Sunday, January 29, 2023

Inside Mexico’s Largest Detention Center:


Inside Mexico’s Largest Detention Center: 

A Q&A with Belén Fernández
“There may not be human rights in Siglo XXI,” the name of the Tapachula immigration detention center where the author and journalist was imprisoned, “but there’s lots of humanity.”

Todd Miller Border Cornicles


In 2012, former Customs and Border Protection official Alan Bersin proclaimed that “our southern border” is now with Guatemala.

In her great new book, titled Inside Siglo XXI: Locked Up in Mexico’s Largest Detention Center, author and journalist Belén Fernández writes about this underdiscussed part of the U.S. border from the on-the-ground perspective of the Tapachula immigration prison, where she was detained. In the book, and in the below interview, Belén describes how she ended up behind bars and what she witnessed and experienced, including the friendships and solidarity she had with other detainees. As she writes, “There may not be human rights in Siglo XXI, but there’s lots of humanity.” Belén has this unique ability to write in a personal, detailed, and heart-wrenching way that is often also bitingly hilarious. She also has a penchant for coupling deep geopolitical analysis of state power, particularly that of the United States, with its absurdity, often in the same sentence.

This is Belén’s fourth book. Her others include The Imperial Messenger: Thomas Friedman at Work (Verso, 2011); Exile: Rejecting America and Finding the World (OR Books, 2019)—a travelogue like no other about how Belén has successfully traveled and written about the world without setting foot in her home country, the United States, for 17 years (here’s a review I wrote about it in 2020); and Checkpoint Zipolite: Quarantine in a Small Place (OR Books, 2021), about what it was like be stranded in a Oaxacan beach town during the pandemic, where she ended up living right across the street from a Covid checkpoint. Needless to say, I strongly recommend checking out all her work. She is an original. And we are proud to feature her here in The Border Chronicle.

Can you explain how Siglo XXI: Locked Up in Mexico’s Largest Detention Center came to be? What were you doing? How did you end up arrested and incarcerated by Mexican immigration authorities?

In July 2021, I traveled to the southern Mexican border city of Tapachula, in the state of Chiapas, to write an article about migrants for Al Jazeera. I had been residing in the coastal town of Zipolite, in the neighboring state of Oaxaca, since March 2020, when the pandemic put a halt to my previous modus operandi of manic itinerance. This itinerance had entailed 17 years of darting between countries with the help of my U.S. passport—even as I avoided the homeland at all cost, finding it irremediably creepy.

During the pandemic, I overstayed my Mexican tourist visa, and rather than rectify the situation legally, I opted to simply DHL my passport to some dude in Mexico City whose visa falsification services came highly recommended by other lazy white foreigners in Zipolite. As it turned out, these services worked just fine for exiting the country, but it was another matter altogether in the Tapachula airport—where, while attempting to board my domestic flight home after spending a couple of days writing about migrants, I was carted off to Mexico’s largest immigration jail, charmingly branded Siglo XXI (Twenty-First Century).

So it was that I unwittingly finagled myself an exclusive view of the innards of Siglo XXI—where journalists are banned from entering (oops)—and of the U.S.-imposed migrant detention regime in Mexico. As a friend in Tapachula put it, I was “gringa collateral damage” of U.S. policy, and as such was able to witness firsthand the torment to which my country subjects asylum seekers and other migrants—many of whom are fleeing U.S.-inflicted political and economic catastrophe in the first place.

My own torment was of course exceedingly brief, and I was released from Siglo XXI after only 24 hours, thanks entirely to the efforts of a Mexican journalist acquaintance of mine. Not a finger was lifted by the U.S. embassy in Mexico City, whose staff hung up on my panicking mother after inquiring whether she was sure I was a bona fide U.S. citizen and not just some naturalized María Belén Fernández.

Can you describe the Siglo XXI detention center? How many people were in there, and where were they from? What sorts of memories do you have of the prison? Were there people who stood out to you? Was there solidarity?

I can only speak for the women’s section of the prison, although there is a unanimous consensus that the conditions in the men’s part are even more atrocious. When you enter Siglo XXI, you are first relieved of your shoelaces and most of your other possessions—which in my case included the 40-plus bracelets to which I had developed a rather pathological attachment over the years and whose removal required the intervention of two policewomen.

Once you’ve been effectively stripped of personhood, you are admitted to the bowels of the 21st century, which consist of a large room with concrete tables and a corridor to the left, where there are smaller rooms containing toilets with no doors (for our own “security,” as one immigration official assured me). I am bad when it comes to estimating numbers of human beings, but Siglo XXI is notorious for its overcrowding, and there were definitely many hundreds of women in there—such that every last bit of table and floor space was occupied by bodies at night. Since there was literally no space for my floor mat, a Cuban girl named Daniely insisted that I share hers—and furthermore insisted that I use her spare clothes as a pillow: “Here we share everything.”

In addition to many Cuban detainees—whose country was of course going on six decades of the asphyxiating U.S. embargo and attendant scarcities that fuel migration—there was a range of other nationalities: Haitians, Hondurans, Nicaraguans, Salvadorans. There was a lone Bangladeshi woman, who had traveled for nine months in the hopes of reaching the U.S. only to end up behind 21st-century bars—where she had been taken under the wing of a group of Haitian detainees. A pair of Cubans had undertaken to teach Spanish to the lone Chinese inmate, who could not communicate with anyone—much less the jailers—but who by all accounts had been in Siglo XXI a long, long time.

As for me and my position of extreme privilege, I hardly merited the compassion and solidarity I received from the other women. It was not just Daniely; there was Kimberly, a young Honduran girl whose two sisters had been murdered in Honduras and who with her affectionate presence brought me back from various psychological precipices. Another young Honduran held up her towel for me in lieu of a shower curtain. A Salvadoran gave me her remaining toilet paper. Whenever I was alone for a fraction of a second, some or other group of women would invite me to sit with them. There may not be human rights in Siglo XXI, but there’s lots of humanity.

I’m curious to know if you have any revelations that you can share with us from this experience? I ask this as a journalist, knowing that many of us who cover immigration or borders have never been behind bars in an immigration prison.

I can certainly say that I now understand why they confiscate shoelaces.

It is impossible to downplay the physical and mental anguish that Siglo XXI signifies for so many people—many of whom have already suffered sufficiently in their home countries or during their respective migrant trajectories. The waiting game can be the worst part of it all; I met women who had been imprisoned for a month and still had no idea whether they would be deported or granted asylum in Mexico—or when they might expect an answer to this existential question. The indefinite limbo constitutes psychological torture in itself, and on more than one occasion during my 24-hour stay, I heard a detainee declare, “I’m going to leave this place traumatized.”

