The Blurred Line between Good and Evil in Moby-Dick and Post-WWII Cinema: How John Huston Read Melville for his Movie Adaptation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24197/ersjes.45.2024.192-216Keywords:
Moby-Dick, Herman Melville, John Huston, ambiguity, good and evilAbstract
John Huston found ambiguity between good and evil in Melville’s Moby-Dick, which he represented in his 1956 movie adaptation. Hans Robert Jauss’ reception theory complements this analysis of both works through the reactions of their audiences. Moby-Dick is analyzed together with its adaptation, considering the work as a fluid text, to offer a deeper perspective on its ambiguity between good and evil. While the novel responds to Transcendentalism’s enthusiastic view of nature and its search for essential truths, Huston’s adaptation reflects how post-WWII cinema was influenced by the conflict and the consequent difficulties in separating good and evil in humans, who were seen as capable of both sublime noble acts and devastating evil.
Downloads
References
“The Romantic Period (1785–1830).” The Norton Anthology of English Literature, vol. 2, edited by M. H. Abrams et al., W.W. Norton, 2000, pp. 1–23.
Battersby, Christine. The Sublime, Terror, and Human Difference. Routledge, 2007.
Bercaw Edwards, Mary K. Cannibal Old Me: Spoken Sources in Melville’s Early Works. Kent State UP, 2009.
Bryant, John. “Rewriting ‘Moby-Dick’: Politics, Textual Identity, and the Revision Narrative.” PMLA, vol. 125, no. 4, 2010, pp. 1043–60, doi.org/10.1632/pmla.2010.125.4.1043.
Bryant, John. “Wound, Beast, Revision: Versions of the Melville Meme.” In The New Cambridge Companion to Herman Melville, edited by Robert S. Levine, 2nd ed., Cambridge UP, 2013, pp. 202–18, doi.org/10.1017/cco9781139149952.016.
Burke, Edmund. “A Philosophical Inquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful.” The Works of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke. 1792. Vol. 1, Project Gutenberg, 2005, pp. 67–263, www.gutenberg.org/files/15043/15043-h/15043-h.htm/.
Cook, Jonathan A. Theodicy, Eschatology, and the Biblical Sources of Moby-Dick. Northern Illinois UP, 2012.
Chorley, Henry F. “An Ill-Compounded Mixture.” Moby-Dick, edited by Hershel Parker, 3rd ed., Norton, 2018, pp. 581–83.
de Sousa, Maria Isabel. Environmental Concerns in Melville’s Moby-Dick and Thoreau’s Walden. Universidade de Aveiro, 2013. MA thesis.
Eller, Jon R. “Adapting Melville for the Screen: The Moby Dick Screenplay.” The New Ray Bradbury Review, edited by William F. Touponce et al., Kent State UP, 2008, pp. 35–60, dx.doi.org/10.1353/book14389.
Finkelstein, Dorothee Metlitsky. Melville’s Orienda. Yale UP, 1961.
Gasché, Rodolphe. “… And the Beautiful? Revisiting Edmund Burke’s ‘Double Aesthetics.’” The Sublime: From Antiquity to the Present, edited by Timothy Costelloe, Cambridge UP, 2021, pp. 24–36, doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511978920.004.
Gray, Richard. A Brief History of American Literature. Blackwell, 2011.
Hayes, Kevin J. The Cambridge Introduction to Herman Melville. Cambridge UP, 2007.
Herbert, T. Walter. “Book Review: Inscrutable Malice: Theodicy, Eschatology, and the Biblical Sources of Moby-Dick.” Leviathan: A Journal of Melville Studies, vol. 17, no. 2, June 2015, pp. 95–98, doi.org/10.1525/ncl.2014.69.3.409.
Himmelfarb, Gertrude. One Nation, Two Cultures: A Searching Examination of American Society in the Aftermath of Our Cultural Revolution. Penguin Random House, 1999.
Holmqvist, Kenneth, and Jaroslaw Pluciennik. “A Short Guide to the Theory of Sublime.” Resources in Stylistics and Literary Analysis, vol. 36, no. 4, 2002, pp. 718–36.
Horton, Scott. “Melville – What the Whale Teaches Us.” Harper’s Magazine, May 2010, www.harpers.org/2010/05/melville-what-the-whale-teaches-us/.
