The Cold War's "Undigested Apple-Dumpling": Imaging Moby-Dick in 1956 and 2001

By Metz, Walter C. | Literature/Film Quarterly, January 1, 2004 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

The Cold War's "Undigested Apple-Dumpling": Imaging Moby-Dick in 1956 and 2001

Metz, Walter C., Literature/Film Quarterly

On 10 September 2001, I was writing the following as a chapter in my book project about canonical novels adapted into Cold War American films: In Approaches to Teaching Moby-Dick, one of a series of pedagogically-oriented Modern Language Association books on classic literature, Martin Bickman makes the following claim about the 1956 Hollywood film version of Melville's mid-nineteenth-century novel, directed by John Huston:

There is widespread agreement . . . that the 1956 Warner Brothers film of Moby-Dick, casting Gregory Peck as Ahab and something like the Goodyear Blimp as the whale, is unsatisfying. Milton R. Stern, however, ingeniously shows in "The Whale and the Minnow: Moby-Dick and the Movies" how a comparison of the film with the book can highlight the nature and strengths of the latter. (15)

As much of my previous work on film adaptation has shown-for example, my defense of Martin Ritt's 1959 melodramatic film version of William Faulkner's The Sound and the Fury-the elitist assumptions imbedded in such a knee-jerk critical assault on Hollywood films need to be challenged.1 This paper proposes to question the "widespread agreement" that the only things to be said about Huston's film version of Moby-Dick are that it is obviously inferior to Melville's original and that it sports a rubbery special effects whale.

To pursue such a project, I will explore a set of critical approaches to Melville's novel that center on the 1950s as a crisis point in Moby-Dick criticism. In particular, this critical strand centers on the New Historicism's assault on accepted notions of the meanings of the key texts of the American Renaissance. Led by "New Americanist" Donald Pease, this criticism has suggested that the increased attention to Moby-Dick in post-World War II America was driven by Cold War ideology. By reading F. O. Matthiessen's American Renaissance as expressive of these ideological concerns, Pease argues, in his essay, "Moby-Dick and the Cold War," that Melville's novel was appropriated during the Cold War as a direct expression of a simplistic battle of good and evil, between an Ishmael who allegorically codes for freedom and a totalitarian Ahab. Of course, more generalized studies of the Cold War critical establishment's ideologically-driven readings of canonical literature have situated the Moby-Dick case within a larger paradigm. Geraldine Murphy's "Romancing the Center: Cold War Politics and Classic American Literature" is one such case in point.

This paper will use such criticism as a methodology for interrogating John Huston's film as a critical act, engaging with the Cold War assumptions as to the meaning and scope of Melville's Moby-Dick as it would have been understood circa 1956. First and foremost, such criticism pushes the apocalyptic components of Melville's novel to the foreground. A novel that uses the Pequod as a microcosm of American diversity-in terms of class and race-ends with the destruction of that symbol. Furthermore, as Lakshmi Mani proposes in The Apocalyptic Vision in Nineteenth Century Fiction, Melville's apocalyptic ending relies on the vast ocean as the site of imperialist conquest and its failure, an ocean that clearly resonates with Pacific atomic bomb testing prevalent in the American consciousness of the 1950s. Thus, when Pease suggests, "That final cataclysmic image of total destruction motivated Matthiessen and forty years of Cold War critics to turn to Ishmael, who in surviving must, the logic would have it, have survived as the principle of America's freedom and who hands over to us our surviving heritage," it can be made resonant with Huston's film's Cold War activation of Richard Basehart-as-Ishmael's ideological survival of the United States in its conflict with the Soviet Union.

Continuing with such top-down political readings of the film, one would observe that Melville's engagement with theories of leadership-contained in his examination of Ahab's ruination of the "ship of state" and its resonance with Thomas Hobbes's Leviathan, for example-would be pertinent for a film made at the moment of Dwight Elsenhower's 1956 defeat of Adlai Stevenson.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Cite this article

Cited article

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

The Cold War's "Undigested Apple-Dumpling": Imaging Moby-Dick in 1956 and 2001


Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?