Violation Of The Hollywood Production Code In Alfred Hitchcock's Films

Christine Geraghty’s theory of film stardom distinguishes between two star categories and their emphases on personification or impersonation. Choose two postclassical Hollywood film stars, one a personifier and one an impersonator, and discuss the differences between them.  Is Geraghty’s distinction sound or should we attend to other factors?

Christine Geraghty's Theory of Film Stardom

The Hollywood Production Code, known also as the Production Code for Motion Pictures, was a set of moral guidelines that were adhered to by the movie industry in America, for most of the films that were released by major production houses in the country in the years between the 1930’s and the 1960’s. The Hollywood Production Code is referred to often as the Hay’s Code, largely because of the fact that it was created and implemented by a man by the name of William Hays who presided over the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors unit in the years between 1922 and 1945. It was under the leadership of Hays that the Production Code of Hollywood came to be officially adopted in the 1930’s and which was executed quite rigidly in the making of films from the middle of 1934. What the Hollywood Production Code essentially spelled out for film makers and distributors, was what was unacceptable and acceptable when it came to making movies that were produced for the US public. This essay discusses in detail, how the film maker Alfred Hitchcock violated the conservative tenets of the Hollywood Production Code when making controversial yet widely popular films like Psycho (1960) and Rope (1948). The essay argues that the Hollywood Production Code had greatly limited the freedom or scope of artists to adequately represent society in its actual form, that is, with its flaws, limitations and many different dimensions. The essay concludes that it was only because of the boldness and creativity shown by the likes of Alfred Hitchcock that the Production Code ultimately came to be defied by the whole of Hollywood.

In the years between 1930 and 1934, the Motion Pictures Producers and Distributors of America introduced the conservative and much disliked production code for film makers and film producers to adhere to, which greatly stifled the artistic freedom of film script writers, movie makers and actors and which resulted in the limited representation of movie characters on screen. The production code was specifically formulated and set in motion by William Hays, who was in charge of American film making and production in these years and who introduced the strict moral guidelines and ethical codes of conduct that were to be followed when making a movie that was to be viewed by the American public. What resulted in the Hollywood production code being followed and adhered to so widely, was the fact that it was endorsed and supported by all the studio executives in Hollywood. There were many dos and dont’s that had to be borne in mind at the time of making films and scenes of passion for instance were to be strictly restricted in movies. No movie maker had the license or the freedom that was needed to have film artists openly demonstrate a love making scene as part of a film plot or story. This is something that was entirely forbidden be the Production Code. What was also prohibited was the type of characters that could be represented on the screen. Film makers and producers only had the right to include characters in movies who were conventional and orthodox and who did not go against the norms and traditions of society. Gay and lesbian characters could not be shown in films and even when women were represented in films, they could not be portrayed in a bold and orthodox manner. Women when shown in films had to be shown as fulfilling conventional roles, as mother’s, daughters and sisters. There was absolutely no room for the representation of feminism for instance, in Hollywood movies at a time when the Production Code was introduced and being implemented.

The Hollywood Production Code

Alfred Hitchcock, who is one of the most renowned movie makers that the world has seen and who was making films in Hollywood in the decade of the 1950’s and 1960’s, at a time when the Production Code was very much in execution, clearly went against the rules and tenets of moral behavior and acceptability as outlined in the code. He did not care to adhere to the moral standards of the Hollywood Production Code, and this was evident in two of his films, Psycho and Rope. In the movie Psycho (1960) for example, there were a number of controversial statements and dialogues given by characters in the movie, that were not entirely moral in nature. A risqué dialogue was given by the Texas oilman in Psycho, where he refers to a bed as the only playground that beats the city of Las Vegas, implying thusly, that sexual activity was at an all time high in the city. The lunchtime hotel room scene in the movie shows a tryst between Sam and Marion in the opening scenes. The most vivid violation of the Hollywood Production Code as seen in the movie Psycho by Alfred Hitchcock, is the very pointed and graphic description that is given of the relationship that is shared between Norman, the chief protagonist of the movie and his mother. Indeed it was his obsessive love for his mother that caused him to keep her with him in his room even after her death, and the film did not hesitate to show this obsessive love in vivid details. He was shown as sleeping next to the corpse, hugging it, feeding it, and doing the same things that a man would do with a normal living person, be it his mother or his wife. The use of the word transvestite in the movie, Psycho, is something that appeared to have upset the implementers of the Hollywood Production Code very deeply. The script-writer Josef Stefano was informed very explicitly, that such words could not be used in the movie as the these have dirty connotations that are unacceptable for being expressed in the public domain. Many of the Hollywood Production Code enforcers were also quite embarrassed by the use of the word transvestite in the movie, Psycho.

