MovieChat Forums > Stella Dallas (1937) Discussion > Uncomfortable Class Message

Uncomfortable Class Message

posted 14 years ago by Local Hero
23 replies | jump to latest

This movie is powerful in many respects-- especially Stanwyck's performance-- but there is also what seems to me an uncomfortable class message here (especially as it comes at the end of the Depression).

The movie begins with Stella's superficial, vapid class aspirations, as she is clearly drawn to Stephen just for his money and his connection to the sort of "high class" world that she thinks holds all of life's answers. We see her mendacious behavior in wooing Stephen, and then her voracious, unending appetite for further social mobility even after she is married. Once he realizes them, Stephen disapproves of her motives and behavior, and the audience is clearly meant to agree with Stephen -- and we know that Stella is only sowing the seeds of her inevitable future woes (given that most Hollywood films operate in a just universe where all bad actions meet their appropriate ends).

Eventually cut off from Stephen's schooling in "proper" behavior, Stella reverts to her tacky, ill-mannered, lower-class ways, and when she later enters the world of the country club, all of its members-- especially its young members-- look down their noses at the "uncouth creature" in their midst. We, the audience, are meant to feel the pain of the moment, but are we meant to disapprove of this community's ill-bred snobbery? No!

No. Despite Stephen's early disapproval of Stella's naked class ambitions, and despite the country club's blatant snobbery, we are by the end subtly manipulated to side with the worst kind of class snobbery. In the end, Stella fails not because she was shallow in her class ambitions, but only because she lacks the patience to attain the genteel mannerisms of the wealthy. Indeed, [vague spoiler] when she finally makes her great self-sacrifice so that her daughter can be brought up among the wealthy, we are allowed to feel the pain of separation, but we are also meant to feel the great magnanimity of the move-- in other words, we are supposed to agree unquestioningly with a larger snobbery: the rich are better people, and Laurel is, of course, better off among them, rather than with her mother. In short, the movie still maintains that old-fashioned equating of noble character and the noble class.

[–] Enrique-8 14 years ago

Believe it or not, there are still class values today which work against the poor person and exalt the rich. I've experienced them first hand.

Enrique Sanchez

[–] Local Hero 14 years ago

No argument there, my friend.

And in the political arena in the United States this year we are seeing a renewed wave of open, utterly merciless class warfare on behalf of the rich and against the poor and middle class. But if anyone so much as dares to notice this in the media, he or she will be the one accused of class warfare and no one will question the logic of such an accusation.

Some things change in this country, some things never do.

[–] Enrique-8 14 years ago

Thank YOU, Local Hero. You are not, by any chance, a fan of the movie called Local Hero?

Enrique Sanchez

[–] beetiesmom 14 years ago

Excellent post, Local Hero. The "richies" in this movie made my skin crawl. What a class differentiation! And WHAT is with that "veddy prop-ah" dialect they all seem to speak?? Is it supposed to be the result of only the very best finishing schools and ivy-covered colleges? This too drives me nuts---how many actors and actresses had to log in countless hours with speech coaches, trying to master the Upper Class way of speaking?

Am I the only one who gets the giggles over this?

Am I also the only one who felt that Stella did the wrong thing? What mother would want to actually make her child feel that she (the mother) is not worth the child's time it takes to say Hi? She must not thought much of Laurel, that she had to make herself into such a slattern, in order that Laurel would run back to Daddy (and Mommy) Bigbucks. Why would she think so little of herself?

Also, does anyone else think Stepmommy Dearest was the ultimate in smug snobbery herself? Barbara O'Neil was very beautiful, I'll give her that. And sounded the perfect cultured mother!

[–] bill3-1 14 years ago

Also, does anyone else think Stepmommy Dearest was the ultimate in smug snobbery herself?

No, not whatsoever, I don't see it. Please see my recent post on Helen.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0029608/board/thread/182637983

I would rather have Stella as my mom though, but not sure I'd want her for a wife, but I think Missy's gorgeous.

