The Blot

A statistic that may be of interest. I have a database of silent films that contains about 2000 directors of all nationalities. It simply contains films I have personally watched and have copies of but is probably reasonably representative. Male directors are certainly far the majority but the list includes over eighty women directors (over forty for the US). Many it is true directed only one or two films but even so women directors were not as thin on the ground at this period as many people suppose and may well not have been any more thin on the ground than they are today.

Although the US heads the list numerically, this is only because the 2000 includes far more US directors than there are for other countries because of the relatively high availability of US films. The actual proportion of women directors was much higher (as one might expect) in a more egalitarian post-Revolutionary Russia....

As for scriptwriters women are, as one would expect, better represented but still hugely under-represented. Out of again 2000 or so in all, 237 are women (about 170 for the US).

Pretty librarian Claire Windsor (as Amelia Griggs) begins to attract eligible men; they include the boy next door, their community's poor young minister, and wealthy student Louis Calhern (as Phil West). Since Ms. Windsor's parents are poverty-stricken, mother Margaret McWade (acting up a storm) would like her to marry Mr. Calhern. He is a student of Windsor's poorly-paid professor father Philip Hubbard. When Windsor becomes ill, the doctor orders Ms. McWade to provide her daughter with nourishing food - but the family doesn't even have enough money to make house payments, or feed itself and the family cats. Learning how the other half lives, Windsor's suitors come to her rescue - and teach viewers about humanity...

"Men are only boys grown tall," is our introduction. Guessing writer/director Lois Weber was trumpeting a call for charitable fairness, and higher pay for clergy and college professors; this is accomplished by the end of the narrative, as society's "boys" seem to have a better recognition of their responsibility. Within its narrative, "The Blot" hearkens an uneven distribution of income. Presently, much ado is made of Ms. Weber's gender. All sorts of readings are possible, most unsatisfying...

My enjoyment of the film is in its depiction of class - specifically the conflicts between "old money" (the extravagant West family), "new money" (the neighboring Olsen family), and "no money" (the lowly Griggs family). The real "class warfare" is between the lower classes, of course. Like today, the poor don't really resent the upper class, who live a lifestyle they do not even fully understand; those of middle and lower classes more often resent and envy each other, which is exactly what many (not all) of the super-rich want. Weber may not make her point, but she makes another one. The symbolism, much involving shoes, is strong. The setting is superb; it isn't more than you can see elsewhere, but it is conveyed exceptionally here.

******* The Blot (8/19/21) Lois Weber ~ Claire Windsor, Louis Calhern, Margaret McWade, Philip Hubbard

I tuned into "The Blot" mostly to see what Louis Calhern was like in his younger days. But what I found was an engaging, multi-faceted story.

Like a Robert Altman film, "The Blot" tells its tale with a host of interesting characters who interact at various points. The characters are fleshed-out, not just stereotypes.

Without giving away the plot, let me just say that I loved the use of shoes (and even shoe-polishing) to point out class differences. And the scene with the chicken dinner is poignant on many levels.

Highly recommended!

Blot, The (1921)

*** (out of 4)

There's no question that THE BLOT is a message picture and while it does go overboard at time the thing's heart is in the right place and there's no question that much of it is very touching. The film centers around a poor Professor (Philip Hubbard) and his beautiful daughter Amelia (Claire Windsor) who is wanted by a rich man, Phil (Louis Calhern) who just happens to be her father's student. The family are struggling with very severe poverty, which soon begins to weigh on Phil who wonders why some eat and throw away so much while others are near death because of the lack of nutrition. Director Weber has pretty much been forgotten today but at one point she was a very key figure in the early days of cinema with such films as HYPOCRITES and of course this one. I think a lot of people might roll their eyes to the heavy preaching but at the same time there's quite a bit of good in this film and you really can't blame it too much since its heart is in the right place. I'm really not sure how well this movie went over in 1921 but it's clear that it was a cry or at least plea that those who have plenty should share with those less fortunate. I guess that message rings just as true today considering what's going on in this country as it did in 1921 but you can't help but be impressed with the way the story plays itself out. There's quite a bit going on in this picture with various characters having a connection to this poor family and either wanting to help them or hurt them. This includes a neighbor who doesn't care how poor they are and she gets her chance for revenge when the poor mother finally cracks and steals a chicken from her. The story of the rich student who falls in love with the poor girl is handled perfectly and the way he wants to help but can't simply because the poor family are so proud is handled extremely well too. The performances are a major plus with Windsor doing a very good job as the daughter and Calhern is equally as good. The two of them create a nice spark together and Hubbard is one you can't help but care for. Again, there are some moments that are just way too over the top including the daughter's reaction to the mother stealing the chicken because this reaction is so out there that you'd think she saw her mom shoot some handicapped children. Another problem is the final ten-minutes and how the story plays out. I won't ruin what happens but it just doesn't work. THE BLOT seems to have been forgotten but that's a real shame because there's enough here to make it worth viewing and like many other Weber films it's worthy of being rediscovered.

For an intellectual analysis, see Jennifer Parchesky's article "Lois Weber's The Blot: Rewriting Melodrama, Reproducing the Middle Class" in Cinema Journal 39.1 (1999) 23-53 [University of Texas Press].

Through an examination of social conditions during the 1920s, Parchesky defines the ethos, pathos & logos that Lois Weber most likely deduced in the writing and directing the film, the Blot.