The Best Years of Our Lives (1946): Hollywood, Postwar Social Change and Disability
At the peak of movie attendance in the United States, films like The Best Years of Our Lives (1946) marked history. Best Years came out just seven months after the end of World War II and follows veterans as they face harsh realities while trying to reintegrate into civilian life. Its themes go from alcoholism and poverty to disability and ableism. Although the film was a major success, winning the Academy Award for Best Picture, it was a controversial piece that took risks, as it caught the attention of the HUAC (House Un-American Activities Committee) right at the peak of the Hollywood Blacklist, while also challenging the regulations of the Hays Code, Hollywood’s system of self-censorship.
I think it is crazy that this 2-hour and 50-minute film can be praised for its glorification of the military, since the HUAC and other critics themselves viewed it as a potential connection to criticism of the army, leading to accusations of unpatriotism. It is true that the happy ending overlooks the harsh realities of many veterans' lives, but I understand that romance is supposed to save us all in a perfect reality, and that maybe was what postwar society hoped to see to help with their grief. I don't think this, in particular, would inspire a screening to promote the military. However, in this post, I want to focus on a specific aspect of the film: disability representation.
Best Years was directed by William Wyler, a disabled Veteran who lost part of his hearing while producing films for the War Department. He wanted Harold Russel in particular, an Army veteran who lost both hands in a training accident, who was not even an actor, and later won two Oscars for his performance in this movie. This level of authenticity, which the director achieved by hiring actual people with disabilities without resorting to methods like cripface, is what I think made the film resonate deeply with viewers.
Homer Parish, Harold Russel's character, is a former disabled Navy veteran returning home to his family and, importantly, his girlfriend. At first, he seems proud to show his fellow companions what he can do with his unconventional prosthetic, like smoking a cigarette, carrying his own stuff, things that people without a disability usually doubt us for, you know… normal stuff. However, we later learn about his insecurities through his encounter with his girlfriend, and the narrative starts to become a little too melodramatic. Although these are real and personal struggles of many people with disabilities who carry trauma, Homer's plot revolves around being accepted, especially by himself. This personal battle is his only conflict, as his girlfriend, later his wife, confidently states that she wants him and remains in love with him. I would've also loved to see Homer in a job-hunting or work environment, as we did with the other characters. His later “suffering” only ends with his marriage, which could've gone more to the inspirational side of reactions as some modern movies do with disability, but… I don't think it did.
This disability narrative might sound narrow to those looking at it with modern eyes, for those reasons, but given that Freak Shows only began to decline in the 1920s and continued through the 1960s, a period during which the movie Freaks played a significant role in their decline, it is a progressive move. It might've been one of the first times the public (at the Oscars) actually saw a disability narrative, and it seemed to elicit a positive reaction.
