‘Breakfast at Tiffany’s May Not Be as Charming as We Remember

Blake Edwards’ Breakfast at Tiffany’s, based on the Truman Capote novel of the same name, is often viewed as a classic of American cinema. It’s often remembered for the sweet love story between its two main characters, Holly Golightly (Audrey Hepburn) and Paul Varjak (George William Peppard); and, of course, for Hepburn’s dazzling fashion looks. Who could ever forget Hepburn’s soothing voice singing “Moon River” as she lightly strums a guitar out her New York window? However, under the glitz and glamor of its exterior lies a dark underbelly, full of problematic elements that render Breakfast at Tiffany’s less charming than many fans may recall. For one, there is a horrific case of yellowface in the form of Mickey Rooney‘s character, Mr. Yunioshi. As atrocious as this is on its own, the character of Holly Golightly herself has a darker truth that peels back the cover of glamorous urbanity.

Breakfast at Tiffany’s

Breakfast at Tiffany’s is a romantic comedy film by director Blake Edwards and is based on Truman Capote’s 1958 novella. The 1961 film stars Buddy Ebsen, Audrey Hepburn, Patricia Neal, and George Peppard. The plot revolves around Holly Golightly as she falls in love and the trials and tribulations that come along with it.
 

Release Date

October 6, 1961

Director

Blake Edwards

Cast

Audrey Hepburn , George Peppard , Patricia Neal , Buddy Ebsen , Martin Balsam , José Luis de Villalonga

Runtime

115 minutes

Writers

Truman Capote , George Axelrod

What Does Holly Golightly Do in ‘Breakfast at Tiffany’s’?

Firstly, the air needs to be cleared about the profession of Ms. Golightly, who, in 1961, may have needed to hide it. In more modern times, it can simply be stated that she’s a sex worker of some stripe. The profession, having more recognized forms in today’s world, largely doesn’t hold the same stigma that it did in 1961, which is likely why the film tries to hint and intimate at the plainly obvious. Today, there is also a whole spectrum of activities covered under “sex work” as a general term (all of which would’ve been discouraged in cinema at that time). Golightly is seen entertaining men of status and wealth as well as known mafia associates. She even describes a mysterious type of “photo” she may agree to take with her neighbor, Mr. Yunioshi (more on him later). Since she has no other stated source of income, the audience is left to draw their own conclusion as to her revenue stream since even in 1961, apartments in New York City didn’t come cheap. Whichever view one takes, anything even slightly risque was not likely to make it past contemporary censors, especially in an era when television couples generally slept in separate beds.

Related

Why Marilyn Monroe Turned Down ‘Breakfast at Tiffany’s’

“You call yourself a free spirit, a wild thing.”

In an interview with Playboy (via The New Yorker), however, author Truman Capote was quoted as saying that the character of Holly Golightly was an “American geisha,” and that she was “not precisely a call girl.” While this distinction may hold weight in the novella, the movie’s portrayal of Golightly is not so ambiguous. Whether Edwards intentionally didn’t make such a distinction, or didn’t think one existed, is unknown. Since today’s society is able to discuss sex (and sex work) more openly, whatever the services were that Golightly provided would still fall squarely within the contemporary spectrum (which is an expansion of what would’ve also been considered sex work in 1961). We do know from instances in the film that strongly hint at this, but the most obvious and germane is when Golightly mentions receiving $50 for the “powder room.” Even given the rate of inflation, only the most purposely obtuse viewer will see this as anything but an obvious exchange of money for services rendered.

Why Did ‘Breakfast at Tiffany’s Hide Holly’s Sex Work?

So, why steep the truth in a clandestine metaphor? The obvious answer is that audiences are supposed to love Holly Golightly; Holly’s the woman every young man wants to marry, and every older man wants as his daughter. But in 1961, the charming leading lady of a major film couldn’t be a sex worker. Not because there was a dearth of them in 1961, nor was it less lucrative or known than today, but art tends to cycle between the ideal and the real (The Hays Code sought to enforce the former). The cultural changes of the ‘60s and ‘70s paved the way for a more open (though not completely so) society where stories can feature sex workers in any role. This begs the question that if Breakfast at Tiffany’s were made today, could Holly Golightly be a sex worker in an overt way? We can wait for a reboot, but it doesn’t really matter because today, as should have been the case in her day, she can be whatever she wants.

Mickey Rooney’s ‘Breakfast at Tiffany’s Character Is a Horrific Case of Yellowface

However, if the film were made today, it would certainly not feature the buffoonish, befuddlingly insensitive display of Mickey Rooney (a very white man) as Mr. Yunioshi, Holly’s non-descript, East Asian neighbor. Rooney’s impression was not new for the time; in fact, it’s part of a tradition known as yellowface, where white actors are made up to look East Asian, rather than casting someone of that actual descent. The most glaring example of this, besides Rooney’s part in Breakfast at Tiffany’s, is the Charlie Chan series of films in the ‘30s and ‘40s, which started with East Asian actors, and then switched to a Swedish-born lead for the titular character. This, of course, was not due to a lack of East Asian leading men but stemmed more from rising anti-Japanese sentiment among many white Americans in the lead-up to, and aftermath of, WWII.

The character of Mr. Yunioshi exists in the novella but is given relatively little attention, certainly nothing near what viewers see in the movie, and is not detailed the same way. If there were a populated list of the most insulting East Asian stereotypes, Breakfast at Tiffany’s would check them all off in a clean sweep. But more than being a caricature of Asian Americans, Rooney’s perplexing performance is also a needlessly farcical slapstick bit that seems to fit into Vaudeville, rather than the rest of the movie. Intended as a sort of comic relief, the audience is forced to ask themselves whether the rest of the film is even tense enough to need it, given its halcyon, and rather subdued, mood. Mr. Yunioshi’s appearances on screen seem to exist almost in a different movie as if the editors lost the original footage on the cutting room floor and spliced two movies together hoping nobody would notice.

To go to such great lengths to make an undeserved affront to an entire group of people, and not even workshop the scenes to see if they fit, just adds insult on top insult. It should be noted that the condemnation of Mr. Yunioshi is not a recent revelation, as even when it was released, many viewers, including critics from The Hollywood Reporter, noted the offensive nature of the character. For that reason, Breakfast at Tiffany’s is often the subject of boycotts, with one television station in the UK, according to The Express, even airing a version with Mickey Rooney’s scenes removed entirely.

Despite the controversy, Breakfast at Tiffany’s endures as a muniment of must-see American cinema, and it’s ultimately up to viewers to decide for themselves. Every generation judges what is acceptable, and what should be culled for posterity based on their own social norms and morals. Regardless, it cannot be denied that Breakfast at Tiffany’s has carved out a place for itself in cinema history — it just might not be as sweet and charming as we like to remember it as.

Breakfast At Tiffany’s is available to stream on Paramount+

Watch on Paramount+