14 December 2010 @ 02:10 pm
The Shining part 7: 4pm  
 

 


Jack is down for the count, locked in a pantry by his wife, who, moments earlier, was incapable of the slightest act of self-preservation.  This is, surely, the protagonist's low point: all hope is lost, there's no way he's ever going to get out of this pantry.

Or is there?

 



Delbert Grady, whoever he is, shows up, or at least his voice does, to express his disapproval of Jack's inability to act.  At this moment, Delbert Grady is the spokesman for the protagonist, the mysterious entity Lloyd referred to earlier as the man buying Jack his drinks.
The thing you have to understand at this point is that Kubrick's narrative strategy, up 'til now, is to suggest that there may not be any actual ghosts at the Overlook.  Danny's visions may be an expression of his gift and Jack's visions may be an expression of his rage.  Lloyd and Delbert, one could say, are no more or less than whatever Jack needs to see in order to talk himself into killing Wendy.

(And here's a thought: Wendy was the name of the girl in the Peter Pan stories, the girl whom the Lost Boys recruited to be their mother.  Well, the Wendy of The Shining has certainly devoted her life to taking care of boys who have not grown up, which would make Jack's murderous rage an impulse of matricide.)

Delbert Grady, in spite of being a ghost, or in spite of being a figment of Jack's imagination, doesn't actually come into the pantry with Jack to talk about his situation.  He stays outside and, in his English-butler way, taunts him.  To me, this argues all the more heavily that Delbert isn't any kind of proper ghost at all, that he remains on the other side of the door of Jack's prison because he is acting the role of the disappointed parent, which is, ultimately, what Jack requires him to be at that moment.  Jack is penitent to his father-figure (since Delbert is both the mask of the protagonist and the previous caretaker in Jack's mind) and his father-figure forgives him, in his distant-father manner, and frees him from his imprisonment, so that he can get on with the job of killing his mother-figure.

The key thing about the scene, and the reason why it's the fulcrum of the whole movie, is that Delbert Grady is physically capable of letting Jack out of the pantry, and does so.  This is the first indication, and arguably the only one, that the ghosts are "real," and that there is an outside force, the invisible protagonist, operating on Jack's mind.

Except, of course, that The Shining is also about psychic powers, which means that Jack, in whatever psychological maze he might be in, may also have the ability to unlock the pantry himself, once his imaginary father-figure has chastised and forgiven him.

(It occurs to me now that The Exorcist, which is a strong model for The Shining, could also be said to have an invisible protagonist, that the mother and the priest are, in fact, antagonists standing in the protagonist's way.  The invisible protagonist of The Exorcist arguably gets what it wants, which is to destroy Father Merrin -- the fact that Father Karrass takes the protagonist into himself and then throws himself out a window is mere plot resolution.  The girl in The Exorcist isn't even a character, she's the maguffin.)

While Jack gets out of the pantry, here comes Hallorann to the rescue!  The little scenes of Hallorann racing up the mountain in his snow-cat are an echo of the title-sequence, the difference being that now Kubrick puts us inside the vehicle's cab, giving us close-ups of Hallorann as he trudges his way up the mountain.  The title sequence was designed to show that Jack is a tiny speck in this huge wilderness, but the Hallorann-to-the-rescue scenes are meant to illustrate that Hallorann is the master of this domain, that everything will be all right now now that the knight is coming to rescue the damsel.


Meanwhile, up in the family apartment, something is happening to Danny.  While Wendy sleeps, Danny walks the room, chanting "redrum" in his Tony voice.  He's seen this word, "redrum," in his visions, and now he's chanting it.  What's really happening here?  Danny, like Jack, is trapped in a psychological maze.  He's been confronted by a trauma, the old woman trying to strangle him, and it has thrown Danny out of his own mind, allowing his guardian, Tony, his own kind of father-figure, to take over.  Tony, like Delbert, is the only one who can free Danny from his psychological pantry at this moment.  What's happening in the "redrum" scene is Danny/Tony working out a psychological puzzle, and the puzzle is: what does "redrum" actually mean?  Danny/Tony writes the word out on a door, and something interesting happens: his voice changes from Tony to Danny.  Tony cannot wake Wendy up, but Danny can, and does, screaming "redrum!" over and over.  Wendy wakes up and sees Danny/Tony's word in the mirror, which is, of course, not "redrum" but "murder."