Again, I myself barely experienced a fraction of what everyone else had to go through, and I basically felt like a preposterous asshole the whole time—for manifold reasons: for the superior value that my U.S. passport automatically conferred on my life; for my deathly fear of being deported to the U.S., the country most of my fellow inmates were risking their lives to reach; for my psychological fragility and physical unkemptness when I had spent not even a week trekking through the corpse-ridden Darién Gap, as many of the women had.

For those of us accustomed to moving through the world with relative ease, it is difficult to convey the sensation of being stripped of one’s free will, however briefly. In Siglo XXI, I at least caught a glimpse of the system of criminalized oppression that defines migration in the 21st-century.

How much of an influence do you think the United States has on Mexico’s southern border enforcement and detention? Is this a part of the U.S. border system that people need to know more about?

Absolutely. The U.S. has long forced the Mexican government to do its anti-migrant dirty work, not only on Mexico’s northern border but also on the southern one. It’s no coincidence that, two days after the inauguration of Siglo XXI in 2006, then Mexican president Vicente Fox met with U.S. war on terror chief George W. Bush at a Cancún hotel, where the latter tripped over himself in praise of Fox’s “work to enforce Mexico’s southern border.”

As you yourself write in Empire of Borders—recounting an episode from 2014—U.S. officials had already described the Mexican-Guatemalan border near Tapachula as “where … the United States border really began.” And current Mexican president AMLO has only proved too eager to kiss the gringos’ ass on the migrant front, even while purporting to pursue a more humane approach to migration and uphold Mexican sovereignty. In 2019, for example, he reduced the U.S.-bound trans-Mexico migrant flow by no less than 75 percent in three months after Donald Trump threatened to impose tariffs on Mexican imports—a statistic that the supposed no-shit-taking AMLO has curiously chosen to boast about in his own book A la mitad del camino.

Under pressure from the imperial neighbor to the north, AMLO has also overseen the unprecedented militarization of migration policy—hardly reassuring in light of the Mexican military’s track record of human rights violations and other crimes. In 2021, the White House press secretary announced that, thanks to bilateral discussions with the Joe Biden regime, the AMLO administration had decided “to maintain 10,000 troops at its southern border, resulting in twice as many daily migrant interdictions.”

That same year, Mexico experimented with a ludicrous “air bridge” project that involved flying migrants from northern to southern Mexico and then expelling them into the Guatemalan jungle.
What is the most important point of your book? What do you want people to take away from it?

That structural inhumanity has somehow yet to crush the human spirit. As I suggest in the conclusion, in a 21st century governed by sadistic U.S. imperial policy and shitty capitalism, there is often more magnanimity behind bars than beyond them.

Thursday, January 26, 2023

Man Convicted in Terror Attack That Killed 8 on a Manhattan Bike Path


Man Convicted in Terror Attack That Killed 8 on a Manhattan Bike Path
Benjamin Weiser and Lola Fadulu NY Times

Sayfullo Saipov could face the death penalty in the federal case. He said he was inspired to carry out the attack by Islamic State videos.

The jury in the case made its decision during its first full day of deliberations after weeks of testimony.

A man who raced a truck down a Hudson River bike path in 2017, killing eight people in what the authorities have called the deadliest terrorist attack in New York City since 9/11, was convicted of murder charges on Thursday by a federal jury and could now face the death penalty.

The man, Sayfullo Saipov, 34-year-old Uzbek native, said after his arrest that he was inspired to carry out the attack by Islamic State videos that he watched on his phone and that he chose a truck to inflict maximum damage against civilians. Mr. Saipov is the first defendant to face a federal death penalty trial during the administration of President Biden, who had campaigned against capital punishment.


The Manhattan jury delivered its verdict during its first full day of deliberations, after hearing wrenching testimony from survivors and relatives of people killed in the attack. The truck had plowed into bicyclists, sending riders flying into the air, crushing others on the ground and leaving broken truck parts, mangled bicycles and bodies scattered behind.

The eight fatalities included six tourists, one from Belgium and five from Argentina. The other victims were a 23-year-old software engineer from Manhattan and a 32-year-old financial worker from New Jersey.

Having convicted Mr. Saipov, the jury will now be asked to decide whether he should be imprisoned for life or face the death penalty, which would require a unanimous vote of the 12 jurors.

The government’s decision to seek capital punishment against Mr. Saipov was originally made during the administration of President Donald J. Trump, who tweeted after the attack “SHOULD GET DEATH PENALTY!”

Later, the attorney general at the time directed federal prosecutors to seek Mr. Saipov’s execution if he was convicted.

Last year, Mr. Saipov’s lawyers asked the Justice Department under Mr. Biden to withdraw the death penalty request. But in September, writing to the judge, Vernon S. Broderick, prosecutors said Attorney General Merrick B. Garland had decided that the government would continue to pursue capital punishment.

The government had argued that Mr. Saipov carried out the truck attack in order to become a member of the Islamic State, a terrorist group that once held authority over large areas in Iraq and Syria and had pledged to create a new Muslim caliphate

“He turned a bike path into his battlefield,” Jason A. Richman, a federal prosecutor, said during his closing argument on Tuesday. “He was happy about the terrorist attack he unleashed.”

Mr. Richman noted that Mr. Saipov had asked to hang an ISIS flag in his hospital room at Bellevue Hospital Center, where he was interviewed by the F.B.I. after being shot in the abdomen by a New York police officer, ending his rampage.

“He told the F.B.I.: ‘I committed this attack to do my part, my part for Allah, my part for my version of Islam, and my part for the caliphate, my part for ISIS,’” Mr. Richman said.

The government has said that a cellphone found in Mr. Saipov’s truck contained roughly 90 videos, many ISIS-related, depicting, for example, the shooting or beheading of prisoners and instructions for making an improvised explosive device. The phone also contained about 3,800 images, including many of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, then ISIS’s leader.

Mr. Saipov’s lead lawyer did not deny that his client had intentionally driven the truck that caused the deaths and injuries. “His actions were senseless, horrific, and there’s no justification for them,” David E. Patton, the city’s federal public defender, said in his summation.


“Nobody forced him to do this, and he’s guilty of murder and assault among many other crimes — plain and simple,” Mr. Patton said.

But Mr. Patton disputed the government’s claim that Mr. Saipov carried out the attack in order to become an ISIS member — which Mr. Patton indicated was a critical distinction. Some of the charges say Mr. Saipov committed the murders “for the purpose of gaining entrance to ISIS.”

Mr. Patton argued that his client had merely been “steeped in ISIS propaganda,” which encouraged followers to carry out martyrdom attacks around the world.

“He bought into all these notions of the caliphate and that it was a religious obligation for him to become a martyr and ascend to paradise,” Mr. Patton said.

