Is Adam West's character gay?
Since Anthony Judson Lawrence ran out on his wedding night, is the implication that he is gay?
shareI think that we are left to suppose whatever we wish, and I doubt that they could have come right out and said that he was a homosexual in the script, during that era. But, he is terribly tormented, impotent as a lover of women, he has done his bride a terrible wrong and can't make her happy, so he says, and is so distraught over being stuck in this position - just to please his mother by siring a son - has to run out on his new bride and kill himself because his homosexuality is such an unbearable tragedy!
Oh well, it was the 50s, after all.
By the way, his name was William Lawrence, III. Anthony Judson Lawrence was the son, played by Paul Newman.
I thought that it was such a hoot to see Adam West playing such a complex, albeit brief, part in this story! It's almost too bad he didn't have more screen time, he came and went too quickly.
As I recall from the novel, he was indeed gay, which is how his widow blackmails his mother into furious stillness. Agree that West was excellent.
shareThanks for the details. It's pretty clear in the film his character is gay and that his widow is blackmailing the mother into secrecy to keep the family name, though this being 1959, you have to read between the lines. Kudos to Adam West for taking the role, and he was terrific.
How did you like the novel, and is it worth seeking out? I could tell watching this film that it was based on a much more detailed story that had to be condensed to fit in a two-hour film. Regardless, they did a superb job, but I'd love to read more.
The novel, "The Philadelphian" is excellent. It covers a much longer period than the film (4 generations). The film is mainly about the 4th generation character- Anthony Jundson Lawrence, wiht the opening to the film about the third generation character- Anthony's mother- Kate.
As to whether Adam West's character (William Lawrence) is gay- that is unclear- based on both the film and the book. The book suggests he is a "momma's boy." But it is unclear whether he is gay or he just can't get it up on his wedding night. Probably the former- that he was gay, although this is certainly not overtly stated even in the book.
Thanks for the details on "The Philadelphian." I shall seek it out.
I suspect the author was dealing with the constraints of the time regarding Adam West's character, dropping all the hints without fully developing him as gay, which would have been very taboo at the time. It's probably at bit more obvious in the film – though you still have to draw your own conclusions. Anyway, it's an interesting little detour, not the centerpiece of the story.
I see it as a possibility, but see no evidence in either the movie or the book that Bill Lawrence was gay. In the book, his character is developed as someone who is afraid of his mother and afraid of women, but there is no suggestion of his being gay. Why do you feel he is gay? He could be impotent (psychological or physical). He could have been just plain extra nervous on his wedding night. He could have extraordinary fear and hatred of his mother, which may have affected his attitude toward all women.
But gay means he is attracted to and has sex with men. There is so suggestion in either the film or the book (in which his character is much further developed) of his sopending time with other people- men or women. My guess is that before his wedding night, Bill hadn't had sex with anyone- female or male.
There is also little suggestion in the book, or the film, that he committed suicide by smashing up his car. In the book he was known as a daredevil sportsman, and someone who could control his car. But very few principals from the film or the book are still around. Perhaps Robert Vaughn from the film or Richard Powell's daughters (from the book) could give their views on this topic.
Excellent points. It's been almost a year since I've seen this film, so my memory of Bill Lawrence is a bit sketchy. The two things I remember best:
1) The look of horror on his face in the hotel room on his honeymoon when he is unable to consummate his marriage.
2) His death under mysterious circumstances in a car crash.
You are right that it would be a huge leap of faith to conclude from the limited evidence here that he is gay. There's no indication Bill is interested in other men – just that that he wasn't interested in having sex with his bride. He's probably not the first man, gay or straight, to fall in this category. He's also not the first man to have married the wrong woman.
I didn't know that he was a daredevil sportsman in the book, so it stands to reason the car crash could have been an accident.
It does seem like there's much more to Adam West's character than is explored here, but I don't think we can reach any conclusions based on his short portrayal here. Films from the '50s and earlier have many ambiguous characters who today are speculated as being gay, but this wasn't always the intention when the movies were made, and it probably didn't occur to audiences at the time to view the characters that way. I would also love to hear from anyone involved with the film or the family of Richard Powell to see if they have any insight.
