BAD SEED
1953
Mervyn LeRoy (director)

Learned vs. Innate
Nature Nurture
Culture – genetic
Before the film

The long standing argument about are things innate or learned has persisted in some form for more than 2000 years in the west. Rodney Needham in his “History of Science in China” claims this is a Western problem and the Chinese do not dichotomize in this way.

Similarly some scientists have come to the same conclusion, namely T.C. Schneirla who sees the opposition between “learned and innate” as spurious. None the less, many scientists today still try to demonstrate whether things are “learned” or “innate” or an interaction of the two.

Consider the following problem however. Is sexuality in cats “learned or innate”. If kitten is removed from mother almost immediately after birth it develops normal sexuality. This tends to imply that the sexuality is innate. However if the removal is immediate, then the kitten does not develop normal sexuality.

What seems to be the case is that the mother cat during pregnancy dehydrates and needs a great deal of water. When the kittens are born they are wet and the mother licks them. If the kittens are removed before the licking they do not develop normal sexuality, if they are removed after they do.

The questions here are numerous, not the least is whether there is a linguistic problem that is “learned “ has two opposites – taught and innate. This may lead to some confusion. That is to say, the kitten has “learned” sexuality (i.e. it is not innate) yet it hasn’t been “taught” or even seen sexual behavior hence it is innate!

Recently, as biological science has become more and more biochemical, there is a greater tendency to label things “genetically based”. This however, goes against the grain of much American (and indeed western) belief – that is that we are what we make ourselves. This is a strong argument for free will rather than determinism. This argument is very important in many areas of social programs which tend to argue against genetic control and in favor of environmental control. If we can just change the environment everything will be fine. Check the criminal justice system – people are not intrinsically criminal, but are made so “They made me a criminal”. This approach tends to remove responsibility from the individual and place it on society. Hence social programs are rooted in the belief that if the environment is changed, the person will develop into a “good” person – however that is defined.

“Twilight of the Golds” is a film which deals with this same problem in terms of whether “homosexuality” is genetic or not, and in the film a pregnant woman, married to a geneticist discovers that her unborn child is carrying a gene for homosexuality. Her brother who is openly gay is appalled when the family starts to discuss the possibility of aborting the child on the grounds that it has this gene. On the other hand, as we will see later in the course, there are questions about development of different sexual proclivities and even their contagious nature!

Bad Seed raises the same question and the title indicates the “genetic side of the problem”

Consider the problems the film confronts about the ideas and how to present them in terms of film. Consider also the problems of style, especially in acting.

Films have many sources - some scripts are written specifically for the screen (Third Man); others are from previously written materials – novels, novellas and short stories. Generally short stories and novellas are better sources since they are not as compex as a novel which may be better handled as a mini-series!

Some films use plays which have already been produced (usually on or off Broadway) This is the case with The Bad Seed and so the question becomes how do you keep the film from being a kind of documentary of the stage play. How is the film “opened” up which is difficult because the play is written for the stage and has some restrictions. West Side Story is a film which in part opened up the play

There are even films that have been based on paintings!

In terms of the film one question to examine is how does the film “open up” the stage play?

In both films and plays there are areas in which variables can be manipulated there are:

In the theater, the entire stage is always in view with all the performers who are on it, but in the films, one can restrict the view of the audience to a single character – or even part thereof.

AFTER THE FILM

On which side of issue does the play come down? Genetic or learned. Obviously genetic.

The film is originally a play by Maxwell Anderson, who writes rather unnatural dialog. How does this serve this particular play. How would the film be different if it were acted in a more natural style. Is there a parallel between genetic and stilted dialog, and cultural “natural” dialog”?

The play differs from the film in the ending. The code would not allow a murderer to go unpunished. What do you think of the films ending?

How does the boy’s mother’s drinking affect the play – is there some lack of control that parallels the non-genetic piece compared to the normally stylized dialog. Consider the way different acting styles in a play or film affect the film (Street Car Named Desire) All in film from actor’s studio, expect Blanche Dubois (Vivian Leigh).