What's happening here?  Danny has been confronted with the most nightmarish concept possible: not ghost-girls, not a dead woman in a bathtub, but the thing that those visions mask: his father's rage and desire to kill his mother.  No child could be expected to grasp the concept of a murderous father, and Danny does what any bright child would: he abstracts the concept and turns it into symbols.  The dead girls, the woman in the bathtub, the elevator full of blood and "redrum" are Danny's attempts to grasp the reality of his situation: his father wants to kill his mother, and is willing to kill him as well in order to achieve his goal.  He can't grasp the concept of "murder" so he flips it around and makes it "redrum."  In this way, he both sounds the alarm and also retains a shred of innocence.  He doesn't need to say "Dad is going to murder us," he only needs to write "redrum" and lets Wendy put together the final pieces.  His trauma has been worked through, order is restored, he's made his way through his psychological maze, and now his personalities can merge in his new reality.

Just in time too, because here comes Jack with an axe!  When Jack succeeds in bashing in the door to the apartment, he says "Wendy, I'm home," an obscene perversion the evening greeting of the paterfamilias, and proceeds to corner them in the apartment bathroom (another bathroom as a psychological terminus -- the third in the movie, if you count the bathroom in the apartment in Boulder where we first see Danny talking to Tony).

The final suspense sequences of The Shining remind me a lot of the third act of Scorsese's Cape Fear.  In both cases, they are genre sequences made by directors not known for their mastery of genre.  Kubrick doesn't care that much about the mechanics of the horror narrative, and Scorsese, I think, doesn't care that much about the mechanics of suspense; both directors have bigger fish to fry.  In the case of each movie, the final suspense sequences are "good enough" in concept, then executed with enough flair to make them work, but in each case they are hardly the point of the larger narrative.

Just as Jack is about to lay claim to his prize of killing Wendy, Hallorann shows up to save the damsel.  Jack, who, in this fairy-tale narrative would be the dragon (or, as he explicitly states it, the Big Bad Wolf) then must go tangle with the brave knight who has come to save the day.
Which, to the shock of the audience, he does with no trouble at all.  Hallorann never even gets in a punch or a squeak of a resistance as Jack kills him with one blow.  This shocking turnaround traumatizes Danny (who has hidden nearby) but does not force him into a Tony-state, which has been the case in the past.  No, Danny is now a complete person, he is now cognizant of his situation, and he acts sanely: he runs like hell from the crazy man with the axe.  He's capable of out-running Jack because Jack is wounded from his earlier confrontation with Wendy; he still sports a limp from falling down the stairs.  So we see that it's not just Danny successfully out-witting Jack, it's Danny building on the wound that Wendy inflicted earlier; the mother and child work together to slay the Big Bad Wolf.  The important thing is that Danny has run the maze successfully, while Jack was too tied up with his "work" to venture out of his man-cave, and so Danny is prepared to win this battle of wits while Jack is still resolutely lost.  Danny has lived at the Overlook in a way Jack has not; Jack has lived only in his head while Danny has ventured out into the world, and, more importantly, has reconciled the trauma in his mind in a way that Jack has never even approached.  And while Jack is lost in the maze, I am reminded, again, of Cape Fear, as both Big Bad Wolves (both Max Cady and Jack Torrance explicitly refer to themselves as such) end their lives babbling nonsense, their capacity for language, their last shreds of humanity, gone.

The protagonist of The Shining does not achieve its goal, but it does get a consolation prize: Jack, who is now literally frozen in the way he was only metaphorically frozen before.  The enigmatic last shot of the movie, of Jack appearing in a photo in the Overlook lobby from 1921, suggests many things, but to me means simply that Jack is now a permanent resident.
hits counter
 
 
( 29 comments — Leave a comment )
Tim Lieder[info]marlowe1 on December 14th, 2010 10:50 pm (UTC)
WHat's interesting about this movie is that you can read it as a manifestation of Jack's telekinetic/psychic powers which is also the strength of the main inspiration The Haunting of Hill House</b> by Shirley Jackson.

