Interview with Mike Farrell
Creating the Mike Farrell Website was fun. What merely began as a fan's appreciation page turned out to be a dream come true. Not only did Mike, after viewing the first, ancient "edition" of the MFAP send me information to put on the pages, he also agreed on doing an interview with me.
An ocean and a continent between us, 9 hours time difference and not an awful lot of time on our hands, the interview took place through e-mail. Perhaps not the most "direct" way of doing an interview, but it certainly has been a wonderful experience and a lot of fun.
If you have remarks, question or whatsoever about the things you read in this interview, feel free to hit the "contact" link at the top of the page.
L.A. van Aardenne; April 1998
Issues
You recently [1998] got appointed to the California Commission on Judicial Performance. What exactly is the influence this Commission has and could you explain a bit about how it works?
The Commission has been in existence for many years, but has only recently been strenghtened by significant legislation, one aspect of which is to ensure that it has more "public members" than lawyers. It is an 11 member commission which now has 3 judges, 2 lawyers, 6 public members (of which I am now one) and has been described as the most powerful commission in the state. We hear complaints against judges in all courts throughout the state and are the only body empowered to act against them if we, after our staff investigates the complaint, deem it to be appropriate. We can either admonish them publicly or privately (the least severe punishment), censure them publicly or privately (a more severe act) or remove them from the bench entirely. I was appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the State Senate and have been very impressed by the seriousness with which the Commission deliberates and the level of commitment of each of the Commissioners. I frankly wasn't sure what I was getting into, but am finding it enjoyable and a serious and worthwhile effort.
Do you know why you were appointed to this Commission?
Not really. I've only met the man who appointed me one time, but he said he had heard me speak somewhere. In fact, on the one occasion we did meet, while he was complimentary about my political activities, we argued about the death penalty. So the appointment was a big surprise.
For how long is this appointment exactly?
The appointment is for four years.
Do you think alternative sentencing has more impact on perpetrators then just sending them to prison where they do their time without being confronted with what they did? And how far should we go with alternative sentencing?
I think alternative sentencing, if I understand your use of the term, is a good idea for some offenders, who can then continue to be useful members of society at the same time as they are having their activities restricted by law, but is not appropriate for those who have demonstrated, for example, a propensity for violence against others.
What do you think about the victim's family having a say in a sentence laid upon a perpetrator? E.g. a judge in Texas sentenced a 19-year-old, who killed two people while driving under influence, to the unusual sentence of having to walk with the photo's of his victims in his wallet for the next ten years; to stand outside a bar with a sign saying he killed two people because of alcohol; to talk to teens and other groups about drinking and driving. He did also serve 6 months in prison. This sentence came about through the victims' family's input. Do you think this is a fair sentence or is it more to "please" the victims' family?
Without knowing any more about the case than you've told me, I'd say that much of what the judge sentenced that young man to was the kind of penalty that might truly have an impact on his thinking in the future. That being so, it sounds like a reasonable enough response.
I think the issue of allowing the victim's family to "have a say" is problematic, however, and should be looked at carefully. Some family members are so traumatized by what has happened to their loved one that they may be tempted to be overly vindictive regardless of what might, to an objective person, be mitigating circumstance. There is in America a political tide now running in favor of what are known as "victim's rights", and that movement, such as it is, tends often to be very angry, very vindictive and overly punitive, in my opinion. Worse, many politicians see it as a likely bandwagon to hop onto, so they use these poor people's upset and misdirected anger for their own purposes, usually without any real concern for the serious psychological needs of these anguished souls who are truly in need of compassionate care and understanding rather than being given a whip with which to scourge others.
What or who motivated you to become so active in good causes, like anti death penalty, human rights, etc?
A lot of things come together, I think. I was raised in a manner that suggested that some behaviors were not appropriate, the death penalty being one. Then, when I was 24 years old, JFK was killed. He was a personal hero; the first president I was old enough to vote for and, like me, an Irish Catholic (though, unlike me, a wealthy one). Events followed which made me feel the government wasn't telling the whole truth about the assassination and that energized me to get involved in ways to insist that we deserved to know the truth about anything, no matter how difficult it might be to understand.
Then, a few years later, the Vietnam war brought all of that home very keenly. I felt my government was not only wrong, but was lying to cover up some very inappropriate choices and behaviors. People on both sides were dying needlessly and that infuriated me.
