TIME CAPSULES: Film’s interpretation of Glasgow novel varied from book

Movie version of Glasgow novel varied from book News that Richmond novelist Ellen Glasgow had "gone Hollywood" raised eyebrows in 1935.

Glasgow's "Vein of Iron," the 62-year-old writer's 18th novel in a distinguished career spanning four decades, had become a best-seller that year. Purchase of the book's film rights by MGM Studios for an undisclosed sum was announced Oct. 15 in The Richmond News Leader, and two days later the newspaper published an editorial on the sale:

"Miss Glasgow herself was approached many times in the past with offers for her novels, but she was steadfast in rejecting them," the editorial said. "The tone of the motion-picture industry for many years was not one that she, as a literary artist, was willing to endorse. . . . She does not hope, of course, for a perfect motion-picture version, . . . but she does believe that an honest effort will be made to preserve the atmosphere of that work."

No film of "Vein of Iron" ever materialized, but Hollywood again knocked at Glasgow's door when she completed her next novel in 1941. "In This Our Life" became a milestone for Glasgow on three fronts: It was her last full-length novel; it won a Pulitzer Prize; and, it provided the only film version of any of her novels.

. . .

Three weeks before "In This Our Life" went on sale at bookstores in March 1941, The News Leader reported that Warner Bros. had purchased film rights for $40,000.

Two days later, the Richmond Times-Dispatch reported that Olivia de Havilland had been cast in a starring role. The movie was rushed into production with the signing of Bette Davis to play opposite de Havilland in the tale of two sisters at odds.

Retaining the novel's title, "In This Our Life" premiered in New York at the Strand Theater on May 8, 1942, to tepid reviews. The New York Times said it was "neither a pleasant nor edifying film."

The review described the plot as "one of those Snow-White and Rose-Red sister yarns, in which the evil and mischievous sister, played by Miss Davis, of course, deserts her loving fiancé and runs off with her good sister's spouse. Then, when she has driven the latter to suicide by her selfish and frivolous ways, she returns home and tries to lure her old flame away from her sister, with whom he has taken up. And finally, she reaches rock bottom when she tries to escape a hit-run killing charge."

The review did not reveal that Glasgow's tale had been altered by a Hollywood ending that spoiled the novel's intent.

Despite mixed early reviews, the recent announcement of Glasgow's Pulitzer win and the movie's Richmond setting piqued local interest. Though the movie was not filmed on location, even those who had not read the novel wanted to see Hollywood's depiction of Richmond.

Sensationalized ads began appearing in local newspapers days before the movie's May 21 Richmond opening. "See Bette Davis and Olivia de Havilland battle for George Brent and Dennis Morgan!" screamed one.

. . .

Local reviews were more favorable than in New York. "Critics have said that Miss Glasgow 'debunks' the South," The News Leader said. "Hollywood has kept faith with her. It added no touch of old lace and magnolias." Hollywood did add Spanish moss, however.

The Times-Dispatch review showed greater familiarity with the movie's source: "The film, which opened at the Colonial yesterday, bears only slight resemblance to the novel," wrote the reviewer.

From her home at 1 W. Main St., Glasgow issued no public comment, but privately she revealed she did not see the movie. "The advertisements were enough to make me understand that Hollywood had filmed a different book, not mine at all," she confided in a letter to a friend that June. "I hated the whole thing."