1 Marketing America: Public Culture and Public Diplomacy in the Marshall Era, 1947 - 1954, unpublished doctoral dissertation by Amy Garrett, University of Pennsylvania, 2004. “In 1953, Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs, Edward Barrett observed of the WWII propaganda agency, the OWI, that ‘Eager-beaver workers [had] soon learned you don't sell democracy to Danes . . . the way you sell soap in Sioux City.’” Garrett also shows that French and Danish ECA campaigns to change consumer attitudes fueled passionate debates about modernization. A Danish brochure extolled the virtues of supermarkets but met resistance from traditional merchants and threatened the fabric of neighborhoods, much as the “big box” stores are said to threaten American communities today.
2 The Marshall Plan: Reflections in Retrospect, Harlan Cleveland’s Keynote Address at the Fiftieth Anniversary of the Marshall Plan, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, The Hague, May 1997.
3 A letter from Barbara (Mrs. Stuart) Schulberg to her father Dr. Carter Goodrich (Chairman of the International Labor Organization of the United Nations) and mother, dated March 29, 1948, documents the strained political atmosphere in which the OMGUS films were made and shown: “While we were collecting our travel orders and magazines at OMGUS for the train trip, Stuart learned that Hayes had just ordered that the Hunger film be withdrawn. It had run about four weeks and still had some twelve to go before it made the rounds of all the theaters. When word like that comes from Hayes there’s nothing that can be done. Stuart saw Textor right away (Textor is the Chief of Information Control) only to learn that Textor himself had advised Hayes against withdrawal and had been overruled. So the picture has been withdrawn. The reasons for it are rather complex, but it was unfortunate and remains so. As a film every one admired it tremendously…particularly the German documentary film men who had never seen anything like it and were terribly excited by the techniques and spirit of it. Hayes himself was delighted with the film when it was previewed for him. But a combination of uneasy intelligence reports about the film’s reception and policy reversal on the wisdom of having a Food Month (the film was part of a whole campaign which was a major mistake on somebody’s part) and an unfortunate redundancy in the newsreel that was booked with the Hunger film, all made continuing of the film seem impossible to the brass……I think I wrote you about a sneak previewing of the film here in a big workers district movie house. Then there was a quiet reception, laughs at the shot of Goering saying guns instead of butter and generally favorable comment. It wasn’t pretty or pleasant, but they took it. In the Zone all the reports were very different. Great applause at the sight of marching troops (German), shouted remarks about “Hermann wouldn’t let us starve”, and “We want Hermann” when Goering appeared and so on. Hissing and booing and so forth. It was talked about a great deal on our trip. The weekly American licensed paper, Neue Zeitung, (for which our friend [Friedrich] Luft among others writes) had a letter printed last week from somebody saying the film was a fine thing to be shown and this week has a big column of replies in answer. And so on and so on. It’s far too complicated to tell here….but it made several things clear. No film made up here and shown to cross section Berlin audiences is going to be acceptable in the Zone only on that basis. The difference in attitudes and values is enormous, and not just between Berlin and Bavaria. Also, it may turn out that Hayes or Textor or someone will get scared off by intelligence reports of reactions and cut out the possibility of making any films which are unpleasant to the Germans. Anyhow, one definite thing, from now on Stuart is going to sneak preview everything in the Zone before it is finished, or show it to an intelligence selected cross section and get the reaction straight before releasing a film….Stuart is not himself responsible, since ICD intelligence is here to pass on things like anticipated reception, etc. but it will look pretty strange if a string of films come along and get withdrawn, even thought they’re damn good films. The Kiepenheuer film on the rise of militarism in Germany It’s Up to You (Es liegt an dir) is nearly finished and full of marching troops and so forth. There’s no reason to expect that it won’t evoke wild applause too, and scare the intelligence people so more. So that one is soon on its way for a test in the Zone and Stuart looks over into the distance at breakfast wondering how it could be changed without rewriting the music, re-recording the music etc. (It had a seventy man orchestra for the score.) But enough of this. It was a damned good thing we did get down to the Zone. You are told again and again that the mental climate is different there, and you think that you make appropriate allowances, but it’s like seeing ruins, you don’t realize what they are though you’ve heard a great deal about them, until you’re there.”
4 The Propaganda of the Marshall Plan in Italy in a Cold War Context by D.W. Ellwood. Forthcoming.
5 Fictions of the State: Two ABC Network Documentaries Promote the Marshall Plan at Home, chapter from unpublished dissertation, Black Marketers and Other Bad Actors: Narratives of Economic Citizenship in American Film, 1945-1960, by Elizabeth Heffelfinger.
6 The Marshall Plan’s European Film Unit, 1948-1955, by Albert Hemsing. Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television, Vol. 14, No. 3, 1994.
7 Chapter by Thomas W. Wilson, Jr. in The Marshall Plan From Those Who Made It Succeed.