I think this is why I was seriously disappointed when I read the book and got to the confrontation where King makes it explicitly clear that the hotel ghosts are literally possessing Jack (same problem in Christine)
Moral Explorer[info]notthebuddha on December 15th, 2010 12:25 am (UTC)
King may also have been disappointed, since he did it the other way in Rose Red.
laminator_x[info]laminator_x on December 15th, 2010 03:14 am (UTC)
First manifestation?
I would think that Danny's bruises were the first manifestation of the supernatural that couldn't be all in someone's head.
Todd Alcott[info]toddalcott on December 15th, 2010 03:33 am (UTC)
Re: First manifestation?
They are a strong indication, yes, but it's not impossible that they aren't. Because if the Overlook really just wants Danny dead, and it has the ability to kill him, why doesn't it?
laminator_x[info]laminator_x on December 15th, 2010 03:54 am (UTC)
Re: First manifestation?
Well, Wendy saw them. If the ghosts didn't do it, who did?

I think the Overlook doesn't just want Danny to die, it wants to get Jack back.
Todd Alcott[info]toddalcott on December 15th, 2010 04:26 am (UTC)
Re: First manifestation?
Wendy does see them, yes. Which could mean there are ghosts, or it could mean that Jack and Danny's powers are so great they can make spirits manifest. The point is, the movie hangs in your mind because Kubrick refuses to give you the answer. He delivers the drama, but doesn't answer the question.
e: literature[info]mimitabu on December 15th, 2010 05:30 am (UTC)
Re: First manifestation?
when it comes to 1) supernatural hotel, vs 2) psychic power only, vs 3) 100% natural plus delusions and film metaphors (ie the ghosts "weren't there", but i the director / unreliable narrator put them in to make a point), i think the fridge lock scene definitively precludes (3), but as you say, fails to decide between (1) and (2).

throw in (real in the narrative) powers as metaphors (which they must be) and i don't know... i think (as far as this question even matters) you're forced to take it that the hotel has supernatural powers (read: it is a large public sphere that has extreme and nuanced influence on personal action) just as jack and danny both have psychic powers (read: they are aware of or at least sensitive to the influence of powerful larger structures, and are either possessed by these influences or break free of them). just in terms of the narrative, the hotel may be inert. in terms of thematic resonance, the hotel-as-supernatural is just as (if not more) thematically resonant as jack/danny-as-psychic, and explicitly so, (built on a burial ground, man paying for your drinks, random shit people see that isn't in either jack or danny's mind for any legitimate reason, etc).

(3) above is an attractive reading, but i really don't think it's possible given that the ghosts (or jack's telekinetic power) let him out of the fridge. fine, there's giant amounts of effort (in the script and in terms of time spent actually producing the film) spent to do things that must have, at best, mild symbolic resonance. it's a strangely produced movie, and some stuff seems to happen inexplicably. but the (3) reading entails that jack and/or wendy only imagined that the fridge was locked. the problem with this consequence is a) it's fucking stupid, and b) there just cannot be a justification for that outlandish detail. it serves no larger purpose, and it intrudes on the action and tension. to accept this consequence (jack and wendy both thought the fridge was locked when it wasn't) is to welcome with open arms any reading at all, for example, that stanley kubrick's the shining is all in the mind of a man caught in the matrix from the movie the matrix, and thaaaaat's why there's some plot/set discontinuity and mysteries.

---

tl;dr:

* fridge key scene proves there is supernatural activity in the shining; this shit is not all in jack or danny's head.

* if psychic powers are metaphors (they are), supernatural hotel makes too much sense as metaphor for the hotel to not be supernatural. seems like a backwards way to read things, but (shrug).
(Anonymous) on December 15th, 2010 12:51 pm (UTC)
Re: First manifestation?
The point is, the movie hangs in your mind because Kubrick refuses to give you the answer. He delivers the drama, but doesn't answer the question.

And there we have the difference between a truly great movie and a well-crafted thrill ride.
—Ed.
Moral Explorer[info]notthebuddha on December 15th, 2010 06:35 am (UTC)
Re: First manifestation?
Well, Wendy saw them. If the ghosts didn't do it, who did?

self-inflicted by Danny/Tony
Lady Sheherazahde Lachesis: Full Moon[info]sheherazahde on January 31st, 2011 03:18 am (UTC)
Re: First manifestation?
And they don't have to be self-inflicted physically. Bruises would be relatively easy to create psychosomatically. The mind is a powerful force even if we don't bring in psychic powers.
(Anonymous) on December 15th, 2010 06:51 am (UTC)
I agree that much of Jack's madness is psychological, but I think that Kubrick also indicates that the ghosts in the Overlook are real. After all, as Wendy runs through the hotel after Jack leaves to kill Hallorann, she sees physical manifestations of the ghosts 3 times. 1st when she sees the man in the bear suit and the man on the bed, 2nd when she sees the skeletons sitting in the room, and 3rd when she sees the elevator full of blood.

