As we are now in December, Christmas is on the minds of most of us. Our family kicked off the Christmas “movie” season by watching, “The Christmas Chronicles.” It is one of the top two holiday favorites of our grandchildren and Dayna and I also enjoyed it.

My favorite is, “It’s a Wonderful Life” with Jimmy Stewart. Almost every year, Dayna and I watch it during December.

How Jimmy Stewart Became George Bailey The star of ‘It’s a Wonderful Life’ struggled with his wartime memories

Every year around Christmas, Americans stop to pay homage to what is perhaps our most beloved motion picture, “It’s a Wonderful Life.” The 1946 film may flicker in black and white, but it still manages to feel fresh in affirming the human spirit as we head into each new year.

Fans of the movie might assume that making such an uplifting tale was a joy for cast and crew. In truth, this story of redeeming angels was born in the devastating wake of World War II, and it starred an actor swatting away his own demons.

The first time that Jimmy Stewart appears on screen as George Bailey, the image freezes in closeup as two angelic figures discuss the character in voice-over. One says to the other, “I want you to take a good look at that face.” It’s something that all of us should do as we watch the film.

Stewart is supposed to be playing a young man in his early 20s, but the once-boyish 38-year-old had just returned the year before from fighting in Europe, and only makeup and careful lighting could give him a semblance of youth. More seriously, as we know from the testimony of those who worked with him in the military and in Hollywood in those years, Stewart was suffering from what we now call post-traumatic stress disorder.

After two years of subsisting largely on ice cream and peanut butter, he had only just begun to eat real food and keep it down. He had the shakes and at times flew into rages, and his sleep was interrupted by images of bombers burning in the sky and men tumbling to earth.

“It’s a Wonderful Life” was Stewart’s first picture after almost five years away, including 20 months on the front lines. As a squadron commander of B-24 heavy bombers, he flew his first combat mission to Germany on Dec. 13, 1943. He commanded 12 missions in his first two months and was almost shot down twice. The experience unnerved him enough that he spent time at the “flak farm,” where fliers went to decompress after seeing too much combat.

It wasn’t fear of losing his own life that had gotten to Stewart. It was his deeply ingrained perfectionism, which made him fear making the wrong split-second decision in German airspace while leading dozens of planes and hundreds of men in combat.

Filming “It’s a Wonderful Life” found him back in Hollywood after surviving too many crash landings and close calls. In sunny Southern California, the land of make-believe, this suddenly middleaged man faced other problems. A new crop of youthful leading men had emerged in his absence. He also faced a crisis of conscience, wondering if acting was a worthwhile profession after the gravity of his daily life in the military.

This back story may help to explain the remarkable emotional energy of “It’s a Wonderful Life.” Stewart’s borderingon- frantic performance was not just virtuoso acting. Co-star Donna Reed reported that both Stewart and the picture’s director, Frank Capra, made the production difficult at times as they second-guessed how scenes were done.

And why not? Both men were desperate to re-establish themselves in a Hollywood that, they feared, had passed them by while they served in the military. “It’s a Wonderful Life” is considered the picture that relaunched Stewart as a more serious, seasoned actor. But for him, making it was just one more trial by combat.

It was the veteran actor Lionel Barrymore—the movie’s villain, Old Man Potter—who helped Stewart to claw his way back. When Stewart wondered aloud during production if acting was worth his time, Barrymore looked him in the eye and asked: Isn’t entertaining people better than dropping bombs on them?

Stewart seems to have gotten the message. He was able to convey great joy and passion in the movie’s closing scenes, shouting “Merry Christmas, Bedford Falls!” as he runs through the streets and saying with a wink to his guardian angel, as he turns heavenward, “Atta boy, Clarence.”

Jimmy Stewart returned to Hollywood unsure if he would be able to continue his career as an actor. “It’s a Wonderful Life” showed that he could. It arrives every December like a holiday card from a dear friend, a man who came home from war and found the beauty in peace. By Robert Matzen Wall Street Journal

—CC—

Elise Temme reminds us that the selfsacrificing housewife, Mary Bailey, is the real guardian angel in “It’s a Wonderful Life.”

A Self-Sacrificing Housewife, Mary Bailey Is the Real Guardian Angel In ‘It’s A Wonderful Life’ Amid the cultural push to break traditions and abolish nuclear families, women should look to heroes like Mary Bailey, not Meghan Markle.

Within the genre of Christmas classics, “It’s A Wonderful Life” is a household name. It airs on TV each year during the holiday season and continues to charm the hearts of Americans young and old for its inspirational message: “No one is a failure who has friends.”

Viewers are familiar with the basic plot, which involves a discouraged George Bailey deciding to jump off a bridge on Christmas Eve, and his guardian angel Clarence saving him by showing him what life would be like if George had never been born. A lesser but important supporting character is housewife Mary Bailey, who at first glance appears to be simply the tranquil homemaker who takes care of the house and helps raise their four young children. Upon a deeper analysis, Mary is not only indispensable to the film, but she is also an embodiment of conservative family values.