Mr. Patton appeared to be setting the stage for arguments during the death penalty phase of the trial that his client, in orchestrating the attack, was not trying to become an ISIS member but rather had been manipulated by ISIS propaganda.

The trial, coming more than five years after the attack, had been long delayed, largely because of the pandemic. Mr. Saipov did not testify. But the words of the victims and witnesses, often delivered through interpreters, were riveting as they recalled that sunny afternoon on the tree-lined path.

The first fatality was Ann-Laure Decadt, 31, the Belgian tourist, who had come to New York with her mother and two sisters.

One sister, Friedel, took the witness stand, carrying a bottle of water in one hand and a package of tissues in the other. Mr. Saipov, sitting at the defense table in a mask, stared at her.

As she began to describe their visit to the city, she wiped tears from her face and occasionally looked up at the ceiling. Mr. Saipov looked down into his lap.

Friedel said the family had visited Fifth Avenue, Central Park and Wall Street, had taken the ferry to Staten Island and had gone to the 9/11 Memorial in Lower Manhattan.

On Oct. 31, they were pedaling side by side on the bike path, she testified, when she heard a loud rattling noise — the sound of a rapidly approaching vehicle.

As she tried to turn to look, the truck must have passed her, she said, adding, “As of that point, I have only flashes of memory of what I saw.”

She said she remembered seeing Ann-Laure lying on the ground ahead of her. Her first thought was that the truck “might have driven over her head,” she testified. “I went over to my sister, and I just started screaming.”

Ann-Laure had a lifeless gaze, staring into the air with blood gushing from her mouth, she recalled.

Another sister, Justine, and their mother, Lieve, said that the trip was to be a celebration of the sisters’ birthdays and Lieve’s recovery from two bouts of breast cancer.

“It was supposed to be a fun trip, a girls’ trip,” Justine said.

The jury also heard from another Belgian family that was on the bike path that day.

Aristide Melissas, his wife, Marion Van Reeth, their son Daryl and their nephew Timothy Buytaert, had stopped at a traffic light near Pier 40 to take a photograph.

Marion Van Reeth was struck and gravely injured as she took a photograph.


The light turned green. “I remember perfectly well what I said to the boys,” Mr. Melissas testified. “I said the last who reaches the One World tower, we will offer the ice cream.”

He heard “slippery tires” and a sound like “metal crushing” behind him as he was thrown into the air, he said.

Marion testified that she woke up in a hospital, where she learned that she had suffered a spinal cord injury, broken ribs and head wounds and had to have both legs amputated.


The five Argentine victims of the attack had been part of a group of 10 friends from high school, who had come to New York to celebrate the three decades since they had graduated.

One, Juan Pablo Trevisan, testified that the group was biking in pairs, one couple behind the next. They were heading south to visit the 9/11 Memorial and then planned to bike across the Brooklyn Bridge.

Mr. Trevisan recalled that he was talking with the bicyclist to his immediate left, Hernan Ferruchi, when he heard a strange sound, which he tried to imitate for the jury — “too-toom, too-toom, something like that,” Mr. Trevisan said.

“It sounded like a very loud engine,” Mr. Trevisan testified. “It was as if a train were passing by.”

Mr. Trevisan said he asked Mr. Ferruchi, on the left, if he had heard the sound. “He made a gesture as if he didn’t know,” Mr. Trevisan testified.

It was then that the truck plowed through the group, striking and killing every rider on the left side of the column.

Benjamin Weiser is a reporter covering the Manhattan federal courts. He has long covered criminal justice, both as a beat and investigative reporter. Before joining The Times in 1997, he worked at The Washington Post. @BenWeiserNYT


Lola Fadulu is a general assignment reporter on the Metro desk. @lfadulu


Saturday, January 14, 2023

How to Help Girls Enduring the Unendurable

How to Help Girls Enduring the Unendurable


By Nicholas Kristof NY TIMES



NAIROBI, Kenya — She is impossibly young to have endured what she did, and what still haunts her is the job of the man responsible: a police officer.

“He said that if I tell, he will kill me,” whispered the 11-year-old girl, whom I’ll call Nancy (the names of the girls in this column have been changed). “I have dreams that he is coming to kill me.”

Nancy was walking home last year when the policeman chased her. She might have been able to outrun him on her own, but her mom had entrusted her to walk her 5-year-old brother home. They ran together but the boy was slow, and she was too responsible to let go of his hand — so the officer caught her and then, she said, raped her.

Afterward, she delivered her brother home but was bleeding so badly she soon lost consciousness. Her family rushed her to the hospital.


The authorities are still searching for the police officer, but because she is a prospective witness, the family fears for her safety. So now she is rebuilding her life in a safe house on the edge of Nairobi run by a nonprofit called Kara Olmurani.

Two dozen girls spill out of the seven-bedroom safe house, telling stories that sear the heart. They underscore that sexual violence is a global scourge that we haven’t done enough to fight.


One unpublished survey found that a majority of women in the Kibera slum here in Nairobi had their first sexual experience through rape or sexual assault. The World Health Organization estimates that almost one-third of women worldwide have experienced physical or sexual violence, with rates particularly high in developing countries. A 2013 United Nations survey found that almost a quarter of men in six Asian countries acknowledged that they had raped someone.

This is part of the unfinished business of #MeToo, and it could use more American leadership. For many years, the bipartisan International Violence Against Women Act has languished in Congress; it would make permanent an office in the State Department for women’s issues and elevate issues of gender violence.



How much difference would this make in practice? I don’t know, but a similar approach to human trafficking has been fairly effective at applying American pressure on foreign countries to end impunity for traffickers.

Sexual violence persists because it’s hard to talk about. It thrives in silence, leaving children nowhere to turn.

“I could not tell anyone,” Muriel, 14, told me. “My mum would not have understood.”

Muriel says that her stepfather abused her beginning when she was 8. “I started asking myself questions,” she said. “‘God, why did you allow this to happen? What did I do to you, God, to allow this? Did I bring this about? Who’s to blame, me or my dad?’”

Eventually Muriel did tell her mother, but it didn’t help. “My mum was blaming me, scolding me, warning me not to tell anyone else,” she said.

Things changed only after Muriel was raped while at school at age 13 by a young man who entered the school grounds and drugged her. She became pregnant from that rape, and hospital authorities informed the police. The perpetrator has not been found, and there was never an attempt to prosecute the stepfather.


The impunity is typical. The Kara Olmurani shelter has 24 girls, and in only one case has there been a prosecution. That case involved a man who was regularly raping his 9-year-old stepdaughter.

“I told my mum, and she wouldn’t believe it,” the girl told me.

