Communist infiltration of Hollywood motion-picture industry : hearing before the Committee on Un-American activities, House of Representatives, Eighty-second Congress, first session (1951)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




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.

3484 COMMUNISM IN HOLLYWOOD MOTION-PICTURE INDUSTRY attention when Waiting for Lefty, by Clifford Oclets, who had been known as a playwright before, was chosen as the best among hundreds of scripts submitted." Mr. Odets. That made a good story, I would say. But it was not the truth. Mr. Tavenner. It was not true. Returning to the magazine New Theater, according to a note by the author appearing at the end of the script of Waiting for Lefty, no production of the play could be presented without your permission. Is that correct? Mr. Odets. That was my hope. Mr. Tavenner. Well, what copyright protection did you have when you produced the play? Mr. Odets. I will guess, in the line of normal procedure, I later took a copyright out on the play. I didn't know about copyrights when the play was written. But I would doubt that in my entire life I parned $1,000 out of that play. People just did it. It was kind of public property. That play has gone to this day. As a matter of iact, one ot the few times permission was asked for that play was from the United States Army. They did it in Japan just after the war. Mr. Tavenner. According to the Daily Worker of January 23, 1948, Waiting for Lefty was produced under the auspices of the Com- munist Party of New Jersey, at a mass demonstration on January 25, 1948. Did you grant permission to the Communist Party of New Jersey to produce your play? Mr. Odets. I haven't granted permission for that play, to my knowl- edge, I would guess, for 8 or 10 years. The play is now handled by my agent, Brandt and Brandt, in New York City, and is rather infre- quently done by colleges. Mr. Tavenner. Well, were you acquainted with the fact that the play was being produced or would be produced by the Communist Party of New Jersey in 1948? Mr. Odets. No, I don't know about that. No. As a matter of fact, the last year I was in California, some people came from New York and told me they saw a very good production of Waiting for Lefty in New York City. I would guess that was around this time. It was somewhere down on Second Avenue that ran for a long time. I knew nothing about that, either. Mr. Tavenner. On April 30, 1948, the play was presented by the New Theater, according to the Daily Worker of April 30, 1948. Did you grant permission for its production by the New Theater? Mr. Tavenner. I have not granted permission for the production of that play for, I would guess easily 8 or 10 years, with the one excep- tion that I told you about. Mr. Odets. Well, how did they obtain authority to reproduce this play if you weren't asked about it? Mr. Odets. Waiting for Lefty has been done all over the world. To make an example it has been done in the British Isles in 17 different dialects and I have not received 5 cents of royalties. I don't know, I would say that the play existed as a kind of public service. Mr. Tavenner. Then the Communist Party has made the use of the play, regardless of the amount of criticism that it may have re- ceived by technical reviewing writers, at the time it was produced.