On a side note, I've never been able to make sense of the first pair of ghosts Wendy encounters, the man in the bear suit presumably giving oral sex to the man on the bed. As seen here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aLNa1RfkIY Apparently this is a reference to the book. My question is, of all the ghosts Kubrick could have Wendy see in this scene, why pick this one?

Thanks for the analysis, it was great.
John Green[info]crypticpress on December 15th, 2010 03:52 pm (UTC)
I've always found the TV edit of the "bear suit" scene freakier than the version with the implied oral sex. In the TV version, when Wendy gets to the top of the stairs, the first second or so of the shot is edited out, and it starts with the two ghosts upright and quickly zooms to their close-up. To me that's scarier because without the context of a sexual fetish, it makes LESS sense to see a guy in this bizarre bear suit.
richardthinks[info]richardthinks on December 15th, 2010 09:59 pm (UTC)
Does that make The Shining the first ever yiff movie?
Todd Alcott[info]toddalcott on December 16th, 2010 11:19 pm (UTC)
I think that's this.
(Anonymous) on January 4th, 2011 02:45 am (UTC)
I agree that Kubrick is making the ghosts real, but the timing after the freezer door confirmation is key. Only after it's been confirmed for the audience is Wendy able to see the ghosts of the hotel. Again, they could be delusions, but we accept her witnessing them as real. The Overlook at this point could become physical enough to kill Danny with telekinetic knives and falling debris, but Kubrick is doing more than Poltergeist. The Overlook needs to make Jack its human agent. The horror has to have a human psychological drama. The hotel doesn't trap or injure Danny and Wendy to make it easier for Jack; they can actual use its mundane reality as an obstacle to him in the conventional, physical chase.
(Anonymous) on December 15th, 2010 12:58 pm (UTC)
The Exorcist
Your aside on The Exorcist makes so much sense that I'm surprised you hadn't seen this earlier. You could do a whole series on invisible protagonists, if only you had time. They have a deeply unsettling effect on the viewer.
—Ed.
Graham Nicholas Palme[info]kite221 on December 16th, 2010 05:02 pm (UTC)
Wendy's visions
Incredible review.

What is your take on Wendy's visions? I'm always a little confused about the fact that both Jack and Danny have been seeing them incrementally from start, whereas Wendy encounters them at critical mass. Is it the protagonist showing it's full hand?
Todd Alcott[info]toddalcott on December 16th, 2010 07:58 pm (UTC)
Re: Wendy's visions
I think that's about right -- the protagonist no longer has to hide, it can come out and play now.
Graham Nicholas Palme: ?![info]kite221 on December 16th, 2010 08:21 pm (UTC)
Re: Wendy's visions
The scene where the older gentleman toasts while the blood is dripping over his head definitely feels like the Overlook is taunting Wendy.

In a moment I think you'd enjoy, I just had the pleasure of re-watching this on the big screen recently and something happened I was not expecting. Aside from seeing little details I may not have noticed before and soaking in the mounting terror the overlook presents I apparently was watching the film with some who had never seen it before. There was a hushed silence as the film grabbed everyone's attention and as we approached the scene when Hallorann walks down the empty hallway. In a moment that was all too perfect, just as Jack enters the frame with the axe and just as it makes contact with Hallorann, a young woman who had never seen it before let out an incredible scream. I couldn't stop smiling. It's so amazing how well this film holds up. It's timeless horror.
(Anonymous) on January 3rd, 2011 10:14 pm (UTC)
Re: Wendy's visions
I always felt that the sudden and brutal killing of Hallorann, after the procession of scenes portraying his difficult trip to the Overlook, was Kubrick's ultimate declaration that this was his movie, not Stephen King's book. Fans of the book feel like the wind has been knocked out of them when Scatman Crothers goes down.
Curtis Holman[info]curt_holman on December 16th, 2010 07:47 pm (UTC)
Excellent analysis of the integration of Danny's psyche.

