|
Questions and Answers with Ken Verdoia, Producer/Director
Q: Why Joe Hill?
A: The story of this one man enables us to open a window on a largely lost chapter of the national experience. The years between the turn of the century and the outbreak of World War I are often ignored in most overviews of our history. That creates the impression that, somehow, "nothing of note happened" over nearly two decades. Not only is that a dangerous misreading of history, it ignores some profound currents that were reshaping the nation. The story of Joe Hill is the story of European immigration at its peak--and the extraordinary challenge faced by millions of people seeking opportunity in this country. Its the story of dangerous times as a worker in the large industries that dominated economic growth in the era. Its the story of some of the earliest steps to organize those rank-and-file workers---and the sharp conflict that resulted. Its the story of the use of power. The story of a nation wrestling with issues of justice and fairness. All of this is found in the story of a radical labor songwriter who comes to Utah and is eventually executed.
Q: Do you think Joe Hill was guilty?
A: That is easily the most asked question aimed at anyone spending time investigating the case of Joe Hill. I'm not trying to finesse a response when I say that, early on, I came to the conclusion that Hill's guilt or innocence was not the central reason for undertaking this program. Different people looking at the evidence will come to different conclusions about whether Hill actually was one of the gunmen who entered the Morrison store in January, 1914 and shot two men to death. For me the importance of the story is to understand the process that was at work. . .the political and social climate that contributed to, and perhaps shaped, the trial. . . the very notion of "justice." The Joe Hill case is an incredible opportunity to study this nation at the turn of the century, and see what life and living and law were like long before our society's safety nets were created.
Q: Still sounds like you're dodging the question of guilt. . .
A: That may be due to the absence of black and white evidence in the case of Joe Hill. There was no conclusive eyewitness, no telling piece of material evidence. The two critical pieces of trial evidence that led to his conviction were his unexplained gunshot wound, and witnesses who described a physical similarity between Hill and a man who entered the Morrison store at the time of the shooting. Using the gunshot wound as evidence against Hill is troublesome for several reasons. First, there still is some doubt that a gun was actually fired by the Morrison's inside their store. Second, if the gun was fired, why was the bullet never found. . .either in the store, or in Hill, if we was a gunman? The eyewitnesses who testified at trial that Hill looked a lot like one of the gunmen were unable to make a similar identification to police when Hill was first arrested or at his preliminary hearing. The testimony noticeably "improves" over time. Also, the police identification of Frank Z. Wilson, a recently released prison inmate, as the prime suspect in the Morrison murder is dropped without comment after Hill's arrest. Since Wilson went on a rampage of crime in other states, it seems odd that authorities would make no effort to pursue the theory of his role in the Morrison killings.So, on the one hand, the evidence does not point to Joe Hill without some very reasonable doubt along the way.
On the other, Hill seems to do everything he can to avoid establishing his innocence.
Given literally a dozen opportunities to establish an alibi for his whereabouts at the time of the Morrison murders and the events that caused his gunshot wound, Hill refuses to cooperate. He talks vaguely about being shot in an argument over a woman, but refuses to identify the woman or the man who allegedly shot him. No woman ever steps forward to identify herself as the subject of the triangular showdown. No man ever confesses to having used his gun to wound Joe Hill. Human nature would seem to indicate that with a life in the balance, at least one of the three would break their silence and corroborate Hill's story with names and places. It never happened. Additionally, when Hill is being treated for his wound by Dr. Frank McHugh on the night of the Morrison murders, a handgun falls from Hill's pocket. While being driven home by a friend of McHugh, Hill insists on stopping along a desolate stretch of road, where he throws the gun deep into a field. Again, if Hill was simply a victim, his possession of a handgun would not appear to be a problem worthy of the solution he chooses. Finally, Hill does practically everything he can during the course of his murder trial to undermine the efforts of his young, inexperienced, but well-intentioned, defense attorneys. While its true that his courtroom outburst aimed at firing his attorneys and his refusal to testify were either arguably or certainly within his rights, they contributed to a subjective environment that worked against any reasonable doubt in the mind of the jury concerning Hill's guilt. Again, it seems that the reasonable, innocent man would do anything in his power to refute the charges and evidence alleging his guilt. Hill does not.
So, it is easy to see how the conflict over guilt and innocence can continue more than eighty years after the trial. And it is easy to understand the adamance of those who believe an execution should not have moved forward in such an arena of confusion and contradiction.
Q: Was there a conspiracy of power interests to kill Joe Hill?