Thank you for the compliment. An excellent response on your end.
I don't recall that Bill Lawrence was unable to consummate the marriage. In the film he never tried. He seems his bridge in a partial state of undress and says "very lovely." Almost right after that he bolts from the room. There is no indciation that he tried to have sex with his bride and failed. I;m not even sure he wasn't interested in having sex with his bride. Whenever I've seen the film, I've felt that Lawrnce perhpas had a sexual problem of some kind (physical or psychological)that may have prevented him from successfully consummating the marriage. And that is just a guess.
Besides the possibility of impotence, other possible explanations for Bill's acttions are: (1) he was just scared to death of attempting intercourse because he was so dominarted by his mother (I;m not sure what I'm implying); and (2) he was gay.
I agree with you. It would be desirable if a member of Richard Powell's family or a surviving actor such as Robert Vaughan (nominated for Best Supporting Actor for his role as Chet)could offer a view on this question. Although I'm not sure they'd have any more insight than we viewers.
No, Bill Lawrence didn't even try to have sex with his bride. I don't even recall him touching her in the hotel room. But that's what I meant by failing to consummate the marriage – not that he was unable to perform (<--- another euphemism!), but that he didn't even care to try.
There's so much innuendo in films of the '50s and earlier that it's hard to tell when characters are underdeveloped or when there's genuinely something being communicated that the studios required be enshrouded in code. John Kerr's character in "Tea and Sympathy" and Sal Mineo's in "Rebel Without a Cause" are two clear examples of characters that most audiences seem to see as gay today, though this isn't stated in the films. In Bill Lawrence's case, it isn't so clear.
Little "hints" like a dominating mother can be real red herrings. Whether this would cause Bill to be gay or unable to perform sexually seem very simplistic to me, but so do a lot of scenarios in the movies.
Bottom line: I just don't know about Bill, and I'm not sure there's enough evidence here to conclude anything other than he had "issues."
I agree with your conclusion of the uncertaintly over whether Bill Lawrence was gay, impotent or had other issues.
In both the book and the fil, Bill Lawrence's mother seems to have known in advance he had sexual or at least female issues, sinch she hired private investigators whose foucs seemd to be in tracking the movements of Kate (the bride) after Bill Lawrence ran out of the hotel room. In the book, Bill's "issues" as recognized by his mother, are presented as female issues (scared or tenative with females, but not necessarily wiht a sexual problem and certainly not gay.)
So both the book and the film portray the mother at a minimum speculating that Bill Lawrence may have been unable or unlikely to father a child for whatever reason. It's an ineresting question. Without talking wiht the author we may never know. If someone is really interested, they can contact the two daughters of Richard Powell, the auuthor, or one of the suviving actors in the film, including Robert Vaughan (who received a Best Supporting Actor nomination), or paul Picerni, who played Tony lawrence's adversary in court and later gained fame as Robert Stack's sidekick in "The Untocuhables" on TV.
In 1999, I exchnaged correspodence wiht Vincent Sherman, the Director of the film. He weas then 93 years olf, but very lucid and energetic. He had a number of interesting comments to share, but nothing on the Bill Lawrence issue. Had I known at the time of the interest in the question, I would have asked Mr. Sherman about his take on the issue.
You corresponded with Vincent Sherman? That's terrific. Was this via postal mail or e-mail? What did he have to say?
Mr. Sherman was an excellent director who continued working well into his 70s – mostly on TV series and movies at that point.
I need to seek out the book "The Philadelphian" to learn more about Adam West's character. It sounds like he's developed more in the novel – but not completely. Of course, he's just a side character anyway.
This was in 1999, and it was by postal mail. It might have been late 1998. But Mr. Sherman sent back a full 1-page typed letter. He gave the impression he was still working. I forget what he said about "The Young Philadelphians," other than he had kept in touch wiht Paul Picerni, who played the role of the prosecutor in the film. When I communicated with Mr. Picerni, he said that he had seen Mr. Sherman at an autograph show, and that he (Sherman) told Picerni that he had a part for him in his next film!