The abuse in that case ended only when some men smoking marijuana in a field saw the stepfather raping the girl and intervened, leading to arrest and prosecution.


“People are not willing to talk about the sexual abuse of children,” said the Rev. Terry Gobanga, who founded Kara Olmurani. “They’re not willing to confront it.”


Gobanga speaks from experience. On the morning of her planned wedding in 2004, she was on a street in Nairobi when several men shoved her into a car and then gang-raped her, stabbed her and threw her from the moving car.

The wedding party gathered at the church without her, unaware of what had happened: When she was supposed to be celebrating her marriage, she was fighting for her life in a hospital.


Seven months later, after she had recovered, she and her fiancé married. She regularly counseled sexual assault survivors and was frustrated that abused children often had no safe place to go, so she started Kara Olmurani and runs it on a shoestring. It takes in girls 14 and under but can’t begin to meet the need. If Gobanga can raise the money, she would like to expand the safe house and open a similar home for abused boys.


These are hard stories to hear, I understand. But change will come only when we talk about these difficult topics — and prosecute perpetrators.

One girl in the safe house told me that after a pastor raped her at the age of 12 she tearfully told her father: “He did something to me. I don’t know what it was.”


We know what it is, though: an enormous global human rights issue. We won’t eliminate it, but passing the International Violence Against Women Act would help to end the impunity, reducing the number of children traumatized by something that they don’t even understand.


Tuesday, January 10, 2023

Bridging the Generation Gap at the Oscars

Bridging the Generation Gap at the Oscars

How an unlikely alliance between Gregory Peck and Candice Bergen brought the Academy Awards up to date.



Academy President Gregory Peck, at the Forty-first Academy Awards, in 1969.Photograph from ABC Photo Archives / Getty

On April 14, 1969, Gregory Peck strode across a deserted hall of Los Angeles’s Dorothy Chandler Pavilion like a weary cowboy crossing a prairie. He had become the president of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences two years earlier, and his job was to introduce the Forty-first Academy Awards. On camera, Peck descended a mirrored staircase in the atrium, looked around, with his thick eyebrows furrowed, and announced in his deep voice, “It’s kind of lonesome out here. The audience is already on the inside.”

The most nominated films that year were the splashy studio musicals “Oliver!” and “Funny Girl,” whose twenty-six-year-old star, Barbra Streisand, showed up to the ceremony in a see-through pants suit. In an effort to make the Oscar broadcast less lugubrious, Peck had hired the stage director Gower Champion. In place of Bob Hope, hosting duties were shared by “Oscar’s best friends,” among them Ingrid Bergman, Sidney Poitier, Burt Lancaster, and, for the youth market, Jane Fonda, her short hair waved for her role in “They Shoot Horses, Don’t They?”

When Bergman opened the Best Actress envelope, she found a shocker: Streisand had tied with Katharine Hepburn, for “The Lion in Winter.” Because Hepburn was absent, Streisand had no chance of being upstaged. She cooed to her statuette, “Hello, gorgeous!” “Oliver!” won five awards. Several months earlier, the M.P.A.A. had instituted a new ratings system, replacing the old Production Code after three and a half decades. “Oliver!” was rated G, designating it as the kind of wholesome studio entertainment that could be enjoyed by “general audiences,” whoever those were. But a closer look revealed another Hollywood—and a more unconventional kind of movie—clawing at the gates. “Rosemary’s Baby” was nominated only for its screenplay, by Roman Polanski, and for the performance of Ruth Gordon, who won Best Supporting Actress. Stanley Kubrick’s “2001: A Space Odyssey” had managed four nominations, Best Picture not among them, and won for special effects—the only Oscar that Kubrick would ever receive. And sitting next to Streisand was her estranged husband, the little-known Elliott Gould, wearing the droopy mustache he had grown for Robert Altman’s “M*A*S*H.”

After the awards, congratulations on a smashing show poured into Peck’s Academy mailbox (along with a few complaints that it was “too far out”). “At a time when the morals within movies are being pushed to the outer edges of chaos,” Vincent Canby wrote in the Times, awards for films such as “Oliver!” “Reassure everyone in the industry that all is well, that Hollywood really isn’t some giant bordello that’s about to be raided.”

He spoke too soon. A year later, Gould would be nominated for a movie about wife-swapping, Fonda would hold up a fist on the red carpet, hippie garb would turn the Oscar stage psychedelic, and the winner of the Best Picture award would be rated X.

If Hollywood had arrived late to the sixties, the Academy arrived even later. “The Graduate” and “Bonnie and Clyde” made the Best Picture cut in 1968, but both lost to the Sidney Poitier drama “In the Heat of the Night,” one of Hollywood’s belated acknowledgments of the civil-rights movement. The next year, the thirty-six-year-old Paramount executive Peter Bart watched “Rosemary’s Baby” lose the adapted-screenplay award to “The Lion in Winter.” “I was by far the youngest person in the audience,” he said. On the eve of the forty-first awards, the Times mocked the Academy for its byzantine membership procedure, “a trying ritual that rivals finding a cheap apartment in Manhattan,” noting that its three-thousand-odd voting body was “heavily weighted with older people, many of whom are no longer very active in the film business.” The nominations proved the point. As Variety observed, the “Over-50 demographic age characteristics of Academy members was brought sharply home with lack of a best picture nomination for ‘2001,’ this year’s youth fave.”

If anyone could lead the Academy out of obsolescence, reincarnating it like “2001” ’s Star Child, it would have to be someone who understood what the sex-drugs-and-rock-and-roll generation was looking for. Yet the job had fallen to a square-jawed fifty-three-year-old whom most of America thought of as Dad: Gregory Peck.

Peck had arrived in Hollywood in 1943, a former rower with the clean-cut handsomeness to match. He could be stalwart to the point of being stiff, but, with the war depleting Hollywood of leading men, his robustness had appeal. In the nineteen-forties, he was nominated for Best Actor three years in a row, for “The Keys of the Kingdom,” “The Yearling,” and “Gentleman’s Agreement,” which won Best Picture. In the last, he played a Gentile journalist who poses as Jewish to expose antisemitism, a role that chimed with his offscreen liberalism. In 1950, he was nominated a fourth time, for the war drama “Twelve O’Clock High.” Onscreen and off, he exemplified the reasonable man who takes a principled stand. But it wasn’t until he was forty-six that he found the role that burnished his legend: Atticus Finch, in “To Kill a Mockingbird.” From behind round spectacles, Atticus embodied the citizen hero, the gentle father, the fair-minded dissenter. “In that film,” Harper Lee said, “the man and the part met.”