At about the same time I became involved with an organization that was made up largely of people who had been trying to deal with antisocial behavior. Many of them were former addicts and alcoholics who were trying to get straight. Many of them had been in prison. I learned a great deal about human nature and about the possibilitiy of personal transformation and became convinced that all people, no matter how debased or unhappy, really have the capacity to be decent and productive citizens. I learned that all any human beings wants is to be loved, to be respected and to have attention paid and that if we make the effort to reach out, most people (unless they've been too damanged by their life's experience) will respond positively.
You oppose the death penalty. It isn't the most popular cause you can pick to support and many people simply aren't open for discussions on this subject.
I agree. Many people, I find, are afraid of the unknown and use this issue to try to deal with those fears. It's neither fair nor appropriate, I think, but it's often hard to get beyond that fear.
What do you think can be done to make people more aware of the inhumanity and injustices of the death penalty? It seems, simply presenting the facts as they are is not enough for some. How do you try to reach those people who seem to have their minds set on only one thing: "letting the perp pay for what he did in the most gruesome way"?
Mostly it's through education. I don't believe killing is right under any circumstances, neither when an individual does it nor when the state does it. Most of the people to whom I speak project their own fears into the situation and that makes it harder to deal with, but I do find that when they have it made clear that there are safer, more fair, less expensive alternatives, like life in prison without the possibility of parole, they sometimes can listen. Then, when they learn about the reality of the death system, it opens some eyes. Even people who believe that it's fair to "kill a killer" can sometimes understand that we lower ourselves to the level of that killer by doing to him/her what he/she did to another.
Sometimes this phrase helps people to think about it more objectively: "state killing lowers the entire community to the level of its least member at his or her worst moment." Once we're talking about it rationally, people tend to better understand the problems with a death system, even if one believes that it's ok to kill the "worst of the worst". When they come to understand that a system, by nature, is run by fallible human beings, they realize that mistakes will be made. Then they understand that prejudices play a role, which explains why in America there is a huge disproportion between the crimes that actually take place and the people who are put to death for them. A much higher percentage of people of color are put to death than reflected by those who are actually responsible for capital crimes. The death penalty in America is the exclusive option of the poor. No person of wealth, who can afford a good attorney, ever gets the death penalty. Innocent people, again because of poor representation - or sometimes because of ambitious prosecutors and police who need to solve a case and sometimes aren't too scrupulous about the facts - are sentenced to die and are killed by the state.
In some cases (75 in this country since the death penalty was reinstated after being declared unconstitutional in 1972) people's innocence is discovered and they are released. But that is usually not as a result of the system working well, but rather in spite of its machine-like tendency to grind people up. It comes about because caring people get involved and investigate and put pressure on and finally budge things in the right direction. Sadly, some innocent are put to death. Then, many in our death rows truly belong in mental institutions. Also, too many were children when they committed (if they did) the crime that put them there, and international norms argue that children cannot and should not be put to death for capital crimes because they lack the maturity to fully comprehend the consequences of their acts. (The U.S, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Yemen are the only countries in the world that execute children.)
There are other arguments as well, but it's a long process to get past people's fears and get them to listen to reason on this issue. The long and the short of it is that now that we can incarcerate "the worst of the worst" for life - at much less expense than it takes to go through the capital process and kill them and without the risk of committing an irremediable error - there is really no excuse for the further spilling of blood.
Would you be as compassionate towards people on death row if someone very close to you would become the victim of horrendous crime?
Of course it would be hard to be compassionate towards one who killed a loved one of my own. But that's why we have a justice system that separates the injured party (in this case the family of the victim) from the process. The criminal justice system is intended to protect society, not to get revenge for an individual's loss. We cannot make laws on the basis of someone's pain. We have to make laws that serve the common good and protect the public to the best of our ability. So in the case of a terrible crime, the perpetrator should get a fair trail and, if found guilty, be separated from society for an appropriate period of time - and hopefully have his or her mental and/or emotional needs dealt with during that time. At the same time, society should be responsible for helping to meet the needs and ease the pain of those injured by the crime. All of that can be done and should be done by a caring society - and it can be done with less expense and with less damage to the larger society than a system that simply relies on retribution will bring about.
I know this is a "what-if" question and I hope you will never have to find out, but I think many will wonder if you would still openly oppose the death penalty (like e.g. the people of "Murder Victim's Families for Reconciliation" who have set aside their anger and frustration) if someone close to you was killed, or would you back off and let others continue the work?
Of course I'd still oppose the death penalty and would work to see it abolished. The problem with these hypothetical questions is that I can only answer in the abstract and, therefore, anyone can doubt or argue my answer. There's really nothing I can say beyond that except to say that the challenge to anyone who loses a loved on to a violent act is to find a way to reach deep into one's soul and strive to find a sense of compassion for the pain in the life of the perpetrator of the act. I don't know if I'd be able to respond to that person with compassion. I'd certainly try and I hope I would succeed.
