University of Virginia Library

Arthur Penn: Explorer Of Offbeat, Heritage

By Jacoba Atlas
Special to the Cavalier Daily

— Ed.)

In the 13 years since Arthur
Penn has been making motion
pictures he has come up with only
six productions. Certainly not very
impressive if numbers alone told
the story. However, what has set
Penn apart from most American
directors is his unfailing
determination to explore the
offbeat and to bring our heritage
and culture into the full light of
consideration.

In 1957, Penn directed "The
Left Handed Gun," a film dealing
with the life and death of Billy the
Kid. Penn took the familiar western
and turned it into a psychological
drama that delved deeply into our
national psyche. Almost ten years
later, he managed to create the
maximum impact with a similar
theme, that of "Bonnie and Clyde."
Last year he attempted to search
into the new culture with "Alice's
Restaurant," and, most recently, in
"Little Big Man," he has filmed a
story of the conflict between
whites and Indians.

What emerges from Penn's films
is a deeply abiding sense of fairness
and an absolute desire to come to
terms with our creations. I spoke
with Penn on the set of "Little Big
Man." The "set" was a ranch some
40 miles outside of Los Angeles.
The day was hot, the area dusty.
Penn and the crew had been filming
since 6 a.m. and the day had been
sprinkled with mishaps. One
stagecoach driver had been
trampled by the coach and had to
be rushed to a near-by hospital.
Penn's voice was giving out as the
afternoon wore on, but his
eagerness to communicate his ideas
did not.

Question: America right now
seems to have its constant
identification with outlaws. In your
films you've dealt considerably
with outlaws on various levels,
either directly as with "Bonnie and
Clyde" or indirectly as in "Mickey
One." Do you think this fascination
is inherent in America or just a
product of the times?

Penn: I think it's inherent
within the American character to
change the law by moving outside
it. Therefore a lot of people feel
they can identify with the outlaw.
Laws have a habit of becoming
antiquated just like everything else.
There's an aging process to law and
it seems to me that at a certain time
somebody who changes the law can
be called an outlaw and at another
time he can be called a
revolutionary. So in consequence
we have to say what is the law and
what is its context and that I think
is more appropriate. For instance,
whose law is the proper law when
people are marching on the streets
of Washington. It's clearly not the
Justice Department's as far as I'm
concerned. The law is an organic
thing.

Question: In "Mickey One"
you've created what seems to me to
be the ultimate paranoiac movie.

Arthur Penn

When the hero says, for instance,
"What am I guilty of? I'm guilty of
not being innocent" - that's an
incredible line...

Penn: That's right...

Question: ...that concept is so
American, inherent guilt...

Penn: Yeah, it definitely is. I
don't think it's so much an inherent
guilt though: I think it's more an
American phenomenon which is if
you are not part of the kink of
system which is guilt inducing then
you find yourself guilty after the
fact. You're guilty of not being
innocent. You can't maintain
innocence. I believe, in a society
which is mainly Mafia oriented.
Also in war time you have the
military structure and that makes
you ask yourself in what capacity
are you innocent and in what
capacity are you guilty. It wasn't so
much paranoia as it was to say
there's a certain justification in
paranoia. You're not just freaking.
There is somebody coming after
you, you just have to know who it
is: but there is someone coming.

Question: Did you find any
optimism in the people of the
commune in "Alice's Restaurant?"

Penn: Yeah, I did find it. But
optimism is a relative word. What I
did see, and it gives me pleasure, is
a generation doing something about
its own destiny. You know there
was a whole generation who grew
up in the Joe McCarthy era that
just took things as they came and
what came was the whole middle
class. What I see with this group
and with groups like it across the
country is that they are fighting for
different kinds of identity How
successful they'll be in their fight I
don't know. I don't think human
beings have ever been terribly
successful in their fight for
identification. But the fact that
they're repudiating a lot of val
that they find, empty values, forced
values and they're searching for
values of their own. It seems to me
really admirable, but more
important a kind of salvation of
their souls. So I think...if I think it
can be saved, and I'm not entirely
sure I do think it can be saved...but
if I did think so, then I would feel
that there was cause for optimism.

Question: There seems to be a
lack of directors in their 40's
willing to deal with that age group.
There are a host of films dealing
with youth, but except for John
Cassavettes, where is the
exploration of "middle age?"

Penn: Well, I think that's one of
the things that's going to change
almost any minute now. I don't
think that we recognize that at
35-45 you're entering into a
distinctly different phase of your
life, and I don't think anyone has
been successful in bringing that sort
of thing to the forefront either
psychologically or dramatically.
But I think that time has come to
an end because a certain number of
filmmakers are forty now. And
although I hate to number myself
among them, somehow I got there.
And I think what interests us in our
lives must perforce be what
interests us on the screen. So
eventually that sort of subject will
come under scrutiny.

Question: How are you dealing
with the Indians in "Little Big
Man?"

Penn: It's not accurate in terms
of actual fact, but I think what is
going to come out is something a
little closer to the spirit of the
Indians. I mean, nothing that we're
showing do we have any reason to
believe actually took place quite as
we're showing it, but I suspect a
good deal of this kind of treatment
of the Indians went on.
Consequently there was a kink of
reciprocal treatment of the whites,
but as someone recently said the
white man brought them smallpox,
tuberculosis and rendered them
interior prisoners, which is what
they are. But we're not showing the
Indians in those terms. As I say,
this is an oddly comic film and
maybe that's not the appropriate
way to deal with something as
important and as meaningful as
this, but on the other hand, maybe
it is the way. The Indians in the
film have told us for the first time
they are seeing at least a part of the
truth. There's no question but that
the whole script is sympathetic to
the Indians. We report Custer as an
absolute fool. More than that, as a
megalomaniac. There's a body of
historical material supporting that
he thought that way because the
Democratic National Convention
was going to take place four days
after the Battle of Little Big Horn.
One of his hopes was that if he won
a significant victory he would go to
the convention as a really
important candidate. He would be a
candidate by acclamation...

Question: Shades of Chicago...

Penn: Shades of Chicago indeed.
So we have that very much in our
film. Not to say so much that this is
contemporary as to say what is
contemporary is also antique and
history does repeat itself.

On The Set Of "Little Big Man"