Lee gave Peck a gold watch and chain that had belonged to her late father, the model for Atticus, and he carried it with him to the Academy Awards on April 8, 1963, where he finally won Best Actor. The moral glow of Atticus Finch propelled Peck to a new role as civic figurehead. The next year, he was elected to the Academy’s board of governors. Unlike Ronald Reagan, Peck declined to run for political office, instead becoming Hollywood’s unofficial mayor—Reagan’s liberal shadow. In June, 1967, he was elected Academy president.

Peck’s role as Hollywood’s liberal ambassador came at a cost to his acting career. In the first month of 1969, Lyndon Johnson awarded him the Presidential Medal of Freedom, calling him a “humanitarian to whom Americans are deeply indebted.” Three days later, Vincent Canby panned Peck’s new film, “The Stalking Moon,” writing, “Peck is so grave and earnest it seems he must be thinking about his duties on the board of the American Film Institute, rather than on survival.” Children who were eleven in 1962, when they first saw Peck as Atticus Finch, were now burning their draft cards. They didn’t want a father figure; they wanted rebellion.

Peck wasn’t blind to the sea change. “Film turns young people on like nothing else,” he said in 1968, predicting an “American New Wave,” brought on by such directors as Mike Nichols and Francis Ford Coppola. Where Peck belonged in that future was uncertain. Splitting his time between a Brentwood mansion and a house in the South of France, he preferred Trollope to Philip Roth.

Peck entered 1969 pulled in different directions. His son Stephen had received his draft card and joined the Marine Corps. “He was very patriotic, my dad, even though he was against the war,” Stephen recalled. “He stoically said, ‘Well, you gotta do what you gotta do.’ And off I went.” In the spring of 1969, Stephen shipped out to Da Nang, where his father sent him boxes of Dickens and Brontë.

At the Academy, Peck was putting out fires. He had received “some bruising comments” about the Oscar telecast, he wrote to a friend, “especially about Barbra Streisand’s derriere.” The efforts to jazz up the broadcast had failed to halt a ratings slump. As in recent years, when the #OscarsSoWhite scandal cast a harsh light on the Academy’s sclerosis, the swiftly changing times were rendering the Oscars irrelevant. Peck had to do something bold to bring the Academy up to date. He had already commissioned a study of the membership rolls, with the idea of demoting administrators and P.R. people to non-voting status. Then he got a nudge from an unlikely source: the twenty-two-year-old starlet Candice Bergen.

In 1967, Bergen had returned to Los Angeles after nearly two years of jet-setting, making films in France and Greece, going along on pheasant shoots, and liaising with an Austrian count. She had the statuesque beauty of a Nordic deity, with silky blond hair and a tapered nose that ended in elegantly flared nostrils. Her wardrobe was stocked with Dior and Hermès, and her style fell somewhere between Holly Golightly and Princess Grace.

But the L.A. she came back to was unrecognizable. “Men in page-boy haircuts preened, ruffled and jeweled, lurching in high-heeled buckled boots, fashionably foppish,” she wrote in her memoir “Knock Wood,” “while women’s heads were shorn: they were more eyelashes than hair, peering out from under the spiky black thatch shading each eye and trying to look like Twiggy, their patron saint.” In New York, Bergen had attended Truman Capote’s Black and White Ball at the Plaza, wearing a mink bunny mask loaned to her by Halston. As she swanned among the crowd, a Women’s Wear Daily reporter asked her: Wasn’t it inappropriate to be hobnobbing at a ball while war was raging in Vietnam?

“Oh, honestly,” Bergen sniffed in her bunny ears.

Back home in Los Angeles, she prepared for her twenty-first birthday, sending out invitations to “mourn the passing of my youth” to guests who included Rosalind Russell and Cary Grant. This was the world she knew: the world of her father, the ventriloquist Edgar Bergen, whose fame had come courtesy of his top-hatted wooden alter ego, Charlie McCarthy. When Candice was born, in 1946, the press called her “Charlie’s sister.” In her father’s office, she would gaze at his special Oscar, awarded in 1938—made of wood, with a movable mouth.

Now that Candy had broken through as a Revlon model and a star of “The Group,” the film Sidney Lumet made from the Mary McCarthy novel, her fame eclipsed Edgar’s—the “father of Charlie McCarthy” was now the “father of Candice Bergen.” The sixties had rendered him prehistoric; now Edgar and Charlie were reduced to performing at county fairs. But it wasn’t as if Candy were especially up with the times. “Evidently the Sweet Bird of Youth had passed me by like a Boeing,” she recalled, “and I found myself, at twenty-one, peering at the generation gap like a tourist—from the far side.”

One night, Bergen went to a party in Benedict Canyon in her Dior lounge pajamas. Inside the house, she smelled burning sandalwood. Janis Joplin’s voice blasted from the sound system. The women wore moccasins; the guys were shaggy-haired and festooned in beads and bells. “People were sitting and passing a joint and listening to the music,” she told me, “and I’m there with my crocodile bag and my little kitten heels. It was just, like, where am I?”

Bewildered, Bergen found the host, Terry Melcher. Doris Day’s son, Melcher had been Bergen’s first love when she was sixteen and he was a college dropout in Italian loafers. Five years later, Melcher wore jeans and an Indian shirt, his hair down to his shoulders. He worked at Columbia Records, which placed him at the center of the California rock scene: he produced the Byrds’ “Mr. Tambourine Man” and played on the Beach Boys’ “Pet Sounds.” “You seem so old,” Melcher told Bergen. “Don’t you miss being a kid?”

The two became a couple again. They took motorcycle rides through the mountains, and she tried to fit in with his hippie circle, which included Brian Wilson and John and Michelle Phillips, from the Mamas and the Papas. “I was beyond straight,” she recalled. “No number of robes and beads, no amount of dope was going to change that, though God knows I tried.” She moved into Melcher’s house in Benedict Canyon, where the party had been: 10050 Cielo Drive.

Among their dinner guests was the self-styled shaman Rolling Thunder, who once asked Bergen if she had any fresh meat for a sacrifice; she gave him chicken legs and ground sirloin from the freezer, and he took them up a mountain and burned them. Bergen was finding her side of the generation gap. By 1968, she was covering the Oregon primaries for Cosmopolitan and expounding to the Los Angeles Times on the Maharishi and “cosmic consciousness.” Her Republican father disapproved of Melcher, whose radical politics were rubbing off on his daughter, with her lectures on materialism and vegetarianism. “One week it’s ducks, the next it’s Indians!” her exasperated father would exclaim.

One day, Melcher came home talking about a commune he’d visited at an old movie ranch, where young women doted on their Christlike leader, singing in the nude. Melcher halfheartedly asked if she wanted to meet them, but she had no interest in Charlie Manson.