Throughout the years you've visited areas that are ravaged by war, famine, economic and political sanctions, etc. What did you expect to see there and how did you prepare yourself for that? What impact did these visits have on you personally?
To answer the last question first, it's not possible for me to assess the impact those trips have had on me, except to say I've been changed by them - hopefully made to be a better, more open, wiser and more humane person, but that's not for me to say.
Each situation is unique, so I haven't known what to expect except to know that it would not be pleasant. And it hasn't been "pleasant", though I am always amazed and inspired by the spirit of the people I meet, be they the "victims" of the particular tragely or those who have gone there to help.
As far as preparation is concerned, I always study what is available so that I can have some sense of what I'm getting into - but that's never enough. What I try to do, and what serves me best, is to go with an open mind and an open heart.
M*A*S*H
Most people know you as BJ Hunnicutt from MASH. Does it bother you to always be reminded of that and not seen for the work you do nowadays?
Not at all. I loved BJ and loved doing MASH, so I'm delighted with the association.
To what extend has the fame of MASH helped you in getting your message across? And do you think you might have reached as many people as you do now, without the fame of MASH?
No, it would be silly of me to think that I would have achieved a significant public profile without MASH. And even if I somehow did it wouldn't have been as far-reaching as this has been. But all the MASH identification does, it's important to add, is offer the opportunity. The rest is up to the legitimacy and/or credibility of what I have to say and the willingness of people to be open to thinking about it.
How much of Mike Farrell can be found back in BJ?
Well, we're the same height.... In fact, I think that one can't do a running role in a long-term series without introducing significant aspects of one's own character into the person being played. I've long felt that BJ and I are much alike, but have significant differences. I think I have rougher edges than BJ does.
What are some of your best memories of MASH?
It's hard to answer that question only because they are all so great. The games, the fun, the jokes, the hard work, the challenges as an actor, writer and director, the long hours, the important lessons learned and so much more all kind of pile onto one another in my memory. I guess my relationships with the people with whom I worked are the greatest treasures I took with me.
What are some of your worst memories of MASH?
I'm sure there were some long days and some tough times, but they faded away long ago. The death of Connie Izay, our surgical nurse/technical consultant, was very hard for all of us.
In the 8 years that you were part of MASH the bond between cast and crew must have been pretty tight. What happened after MASH? Wasn't it like falling into a gap? Do you still have contact with some of the actors from MASH?
Those relationships were what made leaving the show so painful. Even though we knew we'd try to maintain them, and have, we also knew the reality of today's world (and this crazy business) meant that we'd never again have the same opportunity for intimacy that working together offered.
Yes, we stay in touch. I try to have dinner with Harry Morgan and his wife regularly, sometimes with Bill Christopher and his wife, too. Alan and Loretta and I stay in touch by phone and/or mail and occassionally have dinner. Harry and Bill and I try to hook Jamie Farr in on the dinners, but he's hard to catch. Gary is in touch periodically. And I try to stay in touch with Larry Gelbart. Sometimes we run into each other at events or special occasions. It's always fun.
I read that there were always was a lot of fooling around on the set of MASH. Is this true? And what's the most "terrible" joke you ever pulled on someone on the set of MASH?
There was always laughter and there was a good deal of clowning around on the set, but we rarely allowed it to seriously interfere with the work. Most of the gags were of the "you had to be there" variety that simply can't be explained. It was a matter of a highly intelligent, very dedicated and extraordinary witty group of people coming together on a daily basis to do a show they loved and were proud of doing, putting their talent and their best ideas on the line and having a hell of a good time in the process. Not the sort of thing one runs into often, I'll tell you that.
What do you think makes MASH so popular, even after all these years?
Its humanity. The fact that the writers/producers never talked down to the audience or treated them as if they were stupid. The fact that we always tried to be aware that we had an obligation to come up to our own and the audience's highest expectations. The fact that the writing was consistently a cut above. And the fact that we were portraying a situation everyone could understand and identify with - even if they never go to war, everyone understands the feeling of having to be away from home and loved ones, having to do a job that is hard and, though sometimes awful, still very important, and wanting to do the best they possibly can in the process.
Would you be part of such long-running series as MASH nowadays if it gave you the same opportunities as MASH did?