[–] beetiesmom 14 years ago

I liked the title of this post, "Uncomfortable Class Message". I have to take an idea from one of the reviewers, who wondered about this class message as seen by the Depression audiences who viewed this movie. All that Ivy League muckety-mucking, all the "I say, that was a smashing game of tennis, Brockington!" stuff, and poor Stell embarrassing herself by hollering, "Boy! Oh, boy!" to the hired staff amidst the luncheon crowd, who snickered as they looked down their noses at her, Mrs. Morrison meeting Stella in a beautifully flowing housedress (!)~~~~that had to be uncomfortable for these folks to watch, but evidently, as the film did so well, they must not have cared TOO much, right? American blue-bloods can be just as exclusive as the English. Too bad.

As close and protective as Lollie always was of her mother, she sure didn't hesitate to turn her back on her at the ice cream counter, did she? I guess Laurel was deep enough into the "smart set" that she wasn't going to jeopardize it by owning up to Stella being related to her!

[–] bill3-1 14 years ago

As close and protective as Lollie always was of her mother, she sure didn't hesitate to turn her back on her at the ice cream counter, did she? I guess Laurel was deep enough into the "smart set" that she wasn't going to jeopardize it by owning up to Stella being related to her!

I don't know that I see it like that, I love how sweet girl Lollie is so unpretentious, while the whole group is engaged in banter and criticism she sits there ignoring what they say, she would rather enjoy her chocolate soda, then when she realizes that they're talking about her mother it becomes a fight or flight situation, she goes into a panic, she really doesn't know what to do, her first thought is escape, Laurel isn't really the type of girl to take a stance. Later when the cats out of the bag that lovely girl - what does she do? She doesn't get mad or embarrassed (for herself), she snuggles into bed with her mother to comfort her. Again, she's just not the type of girl to be confrontive with her adversaries, I believe she has no problem "owning up" to Stella's eccentricities, she loves her mother too much. Laurel like her mother is far too selfless to give a rat's ass what her peer's think, she doesn't have the maturity yet to know what's best for her, and that's why Stella goes and does what she had to, what a terribly difficult sacrifice she had to make, and what an amazing display of expression Stany makes! Horrendously heartbreaking and she doesn't have to say a word, Barbara is so incredible here!

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bill3-1 13 years ago

I can't see Stella's sacrifice as noble, because she had the choice. She wasn't willing to change, but she was willing in abandoning Laurel. If Stella was able to play the innocent as she was trying to seduce Stephen, why was she incapable of playing the socialite in Laurel's behalf?

Stella didn't exactly abandon Laurel, her original plan didn't work out, I don't think she could figure out another way to make her stay with Stephen and Helen other than to make it impossible for her to return, Stella didn't want Laurel sacrificing herself, her life, her future for her. I like to think this isn't the end of the story, their life (mother/daughter) relationship goes on from there.

Stella's sacrifice was noble because she was being selfless, Stella wasn't playing when she was "seducing Stephen", that was no act, she was just being herself, sure for awhile she tried to talk and act proper, but I think that was no fun for her, it is not who and what she is, it was Stephen who couldn't accept Stella for who/what she really is.

At some point with Stephen I think she does realize she's a leopard who can't change her spots, so she embraces her own dorkiness by claiming to have "stacks of style" but is clueless how truly low brow and tacky she really is, Stella does have style, she's able to make Lolly really nice fashionable dresses, but she's the kind that thinks "more is better", and even more is even better yet, and doesn't even realize she's embarrassing her daughter and hurting her chances until she overhears the girls talking in the Pullman car.

Why should Stella play pretend she's a socialite for Laurel's behalf and ruin her chances for a better richer life? Answer, because she was incapable of changing her spots, she did make a try at it, but she's too blue collar, too low class, it's impossible to chrome out a dog turd, Stella was being real. I like that this isn't another typical over night Hollywood transformation case, one just cannot change who and what they are over night, and why should Stella change for Stephen or Laurel or anyone else if she likes the way she is?

That's why I like this movie so much, Stella is a very complicated woman, and it is Barbara Stanwyck's very best work.

