Annotated entries for all important books, articles, book reviews, dissertations, theatrical productions, reviews of productions, audiovisual materials, electronic media, and other scholarly and popular materials related to Shakespeare and published or produced between 1972 and mid-2001.

Part of the Slide Collection of Literary Landscapes.

Morris, Christopher D. "The Direction of North by Northwest." Cinema Journal 36 (1997): 43-57.

    In this article Morris closely scrutinizes the title of the film "North by Northwest". As is noted elsewhere, this is not a true heading and many wonder where Hitchcock and Lehman came about the title. Morris sides with those who believe it is a play off of Shakespeare's line when Hamlet declares to his confidante Guildenstern: "I am but mad North-North-West. When the wind is southerly I know a hawk from a handsaw." From this, we understand that Hamlet has at least some (if not complete) control over his apparent madness. Perhaps he is strategically mad to his own ends, and the same could be said about Thornhill as well. Torn away from his posh lifestyle and Madison Avenue job, he is thrown into a world of foreign spies and front page headlines. For a good part of the film, nobody believes he is telling the truth and is instead attempting to deceive others about his drunken driving in a stolen Mercedes or rather that he has simply gone mad. Even his mother demands he "pay the two dollars", meaning accept the small punishment and end the charade. The audience is never completely convinced of the existence of a separate Kaplan until we find out Kaplan's wardrobe implies a man much shorter than Thornhill. In the end, Thornhill is vindicated and the truth would be revealed to all.

    Unlike Hamlet, Thornhill does not require long thought before actions. While Hamlet is often suffering in an existential quandary and must laboriously consider each of his actions, Thornhill acts impulsively. Until he falls for Eve he is in survival mode, looking only to clear his name and resume his comparatively dull life. It is through this apparent impulsivity that it becomes clear the madness is only a ruse. For example, his seemingly erratic actions at the art auction serve his interests of escaping the thugs. This shows Thornhill has great ingenuity and creativity at his disposal, no doubt skills honed from his career spinning slogans on Madison Avenue. The feigned madness that is shared between the Hamlet and Thornhill, coupled with the fact that North by Northwest is not a valid direction leads to the conclusion that the title is in fact a reference to Shakespeare's work.  By naming the film after this reference, Hitchcock helps the more insightful audience members better understand and analyze the actions of Thornhill and thus add the depth of the film.

Vest, James M. “Reflections of Ophelia in Alfred Hitchcock’s Vertigo.”The Journal of
        the Midwest Modern Language Association 1989, 1-9. JSTOR. University of Pennsylvania
        Library, Philadelphia. 4 Apr. 2008. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/1315269>.

         Focusing on the use of water as a pivotal plot device, James M. Vest attempts to draw a connection between Shakespeare’s Hamlet and Hitchcock’s Vertigo. He states that in Vertigo “water couples with the idea of the suicide of a beautiful young woman in ways that precisely reflect images of Ophelia” (1). Shakespeare’s work is said to have been very influential to Hitchcock, who grew up reading his plays. Vest believes that Vertigo is Hitchcock’s attempt at creating a modern Hamlet. After Madeleine falls we see her floating in the water in a posture that draws striking parallels to Ophelia’s suicide. Hitchcock insisted on surrounding the dead body with flowers, a depiction seen in John Everett Millais’s painting of Ophelia in the stream. The connection is further emphasized throughout the film when Madeleine talks about her previous falls into water. Scottie serves as the “Hamlet-like hero” who develops an unexpected relationship with her. Vest also notes that after Madeleine is fished out of the bay, she speaks incoherently and assumes a “somnambulistic” appearance which rivals that of Ophelia’s madness. Other links include the multiple roles each character fills. In Hamlet, Ophelia is the “playful sister,” the “dutiful daughter,” and the “disenchanted lover, while Kim Novak’s character is associated with Madeleine, Judy, and Carlotta. According to Vest, “both stories conclude with an expression of love intimately linked to death.” He also notes that both Vertigo and Hamlet follow a main character who not only is mentally unstable, but also appears to see ghosts.
        James M. Vest provides us with some very interesting insight onto the inspiration for Hitchcock’s story. Hitchcock had always dreamed of directing a film version of Hamlet, and even went so far as to begin production on such a film in 1946. Although the project never came to be, it is clear that his intentions have lived on through Vertigo.
 

In Leitch’s discussion of what he calls fallacies in cinema adaptation theory, he invokes Hitchcock’s name under fallacy number nine, “Source material is more original then the adaptation.” Leitch centers his argument around the idea of auterism. Directors like Kubrick frequently adapted his films from pre-existing source material, yet is concerned to be a very original director. The early films from the Golden Age of Disney can all be linked together whether they are direct adaptation or original stories. All of William Shakespeare’s plays were essentially adaptations of pre-existing stories. He later points out that any work, adaptation or not draws from existing material, usually without even knowing it.

Leitch uses Hitchcock as an example of a director who manages to be an auteur with only rarely using original screenplays, noting in a footnote that Lifeboat as an unpublished novelette is up for debate as an adaptation. Despite having strayed so far from the source material that was not even published, under Leitch’s guidelines, Lifeboat still can qualify as being an adaptation. He disregards the notion that fidelity to source material (in spirit and specifics) and the idea that film adaptations are a way of connecting with the source material as ways of judging an adaptation.

Many criticize the differences without acknowledging the similarities. There’s value in noting that although the character’s names, motivations, behavior, and actions change, certain things did stay the same. Each character comes from the same background and represents the same aspect of society as in the final story. Hitchcock took away the competence away from many of the main characters, the sailors and the self-made man, whom Steinbeck idealized. Some plot elements were retained, though their context changed. Lifeboat is an interesting study for adaptation theory as it breaks with many of the false truths Leitch criticizes in his paper.

            Shakespeare’s play describing Henry the VIII describes the events of Henry’s court from a different perspective than in A Man For All Seasons.  In it, he focuses at first on the strong influence Cardinal Wolsey has upon the King, which greatly upsets the court. Shakespeare proceeds to depict Wolsey as a meddler who seeks to dissolve the King’s marriage to Katherine in order to procure an alliance with the French. He also portrays Anne Boleyn as one who cares little for title or nobility. Later, the King finds Wolsey’s wishes for a union with France and his financial holdings in letters and dismisses him and makes it known he wishes to marry Boleyn, not the French king’s sister. Next, Bishop Gardiner begins plotting against Boleyn, the new pregnant King and Cranmer, her ally and archbishop of Canterbury. Furious with Cranmer’s treatment after being accused of being a heretic, Henry makes him the godfather to his newborn daughter. Cranmer prophesizes that this newborn child, the future Queen Elizabeth, will one day achieve greatness and peace.

            Shakespeare wrote during the reign of Elizabeth and her successor, King James I. The play was first produced in 1612-13 during the reign of King James. History suggests that Cranmer’s forecast is accurate. Elizabeth’s reign was one of the most successful in English history. Accordingly, it was in his best interest to off lofty praise of them, as they also supported theater. Shakespeare, writing in Post-Reformation England is writing a history of a time period not far removed and must have been weary of the sensibilities he could arouse.