The shower scene in the movie Psycho, was also another major scene that went against the moral guidelines of the Hollywood Production Code. In the scene, the character Marion is seen to be undressing quite explicitly before getting into the shower and the movie shows Norman watching her as she does so. Apart from issues of nudity, the shower scene was considered to be far too passionate and intimate for the likes of those enforcing the Production Code in Hollywood. Hitchcock was clearly informed by the Production Code unit that he was to censor the scene if he wanted the movie to be released, and while Hitchcock had agreed to edit many of the controversial scenes in the movie, he ultimately sent them back for production and distribution. without making even the slightest change to give such scenes more moral value. The Hollywood Production Unit had objected to the length of time for which the character Norman was seen to be watching Marion get undressed before entering the shower. Hitchcock had expressed his willingness to shorten the length of the scene and had also agreed to go ahead and end the scene right before the time when Marion is seen to be taking her bra off. However, this entire scene remained completely uncut for the European and UK print of the film, with the scene continuing to be shown at times on European television as well. Another specific way by which the movie Psycho went fully against the moral tenets of the Hollywood Production Code was the fact that apart from showing nudity in general, Marion’s breasts were shown up close. Viewers in the American public audience could clearly see her breasts and her nipples in particular stand out while she took a shower, something that led to an outrage among the enforcers of the Hollywood Production Unit. The National Catholic Legion of Decency supported the Hollywood Production Unit implementers by giving this wonderful film a B rating, primarily because of the sex and all the violence that it showed in order to convey the plot to the audience.  A few of the other scenes in the movie that were considered too violent and graphic by the Hollywood Production Unit and which were included in the movie, regardless, by Hitchcock included the part where Norman stabs the detective repeatedly while dressed as his dead mother, with blood oozing and flowing all over the place.

Alfred Hitchcock and Violation of the Production Code

The film Rope that was made by Alfred Hitchcock, was one that was based on the Loeb and Leopold murder case. Loeb and Leopold were a gay couple in America in the 1920’s, who had been assassinated because of their open expression of love and affection for one another. While there were plays and other works of art conceived at this point of time to highlight the injustice of the situation, it was Hitchcock who decided to cash in on the sexual nature of the incident and showcase this in his movie. Hitchcock was never a director who was willing to shy away from things such as gay sub-text or explicit content. He was inspired by the play, Rope’s End by Hamilton, which also focused on this gay relationship and its unfortunate end, and was more than eager to play up all the homosexual undertones of the plot.  He included actual gay and bisexual characters in the making of the film and even the person who composed the music for the film was said to have been openly gay at the time. Many prominent actors in Hollywood at the time, had turned down the leading roles to be played in the movie, for fear that they would be violating the Hollywood Production Code. In the end it was Jimmy Stewart who had to play the role of the protagonist in the movie, a role that he especially felt he had not been well-suited for in the first place.

