How Green Was My Valley and Auteur Theory

How Green Was My Valley and Auteur Theory

Only having viewed The Searchers and How Green Was My Valley, I can see that my quick judgment of John Ford and his style was premature.  Honestly, I hated The Searchers.  And before you judge me and my lack of culture, can we just remember how Barthes talks about the importance of the reader and restoring the status of the reader (3), and thereby championing the reader…?  So, my reading of the film was somewhat valid, right?  I think it was the overt racism that I couldn’t handle.  It took some discussion to see its high points.  How Green Was My Valley was an entirely different experience for me as the reader. 

Sarris notes that “the way a film looks and moves should have some relationship to the way a director thinks and feels.”  (562)  He goes on to specify that auteur theory is primarily concerned with interior meaning. Such a meaning seems prevalent in the two John Ford films that I have seen.  Perhaps it would be interesting first to note some of the analogous themes and the similarity of technique in his films – some of those patterns that help develop Ford’s auteur style and determine authorship.  The cinematography Ford exhibits in his films is quite breathtaking.  The transition from long, sweeping wide shots to close-ups, especially of the face, is seen a number of times.  It aids the reader in first understanding the scope of the piece and then makes them become intimate with the characters as people.  This demonstrates both his technique and his personal style. 

Wollen advises the reader/viewer to notice where the auteur finds and places value.  In The Searchers and How Green Was My Valley both, it is clear to see the emphasis that Ford places on family (both pieces are centered around the family unit and a desperation to keep it intact) and in the social roles of family members.  Further stylistic themes center around the patriarchal hierarchy in the piece and defined roles of men and women.  The women are expected to behave in a certain way, and when they don’t, it is cause for gossip or retribution.  But Ford doesn’t just stick to expectations.  In How Green he allowed some of the women to break from their central role and exhibit power.  Specifically, the determination exhibited by the mother as she takes matters into her own hands and marches up the hill to face off with the union men in the snowy forest outside the town.  Likewise, the daughter exhibits her own gusto when she breaks into the preacher’s house at night, and in quite a forward manner, resolving to find out his feelings and share her own.  Little differences like this highlight an important aspect in auteur analysis that Wollen hit upon in his article.  Therein, he recommends that we follow the advice of Levi-Strauss, in not only noting the similarities in the works of a particular director, but also their differences.  In “comprehending a system of differences and oppositions” (Wollen 572), the text can be studies more meaningfully.  As a female viewer, I appreciated this contrast. 

Wollen also notes that in Ford’s films, he finds transcendent value in bringing civilization to a savage land.” But he also “sees the values themselves as problematic.” (567)  He is able to demonstrate this through the framing and duration of individual shots.  Technically speaking, one must note the use of silhouettes against the sky, sharp contrast, even in a black and white film, with the black coal smoke against the light colored sky, demonstrating a communal dependency on this resource.  His use of silence and line of sight are of equal importance, allowing the audience to soak in his rich thematic material. 

Further introspection into the works of Ford find commonality in the themes of injustice (and the associated violence) loneliness, necessity of community which was expressly featured in this film in the singing and the coming together to support the family after each accident and loss in such a positive manner.  Conversely, it is seen in the treatment of the boy at school, the retaliation for not joining the union, the gossip descending as the deacons of the town join together to ridicule the unwed mother, and then the preacher and the sister. Often, in Ford films, it seems that the story is seen from the perspective of an outsider who can’t seem to join in; either he is too young, or has done too much to be a part of accepted society.  Each film seemed a play on expressive realism and an emotionally charged take on unusual circumstances facing family life and a struggle to survive.  The central characters are shown as flawed and vulnerable.

Clearly, John Ford was successful for a reason.  His visual style and master story-telling techniques are both sophisticated and accessible.  His stunning aesthetics and strong, clear themes allow for audience identification and alienation at the same time.  As a reader, with a view of both The Searchers and How Green Was My Valley, I am encompassed with the frames shots, of bygone years and the notion that the man has to leave his home and go out into the world, either for solitude, or work, to forget the past, or chart off into the unknown.  Home seems to never be enough at the end.

Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip; an Exploration in Media as a Cultural Industry

Mindy Nelsen

TMA 691

Online Response #1

“Stop this!”

“He’s not doing anything wrong.”

“He’s telling people to change the channel.”

“I don’t think you need to worry about anyone changing the channel right now!”

