Leff, Leonard J. "Reading Kane." University of California Press; Film Quarterly, Vol. 39, No. 1 (Autumn, 1985), pp. 10-21
In this article, critic Leonard J. Leff comments on the meaning of Rosebud.
Leonard Leff aims to examine and explain certain questions regarding Orson Welles’s Citizen Kane. He writes that he wants to comment about the arranger of the images, the audience, and a method of reading the film that would allow one to understand his or her reactions to viewing the film and understand the meaning of what they are seeing. Leff begins by describing the methods of presentation of the character Charles Foster Kane by following the journey of Jerry Thompson, the newsreel reporter asked to discover the meaning of Kane’s last word “rosebud.” The history of Kane’s life is given as a summation of the experiences of those few people closest to him. Though Leff mentions the contributions of Kane’s second wife, Susan Alexander, and his long time companion Mr. Thatcher, he focuses on the revelations from Kane’s personal diary. From this point, the author moves his focus to the symbolic meaning of the sled called “Rosebud.” Does the sled give insight into Kane’s life? Does it help the audience understand the character? Can it be seen as a “missing piece of a jigsaw puzzle?”
Mr. Leff’s explanation of the meaning of the sled gives fascinating insight into Charles Kane’s persona. Rosebud is a sled. It is the sled that Kane was playing with on the day he was sent away from his home and his parents. Leff goes as far as to try to relate the sled as a symbol of Kane’s past – a symbol of his home before his great wealth. Leff writes of Kane’s reaction to leaving is mother, “From Charles’s sullen face, the film cuts to neither Thatcher nor the father. Instead, it dissolves to the boy’s sled. The sound of a train whistle far in the distance, connoting Kane and his guardian’s movement east…” Is the sled a huge puzzle that offers closure to the film? Leff argues that the film affirms this. The viewer is given a huge “rush” -- the timpani rolls, the music retards and crescendos, and the camera slowly zooms into “Rosebud.” The revelation may not solve anything because Mr. Thompson never makes the discovery, but the viewer is given a sense of closure.
In his letter to the editor of the PMLA, Walter Shear argues that Robert L. Carringer’s analysis of Kane’s character in “Rosebud, Dead or Alive: Narrative and Symbolic Structure in Citizen Kane” is overly complex and fails to see the obvious simplicity of the film. Carringer argues that Kane’s personality is a pastiche of the multiple viewpoints of all his closest acquaintances, and that this distorts any seemingly objective display or definitive account of the actual character. Carringer argues his case citing that the only way Kane’s character is revealed in the film is through interviews with close friends, associates and family members. As a result, the character, he argues, is subjected to the various biases of those describing him to the inquiring reporter, Jerry Thompson. Mr. Shear argues on the contrary that Kane’s character is revealed through his desire for people to love him. As Shear cites, “’Love… that’s why he did everything. That’s why he went into politics.’” He states that this relatively simple view can closely describe Kane’s actions and ambitions. Not only does it support Kane’s decision to run into politics; it also justifies Kane’s desire for his paper to have a personal relationship with each one of his readers. He also has multiple relationships in his young adulthood. Shear states that this quest for love could be a search to replace his mother as a source of love in his life. (This being a result of being snatched from his family at too young an age.)
Shear convincingly describes the motives of Charles Foster Kane’s impulses in life – politics, running a newspaper because it would be fun and enthusiastically underwriting his second wife’s singing career – all in an effort to gain acceptance and be adored by the public. With this knowledge in hand, one can very easily watch the film and understand some of the seemingly rash decisions that the character of Kane makes. Who in their right mind, with so many alternatives, choose to run a faltering newspaper “because it looks fun?” With a secure personal fortune and no need to earn money, it would make sense that a person in such a situation would seek to find personal gratification of a love that was never present in childhood.
Carringer, Robert L. "Rosebud, Dead or Alive: Narrative and Symbolic Structure in Citizen." PMLA 91 (1976): 185-193. JStor. 9 Apr. 2008.
This article delves deeply into the role that Rosebud plays in the film, and challenges the significance of the sled as an important element of the story. On face value, the sled is the object that Thompson is out to find from the very beginning, and it can be interpreted at face value as a symbol of innocence lost, as could be suggested by Kane’s own quips about how “if I hadn't been very rich, I might have been a really great man.” However, this article delves far deeper and claims that there is much evidence to suggest that the sled is merely what Hitchcock came to call a MacGuffin – effectively an item of little intrinsic value to the story that allows the characters to stay motivated in their actions. The author sites as evidence the numerous changes between the original script and the final version of the film that steer the film away from focusing on Rosebud as a solution and play up the idea that, as Thompson suggests, that Rosebud is simply one piece in the very complicated portrait of Kane. Furthermore, we are reminded in this article that the character who associated the most importance to Rosebud in the first place, Thompson’s boss, is little more than a mockery of the typical Hollywood producer focused more on “angles” and “gimmicks” than he is about the truth.
Meanwhile, the author asserts that the object to which we should attach far more importance is the little snow globe in the beginning of the film. Kane was a rich man his entire life and worked ardently to craft for himself a world that suited him. He was displeased with the way that things were done, and used his power and influence to create his own world, as is found inside the snow globe, which was ultimately smashed into a number of pieces of glass, representing the different pieces of him that people saw.
Mulvey, Laura. Citizen Kane. Great Britain: BFI, 1992. 49-57.
Orson Welles, himself, discounted the idea that Rosebud was in some way conclusive insight into the character of Charles Foster Kane, denouncing that such a straight-forward analysis would be simple “dollar-book Freud.” However, in part of this essay, Laura Mulvey goes about doing just that, only deeper, applying thoroughly supported psychoanalysis to some of the films most important scenes and explaining the significance that they play in the deeper level of the story.
Mulvey asserts that the informed view can and should attach significance to the sled because the scene in which the sled is introduced is very important in establishing Kane as a character. From a Freudian perspective, we see Kane’s closeness to his mother and the role that Thatcher plays in tearing young Kane away from her, setting up a type of Oedipal triangle that causes Kane to rebel against Thatcher and “everything [he] hates.” Because Thatcher, in contrast to Kane’s real father, represents capitalism, emotionless financial analysis, and crude decision making, Kane comes to despise these things, stuck forever in his childish past that must rebel and wants to be close again to his mother. As the scene comes to a close, the sled is the only thing left among a blanket of white. Mulvey mentions that in Freudian psychology, a memory is something that can be formed and forgotten, only to resurface again at a later time.
This trend of Oedipal aggression against the variety of father-figures in the film further exemplify the role that Mulvey’s psychoanalysis plays in interpreting the film.


