Book Review - "What Makes Sammy Run?"

Over the years, Budd Schulberg's What Makes Sammy Run? has been given a slew of epithets. Most are derisive, such as lewd, trashy, anti-Semitic, and worst of all, anti-Hollywood. Normally, a controversial book (that isn't overly conceptual and unfilmable) makes great material for a movie. Schulberg's tour-de-force about the rise of one Sammy Glick, however, has a reputation no one in the business wants to touch. Steven Spielberg, among others, believes it should never be filmed.

Interesting interpretation with this cover.

The perception around this novel is bound to change. It's not so much anti-Hollywood as it is anti-Studio System.

What Makes Sammy Run? revolves around the rise of Sammy Glick from newspaper copyboy to a movie studio boss in 1930s Tinseltown. The story is told from the perspective of Al Manheim a columnist turned screenwriter and Glick's personal "Boswell" to put it in the novel's lingo (Boswell was Samuel Johnson's biographer). Glick is ruthless in his self-serving aspirations, stepping on anyone and anything to get ahead.

Manheim, Glick's first stepping-stone, chronicles the whole thing and he can't help but be intrigued behind the titular question: What makes Sammy run? Sprinkled throughout the two principle characters' intermingling stories are clues. Eventually, Manheim discovers Sammy's secret and he sees everything clearly.

Along the way, some very unflattering episodes about the so-called "Dream Factories" that turned out movies in an assembly line process are depicted. Glick is a master brown-noser, and he uses the ego of his producers and bosses to move up. Also, there are multiple asides to the casting couch and "unpackaging a new crate of virgins." Again, something Hollywood loves to keep on the down-low. But the biggest accusation comes through Glick's unabashed re-purposing of produced films and old stories, which he brands as "originals." Show business loves to think of itself as being artistic and creative, and this is a slap in the face. One that happens to have some truth behind it.

There are many, many more escapades, and all of them undoubtedly lead to the belief that this novel is "anti-Hollywood." For this to be completely true, however, cynicism has to win out over the optimism and the Hollywood (appropriate) desire for a neatly wrapped-up and mostly positive ending. That is not the case.

Everyone "gets what is coming to them." All of Glick's victims, it seems, end up with some degree of redemption. Manheim has what he wants. Julian Blumberg, a writer Glick uses, has what he wants. Kit Sargent, another writer and Glick's ex-lover, has what she wants. Then there's Glick, who wallows in the shallowness of his success. One gets the sense that Schulberg is being too nice and too 1930s show business with his conclusion.

Sorry Spielberg, it looks like this story has been filmed for TV back in the old days.

This bow-tied ending ultimately weakens his critique of show business and diminishes the strength of his story as a whole.

Regardless, the novel is worth reading for it's historical value alone. There are some very interesting descriptions of 1930s Los Angeles.

On Beowulf, and The Hero's Journey

I would like to start by saying that I apologize for the long lay-off in between activity. Things have been extremely busy for me, but I should be back to regular reporting as of right now. Anyway, let's get on with the important stuff.

If you are aware of the history of English literature, then it is an almost a certainty that you have come across Beowulf (at least the name). It is an epic-ish poem about Mr. Beowulf, a prince who faces three important foes in his warrior centered life. The only reason I add an -ish on the end of epic is because an epic poem would be something like the Iliad or the Odyssey or Dante's Divine Comedy. All of those are ridiculously long. Beowulf, in comparison, sits at a modest number of just over 3,180 lines of verse.

Is this how you see Beowulf?

More importantly, Beowulf, stands a classic example of that lovely concept known as the Hero's Journey or the monomyth. The single story that gets told and retold under a multitude of extraordinary and very ordinary disguises. You'd think they find another story to tell in the who knows how many years humanity has been around. Well, apparently they haven't, which is probably why something like Beowulf still manages to be relevant today.

Our journey with Beowulf begins when an evil and dastardly being by the name of Grendel, a descendant of Cain, surfaces in the kingdom ruled by King Hrothgar (which is not just a place in Skyrim). He brutally attacks a group of thanes, devouring and looting them after robbing the noblemen of their lives. Understandably, there's a great deal of distress in Hrothgar's kingdom. What is this called in the monomyth? That's right, the inciting incident. The action begins and the stage is set for the hero to save the day.

This is where Beowulf is introduced. He is a foreign prince, who has heard of Grendel and offers to remove the beast as a threat. Hrothgar gladly accepts his offer. For anyone adhering to the ancient code of honor and nobility, this is the point of no return. Beowulf will simply not go back on his word, as it is not in his nature to do so. During this meeting, two and maybe three boxes are checked on the hero's journey. (There is no refusal, and if there was it happened back at home before he is introduced) Beowulf meets his mentor, Hrothgar; Beowulf crosses the first threshold by claiming the responsibility to hunt down Grendel; and Beowulf figures out his allies and knows the name of his enemy.

Beowulf is on his way.

Then, in the middle of the night, Grendel strikes again, killing another large group of men when they are sleeping. By this point, Beowulf is aware of the nature of his enemy. He sets out to fight him, but without his armor. Grendel has no armor, and being a man of honor and nobility, Beowulf decides the armor would be an unfair advantage. He knows that God will either grant him victory or not, and doesn't appear too worried about it. I'm not sure how many boxes are checked, but a second point of no return has been passed and he approaches the showdown with Grendel.

When he comes face to face with Grendel, Beowulf grabs him by the arm with a grip strong as a that of thirty men--an English speaking Hercules of sorts. Grendel struggles and struggles to break away, but he cannot. He knows this, but is not willing to give in, so the beast forfeits his arm, allowing it to be torn from him as he attempts to flee. Grendel succeeds in getting away, but his victory is only temporary. Death is a certainty to him. At this point, Beowulf's ordeal with Grendel is complete. He has conquered and vanquished his foe. 

The rest of this episode is the falling action, as he is given his just rewards by Hrothgar and his men celebrate. Here's where the end would be fitting. However, it isn't the end of Beowulf's story. Grendel's death is merely the inciting incident for the second heroic episode of for the noble prince. I will not go into the details there, as I would be repeating myself. The same points will be hit although in a different setting and will have different details, which is why storytelling hasn't been phased out by humanity. There is still a great deal of originality.