A: If you read the Industrial Workers of the World newspapers of the time, its hard not to come to that conclusion. But, free from the passionate beliefs of advocates, it is impossible to find anything approaching a conspiracy or a "smoking gun" throughout Hill's trial, conviction and execution. Charges that the Mormon Church. . .or large companies such as Utah Copper or Utah Construction. . .or all of them together conspired to kill Joe Hill are simply not supported by evidence. But (and this is a big reservation) there is an absolutely clear, openly stated anti-union sentiment at work in Utah during this era. As noted historian Tom Alexander has said, such a community-wide climate of fear and loathing for labor agitators is far more dangerous to the concept of justice than an overt conspiracy in which people sit around a table and say, "Lets get the radical."While there are isolated cases in which members of the I.W.W. union are, in fact, acquitted of charges in the years leading up to World War I, such acquittals are very rare exceptions, and usually take place in more isolated locations. In urban areas throughout the West the system of justice dealt with Wobblies in a very certain, very swift fashion. Many times members of the I.W.W. were not even deemed worthy of being put through the court system. Instead they were rounded up by local police or private security guards, taken to the edge of town, beaten severely and warned never to return.
Q: Re-creating scenes from history can be very controversial. Why did you use re-creations in Joe Hill?
A: Re-creations are very dangerous tools in documentaries. Many times they are misued, and become a tool to argue only one side of an issue, because only one perspective is offered. The likelihood of altering events and cause-and-effect relationships is very real, and can lead the viewer to conclusions that are simply not supported by fact. In JOE HILL we use re-creations to explore the sequence of events surrounding the murders of the Morrisons in their grocery store in 1914. We based our re-creations on the newspaper accounts of the day and testimony from the preliminary hearing and trial of Joe Hill. And rather than show just one point of view, we shot the sequence of the shootout from seven different perspectives---each representative of a different piece of testimony or prosecution or defense argument. The goal is to show the viewer how the perception of the shooting changed over time, and how different people drew different conclusions from the event. To show how witnesses became increasingly clear in their recall the farther they got from the night of the shooting. Additionally, a re-creation can have value if it reinforces the humanity of a story---in this case, that the Morrisons were suddenly, recklessly and brutally killed as they sought only to live a simple existence.
Q: Why did you select the authors or historians to participate in the program?
A: Each brings a wealth of experience and insight in some specific areas that we address in the story of Joe Hill.Helen Papanikolas has done some of the most important work in the realm of the immigrant experience in Utah. She has conducted hundreds of oral history interviews with men and woman who came to this country around the turn of the century. She has a unique insight on the reasons immigrants came to this nation, and what they experienced. While capturing the moving stories of individual families realizing dreams and new lives, she also has a sharp eye for detail in terms of the obstacles and resentments the new immigrant faced.
Ron Yengich is well known for his work as a criminal defense attorney in Utah. What is less appreciated is the fact that Ron has deep families ties to the immigrant and mining experiences in Utah. Ron has spent some twenty years studying the case of Joe Hill from those two perspectives. His interest reached the point that he was retained by the University of Utah to serve as an adjunct member of the faculty to teach an honors course using the Joe Hill case as a mechanism for studying issues of law, justice and opportunity.
Michael Quinn is a nationally respected historian and author on the subject of Utah and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Few people have had the access he has had to original documents and materials related to the early history of each of those subjects. He provides illuminating and factual insight into the activities of Mormon Church leaders in settling the Great Basin area and providing for the future of their followers. As well as their response to economic, social and political challenges. For the production of Joe Hill he helps the viewer understand the perspective of Church leaders in the sensitive first years of Utah's statehood. I've worked with Mike on four different projects, each time finding him a dependable guide in complex and often confusing terrain.
Thomas G. Alexander holds the Redd Chair in Western American History at Brigham Young University. Tom is nothing short of encyclopedic in his understanding of people and events in the history of Utah. Over the years his guidance and patience have shaped a number of my projects for public television, notably UTAH: The Struggle for Statehood, Brigham Young and A Matter of Principle. In this project he provides insight on the partisan politics of Utah, the career of Governor William Spry, and the general economic climate of the state in the years leading to the case of Joe Hill.
Gibbs Smith is well known as a publisher of books. Less appreciated is his background in history and his years of research into the life and times of Joe Hill. Smith started a serious investment of time into the case of Hill when Smith was a graduate student in History at the University of Utah. That work led to an outstanding master's thesis, which in turn was published with refinement by the University of Utah Press in the late-1960s as Joe Hill. In my opinion, Smith's book joins the work of Philip Foner as the best explorations of the Hill case.
John Sillito was a very fortunate discovery for us as we researched the case of Joe Hill. Actually, it wasn't much of a discovery, since every historian or author we spoke with asked us if we were including a session with John in our research. Well, a session with John is simply not enough time to explore the depth of his understanding of the Hill case. With more than 25 years invested in his research, Sillito is one of the few people to have directly interviewed the last participants of any note in the case of Joe Hill. On the faculty at Weber State University in Ogden, John also offers insight on labor organizing and socialist activities in the early years of Utah's statehood.
If a viewer takes any significant insight away from Joe Hill, the credit must go to these fine people who shared their time, expertise and patience with the project.
Q: The music sounds familiar. Why did you select such well-known songs from the past?