The movie Rope (1948) is one that is steeped very much in gay innuendo’s with a  character by the name of David Kentley being murdered in the initial scenes of the movie by the gay characters Philip and Brandon. Even the instrument of murder, which is strangulation, has sexual undertones to it. The film also interestingly shows, how the gay couple Philip and Brandon justify their homosexuality by considering themselves to be far better than the others in their society, by virtue of their culture and breeding. Both intellect as well as cultural breeding were used by Hitchcock as metaphors for the intellectual movement in America at the time, which was largely dominated by gay writers, poets, artists and musicians. It is based on their inherent notions of supremacy or superiority, that Brandon and Philip assume that societal rules do not apply to them at all and that standing out in society is a good thing. Such content was of course unacceptable for the Hollywood Production Code Unit which had until then restricted the portrayal of gay and lesbian characters by a considerable extent. Repeated efforts and attempts were made to get Hitchcock to modify all the sexual elements of the movie, Rope, and there was even the fear generated by those who dominated the Hollywood Production Code Unit, that the film would not be watched by the majority of the American public once it was released. Hitchcock was entirely unfazed by the alarm and the concern that was shown by the members of the Hollywood Production Code Unit and did not make any attempt whatsoever to edit the content of the movie in any way. Everything was shown quite explicitly, right from the love that Brandon and Philip felt for each other, to their disdain and hatred for societal rules and regulations right up to the sexual and violent manner in which they carried out their crimes. Most, if not all the scenes in the movie were those that violated the Hay’s Code, but which ultimately turned out to be such an eye opener about homosexuality and homosexual lives once it was formally released.

Thus, both the films Psycho and Rope by Alfred Hitchcock were in clear violation of the Hollywood Production Code, which had been restricting the freedom of artists and film makers in Hollywood on moral grounds. The do’s and the don’ts as outlined in the Hollywood Production Code were completely defied by Alfred Hitchcock, who not only chose to show violence, nudity and gender based crimes in his movie, but who also decided to touch upon the subject of homosexuality, which was a taboo subject for film makers at the time. Hitchcock really went against the film making norms that were established by the Hollywood Production Code by making a movie on gay characters and even including gay and bi-sexual characters in the movie. The movie Psycho had sexually explicit content in it from the very beginning to the very end and there was no desire on the part of the film maker to bring about alterations in the content of the movie, just because of the fact that it was not approved of by the Hollywood Production Code. He continued to release the movie in its exact form and content, without paying any heed to censorship. What Hitchcock ended up doing therefore was to not allow himself to be restricted by the moral and didactic conditions of the Hollywood Production Code. The code had not given movie makers and actors in Hollywood the freedom to portray characters and elements of society that were unconventional and real, or pressing societal issues such as homosexuality to be addressed. It took the bold efforts made by Alfred Hitchcock to stand up to the moral oppression of the Hollywood Production Code and make the kind of movies that America and the whole world deserved to see at the time, and continue to see.

References

Abramson, Leslie H. "Psycho." In Hitchcock and the Anxiety of Authorship, pp. 83-93. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, 2015.

Burdock, Erick. "Villains, victims, and virgins: Asexuality in the films of Alfred Hitchcock." (2018)

Cook, David A. A history of narrative film. WW Norton & Company, 2016.

Diehl, Heath A. "Reading Hitchcock/Reading Queer." Hitchcock and Adaptation: On the Page and Screen (2014): 113.

Gaunson, Stephen. "Queer strangers: alfred hitchcock’s fidelity to patricia highsmith." Journal of Adaptation in Film & Performance 11, no. 1 (2018): 5-16.

Greven, David. Intimate Violence: Hitchcock, Sex, and Queer Theory. Oxford University Press, 2017.

Jung, Stefan. "The Visual Peak: Saul Bass as Hitchcock’s ‘Pictorial Consultant’." In Reassessing the Hitchcock Touch, pp. 153-169. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, 2017

Polchin, James. "The Killer with Something Extra." The Gay & Lesbian Review Worldwide 22, no. 5 (2015): 40.

Pollard, Tom. Sex and violence: the Hollywood censorship wars. Routledge, 2015