The Historical Accuracy of It's a Wonderful Life: The Portrait of FDR and Mr. Potter

Introduction

"It's a Wonderful Life" is a film that has captivated audiences for decades, presented as a heartwarming story of a small-town banker, George Bailey, who harbors dreams beyond his hometown. However, one aspect that often garners much discussion is the portrayal of the character of Mr. Potter as a representation of President Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR). This article explores the historical accuracy of this depiction, examining the contrasting characters and their implications within the film and beyond.

FDR and Potter – A Contrasting Pair

In the film, it is clear that FDR is contrasted significantly with the character of Mr. Potter, also known in the movie as Henry F. Potter. FDR, played by Ronald Reagan, is portrayed as a sympathetic and compassionate figure, while Mr. Potter epitomizes the ruthless and self-serving tycoon. This dichotomy is particularly striking when FDR reaches out to pass the New Deal, with his advisors informing him that while he has gained the support of the working class, he has also earned the hatred of the super wealthy. FDR's response, “I welcome their hatred,” underscores his determination to stand against those who caused and perpetuated the Great Depression.

Mr. Potter, played by Lionel Barrymore, is indeed a scoundrel and a devil in the eyes of many viewers. His portrayal as a clout-driven, power-hungry, and tread-shod adversary of George Bailey encapsulates the anti-establishment sentiment of the era. Yet, the comparison of Mr. Potter to FDR is more than a little preposterous, considering the historical context and Capra's personal politics.

The Rhetoric of Hatred vs. Compassion

Capra's practice of depicting contrasting worlds in his films, such as in "It's a Wonderful Life," often serves to highlight the importance of humanity and compassion. In this film, George Bailey acts as a unifying force, much like Joe Biden might, while Mr. Potter, as a symbol of the corrupt elite, opposes the values of those he oppresses. Similarly, in the movie, we see two alternate worlds, symbolizing the potential outcomes of different administrations, both of which reflect real-world issues.

The Historical and Political Context

The film was released in 1946, but it portrays an idealized version of American society during the Great Depression. Despite the post-war context, the film still retains its relevance in discussing the economic and political landscape of the era. Capra's depictions in his films, such as in the 1941 film "Meet John Doe" and the 1936 film "Mr. Deeds Goes to Town," align closely with the goals of FDR and Eleanor Roosevelt, emphasizing humanism and the use of federal power to aid those in need.

Moreover, Capra was a strong supporter of FDR and produced the celebrated "Why We Fight" series, which provided fact-based propaganda for FDR's war efforts. This series was shown to both soldiers in the field and civilian audiences, further solidifying the idea that Capra was no critic of FDR's leadership. The portrayal of Mr. Potter in confinement (a wheelchair) stems from the reality that Lionel Barrymore had been acting from a chair since 1940. Additionally, in 1947, relatively few Americans knew that FDR could not stand without braces, making the portrayal of Potter as a wheelchair user a misrepresentation of historical context.

The Misinformed Assertions

One persistent argument is that Capra despised Roosevelt and his policies, and the character of Mr. Potter was at least partially based on FDR. This assertion lacks substantial evidence and becomes even more questionable when considering Capra's personal politics and his support for FDR during the war. Critics who make such claims often fail to address the intricate portrayal of characters and the overall themes of the film.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the portrayal of FDR in "It's a Wonderful Life" is a deeply contextualized reflection of the character's times and the prevalent sentiments of the era. The comparison of Mr. Potter to FDR is a misreading of the historical and political context of the film. The true essence of Capra's work lies in its celebration of human values and resilience in the face of adversity, which transcends the specific historical figures represented.