The London Blitz provided an ironic backdrop to the film not intended in the 1905 play.
In 1905, Shaw may have intended an anti-armaments story; but with war torn London as a backdrop, the 1941 movie came something different. That Armaments Business is what provides sustenance for lots of people--housing, food, clothing. And certainly the moral issue of working in Armaments for sustenance also meant the survival of Britain. Working in an American plant devoted to creating nuclear armament brings not the same intensity.
We all might decry the Capitalist and Capitalism. Before Rockefeller, whale oil cost $5/gallon; after Rockefeller, oil from oil wells cost 25cents/gallon. In 1900 Rockefeller was the most hated man in America, by 1940 he was one of the most beloved by virtue of his extensive philanthropy.
Shaw in 1905 could not have anticipated either World War that would bring so much devastation to the physical and psychological landscape of Europe. And yet by 1941, when the film was made, that devastation could not have been lost on Shaw, even as it provides a certain backdrop to several scenes in the film. In the movie, it appears by the end, that Shaw is praising the Armaments industry for the good of capitalism sustaining the lives of individuals, and the good of Amazements in protecting Britain (DEMOCRACY) from the Nazi maw. A conclusion Major Barbara Undershaft herself comes to realize.
This review sounds the heavy knell of propaganda message, and yet the film unfolds with a deft drama of a drawing room comedy about love. Even the last half hour, with stock footage of production being overseen by Cusins, Undershaft and his family, the film is brisk and almost sprightly despite the heaviness of physical abuse, a heaviness of abuse which simply underscores the abuse of Germany against its European neighbors.
The film worked because of its genius.
In 1905, Shaw may have intended an anti-armaments story; but with war torn London as a backdrop, the 1941 movie came something different. That Armaments Business is what provides sustenance for lots of people--housing, food, clothing. And certainly the moral issue of working in Armaments for sustenance also meant the survival of Britain. Working in an American plant devoted to creating nuclear armament brings not the same intensity.
We all might decry the Capitalist and Capitalism. Before Rockefeller, whale oil cost $5/gallon; after Rockefeller, oil from oil wells cost 25cents/gallon. In 1900 Rockefeller was the most hated man in America, by 1940 he was one of the most beloved by virtue of his extensive philanthropy.
Shaw in 1905 could not have anticipated either World War that would bring so much devastation to the physical and psychological landscape of Europe. And yet by 1941, when the film was made, that devastation could not have been lost on Shaw, even as it provides a certain backdrop to several scenes in the film. In the movie, it appears by the end, that Shaw is praising the Armaments industry for the good of capitalism sustaining the lives of individuals, and the good of Amazements in protecting Britain (DEMOCRACY) from the Nazi maw. A conclusion Major Barbara Undershaft herself comes to realize.
This review sounds the heavy knell of propaganda message, and yet the film unfolds with a deft drama of a drawing room comedy about love. Even the last half hour, with stock footage of production being overseen by Cusins, Undershaft and his family, the film is brisk and almost sprightly despite the heaviness of physical abuse, a heaviness of abuse which simply underscores the abuse of Germany against its European neighbors.
The film worked because of its genius.