Mr. Sherman did talk about one of his ealier films, and one of my favorites, "The Hard Way" (1943). He said tha most people predicted it would be a failure, but he proved them wrong. I asked him about Joan Leslie, one of my favorite classic actresses. He said he was initially concerned because she was so young (17 or 18) and hadn't had the "life experience" he thought was required for the role. Still, he said she pulled it off.
I'll have to llok around for his letter. But one thing I remember that Paul Picerni said in his letter: He said that Paul Newman was a "selfish actor" and didn't like him.
Thanks very much for the details! What gentlemen Mr. Sherman and Mr. Picerni were to respond to your correspondence.
I'm especially intrigued (and a bit surprised) at Paul Picerni's characterization of Paul Newman as a "selfish actor." Exactly what did he mean by that – that he hogged the spotlight at the expense of his co-stars? I just realized Mr. Percini passed away this year – another great character actor from an era that produced plenty of them.
I'll probably seek out "The Philadelphian" though the usual means – thrift stores, the handful of brick-and-mortar stores that still exist – before I turn to Amazon and the like. I much prefer to find books, records and films that way before turning to the Internet.
Thanks again for your thoughtful comments.
I'll also have to look up my letter from Mr. Picerni to find out why he thought Paul Newman was a selfish actor. I'm guessing it is what you suggest.
By the way, Paul Picerni write an excellent autobiography a few years back called "Steps to Stardom." I'd recommend it highly. Did you know that Telly Svalas was his best friend. Mr. Picerni new and was friends with a lot of the greats, and you can read a lot of his comments about such great stars as Burt Lancaster, Audie Murphy and Robert Stack, as well as Savalas. He was a genuinely nice guy; at least he comes off that way. And he has some comments about the Young Philadelphians, although nothing that would shed light on the issue of this thread. You could also probably get a cheaper used copy of The Philadelphian under the used books section of Amazon.
By the way, Picerni, himself a war hero, said that Audie Murphy was the toughest person pound for pound he ever met. Murphy was constantly hanted by dream of his WW2 experiences.
I also got responses to my letters in the 1998-1999 periond from several acresses, including Andrea King, June Havoc and Frances Langford. I wrote to Barbara Rush, Newlan's co-star in the film we are dicussing, but she never responded.
Paul Picerni's memoir sounds like a great read! That's another one I'll hunt for. I'm very interested to hear what he has to say about Telly Savalas, Burt Lancaster, Robert Stack and Audie Murphy, a true American hero from an era that still produced them. I love autobiographies by these solid supporting players who have no myth to maintain.
It sounds like you've written many fan letters, and you've done it strategically by contacting accessible stars who actually write back. That's such a lost art.
Thinking back to why Picerni said Newman was a selfish actor, Picerni did say that Newman brought his own writer to the filming. That doesn't sound commonplace to me, but maybe it is for a star. I always thought Newman, as a method actor, was a little bit over the top in mnay of his roles, and possibly that was another reason Picerni made the "selfish" comment about Paul.
As to Robert Stack, Picerni said he enjoyed working wiht Stack a lot, but there were one or two occasions that Stack, as the star, complained because he wasn't getting the limelight. In fact, Picerni said that there was one episode of 'The Untouchables" where Picerni was actually the star of the episide instead of Stacj, and Bob wasn't happy about it. By and large though, they got along well and the show ran smoothly.
Picerni said Lancaster was very competitive, even to the point of one Burt striking Paul in a card game. But ny and large they got along and were close, and Burt was largely reposible for getting Paul the role of the doctor abord the plane in "Airport."
Savalas, as I've indciated before, was Picerni's best friend, and there are a lot of anecdotes about them. In fact, there are a lot of anecdotes about numerous stars and supporting actors and actrsses, and that is what makes the book so outstanding.
Thanks for the details. I'm surprised Paul Newman would bring his own writer to the set, which doesn't sound very "method" to me. It is true that Newman appears over-the-top occasionally, and he probably wasn't the best team player, but I love his work despite the scuttlebutt.
shareWell, it's not surprising that a superstar like Newman would be "selfish" with regard to supporting players. I like his films also. "The Hustler" was my favorite.
As far as bringing your own writer and being a method actor, I don't know enough about the method approach to comment.
