YES, MR.DEMILLE (1959)

220 Yes, Mr. DeMille But at Paramount, William LeBaron, production head at the time, sent a jubilant note to DeMille: Hooray for controversy! DeMille did not share the sentiment. When it came to publicity he rarely objected, but this was of a kind distinctly not to his liking, Moreover, if Family Portrait was useless, a $35,000 mistake had been made. To his numerous critics, DeMille made soothing reply, an- nouncing that no part of Family Portrait would be used in his story. He said, "We are approaching the hallowed story with a deep sense of responsibility and with the same spiritual and artistic thrill that impelled the making of The King of Kings" Still, he felt something might be salvaged from the invest- ment in the play. He met with Joseph I. Breen of the Produc- tion Code office. The studio go-between at the time was Luigi Luraschi, an amiable, spirited man whose duties, in addition to wrestling with the Breen office, included the checking of scripts for whatever might offend any race or creed outside of the United States (a function which, with respect to material offensive to Americans, did not appear to be vested in any single person at Paramount). Breen advised Luraschi that the play was not acceptable to large groups of professing Christians. First, the play suggested that Christ came from a large family and that his mother was not the Virgin Mary of the Gospels. Another major objection lay in that portion treating Christ, not as "the Divine Son of God/' but rather as a "son of man/' gifted with genius possibly, and nobler than his fellows. Further, should the stage play be adapted for the screen, Breen advised a treatment that would "definitely and affirma- tively" establish Christ as the only son of the Virgin Mary and as the Divine Son of God. If it had come to pass that fate had signaled him out as the world's foremost embattled dispenser of mass religion, DeMille