Mary Bailey’s primary role is in the home, but her actions speak volumes both inside and outside the Bailey residence. She is presented not as a housewife stuck and bored at home, but as a creative, uplifting member of her family and local society. Her creativity is shown when she chooses an abandoned, “drafty, old house” to be their home. She installs wallpaper, patches up holes, hangs posters and paintings, and beautifies their living space both frugally and efficiently.

She gives back to the community while sacrificing her own personal comfort, such as putting forward the money intended for her honeymoon in order to keep the Bailey Building and Loan afloat. She volunteers for the United Services Organization during World War II. She contents herself by loving her family and living within her means in spite of reminders from more well-off friends that she could be driving a flashier car, wearing more expensive clothes, or be married to a husband with a higher salary.

A Housewife’s Prayer Throughout the film, she quietly follows George’s lead, whether it is blessing a family in need with provisions or patiently tending to her children while George works long hours to support his family. For all these reasons, it is clear that the young Mrs. Bailey is a respected individual in the small town of Bedford Falls when crisis strikes.

After $8,000 is misplaced at the building and loan and George’s mental health is in shambles, it is Mary who begins a phone chain to raise funds and rally prayer for her husband. In the film’s opening scene, these prayers are the very ones we hear, which waft up to the heavens and initiate Clarence’s rescue mission to prevent George from committing suicide. All theological errors and somewhat cheesy stereotypes about angels and heaven aside, this situation raises the following question: Did Clarence save George, or was it actually Mary Bailey?

Mary’s vocation as a stay-at-home mother is the opposite of how society would define a successful woman, if society can even define “woman,” that is. Not only is the role of traditional motherhood looked down upon, but women are also fed the feminist narrative that true fulfillment means accomplishing her own version of self-actualization and finding liberation from the home, husband, and children. This message is found in many places, whether

it be a birth control commercial, leftist post- Roe social media campaigns, or, more recently, Meghan

Markle’s new charttopping podcast, “Archetypes.” While

these sources are intended to provide empowerment to women, they actually accomplish the opposite: selfishness, dissatisfaction, and weakening of the family structure.

Postmodernism’s Ego Problem In a recent “Archetypes” episode, the duchess of Sussex addresses some of the challenges facing mothers and wives today, paramount of which is the guilt mothers shoulder over not being able to accomplish everything they would like to for their spouses, children, and themselves. Markle and the Canadian prime minister’s wife, Sophie Grégoire Trudeau, discuss this issue as existing on a pendulum, with the “I can do it all” mindset on one end and despair and shame on the other.

Markle and company’s solution for achieving a healthy balance plunges into postmodern, metaphysical territory. A woman should exit this rollercoaster of extremes by becoming “deeply connected to her own knowing,” as Trudeau declares, and, in Markle’s words, by “breaking free of whatever is expected.” The duchess reads an excerpt from Dr. Shefali Tsabary’s “A Radical Awakening,” stating that when a woman “drops the role of savior, she can only save herself.”

As Markle continues to converse with other women, including lesbian comedian Sam Jay and single-mom actress Pamela Adlon, it becomes clear that the only voices that matter on her podcast are ones who are interested in breaking traditional systems, abolishing the nuclear family, and redefining the roles of wife and mother to be whatever feels right to the individual. Not only are these ideas gross subversions of the family structure as our Lord designed, but they also end up putting the emphasis once again on the individual woman. It still becomes up to her to fulfill her destiny, define what it means to be a good wife or mother, and, in Tsabary’s words: “save herself.” The result of this egocentric pandering is that it turns into selfidolatry, thus moving the woman farther away from her family and their needs.

Whether we are reflecting on family values in our current culture or in Mary Bailey’s post-war America, the primary tenets of motherhood remain the same: to raise educated, healthy, content members of society. This duty does not require postmodern navel-gazing and mystical truth-defining. It requires selfsacrifice, discipline, compassion, and ideally teamwork with one’s husband — another component all but missing from Markle’s philosophy.

Although it implies that traditional family roles are stifling and archaic, the nuclear family is actually regaining traction and provides an environment for optimal child development. In many cases, this involves the husband being the breadwinner and the wife taking charge of domestic sphere tasks, a way

of life that is actually more popular than the media

would have us believe. Although this choice often involves women sacrificing personal and professional goals, putting family and children first is not only an honorable endeavor, but it is also crucial for society to survive — else we face a culture of Mr. Potters, warped and frustrated with no one to care for them in their old age.

This Christmas season let us not view Frank Capra’s classic film as a quaint anecdote with outdated stereotypes, but as a tale that still carries relevance for contemporary families. More critically, we must continue to encourage and support the George and Mary Baileys of today.

Elise Temme The Federalist

Good, clean movies without perverts, filthy language and anti-Christian themes. Another thing I miss about the “good ole days.”