We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.
Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.
2316 COMMUNISM IN HOLLYWOOD MOTION-PICTURE INDUSTRY Mr. Doyle. I think, counsel, when Mr. Levy testified before he did not use the word "restraint." He said "no obligation." I am. wondering if there is any difference in his mind between the terms. You used the term "obligation"; you did not use the term "re- straint," did you not? Mr. Levy. I don't remember, but let me say this: That I have been writing most of m} r life, and only once has anybody said to me, "this is what you are to write, and this is the way you are to write it." Nobody in my life has ever said to me excepting once "this is the way the thing has got to be done." And I don't remember using the word "obligation," but I think obligation is the closer word. Mr. Doyle. I think the exact language was—and I wrote it down because I thought it was significant—"I wanted to have no obligation except to my writing." Mr. Levy. I wasn't conscious of using that word, but that is the more accurate thing. That is what I meant. Mr. Tavenner. What I am trying to understand is whether or not you felt that membership in the Communist Party would hinder you in carrying out your work in the preparation of the novels vou spoke of. Mr. Levy. I felt, and do feel, that membership in any organization that has a program to which you bind yourself by being a member must give you an obligation—and thank you for giving me back that word—must give you an obligation to those things which must influence your writing. For instance, in Gold Eagle Guy, the protagonist is a shipping man, a San Francisco man, who is a shipper who creates a shipping empire. Now, as I say, the family of the man who thought that I was writing about him was very indignant that I had treated him this way, but to me he was a character. I didn't want to say, because the family may object to it, I didn't want to paint him one way, but also to me he was a very romantic and powerful, creative character, and I didn't want to be under—this was his significance to me, was that he was both things, was that he was creative, that he built, that he was essential, and also on the other side that he was ammoral, that he was ruthless, and you must have both these things to make a character, to make a man. And if you leave out either thing you are lying. Mr. Tavenner. You stated that there was only one occasion when you were told, or directed what to write. Has that any bearing upon the matters which this committee is investigating? Mr. Levy. I was working for the New York Journal. Mr. Taven*ner. As a result of the problem which you mentioned, you withdrew from the Communist Party in 1933? Mr. Levy. Yes. Mr. Tavenner. During the year's period when you were a member at that time, did you pay dues? Mr. Levy. No, sir; I think I paid Mr. Browder something when he gave me the card, some small sum, but no others. Mr. Tavenner. But as a member at large, you did not pay dues? Mr. Levy. No.