"The Hustler" is fantastic. I'm not sure I could pick a favorite Newman role because his body of work is consistently good, but "The Verdict" and "The Sting" come to mind immediately. He was also superb as a director in such indie gems as "Rachel Rachel" with Joanne Woodward.
I'm far from an expert on method acting — or any other types of acting, for that matter — but my understanding is that method actors "become" the character through intense research and practically living the role they're playing. So it seems to me that bringing in your own writer would betray the method, unless maybe the writer had inside knowledge of the character's situation. That's just an outsider opinion from a fan, not an expert.
I like The Sting and the Verdict also.
Some day when I get a chance, I'll look for the actual letters than Mr. Sherman, Mr. Picerni and other stars sent me about 10-11 years ago. They are fascinating, as these are the real people- the actors and actresses that we talk and speculate about. There wasn't anyhting on our priginal question- about the Adam West character being gay. But I'm sure there are other tidbits that I can share when I locate the letters.
It doesn't surprise me that Newman would bring his own writer to the set. I've heard that done by other stars as well.
(I decided to change the subject line because I think we've said as much as we know about Adam West's character.)
Is bring your own writer to the set really a common practice? Would they rewrite just the lead's lines (Newman's in this case), or other characters' as well? Were they seeing the whole picture (reading the entire script) or just looking at bits and pieces? That must infuriate the original writer and the director. It seems to me an abuse of power, unless it's accepted democratically on the set.
I'd love to hear what Sherman and Picerni had to say. Character actors are the bread and butter of movies, and they do a lot of heavy lifting, but they don't always get the credit they deserve. I'm sure they have a lot of insight into the process of filmmaking and the talents (and egos) behind the scenes.
Vincent Sherman, of course, was the Director. Picerni a character actor. I will look for their letters when I get a chance.
I don't know how common it is or was to have stars bring their own writers to the set- only that it was not unique. I would guess it isn't or wasn't common- just not unique. I also don't know how extensive their role was.
May I suggest you buy three books- "The Philadelphian" by Richard Powell, and the autobiographies of Vincent Sherman and Paul Picerni. Sherman was not one of the more famous directors, but he directed some fine films. And supposedly was a ladies man who had affairs with Bette Davis, Joan Crawford and other leading ladies he directed.
I wrote to Sherman because he directed two of my favorite films- "The Hard Way" (1943) and "The Young Philadelphians" (1959). Among others, he direced Th Adventures of Don Juan" (1949- with Errol Flynn). I wrote to Picerni because I admired his perfromance in "The Young Philadelphions" and always liked him in "The Untouchables." Something about him I found very likable.
[deleted]
Well, as Paul Picerni indciated in his letter to me and in his autobiography, Newman had recently starred in several big ticket films, suhc as "Suddenly Last Summer," "Somebody Up There Likes Me," "HUD", and "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof. As Picerni said, Newman was "hot" and "feeling his oats." He was definitely a star when he made TYP, and close to beibng a superstar. And he apparently was arrogant.
Back to the main topic, as I said in other posts, there is nothing in either the film or the book to indicate that Adam West was gay. He may have been impotent, partially impotent, or afraid of women and sex, but I see no connection to his being gay.
I want to make a few other comments about the book and the Bill Lawrence character. I would strongly encourage you to get the book. I ordered mine through Amazon.com. There are two forwards written- one by one of the author’s daughters and one by Robert Vaughan.
1. Bill Lawrence's dominating mother exerted continuing pressure on him to marry to carry on the line. In my view, that could have caused or contributed to Lawrence's extensive fear of women and possibly to his inability to perform the night of his marriage.
2. There is absolutely no reference in the book to Lawrence being gay. In fact, there is a suggestion that he had few friends of any sex.
3. The book implies (or maybe I should say I inferred) that Bill Lawrence attempted to perform, but was unsuccessful the night of his marriage. This may be a leap on my part, because the book does not say this; it is a conclusion on my part based on the text of the book. Or he may have rushed out of the room w/o attempting to have sex, but the book does say that he "ordered" his bride to go into the bed room to undress and perform the "fertility rite." Perhaps I should revise my conclusion to say that I think that Lawrence either (1) tried to have sex and failed; or (2) did not try to have sex and rushed from the room and out to his car and drive off.
