308
PARTISAN REVIEW
about the atomic bomb, for instance, or to take thought of "our" grave
international responsibilities.) For every difficulty, there is conceived
to be some simple moral imperative that will solve it, at least to the
extent that it can be solved at all. Thus the problem of the monopoly
of capital is reduced to a question of the morals of banks: if bankers
are good men, then they will grant small loans (not large loans, ap–
parently) to deserving veterans (those who are willing to work hard)
without .demanding collateral. (This is "gambling on the future of
America"; the small loan is apparently conceived to be some kind of
solution to the economic difficulties of capitalism--d.
It's A Wonderful
Life.)
And the veteran has a corresponding obligation to be grateful:
"God bless you!" says the simple and reliable farmer whose application
for a loan has been approved.
The makers of the movie are obviously happiest-and also most
successful-in dealing with the sailor, who has lost both hands in the
war and must go through life with a pair of hooks. His problem is at
least quite clear, and the necessary moral patterns have already been
established in a hundred movies: virtue for the sailor consists in assum–
ing that his
girl
will marry him only out of pity and a sense of obliga–
tion; virtue for the girl consists in "really" loving him, so that the loss
of his hands can make no difference. This moral deadlock can always
be broken, and it is broken here, in an extremely affecting scene. (Every–
thing about the sailor is especially affecting because the part is played
by a man who really did lose his hands in the war. There was nothing
else to be done, I suppose, but this is one of the elements that help to
make the movie spill over into the real world, carrying its falsehood
with it.) There is one very uncomfortable scene, when someone raises
the real question: What did he lose his hands
for?
But the man who
raises this question is made personally repulsive and, apparently, a
fascist sympathizer, so one does not mind seeing him knocked down and
the American flag plucked from his lapel (unless one is sufficiently ·at
odds with the movie to realize that this is done not because he is a
fascist but simply because he has put his finger on the really sore spot
that no one is supposed to notice). Thus the political question of the
sailor's hands is dealt with very easily, and the war comes safely back
to the realm of simple morals: "We were pushed into it," says the
unpleasant man. "Sure," the sailor replies, "the Germans and the Japs
pushed us in!" And we in the audience, remembering all the time that
this man has really lost his hands, can breathe easy: he does not be–
grudge his sacrifice.
A secondary element of some interest is the movie's sexual pattern.
Since the starting-point of the story is the veterans' need for "readjust–
ment," the sexual relations of the characters form an unusually clear
projection of the familiar Hollywood (and American) dream of male
