Graham, Don. “High Noon.” Western Movies. Eds. William T. Pilkington and Don Graham. Albuquerque: U. of New Mexico Press, 1979. 51-62.

In his essay, Graham begins first with a reaction to the relative lack of critical respect given to High Noon, and continues on to critique a number of interpretations of the film. While accepting the validity of the HUAC  interpretation, Graham believes the film remains effective, even after audiences can no longer relate to any early-50s political messages, because of the depth of emotion and the heroism shown by Gary Cooper’s Will Kane. Even though Graham casually mentions the HUAC and thereafter ignores it, he still manages to touch on the general issues raised by Carl Foreman in his provocative script. Graham focuses on two issues that are enduring enough to appeal to an audience unfamiliar with 1950s politics: the “hypocritical community” and “the issue of transfer of authority from one generation to another” (57).  

            The former issue is much more directly related to the HUAC, although Graham chooses not to emphasize that aspect. Still, the way in which “High Noon mocks and derides the mask of complacent morality” worn by the townspeople is a clear attack on society (56). It takes little imagination to apply the idea of hypocrisy and false morality to the situation of the fervent anti-Communists and those who stood idly by. The idea of a generation gap, manifested in films of the era such as 1955’s Rebel Without a Cause, is only part of a tumultuous social climate that also included the HUAC hearings. Even though the generation gap might be a secondary conflict to the HUAC interpretation, which pervades the film, it still adds to the level of crisis and stress facing both Kane, standing in Foreman’s place, and the townspeople who represent the apathetic American public. Graham’s essay chooses to minimize the HUAC interpretation, but his emphasis on how High Noon revealed social conflicts in America directly relates to the flawed society in which such persecution could occur.

Loy, R. Philip. “Friendly Neighbors All Around.” Westerns and American Culture, 1930-1955. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2001. 121-151.

            In his essay, Loy focuses primarily on the B westerns which typically define the genre, and as stated in his title, these westerns generally present a positive view of the community, with High Noon as “a dramatic departure from the typical B western” (126). As many sources emphasize, the townspeople in westerns were generally marginalized, with the plot focusing mainly on the hero and villain. While accepting this viewpoint, Loy brings up multiple instances of when towns band together, especially in the form of “community associations” (127), which were essentially posses. Although Loy emphasizes how B westerns focused on community, he still acknowledges that “bigger-budget westerns [High Noon included]… were films most likely to focus on the individualist aspect of American beliefs” (148).

Notably, although the townspeople now refuse to stand behind Kane, when Frank Miller was first arrested five years before, it was by Kane along with a large posse, implying a shift in the town’s attitude. It is hardly a stretch of the imagination to think back little over five years before High Noon was released to WWII, which represents for many the pinnacle of American unity. Foreman could therefore be drawing a contrast to a previous stand against fascism and oppression five years before, but a current unwillingness by the townspeople, and implicitly the American people, to stand against a new injustice. By showing how typical westerns featured a supportive town, Loy’s essay brings the townspeople’s cowardly behavior into even starker relief. At the same time, the individualist attitudes of bigger-budget westerns allow for the independence and non-conformist attitude displayed by Kane. Therefore, it is only Kane’s “big-budget” individualism that allows him to overcome the constraints of the unsupportive community.

Bazin, André. “The Evolution of the Western.” What is Cinema? 2 vols. Trans. Hugh Gray. Berkeley: U. of Cal. Press, 1971. 149-157.

             Bazin opens his essay on the western with the declaration, “by the eve of the war the western had reached a definite stage of perfection,” with John Ford’s 1939 western Stagecoach held up as an “ideal example” (149). Obviously such a declaration excludes High Noon, and although Bazin states that he “[considers] it a fine film,” Bazin categorizes it and most A-budget postwar westerns as “superwesterns” (152). Essentially, Bazin argues that the postwar western tried to exceed the prewar perfection through “some additional interest to justify its existence,” such as political or erotic interest (153). Bazin concludes his essay with some examples of 1950s westerns that were content to portray the frontier without “superwestern-style” theatrics, which presents an ambiguous future for the genre.

