When Charles Dickens published his second novel, Oliver Twist, in 1838, no loud cries of “anti-Semitism!” were raised —though one of the principal characters in the book was a “villainous-looking and repulsive” old Jew named Fagin. Last week there was a chorus of loud cries in the U.S.* over the new movie version of Oliver Twist.
British Cinemogul J. Arthur Rank was probably wishing that his gifted director, David (Brief Encounter) Lean, had not been quite so conscientious in copying Dickens and his illustrator, George Cruikshank. Director Lean’s Great Expectations was hailed wherever it was shown as a superbly Dickensian cinema (TIME, May 26, 1947). In Fagin’s case, Lean actually followed Cruikshank more closely than Dickens. The film never calls Fagin a Jew (Dickens rarely called him anything else), but he is faithfully villainous and repulsive—and unmistakably a Jew.
One loud howl came from New York Star Columnist Albert Deutsch; who had seen the picture in London. Deutsch charged that “even . . . Dickens . . . could not make Fagin half so horrible,” and warned that the film would fan the flames of antiSemitism. In Manhattan, the Board of Rabbis appealed to Eric Johnston to keep the movie off U.S. screens. Other Jewish groups took up the cry.
In Toronto, where Oliver Twist had been showing for three weeks, the theater manager noted little comment against Fagin, no unfavorable publicity, no effect on business. The Toronto Jewish Congress called on Rank representatives to complain, but later decided to drop the matter. “We feel,” one was quoted as saying, that an Englishman has just as much right to complain about Bill Sikes.” Could Rank quiet the din by reshooting some scenes in the $1,600,000 picture? It seemed impractical; there were too many shots of Fagin, and some members of the cast had scattered. Last week Rank announced that the U.S. release would be “indefinitely postponed.”
ncG1vNJzZmismaKyb6%2FOpmaaqpOdtrexjm9taWlmaYFwr8innKaZXZa7tbWMrJymoaSesG7A1qKqrWc%3D