didn't verbalize it. She gave herself to him one night after he pulled some strings to get her siblings out of jail (they got caught stealing coal). You could tell that she didn't truly want to have sex with him, but she felt indebted to him. And if he was to be credited with one thing, it was that he wanted to marry her.
Brander never got the chance to marry Jennie because he died in a train crash on the way back from Washington D. C. That was more catastrophic than it would seem because Jennie was pregnant. She was going to have to leave her home because her father was going to definitely kick her out once he found out.
She went to Cincinnati to stay with her cousin Ada (Greta Meyer) and raise her baby girl Vesta. While there she landed a job as a maid for the Kane family. She kept her child a secret from them because they didn't need to know anyway.
Here's where I thought the movie would pull the curtains back on relationships between men and women, especially rich powerful men and working class women.
Lester Kane (Donald Cook), son of Thomas Kane, was salivating over Jennie. He wanted her in the worst way and he was going to have her. He cornered her in a linen closet at one point and began harassing her. He told her he wanted to see her to which she responded she couldn't. She looked very distressed as though she knew what was about to occur.
Lester grabbed her and said, "You and I may as well understand each other right now. I like you. You like me?" as though he needed the reassurance.
This was an unanswerable question. If Jennie said yes, she was going to have to start doing more than just cleaning house for the Kane family. If she said no, she may have lost her job.
She didn't answer, she just looked away worriedly. You could see her brain churning as she processed all of the different outcomes of this scenario and their consequences.
"Say it," Lester commanded.
"I don't know," Jennie answered, which was probably the safest answer she could give.
"Do you?" he asked again.
"I don't know," Jennie responded one more time.
"Look at me," Lester ordered in a voice that was part loverboy part master so that she could see that he wasn't playing.
She looked at Lester then looked away and said, "Yes I do," in a resigned manner. It was clear she knew that there was no way out of the situation. She had a baby at home she had to feed, Lester had her hemmed up in a locked closet, if she was going to get out of there anytime soon AND keep her job she was going to have to give in to Lester's desires.
He then turned her to himself and forcibly kissed her--something that I've seen dozens of times in movies of this era. It seemed to me that "Jennie Gerhardt" was trying to show how these relationships between powerful men and their subordinates really happen. It's not sentimental women who fall in love with powerful men, or scheming women who want a man for his money, it's men who subdue the women with the physical, social, and economic power they wield.
I was beginning to like this movie even though I hated Lester.
Lester wasn't done with Jennie. Not by a longshot. The next time he saw her she was on her way home. He encroached upon her asking why she'd been avoiding him. He let her know that she wasn't going to be able to avoid him forever, and he was right.
"I'm driving you home," he matter of factly stated.
"Oh no. Please," Jennie pleaded.
"Afraid your family won't like me?" he asked, though he couldn't care less.
"Yes, I..." she began to say.
"Alright we'll drive somewhere else," he chimed in before she could finish. He wasn't going to be rejected.
"I don't want to go anywhere else," she cried.
"Well, if you're not going to get into that carriage I'll have to pick you up and put you in," he said with a touch of playfulness, but mostly seriousness.
Jennie made a move as though she were going to walk away when Lester quite literally picked her up. Jennie didn't resist. I'm sure she realized that resistance was futile.
Lester took her to his boathouse. Jennie followed along meekly and despondently. Lester was going to have her and he didn't care how disinterested and sad she looked.
"There's no use fighting against this. It's stronger than either of us," Lester said. He was referring to the attraction between them, but the truth was that the power structure that was set up to allow him to do what he was doing was stronger than either of them.
"You belong to me," he continued with the confidence of a bullfighter. He didn't need her consent because he was a rich white male, and when did they ever need consent?
"We mustn't see each other anymore," Jennie continued to adjure him.
"There's no use saying that, I'm going to keep on seeing you," he told her.
"Please listen to me. I can't do what you want. I don't want to. I couldn't even if I wanted to. You don't know how things are," Jennie said, seemingly trying to offer anything that he would accept as a reasonable reason for rejection.
Lester responded, "You told me not so long ago that you cared for me. Have you changed your mind?" No doubt he was referring to that day in the closet.
He didn't wait for an answer. He gently grabbed her chin and said, "You haven't, have you," in more statement form than question. And like that, she was all his, but this time she was willingly his. Jennie DID like Lester, he only needed to take charge to tear down her natural defenses and inhibitions for her to realize how much she truly liked him. They kissed while an orchestra played music of passion, then the movie cut away to scenes of a window blowing in the wind then the open skies with wind driven clouds.
I was disgusted and disappointed. Hollywood had the chance to reveal a hidden aspect of thousands of relationships, yet they opted for romance. I could spit on this movie and it would be an improvement.
It only got worse as the two became happy secret lovers. It wasn't proper for Lester to date the help, so they saw each other surreptitiously. "How many servants have fallen in love with their employers, yet had to keep it hidden?" is what Hollywood was asking by showing this drivel, when the real question was "how many servants have been preyed upon by their employers but haven't had a voice with which to retaliate or expose said employer?"
Jennie fell deeply in love with Lester and continued to be his secret lover. What's more, when Lester got her a home for him to play house with her in, she had to leave her child with her cousin Ada lest Lester find out about her and leave her. At one point Jennie's daughter asked, "Are you my mother?" because she saw so little of her. Jennie's love for Lester overshadowed her love for her own child. Her child played second fiddle to her paramour. She was willing to partially abandon her own child just to keep a man. It was beyond reprehensible, yet Hollywood tried to make it romantic.
I hated Jennie's guts and I shouldn't have. Jennie should've been the sympathetic figure in all of this yet she wasn't. Very easily, with a word or two, Jennie could've, and should've, been the victim--the victim of a broken and tilted power structure, but instead they made it seem she was a victim of social mores. If only rich people would do away with their prejudices, then Jennie and Lester could be happy together in the open. That was the message they pushed and it couldn't have been more off the mark. This movie was a travesty written, directed, and produced by blind individuals who were too stupid or too unwilling to see the truth in it all.
Free on YouTube.