Revisit: The Farmer’s Daughter (1947)
Dir: HC Potter
96 Minutes
Revisit is a series of reviews highlighting past releases that now deserve a second look.
During times of great stress and confusion, you should turn your weary eyes and brain to a classic black and white film replete with black and white, resolvable, moral dilemmas. Particularly if that stress and confusion is the result of election year politics — you need a “feel good” movie. Grab a copy of David O. Selznik’s 1947 The Farmer’s Daughter, adapted from Hella Wuolijoki’s1937 play “Juurakon Hulda”, starring Loretta Young, who won a Best Actress Oscar for this performance. For a blissful 96 minutes, you can actually feel good about a gorgeous woman who stumbles onto a political ticket because, at least in this case, it is obvious that she actually understands local and national issues as well as the voting records of Congressmen, even more so than those who are already in office or those who support political candidates. This is not what we have seen lately.
The titular farmer’s daughter, Katrin (Katie) Holstrom, leaves the safety of her Minnesota farm to pursue dreams of becoming a nurse. En route to the Capitol City, Katie is bamboozled by a creep, loses her money, and is forced to find work as a maid in the home of Congressman Glenn Morely (Joseph Cotton). Nothing will keep her from earning her dream; there, Katie learns to admire the Congressman’s mother (Ethel Barrymore), the butler (Charles Bickford) and she more than admires Congressman Morely. Through this new set of experiences, Katie finds her political voice and eventually publicly eschews cronyism while championing integrity. Even when the bad guys try to harm and thwart her good efforts, Katie prevails with the able assistance of the opposite ticket. This is certainly unfamiliar. But can we expect in Obama the type of political leader that sincerely works for the good of the people, not simply the party? My money’s on it.
During this wonderful film’s release and following World War II, Americans debated the appropriate place for women. No one believed that social change on the home front would be one of the outcomes of war. Ladies’ magazines and journals touted roles for women outside the home as well as within politics, and at the same time magazines criticized women for considering any career other than homemaker and mother. In one of three articles for Good Housekeeping in 1940, Eleanor Roosevelt urged women to unite while also noting that “This country is no matriarchy, nor are we in any danger of being governed by women.” Danger? The Farmer’s Daughter gives us hope that strong ethics and integrity can trump gender, greed and dishonesty every time, even if packaged in the form of a beautiful woman. But, where, oh, where are the farmer’s daughters when we need them?
by Jane Hruska