Well, that's a hard question to answer. I don't think there will ever be another MASH. If there could be, I'd leap at the chance. If another show came along that offered the right ingredients, I might do it. I've turned down a great number of them over the years, but just found one that has promise. So we'll see.
(Just a curious one...)Who came first? Erin Farrell or Erin Hunnicutt, and what does she think of her name appearing on MASH?
My daughter Erin was 2 years old when I went into the show, so I named BJ's daughter after her. I think she likes it.
Filmindustry, past and future work
What was your first role in a film or series and what do you remember the most about that period?
I think my first role was in a TV show. Probably "The Dick Powell Show" or "Ensign O'Toole". I'm frankly not sure. That was an exciting time. I had done some plays and had done a fair amount of studying, so was anxious to get a job - any job. I was very insecure and fearful of doing something wrong so that I wouldn't get another one. I did a lot of watching and listening and generally tried to stay out of the way. Except it wasn't always easy. When I did the Dick Powel Show, the star of that particular episode was Peter Falk. He was playing a deaf man. In the scene in which I took part, he was given or found a note and read it (this had something to do with the development of the story, but I don't remember what it was). What I remember is that as he read the note, he moved his lips. I didn't think a deaf man, at least the kind of profoundy deaf person he was playing, would do that, but I was terrified at the idea of going to him to tell him so. It seemed preposterous that a young punk doing a bit part would tell a highly regarded star that he was doing something wrong. I stewed over it for quite a while, then decided to say something. I caught his attention for a moment and mentioned it. He nodded, thanked me and went back to play the scene - without moving his lips!
Of all the parts you played in films/series, which is your favorite and why?
Oh, I guess in fairness it would have to be B.J. in MASH. I've played many roles that have been fun, some of them very challenging, but with B.J. I got to live with him for a long time, develop him, get to know and like him. One doesn't often get that opportunity. And the circumstance was quite extraordinary. It was a wonderful company of very dedicated professionals who were also nice people, many of whome became very close friends. So it would be hard to top B.J.
You've been active in the filmindustry from the early sixties on. Has the filmindustry changed much over the years? Do you think being active in today's industry is easier than back then?
I think it's harder now. Yes, the industry has changed a great deal and too much of it has been for the worse. There is much too much of an emphasis on money today, both on the part of the actors and on the part of those on the other side. There is much too much tolerance of infantile behavior on the parts of big stars. There is less and less concern about quality in the writing, producing and acting and more focus on using projects as stepping-stones to stardom rather than appreciating them for what they are. I find very little responsibility in the business today. Too many people don't seem to have any regard for the audience and don't seem to be aware of their own responsibilities with regard to what is being taught by the images they are portraying.
I agree that people don't seem to care about what message they spread, but isn't the industry simply acting on what the audience wants?
I think it's too easy to say the industry is only giving the audience what it wants. First of all, few chances are taken. Most people parrot what they see as opportunities for "hits", and most of those today involve violence. People tend to forget that "Forrest Gump", for example, was a lovely film with a great message and also was a big hit. It is, unfortunately, seen as an aberration.
Second, I believe that the visual media are teaching people values. And, sadly, the values they are most often teaching are superficial, often hedonistic, sensationalistic and exploitative of the baser human emotions. We're seeing too much evidence in the world of a glorification of violence and the "might makes right" philosophy.
The filmindustry should take more responsibility for what they are producing. There seems a lot of senseless voilence which is not a good example for kids; for anyone. How far do you think senseless voilence in films influences young viewers and what do you think should be done about it?
I don't think there is any way to know absolutely. My own view is that young viewers are very much influenced by what they see. All one has to do is look at the way fashion is inspired by what is seen and then extrapolate that impact out to the violent behavior of film "heroes".
I would, I think, take issue with your definition of "senseless violence". I think all acts of violence orginate from emotions, even those on film. Just because it originates from emotion, though, doesn't mean it isn't gratuitous an unnecessary. We are, as human beings, not the slave to our emotions. It is a sign of civilized behavior that we rise above our base emotions and teach ourselves to respond in a more appropriate manner.
Who are your examples in the filmindustry?
I suppose there are a lot of influences that make an impact - probably many that one isn't even aware of. My father was a big, handsome, tough man. I kind of thought of him as a John Wayne type, so I developed a kind of semi-adoration of Wayne as a substitute for my father. Only later, when I learned more about the kind of person Wayne was, did my admiration cool.