In January, 1969, Melcher abruptly told Bergen that they were moving to his mother’s beach house in Malibu. Manson had been dogging Melcher for a record contract, and the producer asked friends not to tell Manson his new address. Soon after they left the Cielo Drive house, Roman Polanski and Sharon Tate moved in.

Terry’s stepfather, Martin Melcher, had died nine months earlier; his survivors were shocked to learn that he had embezzled millions from Doris Day, saddling Terry with mountains of financial briefs. Terry leaned on sleeping pills and liquor, and Bergen watched the life drain out of him. Left alone to walk her St. Bernard on the beach, she felt adrift. In April, she watched the Academy Awards and saw that something was missing: people her age. “The Academy needed new blood,” she told me. “It seemed to need blood, period. It skewed way too old.”

She was uniquely qualified to act as a bridge—bred by the Old Hollywood but versed in the New. She had crossed paths with Gregory Peck growing up but didn’t know him well. Nine days after “Oliver!” won Best Picture, Bergen sat down with her stationery pad and wrote in blue cursive:

Not being an Academy member, I am most certainly out of place in writing you. I am a film lover and you seem to be the most receptive and constructive of all Academy Presidents.

Among the rising questions provoked by antiquated Academy rules is that of membership. Many or most members are anachronisms clogging the works of an incredibly facile mechanism called motion pictures.

I would be very grateful if I could help in any way to recruit newer, younger members. Perhaps one way is compiling a list of those whose creativity and energy the Academy never before solicited. And by mailing memberships to those people voted upon jointly by the Academy or its Board of Directors. Application procedures are somewhat lengthy & discouraging.

In this way the Academy might be more of a vital, social organism improving higher, more honest standards and encouraging new talent.

I know you are concerned with these very same things. I don’t mean to be rude, I am simply offering my help and interest if it is needed. (Attested by the fact that I used 3 pieces of good stationery...)

Congratulations to you and Mr. Champion on such an exciting show. You do us proud.

Sincerely,

Candice Bergen

Two days later came a reply on Academy letterhead, along with the closely guarded membership list. “Why don’t you go over it, and then make out a list of young people who should be in the Academy,” Peck suggested. “I agree with you that the Academy must break down resistance to new ideas, and indifference to the kinds of films which have meaning today to younger audiences. Since we can’t put older members, who in their time made important contributions, out on the icebergs to die, we must do our best to balance things by encouraging all of the qualified younger people to join and exert their influence.”

Empowered by her latest crusade, Bergen got to work. Among her recruits was Dennis Hopper, who was about to release a film that would tilt Hollywood on its axis: “Easy Rider.” “He was sort of a brilliant lunatic,” Bergen recalled. “Totally unedited and uncensored, just this force of nature, without any impulse control.” The movie opened at Manhattan’s Beekman Theatre on July 14th, as the summer of ’69 was under way, and made back its budget in a week. Teens lined up barefoot and smoked so much pot in the men’s room that the staff had to remove the stall doors. Life credited Hopper with creating “the style of a New Hollywood in which producers wear love beads instead of diamond stickpins.”

Later that month, as the world stopped to watch Neil Armstrong walk on the moon, Bergen was in Eugene, Oregon, shooting “Getting Straight,” a comedy about a campus protest. It starred Elliott Gould, as a sardonic teaching assistant; Bergen, as his coed girlfriend; and the twenty-seven-year-old Harrison Ford, as a long-haired art student. The movie was the sort of studio concoction that tried too hard to chase the youth vote, up to its ludicrous last shot of Gould and Bergen getting it on mid-riot. As the cast gathered in a hotel room reeking of pot smoke, Bergen rolled her eyes. “Candice said, ‘While you were all downstairs watching the moon landing, I was upstairs watching ‘The Prisoner of Zenda,’ ” Gould told me.

Soon after, Bergen returned to Malibu and to Terry Melcher, who had got hooked on Placidyl. Weird things were happening. One morning, they woke to find that the telescope on the veranda was missing. Days later, a friend passed on the message that Manson was looking for Melcher—and if he happened to be missing a telescope, that’s because Manson had borrowed it. A week later, Hollywood awoke to absolute horror: Sharon Tate and four others had been murdered in Terry and Candy’s old house on Cielo Drive. Bergen panicked. “It could have been me!” she wailed to Melcher. “I could have been killed!”

“We could have been killed,” he corrected her. Bergen moved out.

Rumors circulated that the unidentified killers had a movie-star hit list. Los Angeles was upended with fear and speculation. Was it the Black Panthers? A celebrity stalker? Who was next? Throughout Hollywood, people armored their mansions with automatic gates and guard dogs. Gregory Peck hired a night guard in Brentwood.

Peck was summering in France, conducting Academy business through the post. The most pressing matter was his plan to move noncreative members to “associate” status, without Oscar-voting privileges.

He was also brooding about his son Stephen, in Vietnam. “He spent a year in almost terror of the Western Union,” Peck’s younger son Carey, who, at the time, was starting at Georgetown’s School of Foreign Service, recalled. During his first semester, Carey was arrested twice for civil disobedience. His father’s agent chided him for exposing Peck to potential scandal. But Peck told his son, “These days, if you don’t have an arrest record, you’re not young and alive and standing on the right side of things.”

Bergen was in Mexico making a new film, “Soldier Blue,” when Terry Melcher told her on the phone that Manson had been arrested in connection with the Tate killings. (Manson later invited Dennis Hopper to see him in prison, hoping that he would play him in a movie.) She received a subpoena but arranged to testify in private. She sat in the back of the courtroom when Tex Watson, one of the accused, was brought out. She was asked if she recognized him, but she didn’t. Hippies all looked alike to her.

Bergen had bought her own place, called the Aviary, on the old John Barrymore estate. Having once housed exotic birds and, later, Katharine Hepburn, it was an impractical but romantic dwelling: a Mediterranean tower amid cypress trees, with stained-glass windows and moldy murals that reminded Bergen of the “Arabian Nights” tales. She had a horse named Herschel and spent her days practicing photography and contemplating ecological causes. But, after the Manson murders, everything seemed darker. “I remember John Phillips came over to visit once, with Quincy Jones, and left me a gun,” she told me. “I said, ‘Why are you giving this to me?’ ”

Bergen had kept up her end of the bargain with Peck, cajoling Hopper and other friends to join the Academy. Her father and Peck had co-sponsored her own membership, and she sponsored her flock in turn. In the fall of 1969, she wrote a letter to the Academy president, telling him that she’d filled out the forms he’d sent for nine of her friends. “All of them are people who are a vital and creative part of our industry (perhaps the only vital and creative part of the industry).” But each of them needed a co-sponsor: would he oblige?