A: Well, Joe Hill did that for me. The songs you hear in what we would call the "music bed" of the program, with only one or two exceptions, are adaptations of songs arranged by Joe Hill. As the documentary points out, Hill actually wrote very few new tunes. What he did best was take well-known, existing music and add new lyrics--to create songs of labor and struggle. He would use church hymns, childhood nursery songs, even patriotic tunes as his music--and cut loose with a sharp and biting wit to attack unfair labor conditions, politicians, or whatever seemed "the greatest wrong to right" at the time.For more insight into the words and music of Joe Hill, visit the section of this website that explores his songs and lyrics.
By the way, the music you hear in the program is arranged and performed by two very talented Utah musicians. Rex Flinner handles the stringed arrangements--those songs featuring guitar, mandolin and/or fiddle. Dan Waldis provides all of the keyboard arrangements. This is my first collaboration with Rex, who has previously contributed to the KUED documentary Gathered in Time by my colleague Elizabeth Searles. Dan, on the other hand, must be getting tired of hearing me knock on his door. He has provided music for a number of my documentaries, including The Atomic Stampede, UTAH: The Struggle for Statehood, Brigham Young, and The Frontier Photographers.
Q: Did you experience any special moments during the production of the documentary?
A: Two, actually. And when I say that, its with the knowledge that this was a very special process from start to finish.The first moment came when I was working in the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. After a lot of hours of page turning, I finally encountered the files of President Woodrow Wilson on the Joe Hill case. Most of it was pretty straight-forward. Bureaucratic. . .formal. . .very dispassionate. Two exceptions. The first was a note hand-scrawled by Wilson in response to one of thousands of pleas that he find a way to block the execution of Joe Hill. In his simple, firm hand he wrote; "I can do no more. Even the little I have attempted has been resented.--W.W." Just a flash of insight into an emotional aspect of the man in the middle of a highly-charged case. The second important document was from Wilson's special secretary, Joseph Tumulty. In it Tumulty reveals the political pressure being exerted on Wilson by organized labor to do something to stop the Hill execution. Tumulty is also shrewd enough to know that organized labor--though small in numbers--could be an important voting block in the 1916 re-election bid of his boss. Again, a simple document, but one that showed how political pressure can shape events---and that attempts to twist the arm of officeholders is not new to our political process. Through those two documents I felt the humanity that can be found in our history.
The second moment came when we returned to KUED after a bone-chilling night filming at the Pioneer Trails/This is the Place State Park in the middle of winter. It was our first attempt at shooting the recreation of the murder of the Morrisons in their grocery store. And, frankly, we were not sure if it was going to work. As we loaded our videotape into a bank of machines and started rewinding them for viewing, one tape stopped and offered a frozen image. It was of one of our young actors in the role of Arling Morrison--the son who was murdered in the shooting in January of 1914. The actor was face down on the floor of the set we were using. A handgun was on the floor next to him. The store was dark, and a pool of light was around this figure that appeared so lifeless. It was a chilling picture of death---and the first sense that our use of the re- creations could infuse the documentary with an essence of humanity that might otherwise be missing.
The best moments in any documentary project are when you feel closest to the men, women and children who have lived the pages of history.
Q: Did you have any special collaboration on this project?
A: Actually, the whole project is nothing but collaboration. Nancy Green gets the credit for creating the look and flow of the documentary through her work as Co-Producer and Editor. She received an Emmy Award for her similar role on The Frontier Photographers, and is clearly one of the best long format editors in the West. . .if not the nation. Bill Brussard was serving on his second public television documentary as the Director of Photography, and, again, did an outstanding job of visually capturing some very challenging subjects. From bringing life to a quiet courtroom in Beaver, to capturing a range of visual emotions in a prison cell, Bill demonstrates why he is viewed as one of the most promising photographers in television. Kevin Sweet and Bill Gordon continue to be the best combination of location and studio "ears" I have ever worked with. Just like Nancy, their recent work on The Frontier Photographers earned them Emmy Awards for achievement in audio.And, in addition to the previously credited historians and musicians, I received a great boost from some friends in the media who provided services as narrators for the program. A full list is contained elsewhere in this website, including a list of the roles they played.
I greatly appreciated the opportunity to work with Robin Ljungberg as the voice of Joe Hill. Rob is a Salt Lake City attorney with a strong background in theatre. . .in fact, he played the role of Joe Hill in a local performance of Barrie Stavis' play The Man Who Never Died. Rob was versatile, convincing and terribly patient with the pace of documentary production. He also fulfills a "cameo" role in the production by appearing on screen as the ethereal figure of Joe Hill as he awaits execution.
Q: What projects are in the works for you?
A: Half a dozen are scattered across the drawing board at one stage or another. But two documentary projects have recently been completed. Glen Canyon is a documentary examining the construction of Glen Canyon Dam, and the efforts to document historic and geologic sites before they were inundated by Lake Powell. Fire in the Hole will take a hard look at the regional wars that broke out in the West shortly after the turn of the century, as attempts at organizing labor clashed with economic and government forces. It was a frightening, bloody period that is little understood.
