Ask JKM a Question: Alfred Hitchcock vs. Tippi Hedren in The Birds?

My dear friend and regular reader, Trent, writes:

"In your most recent book, Horror Films FAQ, a book that I suggest is a must-read for genre fans, you provide a elegant and cerebral review of the Hitchcock classic 'The Birds'. 

However, does a film like 'The Girl', a very detailed, behind-the-scenes dramatization of the actual filming of 'The Birds', according to the star, Tippi Hedren, change, even a bit, your summation of the film?"

Horror Films FAQ

Great question, Trent, and thank you for the appreciative words about Horror Films FAQ. I had a wonderful time writing that book.  

And this question is certainly a timely one, given the Woody Allen brouhaha.  Do we separate the art from the artist?  

Should we separate the art from the artist?

Here's my short answer to your question: My thoughts about the quality of The Birds have not changed.  

Here's the long answer. The subject matter you raise has caused me, certainly, to add a new mental note to my repository of information about Hitchcock, the human being.  Also, I would be a fool not to believe that those in power in Hollywood (namely white men...), have often abused it. This is why it is important for victims of such abuse to be heard.

On the other hand, we also have the concept of innocent until proven guilty in this country, and so even though we want to hear and acknowledge victims, we must simultaneously recognize that all accusations are not true. There have been "witch hunts" throughout history because people lie or misrepresented the truth about other people.

So this is some really tricky terrain. And even the makers of The Girl readily admit that their film is "partially fictionalized."

Accordingly, the film you reference is "a true story" only as seen through the eyes of another filmmaker, likely tarted up to be as dramatic as possible. The movie is not a documentary, and it is therefore not designed as a vehicle for truth. We shouldn't make assumptions about truth, or a human being, based on the movie.

On the other hand, there is a lot of biographical information out there that confirms aspects of the film's narrative, alas.

So I'm not asserting that Hitchcock wasn't awful to Hedren. I won't defend him as a human being. The law, the final arbiter in many such matters, has also not spoken on this topic, and therefore cannot be a guidepost for us to better understand every aspect of what occurred.

I can, however, testify about the elegance, beauty and depth of Hitchcock's art.

That's the arena where I prefer to focus.

Film criticism is easy and very straightforward by comparison, believe me. 

In that world, I simply construct my aesthetic case, citing pertinent examples from the art in question, and try to present my interpretation as best as I know how. The shots -- the composition -- tell the story, and that is where I like to keep my attention. 

I still love The Birds. I admire Hitchcock's direction. I admire Hedren's performance in the film too. As I wrote in my book, I find the subtext about the birds functioning as the "Id" of one of the characters quite elegant, and powerfully wrought.

But in general, I just don't think it is right to prosecute these cases in the court of public opinion, because then everyone's name gets dragged through the mud, and nothing can ever really get resolved to anyone's satisfaction. And about a million unaffected people -- who have no first hand knowledge of the "bad" event in question  --then fall into camps based on their own biases, and start arguing viciously with one another. But neither side can ever win, and implacable animosity just...blossoms.

Like I said, I do make a mental note of all this stuff, but in terms of how I proceed with my writing, I don't believe that I should let an artist's personal behavior impact my reviews, or, necessarily a film's reputation.  In part, this is because film is a collaborative art form. Why punish everyone involved for one artist's (alleged) error in judgment?

Since not a one of us is perfect, it is a dangerous game to go digging through old movies -- or old jokes for that matter -- to gather "evidence" that someone is or is not a son-of-a-bitch in real life. I think that's what the law is for, and maybe lie-detector tests too.

It's weird to acknowledge this, but I have one last thing to add. Sometimes suffering and strife in the making of a work of art results in great art itself. Perhaps that is also part of the process what occurred on the set of The Birds. But the results -- a great horror film -- speak for themselves.

Don't forget to e-mail me your questions at Muirbusiness@yahoo.com.