By then, Peck was in Tennessee shooting “I Walk the Line,” in which he was miscast as a married small-town sheriff who has an affair with a mysterious young hillbilly. From the Holiday Inn in Cookeville, he kept up on Academy affairs. ABC was “adamant” that Bob Hope be invited back to host the Oscars, but Peck was keen to draw in the New Hollywood set. The Academy’s executive director, Margaret Herrick, wrote to him about the sponsorship cards he’d sent in, many with Bergen’s help. “Warren Beatty and Katharine Ross have been members since 1968; Julie Christie was invited in 1967 and never responded; Dustin Hoffman was invited in 1968 and never responded, but Jack Nicholson, [Elliott] Gould, Peter Fonda, Dennis Hopper and Robert [Forster, the star of “Medium Cool”] should definitely be invited before the end of this year as they are certainly more than eligible.”

The indifference of such young talents as Julie Christie and Dustin Hoffman was bad news. Peck sent them personal appeals, writing, “I urge you to accept membership in the Academy when it is offered to you, as it will be in December. It is not your dues we are interested in. We do want your point of view reflected in the annual voting for awards.” He assured them that even a single vote could change the outcome: “Witness last year’s tie vote between Katharine Hepburn & Barbra Streisand.”

The drawbridge was lowering, and fast. Peck had something even bolder in mind. Over the winter, the Board of Governors finalized a radical new plan: anyone who had not been active in the movie industry for seven years would be made an “associate” member, without an Oscar vote—in other words, put “out on the icebergs to die.” Secret lists were drawn up; lawyers were consulted. The board agreed that the purge would be kept under wraps until after the Forty-second Academy Awards.

Dennis Hopper forgot all about the Academy Awards ceremony, until someone reminded him to show up. “Easy Rider” had been nominated for its screenplay and for its supporting actor Jack Nicholson’s performance. On April 7, 1970, Hopper arrived in a velvet tux, cowboy boots, and a Stetson. Jane Fonda, wearing her “Klute” shag, held up a fist to the roaring fans and yelled, “Right on!” Her political opposite, John Wayne, also received a swell of cheers, although one person held up a sign reading, “john wayne is a racist.” Down the street, some fifty people demonstrated against Hollywood’s stereotypical depiction of Latinos in movies like “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid,” with placards reading, “Power to the Chicanos!”

In the Best Picture race, “Butch Cassidy” was up against the musical extravaganza “Hello, Dolly!” and the period melodrama “Anne of the Thousand Days.” Another nominee was John Schlesinger’s “Midnight Cowboy,” starring Jon Voight as a Texan who goes to Manhattan to be a gigolo but winds up servicing men, while befriending a consumptive con man called Ratso Rizzo, played by Dustin Hoffman. United Artists had actually pushed the ratings board to give it an X rating, which would equal cachet with the hippie crowd.

When the curtains opened, Gregory Peck walked onstage and struck a philosophical tone. “Most of us these days are asking ourselves and each other these questions: What is the meaning of the new freedom of the screen? Is it something to be feared? Should the screen be censored?” Bob Hope, who had been invited to give his usual monologue, said a hammier version of the same. “It’s such a novelty seeing actors and actresses with their clothes on,” he joked, after coming onstage wearing a “True Grit” eye patch. Summing up the new epoch of sex, drugs, and violence, Hope said, “This is not an Academy Awards. It’s a freak-out, ladies and gentlemen.”

So it was. The audience was the generation gap made visible: Vincente Minnelli, Frank Sinatra, and Cary Grant on one side, Jane Fonda, Jack Nicholson, and Dennis Hopper on the other. “These X-rated movies are really something,” Hope continued. “One theatre manager told me he’s been popping corn for six months and still hasn’t plugged the machine in.” The audience laughed, with some groans. “You could feel there was a kind of buzz when Bob Hope would host anything, because he was the conservative,” Candice Bergen told me. “And so it was very much us against them.”

Bergen, one of the recurring presenters (“Oscar’s best friends”) wore a sequinned purple shawl with gold fringe, loaned by her friend Arnold Scaasi. She and Gould handed out the first award, Best Sound, which was won by “Hello, Dolly!” Gould, nominated for “Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice,” was surprised to find himself seated near John Wayne and his wife. When Wayne was called backstage, he turned to Gould and said, “When I go up there, you look after her.” It was unclear whether he knew that he was talking to the guy from the wife-swapping movie.

Presenting Best Cinematography to “Butch Cassidy,” Wayne marked his turf in the culture war, grumbling, “I’m John Wayne, an American movie actor. I work with my clothes on.” Like Hope, Wayne was pro-Vietnam and was despised by the hipper members of the audience.

Each award was a shot across the battle line between the two Hollywoods. The writers of “Easy Rider” and “Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice” lost to William Goldman, for “Butch Cassidy.” Streisand, in a pink pillbox hat, came out to present Best Actor. Both “Midnight Cowboy” actors lost to John Wayne.

Midway through, Hope came out with Fred Astaire. “You’ve never danced in the Academy show, huh?” Hope said. The orchestra played a funky riff, and Astaire, who was born in 1899, began jerking his seventy-year-old frame to an unmistakably seventies sound. He swayed, he twirled—an old man matching his rhythm to an unfamiliar beat. Then the conductor swung into a big-band tune, and Astaire broke into an exuberant tap routine, dancing away the decades, lighter than air. It was a dance to ward off mortality, to reawaken the schmaltzy Hollywood that was falling into the sea. Later in the night, Jon Voight was crossing backstage when he saw Astaire coming toward him.

“We reached each other in the middle of this thing, me six foot two or three and Fred, slight of figure, shorter,” Voight later recalled. “And he looked up and said, ‘Oh, Jon! Hi. Let me stand aside.’ I said, ‘No, no, please—let me stand aside for you.’ . . . That was the meeting of the two generations in the appropriate way, with tremendous regard for each other.”

Finally, Elizabeth Taylor came out to present Best Picture. The winner was “Midnight Cowboy.”

The counterculture had won. “ ‘Midnight Cowboy’ was a total ‘fuck you’ to every way that the town was doing business,” Paramount’s Peter Bart said. “An X picture was acceptable by the Academy. Would that mean that we all should get into the porn business? It was a serious discussion inside closed doors.”

At the end of the night, Bob Hope delivered a farewell that was more like an elegy, or perhaps a white flag of surrender:

Never again will Hollywood be accused of showing a lollipop world. Perhaps by showing the nitty-gritty, by giving the world a glimpse of the element of violence and its destructive effect, it will help cool it. Whatever violence the screen has shown is not an example to follow but to see in its full destructive power. The troubled, kooky characters that people the screens are not examples to emulate but to learn from and try to understand and hopefully, perhaps, contrive help for. More and more films have explored the broad spectrum of human experience. They have fearlessly, and for the most part with excellent taste, examined behavior long considered taboo.

Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton hosted a losers’ after-party at the Beverly Hills Hotel, where Taylor gave one of her diamonds to Gould and Rupert Crosse—the first Black actor nominated for Best Supporting Actor, for “The Reivers”—and let them toss it around like a ball. “It was the size of the Statue of Liberty,” Gould told me. If there was a baton to be passed, this was it.

Hollywood’s warring generations scraped uneasily into the night. John Wayne, Oscar in hand, caught up on his drinking at the Polo Lounge. At one point, his “True Grit” co-star Dennis Hopper approached. Hopper recalled, “He took one look at me and called me a Communist. Then he asked me to come out on his yacht—it’s actually a minesweeper—and he’d explain to me why he’s worth a million per picture.” At the Governors Ball, the official Academy after-party, Frances Bergen expressed her and Edgar’s disapproval of their daughter Candy’s psychedelic smock. “She didn’t have to agree to be a presenter,” Mrs. Bergen huffed. “But, once she did, she should have conformed and worn something elegant.”

Four days after the Oscars, the Academy announced that it had “revised and democratized” its rolls by reclassifying three hundred and thirty-five of its members as non-voting “associates.” As one headline put it, “Stodgy Old Oscar Gets a Facelift.” Ironically, many in the same voting body that had just awarded “Midnight Cowboy” Best Picture were being told that they were obsolete.

Peck set up a committee to review grievances, which poured in. There was the “distressed” former M-G-M producer who did “not understand what is to be gained by tossing others to the crocodiles.” (He was reinstated.) There was the producer of “Bud Abbott and Lou Costello in Hollywood,” who blasted the Academy’s “prejudice or favoritism.” (His appeal was denied.)

Peck wrote gracious but firm replies, took phone calls, had meetings. After the flurry of complaints, the Academy reversed only thirteen decisions. In “To Kill a Mockingbird,” Atticus Finch exemplifies the idea of courage as taking an unpopular stand. The Peck purge of 1970 may or may not have been courageous, but it was definitely unpopular. And by putting the survivors of Hollywood’s golden age out to pasture, Peck was hastening the demise of the Hollywood that had created him, the only one in which he made sense.

Nearly half a century later, the Academy took similar measures after the #OscarsSoWhite outcry, bringing in hundreds of diverse new members, including Idris Elba, America Ferrera, and Ice Cube, while demoting inactive members to non-voting “emeritus status.” Responding to blowback from old-timers that echoed the angry letters sent to Peck, the Academy’s first Black president, Cheryl Boone Isaacs, pointed to the Peck purge as a precedent. “In the ’60s and ’70s it was about recruiting younger members to stay vital and relevant,” she wrote to the membership. “In 2016, the mandate is inclusion in all of its facets: gender, race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation.”

Candice Bergen had finally found a role that excited her, in Mike Nichols’s “Carnal Knowledge,” opposite Nicholson. From her bedroom at the Aviary, she could spy with her telescope on the house across the canyon, where girls sunbathed topless around the pool. Bert Schneider, a producer of “Easy Rider,” had just moved in. He intrigued her, as did his pedigree: a child of Old Hollywood who had helped forge the New, just like her. They had met in passing, first at a première and then at the Columbia canteen.

Schneider was becoming less interested in making movies and more interested in revolutionary politics. In one heady weekend, he introduced Bergen to Joan Baez, the guru Baba Ram Dass, and Huey Newton, the Black Panthers’ “minister of defense.” Her parents were even more appalled by her new boyfriend than they had been by Terry Melcher. When Schneider implored Mrs. Bergen to “go with the flow,” she snapped, “No.”

Schneider isolated Bergen from her old friends. The couple housed Abbie Hoffman when he was on the run, and they hosted Hopper when he was in from Taos, zonked. In Washington, D.C., they joined an antiwar demonstration, lying down in the Senate chamber and getting arrested. By 1972, Bergen was crossing the country campaigning for George McGovern while her father stumped for Nixon, baffled that she would throw away her inheritance on some socialist tax rate.

That same year, Schneider arranged for Charlie Chaplin to return to America with his wife Oona to receive an honorary Oscar—his first time in the country since he had been effectively exiled during the Red Scare two decades earlier. Bergen photographed the honoree for the cover of Life, and the couple accompanied the Chaplins to the Oscar ceremony, where Bergen watched Chaplin bound offstage, beaming like a schoolboy, so emotional that he misplaced his statuette.

Three years later, Schneider made his own splash on the Oscar stage when his antiwar film “Hearts and Minds” won Best Documentary Feature. “It is ironic that we are here at a time just before Vietnam is about to be liberated,” he said in his speech, then read a telegram from the Vietcong expressing “greetings of friendship to all the American people.” Backstage, the appalled Bob Hope scrawled a statement on behalf of the Academy and handed it to Frank Sinatra to read onstage, disowning “any political references made on the program.”

But the days of the apolitical Oscars were over. And so were Schneider and Bergen—a casualty of Bergen’s yearning for independence and Schneider’s belief that monogamy was a “bourgeois concept.”

In June, 1970, Gregory Peck declined to run for another term as Academy president. His tenure had been transformative, even if his entreaties to the New Hollywood cohort didn’t always stick. “The Academy is only two or three years behind the critics,” he said backstage at the 1971 ceremony, adding, “I tried to get the young people involved in the Academy, but it’s impossible to reach them.” Hopper and Peter Fonda belong to the Academy, he said, “but they wouldn’t get involved.” Hopper’s Academy membership lapsed in 1972, owing to nonpayment of dues.

Peck’s next film was “Shoot Out,” another disappointing Western. Peck reflected, “It was humiliating to work in mediocre films—not that I ever felt a lowering of self-esteem, but it was embarrassing to know that people who had liked my earlier work weren’t enjoying my latest movies.” It would take five more years for New Hollywood to find a role for him, in “The Omen.”

His son Stephen returned from Vietnam the spring that “Midnight Cowboy” won. “I was pretty shut down,” Stephen said. Two of his buddies had been killed by artillery ten feet from him. His father tried to draw him out, with little success.

Soon after Stephen came home, Peck optioned a play called “The Trial of the Catonsville Nine,” about a group of activists who burned three hundred and seventy-eight draft files in the parking lot of a Maryland draft-board office and were sentenced to multi-year prison terms. He secured a quarter million dollars to film it.

The movie was praised at Cannes but did little business back home. Peck joked, “All things considered, it may have shortened the war by about fifteen minutes.” The movie didn’t win him an Oscar, but he received a different sort of honor: when Nixon’s enemies list was made public, in 1973, the name “Gregory Peck” was on it. America’s dad had finally joined the revolution. ♦