La difusa línea entre el bien y el mal en Moby Dick y en el cine posterior a la Segunda Guerra Mundial: cómo John Huston interpretó la novela de Melville en su adaptación cinematográfica
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24197/ersjes.45.2024.192-216Palabras clave:
Moby Dick, Herman Melville, John Huston, ambigüedad, el bien y el malResumen
John Huston apreció ambigüedad en la representación del bien y el mal en Moby Dick, de Melville, y la trasladó a su adaptación cinematográfica de 1956. La estética de la recepción de Hans Robert Jauss complementa este análisis de ambas obras con la reacción de sus respectivos públicos. Se analiza a Moby-Dick junto con su adaptación, considerando la obra como un texto fluido, para ofrecer una perspectiva más profunda sobre su ambigüedad entre el bien y el mal. Mientras que la novela responde a la visión entusiasta de la naturaleza del transcendentalismo y a su búsqueda de verdades esenciales, la adaptación de Huston refleja cómo el cine posterior a la Segunda Guerra Mundial recibió la influencia del conflicto y las consiguientes dificultades para separar el bien y el mal en el ser humano, al que se consideraba capaz tanto de sublimes actos nobles como de un mal devastador.
Descargas
Referencias
“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.
Descargas
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2024 Unai Izquierdo Berasaluce
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
Los autores/as que publican en ES Review. Spanish Journal of English Studies conservan los derechos de autoría y propiedad intelectual de su obra y únicamente ceden a la revista los derechos de primera publicación, bajo licencia no exclusiva.
Al mismo tiempo, todos los trabajos publicados en ES Review hasta nº 43 se distribuyen bajo una Licencia Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0), mientras que aquellos publicados a partir de nº44 estarán bajo una Licencia Creative Commons Atribución 4.0 Internacional (CC BY 4.0).
Los autores/as pueden volver a publicar sus artículos en otro medio impreso, previa solicitud dirigida a la dirección/editorial, y siempre y cuando se indique que el trabajo fue publicado originariamente en ES Review. Spanish Journal of English Studies.