Showing The Birth of a Nation in 1938

With all the debate about whether of not a lot of old movies are racist, I think most people can agree on one movie. The Birth of a Nation (1915) is racist and in a way that is much more horrifying than anything you would see in any other movie. Don't get me wrong I believe that modern audiences should be able to see this movie because as horrifying as it is it is still part of our history and there is a lot you can learn about both movie history and the culture of the world at the time it was made. Also despite its horrifying depictions of black people and the glorification of the KKK, the filmmaking and storytelling our excellent. This is not a film that is just controversial today, but one that received a lot of controversy when released. The following article from a 1938 issue of The Motion Picture Herald discusses the reaction to this film receiving a theatrical release that year. 

"The pages of history were turned back this week in East Orange, N.J, in the vicinage of Thomas Edison's pioneerings in motion pictures, where the local courts are to rule on the complaints of a group of Negros against the racial implications of 'The Birth of a Nation,' old Griffith film which has been resurrected and restored by Stone Film Company and is to be reissued immediately in New York and New Jersey. The picture during its early expositions in 1915 and thereafter was the subjects of attacks by Negros, particularly in Chicago and Boston who charged that it stirred race hatred. The Negros would have the authorities censor the picture on the same grounds.

"Adolph J Retting manager of the Ormat Theatre in East Orange was summoned to appear before Police Recorder Albert L. Vreeland to answer to a charge that he violated a New Jersey statute by showing 'The Birth of a Nation.'

"Mr. Rettig was arrested and paroled in custody of his counsel Edward R McGlynn of Newark. Mr. Retting is a former big league baseball player.

"The  complaint was signed by two local Negro physicians, Dr. Theodore R Inge and Dr. Harry W. Mickey. The two alleged that Mr. Retting violated Chapter 151 of the laws of 1935 which makes it a misdemeanor to show 'any picture, photograph or representation which in any way incites, counsels, promotes, advocates or symbolizes hatred, violence or hostility against any persons or group by reason of race, color, religion or matter of worship.' 

"The exhibitor waived examination and the case was referred automatically to the Essex County grand jury. His counsel said he intends to ask D.W. Griffith to testify.

"Dr. Inge said the picture had been prohibited in California, Kansas, West Virginia and Ohio.

"The film was shown at the Ormont from May 8th through May 11th. On May 9th Negro leader submitted a protest bearing 609 signatures to the city counsel. The manager deleted those parts which he understood were considered particularly objectionable.

"East Orange authorities said that as far as they know, this case was the first in which the 1935 statute had been invoked. The act provides for a fine of $200 to $5000 and 90 days to three years imprisonment or both.

"'Birth of a Nation' also meet with opposition in Hartford, Conn., where two negro ministers, the Reverend C.A. Moody and the Reverend C.A. Jackson, succeeded in having exhibition halted at the local state theatre."

I am curious as to what the cut version looked like as the whole second half of this film can be considered objectionable easily.

-Michael J. Ruhland