Hunter Ferris, Daniel. The Collision of Romanticism and Modernism in Post-World War II American Cinema: A Theoretical Defense of Intellectual History in The Undergraduate Classroom. University of North Dakota, 2013. PhD thesis.
Hutcheon, Linda. A Theory of Adaptation. Routledge, 2006.
Inge, Thomas M. “Melville in Popular Culture.” A Companion to Melville Studies, edited by John Bryant, Greenwood, 1986, pp. 695–739.
Ishag, Saada. “The American Novel: Two Studies. An Analysis of Typee, Mardi, Moby-Dick, and The Confidence Man.” The Emporia State Research Studies, vol. 14, no. 2, 1965, pp. 5–62.
Jauss, Hans Robert. Toward an Aesthetic of Reception. Harvester Press, 1982.
Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason. Translated by Marcus Weigelt, Penguin Classics, 2003.
Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Practical Reason. Translated by Thomas K. Abbott, Dover Publications, 2004.
Kant, Immanuel. Kant’s Critique of Judgement. Translated by J. H. Bernard. Andesite Press, 2015
Leroux, Jean-François. “Wars for Oil: Moby-Dick, Orientalism, and Cold War Criticism.” Leviathan: A Journal of Melville Studies, vol. 11, no. 1, 2009, pp. 19–35, doi.org/10.3138/cras.39.4.423.
Levine, Alan J. “Bad Old Days:” The Myth of the 1950s. Transaction, 2008.
Melville, Herman. Moby-Dick. 1851. Edited by Hershel Parker, 3rd ed., Norton, 2018.
Melville, Herman. Typee: A Peep at Polynesian Life. 1842. Boston, 1892.
Meyers, Jeffrey. John Huston: Courage and Art. Crown Archetype, 2012.
Metz, Walter C. “The Cold War’s ‘undigested apple dumpling’: Imaging Moby-Dick in 1956 and 2001.” Literature/Film Quarterly, vol. 32, no. 3, July 2004, pp. 222–28, www.jstor.org/stable/43797181v/.
Niemeyer, Mark. The Divine Magnet: Herman Melville’s Letters to Nathaniel Hawthorne, Orison Books, 2016.
Novak, Frank J. “‘Warmest Climes but Nurse the Cruelest Fangs’: The Metaphysics of Beauty and Terror in Moby-Dick.” Studies in the Novel, vol. 15, no. 4, 1982, pp. 332–43, www.jstor.org/stable/29532238/.
Patterson, James T. Grand Expectations: The United States, 1945–1974. Oxford UP, 1996.
Paulson, Ronald. Representations of Revolutions: 1789–1820. Yale UP, 1983.
Pease, Donald. “Moby-Dick and the Cold War.” The American Renaissance Reconsidered, edited by Walter Benn Michaels and Donald Pease, John Hopkins UP, 1985, pp. 113–55.
Rand, Ayn. The Romantic Manifesto: A Philosophy of Literature. Signet, 1975.
Sealts, Merton M. Melville’s Reading. University of South Carolina Press, 1988.
Spengler, Birgit. Literary Spinoffs. Rewriting the Classics – Re-Imagining the Community. Campus Verlag, 2015.
Stern, Milton R. “The Whale and the Minnow: Moby Dick and the Movies.” College English, vol. 17, no. 8, 1956, pp. 470–73, doi.org/10.2307/495699.
Weinstein, Cindy. “Melville, Labor, and the Discourses of Reception.” A Cambridge Companion to Herman Melville, edited by Robert S. Levine, Cambridge UP, 1998, pp. 202–23, doi.org/10.1017/CCOL0521554772.010.
Yu, Hao, and Chi, Ren. “White Whale in Moby-Dick.” CsCanada, Crosscultural Communication, vol. 9, no. 6, 2013, pp. 14–17, doi.org/10.3968/j.ccc.1923670020130906.H723.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Unai Izquierdo Berasaluce
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain publishing rights and grant ES Review. Spanish Journal of English Studies right of first publication.
Simultaneously, all articles and reviews published in ES Review until nº 43 are available under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) while those published from nº 44 onwards will be available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), by which others are allowed to share and use their work with an acknowledgement of the work’s authorship and initial publication in this journal.
In addition, ES Review allows authors to arrange additional contracts for the non-exclusive publication of the journal’s published version of the work (e.g., in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal. In such a case, authors are required to approach the editor(s)/publisher to request permission.