[–] hodie 11 years ago

I thought Helen was truly "well-bred" in her behavior, compared to the snobs who rejected Stella. But who knows what Helen's background? Maybe she wouldn't be accepted by all the "richies" either. But she was a true lady.

Get me a bromide! And put some gin in it!

[–] beetiesmom 11 years ago

Hi, hodie! Helen was indeed a very gentle, genuinely kind human being, but she had her heart shattered when Stephen had disappeared after the suicide of his father. (BOOK SPOILER!!!)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~According to the book, Helen was raised with money, and after her heartbreak over the loss of Stephen Dallas, she quietly (and quickly) married a much-older man by the name of Morrison; they had three sons and one daughter, who died at age one or two, and it was into this dead child's room, kept almost as a shrine, that Lauren moved. This was a reason that Helen, along with her natural sweetness, doted on Lauren so much.

[–] MrAwersome 14 years ago

I agree with you for the most part, however I disagree the country club members were displaying some sort of "blatant snobbery", or that they were displaying the "worst kind of class snobbery". She comes into the midst of this afternoon tea dressed like a vegas stripper, braying like a donkey and behaving like a lout. I thought the country club members reacted in good humor, rather than calling security to have her thrown out. I mean, she was hardly some innocent flower who stumbled into a den of vipers, she was behaving like a clown and people were laughing. I imagine if today, some Stella Dallas walked into any social situation (in the manner in which she did), regardless of class or society, she would stir a great deal of comment.

Also, I feel there's a distinction between class snobbery and being out of place amongst people you are different from. A man couldn't wear a pink ascot to a hillbilly biker bar and expect to be treated like "just one of the boys". Lower class or upper class, everyone takes notice when someone not only stands out from the crowd, but is polar opposite of that crowd, and it's not a matter of snobbery. I think it's simply a human characteristic.

[–] beetiesmom 14 years ago

The whole scene not only made me annoyed at Stella, but angry at the C.C. crowd....and yes, they would been expected to do this, had they been subjected to Stella's flouncing around. I was just wondering what the Depression-era movie-goers thought of this class-distinctionism.

As for the guy wearing the pink ascot, there's no way I'd wanna be in his shoes in a biker bar.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] beetiesmom 13 years ago

I always thought this movie gave us at least a tiny glimpse of the NY social class distinctions. Stephen Dallas fit right back into his world of money and good living, Helen Morrison never left it, Stella couldn't have molded herself into one of these people if she'd won the lottery....nor would "they" have accepted her as one of them. As the snippy girls in the train were saying, Mrs. Grosvenor (Dick's mommy) most definitely would have had something to say about it, had she found out the truth. Evidently, the ensuing radio show which ran for many years, had Stella and Laurel reunited, and Mrs. Grosvenor playing a big part of her daughter-in-law's life. I don't know if Stephen and Helen were in any of the story-lines or not, but I'd imagine they were.

I am always intrigued by what Hollywood thought was a "well-bred, high-brow accent", developed by many of the Old Hollywood stars. I guess this is how people-with-money are supposed to sound!

[–] Errington_92 12 years ago

The main reason why Stella was isolated from the rich was due to her behavior, I don't believe she was left out due to being raised in humble surroundings. Stella showed ambition at the beginning which you can not fault her for by wanting to better herself and when Stella fell in love with Stephen it was a chance to do so. Instead of improving herself mentally as it seemed to be her original ambition, along the way Stella became seduced by the materialism being rich offered and regressed into a delusional woman. There certainly is a reasonable case to argue the class message of Stella Dallas may have been flawed but in my opinion it was due to Stella's behavior which caused the repercussions in her life, not issues of class.

"I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not".

[–] beetiesmom 12 years ago

I have to stand by my opinion---I think "the swells" would have looked down on her as being not on the Social Register, which was very big in those days, and maybe now, too, I don't know. Those loaded with dough only associated with others loaded with dough----as long as they were Old Money, for the most part. It took a heck of a lot of work for New Money to inch their ways into High-Class Society. I remember my mother talking about this, God rest her soul. Stella would have been "out" no matter what. What a sad thing, but what a great movie!