This argument between the head of content and the director of Studio 60 centers in on the overall predicament.  Are people watching, and if they are, what are they seeing?  Studio 60 on the Sunset Stripdeals primarily with the backstage politics of a sketch comedy show, its position within the network and the conglomerate that the network executives answer to.  The conglomerates like TMG who, of their new President of Entertainment, Jordan McDeere, asks “only unprecedented success.”  From the first moment, both the TV audience and the real audience are inundated with numbers, how many watch, how long have you been watching, etc.  Even Wes’ outburst deals with numbers: how many households tune in, and how much of their content is determined by “idiotic twelve year old boys.”  We know right from the start that television is a business, it’s an industry and its content is consumed by the audience; an audience with their own codes who still laugh and don’t quite understand what’s happening when Wes goes against the expectations and tells everyone to change the channel. 

Aaron Sorkin, who was writing based on his own experiences in television, was likely also “looking for a hit.”  Unfortunately, the show was cancelled after one season.  But Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip still has a fan base, and certainly had some comments to make about the industry and the power struggle between media and the capitalist super-structure; between censorship and art.  Garnham points out that everything, including cultural studies, is based on a capitalist superstructure and that as a result, there has been a “focus on cultural consumption rather than cultural production and on the cultural practices of leisure rather than on those of work.” (Political Economy, 64-65)  Smythe, further observes that the media sees the audience as a commodity, a workforce from the comfort of their own homes.  And in this realm, the audience, advertisers and affiliates response to Wes’ outburst is at the crux of the predicament. 

There needs to be a focus on how we access and distribute information and communication.  The people in charge of content are afraid, and understandably so, of the large viewership of this sketch comedy show. They order “muzzles” to be put on the cast, where “no one talks.”  They will stop at nothing to prevent something that could be deemed offensive to a number of their affiliates and advertisers from being broadcast on the air.  But it is the very repealing of that power that drives the producer to commit the ultimate crime in a scripted comedy – to go off script.  You see, he too is concerned with how communication is being distributed.  And even more so with what information is being distributed.   Fully cognoscente that he is working and operating under a structure of domination, and that he has no choice but to participate in the system (Media, 42), Wes enumerates his monologue of truth, wherein he states that media is “the country’s most influential industry.”  He asserts that there is a struggle with art and commerce. And “art it getting its ass kicked.”  Sitting on my bed, watching this pivotal moment that happened within the first few minutes of the show, I wanted to raise my fist and say, “Ya!  Stick it to the man”…or something equally as profound.  But I think it’s important to note that I was watching a television show; one for which I had paid Amazon.com $1.99, and not a real life happening.  My leisure time was really my work time as an audience member.  I was being manipulated to side in one way or another with a fictitious character all while encountering a number of products that caught my eye.  But yet, I choose to sustain this power play, and if I ever get time, I will likely go back and watch the rest of the season. 

Perhaps we should return to the conundrum and the notion that we have “Every reason not to trust you – you work in television…” The emergency meeting deals first with money.  There first reference to the “big three” leaders of the show, is mistaken for car companies and advertizing.  Indeed, the executives present frantically try to collect and disseminate information on how the advertisers and affiliates will react to the outburst.  There is a need to fit their standards to exist, but this practice is the very thing that limits artistic expression.  They should be worried.  There is definite cause for concern when talking about consumerism vs. meaningful content.  Years ago KSL removed SNL from their lineup due to content and so an entire demographic of people was unable to watch the program and partake in its inherent consumerism. 

Smythe noted that it is important, therefore, to re-examine the role of the audience.  He sees the audience as a powerful entity through which the “mass media under monopoly capitalism produce(s) audiences to market commodities, candidates, and issues to themselves.” (25)  Affiliates who control or privately own their stations get to choose what to broadcast, which in turn decide advertising support.  Audience is a commodity – its power is produced, sold, purchased, and consumed by advertisers, and therefore, commands a price. 

Media is driven by the need from production.  According to Garnham, supply and demand play an obvious part.  It is clear to see, in that case, why Jordan thought they were under-exaggerating their opportunity with this crisis.  They had the audience – the consumer workforce – at rapt attention.  They got to make the next move to determine how they would come out of this.  Their demand was heightened through both interest and media response, and therefore the supply became far more valuable.  They just had to find the right team to spearhead the operation and get enough people “partaking of the service.” (Media, 52).  Because, as Granham determines, an unlimited amount of people can consume any given media, the conglomerates that own the media have to stop “free-riders”, (Media, 57) those who are getting their media from another source, like the numerous member of the press who are reporting on the incident on that night’s programming.  If they can put the ball back in their court, they might be able to not only save the show, but come out on top.  At least that is the hope of their new president.  Curiously, she chooses to have them open the following week with the very sketch with was cut.  Does this further “stick it to the man” or does the press it will generate further the exposure to their public goods?  I admit, Jordan’s choice in that moment somewhat perplexed me.  But I think we are going to see how smart she really is.  All we can really know, in those final shots, is that Matt and Danny are “under pressure.”