documentary film review The Fall of ’55, directed by Seth Randal, was released 51 years after the original scandal of the ‘Boys of Boise’ occurred in 2006. Hence the name, this documentary reminisces of the year 1955—and early 1956—the decade following the end of World War II. The film features interviews by a number of individuals who experienced first-hand, or whose relatives experienced first-hand, the events of 1955 in Idaho. June Schmitz provides a detailed account of a Boise resident watching the events occur around her. On the other hand, Alty Travelstead provides his own interview from the perspective as the only son of one of the adult men accused of ‘immoral’ sexual behavior. Ron Bess is also a key interviewee, whose father was a juvenile probation officer during the autumn of 1955. John Butler, the psychiatrist whose reputation was ruined after his study of this case, describes his part in analyzing the scandal. Lastly, Byron Johnson, former Idaho Supreme Court Justice, provided his perspective on the Boise boys. This film refers to the great scandal of Boise, Idaho. It begins by painting a rosy picture of a smaller town in Idaho: most people knew one another, church was well-attended, and family was held with high regard. However, once-small Boise soon made national news. The narrator and interviewees tell a many-layered tale of a “ring” of middle-aged men receiving sexual favors to various degrees from younger men in exchange for money. The first arrest on these charges was made in October of 1955—thus the “Fall” referred to in the title of the film. Following this arrest, a ‘moral panic’ spread throughout the town, and mass accusations led to the prosecution and imprisonment of 16 Boise men. Although the legalities took place over the course of a couple of years, the effects still hold to this modern-day town. Many men were accused by prosecutors, most of whom managed to gain primary material from the young men who had received money from the accused for their services. This witch hunt imprisoned various men who may or may not have actually been guilty in the ‘immoral’ charges, but who pled as such to avoid longer sentences. These young men were presented in the local and national media as being taken advantage of and corrupted by older homosexual men. The story is framed to be so shocking because its bringing to light of homosexuality in a rural town, instead of solely thriving in larger cities as previously thought. This account of the manner in which a small town in middle-America reacted to realizing that there were in fact gays amongst them is one of the many ways this documentary contributes to LGBTQ history. As Leila Rupp highlights in A Desired Past, the majority of the history of same-sexuality available comes from big cities due to the sheer centralization of people and access to meeting places; this story provides a different narrative. Of course, the ‘Lavender Scare’ podcast that the class listened to on the first day discusses the associations of homosexuality with weakness and communism, which psychologist John Butler explains he was asked to analyze in regard to the Boise men. However, this case provides more questions of morality—whatever that means—than homosexuality. Many of the Boise boys were underage, which brings up questions of sex with minors and perhaps pedophilia. These boys were also paid for their time, which brings up the question of prostitution. The Boise interviewees seem to think that one key change in their community was simply exposure to all of these questions. Prosecutors attempted to frame their trials primarily as a ‘protection of children’ without explicitly stating their homophobia; the idea that young people are ‘corrupted’ by and need protection from homosexuals has long been an excuse for homophobia. This documentary brought to light the many modern issues surrounding the then seemingly straightforward issue of getting rid of the gays. June Schmitz, the Boise resident who watched it all happen, seems to think that at the very least some good came out of it, that Boise “grew up a little”. And that slowly, progress is being made. For this case, a documentary was an effective form of ‘doing queer history’. A viewer being able to see the face of the son of a gay fleer of Boise, and hear the way he speaks about his father and his ‘stolen’ childhood, brings about much more empathy than if one were to simply read an article. Seeing the emotion in John Butler’s eyes when he discusses his excommunication from his beloved Mormon church because of his professional commentary on homosexuality provokes emotion from the audience. Presenting the interviewees as characters in a story, instead of simply account witnesses, shapes the narrative of the movie. On the other hand, the downside to the movie is that—as we discussed in class on Monday—a documentary’s first motive is to entertain. Therefore, I am sure that a few things were dramatized. Some valuable people may have declined to interview, either for fear of being shamed for homosexuality or fear of being shamed for homophobia. That being said, this event was dramatic, and a documentary was a great way to present the drama of the Boise boys. Link to trailer for 'The Fall of '55' provided below: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_HGJ9fQAuE
2 Comments
Seth Randal
8/4/2020 10:39:42 pm
Thank you for your thoughtful review!
Reply
Jaroslaw
6/13/2021 09:52:24 am
This documentary showed all points of view in a balanced way. I disagree with the assessment that “a documentary’s first motive is to entertain” at least for this program. The research was obviously intense as audio history was presented as well as numerous newspapers and many in depth interviews. June Schmitz did say “Boise grew up a little” but I think it mischaracterized her overall opinion to say some good came of it. She said much more about how people were maligned and hurt. The thing that most intrigued me was Emory Bess and his son Ron’s interviews. The documentary did not delve deeply enough into what Emory’s thoughts were about going much further. (And I want to state here I think he had good intentions). Ron stated through most of the film as supporting his father’s work but at the very end seemed to do an about face at the end. He accepted that homosexuality has and will always exist. He said the investigations and arrests didn’t change anything in Boise. I would have liked to hear a.bit more if he was “enlightened” or resigned to this fact.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
April 2018
Categories |