            High Noon, although explicitly called a “superwestern” by Bazin, still succeeds in his opinion because the story, while moralistic, is the sort that could fit with any genre but was specifically adapted for the western. Therefore, “[Foreman] treated the Western as a form in need of a content,” meaning the plot can stand alone without relying on western kitsch such as western stereotypes or constant violence (152). The anti-HUAC message Foreman implicitly imparts into the film is not just a distraction from pure enjoyment of the Western but what raises High Noon to another level of enjoyment by the audience. In general, Bazin critiques the way in which the “superwestern” displays the “awareness it has gained,” but High Noon serves as an example of a positive development thanks to the additional interest provided by the plot (151). As Bazin acknowledges, many critics “turn up their noses at High Noon,” and although it takes a moral stand that would normally detract from the austere western aesthetic, High Noon’s morality provides the intellectual stimulation that makes it effective as a film.

Drummond, Phillip. “Meanings.” High Noon. London: British Film Institute, 1997. 63-81.

             Drummond’s chapter on the meanings of High Noon has 5 sections, but only two are particularly relevant to the argument: “Social Allegories” and “Sexual Politics.” Rather than taking his own stances, Drummond compiles the thoughts of other critics of High Noon in his essay. “Social Allegories” therefore features a number of critics’ viewpoints, most of whom analyze the film “less as a contribution to the western genre than in its meaning as a film about the post-war years, as a drama about American society in its national and international relationships” (69). Although the HUAC is never mentioned, Drummond includes views regarding High Noon as a metaphor for domestic left-right conflicts, US-Communist relations (especially regarding Korea), and politician’s foreign policies. “Sexual Politics” also includes other critics’ views, which emphasize the idea of masculinity and Kane’s individualism.

            Despite the omission of the HUAC connection, “Social Allegories” still has relevance as part of High Noon’s commentary on postwar America as a whole, since the HUAC was only an example of the general anti-communist paranoia gripping America at the time. Critics saw that “High Noon denounces notions of consensus,” which emphasizes how the film attacked the community as a monolithic, passive bloc. “Sexual Politics” focuses on how High Noon portrays the men of the town as alternatively craven, fearful, and generally not fitting in with the brave, masculine male of the stereotypical western. By portraying the townspeople as cowardly, Foreman shows his clear contempt for those in Hollywood who sided with the HUAC or refused to oppose it out of fear of damage to their careers. Kane, too, is hardly the classic masculine hero, but his mental trials serve to increase the sense of pathos in the film, and helps provide an on-screen representation of the anguish that Foreman surely felt before testifying before the HUAC.

Nussbaum, Martin. “Sociological Symbolism of the ‘Adult Western.’” Social Forces. (May 1961). JSOTR. University of Pennsylvania Library, Philadelphia. 6 April 2008. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/view/2573570> 25-29.

 

            Nussbaum’s 1960 article deals with the “adult western,” which Nussbaum defines as an “art form that expresses the emotions, fears, inadequacies and psychoses of modern man” (25). Nussbaum first looks at a number of reasons why, of all possible film genres, it is the western which best addresses the issues facing society. Nussbaum lists six main reasons, but in general the western manages to give the city-dwelling “modern man” a release from the cramped city and his structured life. Most important for Nussbaum is the idea of the “adult western” as part of “a revolt again rationalism and reason” (28). The western, especially the moralistic sort, such as High Noon, serves both as an escape from a postwar conformist lifestyle and a reminder of traditional values, which are emphasized through the valor of the hero.

            High Noon clearly is a form of the “adult western,” which in many ways is similar to Bazin’s moralistic “superwestern.” Although this essay does not touch on the specific moral points which Foreman expresses through his script, it does help explain why Foreman chose the western, of all genres, to use as the backdrop for his allegorical treatment of the HUAC. The “adult western” is a rejection of the bourgeois city values in which the HUAC developed, causing High Noon to stand out less amongst a long line of individualist, anti-conformist westerns. Kane is a western hero whose appeal lies squarely in the “emotions, fears, inadequacies and psychoses of modern man,” since he too faces these issues. His defiance of the Miller Gang (and Foreman defying the HUAC) is not rooted in calculating, self-serving interest but in an emotional decision based on what is right and wrong, which fits with Nussbaum’s anti-rational theory of the Western.

High Noon presents a failed response to a looming crisis. Even after being alienated and abandoned by the townspeople, Marshall Will Kane nevertheless fights. Therefore, High Noon is about responsibility, both that of the individual, represented by Kane, and the community. These issues particularly resonated with Carl Foreman, the screenwriter, who testified before the House Committee on Un-American Activities while in the midst of the films production and was subsequently blacklisted. High Noon then serves as an expression of Foremans frustration with Hollywood, and American society, for its compliance with the HUACs witch-hunt, and a reminder of his own duty.