Final Exam on Success: It's a Wonderful Life

I teach a senior seminar at Brooklyn College. The course concerns success. Here is the final exam. 



http://youtu.be/HC1HT3UjyDA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3sZy7IVRiw

George Baily (Jimmy Stewart) has ambitions that sound like Howard Roark's. But Mary Hatch (Donna Reed) has other plans for George. Life events, not Mary, thwart George's ambitions. Moreover, George's motivation to prevent villainous Mr. Potter (Lionel Barrymore) from taking control of the Bailey family's business, a Building and Loan, motivates him to stay in Bedford Falls and prevent its becoming Pottersville.

I have sometimes thought that Potter represents an American brand of totalitarianism. Notice that while George's younger brother Harry goes to war and wins the Congressional Medal of Honor, George stays at home and fights "the Battle of Bedford Falls" because of his bad ear, which he got by saving his brother's life years before.

Questions for your final. What is George Bailey's theory of success? Is there a divergence between what he thinks success is consciously and what he really believes success to be? Is he afraid of success, as Mr. Potter says at one point? Is he conflicted, as between the (a) Hamiltonian view of success, represented by Franklin and The Millionaire Next Door and (b) the Jeffersonian view of success, represented by Thoreau? Clearly he is not identical to Thoreau because of his commitment to his town, but the film presents a tension between materialism (Hamilton) and the small town American way of life (Jefferson). Potter says that George is worth more dead than alive. But Clarence the angel shows George that he's "the richest man in town."

Is Bailey a communitarian version of Howard Roark, who does what he believes (which involves family and community) while sacrificing superficial success? Or is he a coward, who stays at home, "a warped, frustrated young man" as Mr. Potter puts it in the above clip?

What is the role of community in success? Is the small town American community, so important in the 19th century, an impossible ideal today, even in Frank Capra's day (Capra directed this film) a thing of the past?

A few points about the film. The American Film Institute has ranked it the 11th best film of all time and the number one most inspiring film of all time. AFI has ranked Mr. Potter, played by Lionel Barrymore (Drew Barrymore's great uncle) the sixth best villain in American film history.

When It's a Wonderful Life was released, it was a bust at the box office. Frank Capra was famous for cornball movies, and some have called his movies "Capra corn." The movie was forgotten, and the studio forgot to renew its copyright. In the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, the television stations realized that there was no copyright, and they played it repeatedly during Christmas season without having to pay the studio. The film caught on through the repeated exposure and has become wildly popular. Many people have seen it so many times that they can't watch it. In Palo Alto, California, there's a movie theater that plays it every Christmas and the audience speaks the lines along with the actors. About ten years ago, the studio realized that although the film's copyright had lapsed, they could copyright the sound track. So it is now only played on NBC twice each year, once on Christmas eve.

Jimmy Stewart, the hero, said before he died that this was his favorite role. The villain, Lionel Barrymore, was confined to a wheel chair in the 1930s because of arthritis and an accident. He had won the Academy Award in 1931. In the 1930s he was famous for playing Scrooge on the radio. This role is a kind of reversal of Scrooge. In "A Christmas Carol" Scrooge is the villain who is shown his past, present and future and then becomes a good guy. In this film the villain, Mr. Potter, does not change but the good guy, George Bailey (Jimmy Stewart) is shown what the world would be without him and realizes that he is really a success, that his is a wonderful life.

Is Clarence the Angel doing George Bailey a favor, or is he feeding George Bailey opium?

Yer Blues: Beatles Celebrate Bin Laden Death

 

Mike Marnell called last night to tell me that Obama announced the death of Osama on Donald Trump's television show. The LA Times provides a blow-by-blow account. Video of attack on bin Laden h/t LA Times blog:

New York Libertarians to Back Paul or Johnson

I just received this in an e-mail from Dave Nalle of the Republican Liberty Caucus:

I heard from secondary sources that the LP of NY voted to not support a LP candidate if Ron Paul or Gary Johnson got the GOP presidential nomination.  

The LP usually gets one or two percent. It can't hurt but it wouldn't win a general election. I doubt a good candidate could win in New York under any circumstances.

Paul, or the Tea Party Is Bust

Glenda McGee writes that if the Tea Party can't support Ron Paul for president then it is the party of big government. Glenda links to the Rockwell Institute's Michael S. Rozeff's Infowars piece  assailing American imperialism. It is now apparent that American imperialism and republicanism are at loggerheads, just as they were in Rome.  Hopefully, an American Caesar will not defeat Cato as he did in Rome.  Progressivism was always imperialistic, but the choice between freedom and the Progressivism of the Democrats and Republicans has never been posed explicitly, at least until after World War II, and then in small doses like Vietnam.  America must put its freedom, including both civil liberties and economic freedom, ahead of imperialism.  Rozeff writes:

America can go in one of two ways. It can continue on the path of empire, in which case it continues downhill and impedes the world’s progress; or it can renounce empire, in which case it restores the dignity of Americans and imparts new opportunities to the peoples of the world...The only major politician who is leading America in this direction is Congressman Ron Paul. His is a lonely but courageous voice in Washington. The commendable directions he is proposing add up to renouncing empire...Americans have to understand that they have an empire and that its effects are a net negative for them and for the rest of the world’s peoples...To shift away from empire, Americans have to disavow it. They have to go directly against the powerful interest groups that favor it.

It is becoming increasingly apparent Rozeff is right; freedom and imperialism are incompatible. 

Glenda McGee Writes:

One man has been fighting the Fed, the Warfare/Welfare State/ the UN and for property rights.

When I see Tea Party people still believing in the Rethuglican establishment, I think that the elites are correct - Americans are brainswashed morons. Ron Paul is true to the constitution and no other candidate can claim that.  

If the Tea Party is not the Ron Paul Party, it is the party of big government 'Patriot Act' Bush fascists, Nixon who smiled and wined and dined with Mao after he murdered 10 million people, and the New World Order that came from Bush senior's mouth.

UN Agenda 21 drives every act of the past twenty years.  Only Ron Paul is talking about New World Order. If the Tea Party stays moronic - You will lose you home, your car, your right to eat meat, your children, your right to procreate, and ultimately your life.