[–] EllisFowler 11 years ago

Stephen didn't have any real money when he married Stella, nor was he rich when they had Laurel. His father had left him broke and he was working his way up (albeit in a white collar capacity) in the mill. Regardless, he wasn't "looked down on" by the town swells and I doubt anyone in the Social Register was living in a mill town.

[–] kenny-164 11 years ago

I think class consciousness is a big theme in this film, but i disagree with the OP that the film advocates the views of the country club snob. Right off the bat the OP is wrong to say Stella pursued Stephen only for his money. That is a gross misunderstanding of the film.

As for snobbery, we can both understand why Stella was laughed at, but also how such a view of her was totally incomplete. it was inaccurate, and stereotypical.

What Stella did in sending Laurel to live with Stephen and Helen amounted to was not her agreeing with the standards of the country club snobs so much as an acknowledgement of the power of class that she, and Laurel, were up against. But even then the attractiveness of such arrangement was based in part upon Stella recognizing that after all Laurel did have a real love for her father, and him for her, and also that Stephen and Helen had a strong marriage that would be protective of Laurel.

So, while class consciousness is in the film, it would be a mistake to make too much of it.

[–] TheMichael 10 years ago

I think "praising" the upper class and demonizing the lower class is too simple of a view. Remember: Stella is the main character and we're supposed to empathize with her. She's the one we're supposed to love, and that scene at the drug store with all the rich kids eating ice-cream (damn wild youngsters) and how they make fun of Stella without knowing anything about her. That is a pivotal moment in the moral message in the movie, because we ourselves would never laugh at Stella because we've seen what she has been through and what her intentions are.

As crude as Stella is in her attitude, her idea of acting upper class, her selfishness at times, although all this is against her, this movie shows us that being of a low class does not make anyone a worse person, let alone a parent. Stella gave Laurel away because it was a better and happier lifestyle, but having no money does not diminish true love. Sometimes true love is expressed in sacrifice.

And what is this movie supposed to do? Demonize the high class, showing being rich isn't all it's cracked up to be? This movie, after all, is showing a little truth: it's tough for the lower class, and they have great problems. And the portrayal of the upper class in this movie is kind of like the fantasy that many struggling families in the '30s who would have imagined that that was the good and proper life was like. It would have been awful to have a scene that destroyed that fantasy and to tell the audience it's better to be poor. INSTEAD, this movie doesn't attack any class, but instead shows us where OUR HEART IS is the most important thing, and this movie showed that lower class, crazy and crude mothers have love in them, so don't make fun of them the next time you're eating ice-cream.

[–] EllisFowler 9 years ago

That is a pivotal moment in the moral message in the movie, because we ourselves would never laugh at Stella because we've seen what she has been through and what her intentions are.

We wouldn't laugh at her but we might if we were the age of those kids. And even if we didn't laugh, I can't imagine that any of us wouldn't be stunned (at the very least) by her deportment, and that's not even taking into account her obtuse cluelessness. I do agree with you, though, that the movie doesn't demonize any class, which is one of its strengths. The principals are all nice, good-hearted people caught in a difficult situation. In a sense (and this isn't to say she's by any means a bad person), Stella is the worst of the bunch because of her inability to compromise - she won't even accompany her husband to New York when he's promoted.

[–] beetiesmom 10 years ago

Stella married Stephen, I am convinced, to get away from the living conditions into which she had grown up; she had aspirations for bigger and better things, and as she read the newspaper article about the suicide of Stephen's father, and the upshot of that terrible occurrence, you could see the wheels turning. And she was right! Once Stephen went to New York, he was right back where he had started from....in the Social Register. And it didn't hurt that he married Helen, who also came from money!

[–] MrsBuckyBarnes 10 years ago

i have to agree with the OP; this movie was horribly reactionary and classist. there are subtle references to breeding being an indicator of good character, and the ultimate message is that we should all know our place.

Never, never to be squandered...the miracle of another human being.