A character actor named Jack Albertson was a friend and a mentor to me. He lived across the street and would talk to me and try to help. Gave me tips on how to do the work. He also hired me to help him when he had a running role on a television series and a play to do at the same time. It was wonderful experience for me in that I helped him with lines, helped him with make-up and changes of clothes, watched his performances, saw him backstage, etc. I learned a great deal from him. There were many people whose work I admired. Later I learned more about the human being behind the roles and became more discriminating. I also learned a lot about myself.
What are your future plans in the filmindustry? Are you going to act in a film again, or are you focussing on off-screen activities?
I'm producing a feature film right now and will continue to do that kind of work in the future. I'm also interested in writing and directing more. Right now I'm involved as an actor in a pilot film for a television series. It's one of those things that might or might not become a television series. If it goes well, it would be the first one since MASH, so it's kind of a big step for me. I've said no to so many over the years that I'm sometimes surprised to find myself back in this situation. But it's a very interesting project, well written, with a nice group of people involved. So, we'll see.
If you were given an unlimited budget in exchange for making one more film or documentary, what subject would you choose and why?
I have a script right now that I'm trying to find funding to produce. It's a powerful story about two brothers that has some slight similarity to a film I produced about ten years ago called "Dominick and Eugene". It deals with child abuse and brotherly love. It's very powerful. But in answer to your question, I'm not sure there is just one film I want to do. Another I'm trying to find the money for is about a deaf family. A beautiful story.
What advice do you have for people out there who want to have a go in the filmindustry as screenplaywriter, actor, etc?
Get all the experience you can, in as many aspects of the business as you can, and then go to where the action is. Writers, of course, can work anywhere, but to be an actor you have to be able to act. If you want to act in a film, you have to go to the places where the films are being made.
I think the most important thing is to known who you are. Have a sense of your own value, because there are many people who will do everything they can to strip you of that (often because of their own sickness). And sometimes it's just the dehumanizing aspect of the business that is so painful, but one really must have a clear sense of his or her personal value and personal goals - and I'm not talking about awards and a need for validation or stroking - to survive as a healthy human being in this business.
Some personal questions...
JFK was one of your personal heroes. During the making of "JFK - A One Man Show" did you stumble upon new facts that shed another light on his person and did you come across any "new" facts surrounding his death? And what are you personal views on matters as "who-dunnit" and why?
I don't think I came upon anything particularly startling while doing the show. There were things I loved about the man and many things I actually didn't like about him. And more of that turns up in later years. But then, he was a person, with all the faults people tend to have. I love the fact that he inspired people to do better. I've missed that quality in our leaders since then.
As far as my personal views of his assassination are concerned, I really don't know who did it, but I think Jack Ruby's involvement in the killing of Lee Oswald was very suspicious. Much of what I've read and heard gives credence to the theory that a group of anti-Castro Cubans, who were being trained by the CIA to kill Castro, turned on Kennedy after having the rug pulled out from under their effort. I'd sure like to know. And I'd like to see the perpetrators brought to justice. I think much of America's willingness to trust was damaged by the aftermath of JFK's killing. And that was terribly exacerbated by the Vietnam war.
You're active in the filmindustry, you're active in defending human rights, you're a member of several organizations and commissions (and you're doing this interview...). Where do you find the time and energy to do all the things you do?
Oh, I think we all have much more time and energy than we normally use. Things that move me or interest me are things that I tend to get involved in. Sometimes I get exhausted with it all, but then I take a break and do some catch-up. It's really about living a full life and trying to see that one leaves the world a better place.
What do you do in your spare time?
I read a lot. I love spending time with my wife and kids (though they aren't really kids any more). I love to travel. And, when there's time, I love to ride my motorcycle on long trips. Last year I rode across Australia. Later in the year across Canada. Great fun!
Have you ever been on a biking trip to Europe?
Though I've travelled through Europe a number of times, I've not done it on a bike. Yet.
What's your opinion on today's youth? And what message would you like to get across to them?
I find young people thoughtful, hopeful and inspiring. If I could get something across to them it would be to somehow help them understand how good and decent and powerful they are, how much the world needs their unique talents and energies to solve the problems we have so that we can move to the place we all deserve to be. I think too often people are discouraged by negativity - most of it put out by fear-filled people - and are unaware of their own individual potential. I'd encourage them to reach for the stars. To strive and live and, most of all, to love - themselves and each other.
What are some of your hopes and dreams for the future?
The same. I want to help build a world where people are encouraged to be their best selves, where people's talents and ideas are sought out and encouraged so that they can make a contribution. I think too many people today feel they have nothing to offer, that they have nowhere to go, that they don't matter. The most important thing we can do is to help people understand that they DO matter and that they ARE needed by this world and the people in it.
- the end.... for now -