So you don't think Father Karras is the protagonist of The Exorcist?
Todd Alcott[info]toddalcott on December 16th, 2010 07:58 pm (UTC)
I thought so for a long time, but the analysis doesn't hold because he's reactive. Everyone in the goddamned movie is reactive, to Satan, who doesn't want the girl, doesn't want the mother, doesn't want Karras, only wants Merrin. The whole movie is about Satan wearing Merrin down until he kills him, then the protagonist has what he wants.
Curtis Holman[info]curt_holman on December 16th, 2010 08:02 pm (UTC)
It's been awhile since I've seen it, but isn't Father Karras experiencing some kind of crisis of faith at the beginning of the movie (esp. due to the death of his mother), and the exorcism experience renews his faith, culminating with his sacrifice to save Regan? How does he qualify as reactive compared to Sheriff Brody in 'Jaws?'
Todd Alcott[info]toddalcott on December 16th, 2010 10:57 pm (UTC)
Karras doesn't seek out Regan, Regan's mother comes to him. His crisis of faith, and his guilt over his mother, are things that Satan uses to beat him down.

Chief Brody's goal at the beginning of Jaws is not "to kill the shark" but "to fit in in his newly-adopted town." His desire to fit in overwhelms his desire to kill the shark by a wide margin, and it's not 'til Act III that he realizes he has to go out to sea to kill this thing. And even then, he's pretty sure Quint and Hooper will take care of killing the shark for him. The shark is an obstacle to Brody in his pursuit to fit in.
Curtis Holman[info]curt_holman on December 17th, 2010 09:02 pm (UTC)
Full Metal Jacket
Is the protagonist of Full Metal Jacket "the Army?" I was thinking about one of Lee Ermey's lines, to the effect of "The Army does not want robots. The army wants KILLERS."
Todd Alcott[info]toddalcott on December 18th, 2010 01:23 am (UTC)
Re: Full Metal Jacket
I think it's fair to say that Pvt Joker is the protagonist of Full Metal Jacket, although you raise an interesting question, as the whole first act of the movie is "How does the military turn a bunch of individual teenage boys into a unit of killers?"
(Anonymous) on December 23rd, 2010 12:27 pm (UTC)
If you guys want answers to this film you should watch this first:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEulbcXkgjo&feature=player_embedded

There is a more in depth analysis on his site...
(Anonymous) on January 5th, 2011 03:46 pm (UTC)
Jack's soul is the hotel's objective
Could it be that the protagonist doesn't really care about the death of the boy and the mother as much as owning Jack's soul? Isn't that the main objective of the devil and the main crisis point in these types of fokelore stories, just getting the subject to sign on the dotted line, whatever it takes? Once Jack was fully committed, fully signed on, the hotel had won -- once Jack had broken his contract with the boy and the mother and signed on the dotted line with the devil then manifestations beyond that point seem almost superfluous to the hotel's primary objective. This may be why the hotel doesn't (help) kill Danny and Wendy; they are only antagonists to the hotel owning Jack's soul, which, again, may be the ultimate significance of the 1921 photo of Jack.

This leads to an interesting idea of what is the genre of the unseen protagonist and how does it satisfy the viewer. Here the "bad guy" won but it doesn't feel like tragedy. Jack is not a tragic figure that the audience is made to empathizes with, and there is no tragic flaw at the root of the narrative to learn from. Are stories of the unseen protagonist really about the unseen Other, the beast in the jungle? Does horror always involve an unseen protagonist, one that we can attribute agency to but beyond that still seems foreign and unknowable, like a hidden animal predator. Is the horror genre rooted in the basic stories of the tribal elder imparting, "if you go into the jungle, you may get eaten"? It seems to me that the movie functions as a cautionary tale, a warning as with most horror simply that foreign and unknowable agency does exist in the universe and is intent on doing us harm so be aware of your surroundings. But it's more than a mere monster movie. The evil is psychological in that it manipulates and betrays. Perhaps in the (post) Industrial Age our horror is more Kafkaesque.
Todd Alcott[info]toddalcott on January 5th, 2011 04:01 pm (UTC)
Re: Jack's soul is the hotel's objective
Perhaps the hotel shoots for getting Danny, but settles for getting Jack.
( 29 comments — Leave a comment )