4. That both the films and the book indicate that Mrs. Lawrence checked up on circumstances the night of the marriage and concluded or strongly doubted that the baby was not her son's suggests to me that she may have had some knowledge of her son's possible inability or difficulty to consummate the marriage. Again this may be a leap; she may have hired investigators to check because of the sudden and tragic way her son died the night of his marriage and only formed her strong doubts, based on the report of the investigator.
5 If he was gay, it cannot be gleaned directly from the film or the book, as neither make any reference to this.
> just to please his mother by siring a son
I've never understood this part.
If William's mother thought William could sire a son, then how did she know that Anthony was not William's son?
On the other hand, if she knew William couldn't sire a son, then why had she forced the marriage?
ajbarlas ~ I've never understood this part.
She did say that she had not been idle during the previous nine months, and that she could not let what happened to her son, Bill, go without an investigation. She probably hired a private investigator to find out what other man could have been the father and where Kate had gone that night of her wedding when Bill ran out on her. I'm sure there were plenty of clues and witnesses leading the trail to Mike Flanagan's shack that night.
I assume that she, Mrs. Dewitt Lawrence, had hoped that her son could "snap out of it" or "be cured" of his "condition" by settling down with a good wife. I assume that it was not a case of his being physically unable to produce offspring. The old battle axe must have threatened him with such things as cutting off his allowance or cutting him out of her will unless he produced issue.
What I was wondering was why Tony, and his friends and acquaintances for that matter, had not served in WWII? If he was born in 1925 and in the Princeton class for 1947, he would have been the right age to have served.
Excellent answer. I haven't seen the movie for years and didn't remember the mother's speech.
Is there an explicit graduation date of 1947? Then that's a good question about WWII. Tony's friend Chet was injured later in Korea.
Right after the scene with Kate, the new-born infant Tony and Mrs. Dewitt Lawrence, there is the scene where Mike calls on Kate at home, where baby Tony is in his basinet, and she informs Mike that she can never marry him. We then cut to the "present" time, or, at least to grown up college-age Tony. It starts off by showing a newspaper clipping for a Princeton school newspaper, "The Princetonian", with a little article featuring Tony and he is cited as being of the Class of '47. So, if he were born in 1925, he would have been 18 in 1943 (and 22 in time for graduation from Princeton, Class of '47, right on schedule), he was certainly draft-age in time for D-Day and lots of WWII action. The War didn't officially end until August of 1945.
Yes, Tony and Chet, and Carter for that matter, all served in Korea. I'm just kind of surprised, given the mood during the early 1940s, I would have expected that any abled bodied 18 year old would have enlisted or been drafted to serve in WWII. Tony sailed right into Princeton without missing a beat.
The opening monologue, by Tony, in voice-over, says that the story begins in June of 1924, at his mother's wedding to Wm. Lawrence III. Tony is conceived that night, so I am assuming that he was born in March of 1925 if Kate had a normal pregnancy.
If I were writing this screenplay, I would have created the characters to have been too young to serve in WWII, but old enough for Korea by making them a few years younger. Anyway, it's just a detail, but it caught my attention.
Wow, a good eye for detail. They would have been a little long in the tooth to be soldiers in Korea then, right?
On a similar topic, at some point Chet tells Tony that Carter is in the war and Tony wonders why someone like Carter would not have "gotten out of it". Chet says something cryptic like, "well, there has been talk...maybe he didn't want to" - get out of it.
Was the implication that Joan (Barbara Rush) urged him to do the right thing and serve or ????? Anyone have any ideas what Chet meant?
Exactly. This is such a contradiction. But maybe the mom thought that in the right circumstance, married and in a safe setting, he would be able to perform.
I'm the last person to conclude something, especially if there is insufficient evidence to support it. But the way it was handled in the film leaves little to no doubt that William Lawrence was gay and his mom knew.
Of course that doesn't mean that he couldn't also have sex with a woman. Hence his mom couldn't really KNOW anything for sure about whether the baby was really a Lawrence.
The only way I see that the mom could KNOW for sure the baby wasn't his would be that he had some injury in the past that rendered him physically unable to perform.