See full scan at the bottom of the page.
In this candid three-page missive from January 1972, famed screenwriter Dalton Trumbo responds to critic Eric Bentley’s questions about Cold War politics, radical candor, and the Hollywood blacklist era. As one of the “Hollywood Ten”—filmmakers jailed and ostracized for refusing to cooperate with the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC)—Trumbo offers a revealing self-portrait of a writer navigating the harsh realities of industry blacklisting and ideological conflict.
Historical Context
Trumbo’s letter arrives more than two decades after the initial HUAC hearings that upended Hollywood careers in the late 1940s and early 1950s. Despite subsequent changes in public attitudes toward the Red Scare and Joseph McCarthy’s downfall, many blacklisted writers and directors still grappled with the lingering stigma and economic hardship. By 1972, America had also weathered shifts brought on by the Civil Rights Movement, the Vietnam War, and broader cultural upheavals—yet suspicions toward leftist ideology persisted in some circles.
Strategy and Themes
- Defending Professionalism and Income – Trumbo bristles at criticisms labeling the Hollywood Ten’s earnings “absurdly high,” pointing out that comparable salaries exist in numerous fields. This highlights how stigma over alleged communist ties blended with envy and resentment about the film industry’s perceived glamour.
- Nuanced Debate on Candor – He questions whether fully “coming out” as a Communist in 1946 would have been practical or fair, given the inevitability of blacklisting and personal ruin. His reflections speak to the personal and moral calculations people make when faced with ideological persecution.
- Broadening the Conversation – While addressing specific misunderstandings about remarks by historian Arthur Schlesinger or the left’s activism, Trumbo also implicitly critiques academia for focusing on the Hollywood blacklist’s alleged hypocrisy rather than condemning the larger climate of fear and repression.
Language, Imagery, and Symbolism
- Rhetorical Precision: Trumbo uses a calm but pointed tone, turning reasoned argument against what he views as broad-brush accusations of moral failings among the blacklisted.
- Personal Anecdotes: Recounting a 1946 meeting about open Communist Party affiliation adds vivid detail, making readers consider the real human cost behind the often-abstract notion of the Red Scare.
- Shifts from Self-Defense to Broader Critique: The letter transitions from personal justification of earnings to a condemnation of how society and academia handle “white-collar radicals,” reminding us of the broader cultural forces that enabled blacklisting in the first place.
Impact and Relevance
Though Trumbo would eventually regain recognition (winning an Oscar under a pseudonym before being publicly credited for his work), this letter exemplifies the soul-searching and argumentation required of blacklisted artists well into the 1970s. By discussing both ideology and economics, Trumbo lays bare the tensions that persisted beyond HUAC’s heyday—tensions between creative freedom and societal conformity, between personal conscience and public censure. His words continue to resonate as a testament to the resilience of dissenting voices in American political life.
Special thanks to the USC Digital Imaging Lab for their support in digitizing this item.
