The Nutty Professor – from Julius Kelp to Sherman Klump
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
THE NUTTY PROFESSOR – FROM JULIUS KELP TO SHERMAN KLUMP: A TEXTUAL ANALYSIS OF SCIENCE AND SCIENTISTS IN TWO POPULAR FILMS by BEVERLY D. HARVEY (Under the Direction of Jay Hamilton) ABSTRACT This thesis examines the representation of science and scientists in two popular Hollywood films of the same title – The Nutty Professor. One version was released in 1963, starring Jerry Lewis, and the other was released in 1996, with Eddie Murphy. This study is a textual analysis with an emphasis on the “how” of representation within the two films, which serve as cultural artifacts of their respective time periods. In an attempt to gain a more in-depth understanding of the chosen representations of science and scientists in both films, I also study the historical context of the periods surrounding the production and release of each film. One goal of this thesis is to note any changes or similarities in the representation of science and scientists between the two films, which were produced and released more than thirty years apart. INDEX WORDS: representation; textual analysis; popular culture; film; Hollywood THE NUTTY PROFESSOR – FROM JULIUS KELP TO SHERMAN KLUMP: A TEXTUAL ANALYSIS OF SCIENCE AND SCIENTISTS IN TWO POPULAR FILMS by BEVERLY D. HARVEY B.A., Florida Atlantic University, 1999 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF ARTS ATHENS, GEORGIA 2006 © 2006 Beverly D. Harvey All Rights Reserved THE NUTTY PROFESSOR – FROM JULIUS KELP TO SHERMAN KLUMP: A TEXTUAL ANALYSIS OF SCIENCE AND SCIENTISTS IN TWO POPULAR FILMS by BEVERLY D. HARVEY Major Professor: Jay Hamilton Committee: Carolina Acosta-Alzuru Dwight Brooks Electronic Version Approved: Maureen Grasso Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia December 2006 DEDICATION Without hesitation, I sincerely dedicate this thesis to my son, Alexander, and to my parents, Hubert F. Harvey and Charlene F. Harvey. My son is a wonderful soul, who teaches me far more than I will ever teach him. Throughout my work on this thesis, no one sacrificed more than my son, who had to share me – his one and only mother – for more than a year with seemingly countless scholarly articles and library books, and a laptop computer. All those nights of playing in the bathtub while I sat beside you reading articles and books, or nights you spent watching SpongeBob Squarepants, The Adventures of Jimmy Neutron, Boy Genius, and numerous other cartoons on television as I sat next to you working on the computer were not in vain, my son. I promise you that – and much more. The “future” is closer now than ever before. I also dedicate this thesis to my beloved parents. My mother was one of the funniest people I have ever known, and my father was one of the kindest. My parents helped me begin my college career more than twenty-five years ago, and, in many ways, they have helped me get this far in my education. Even though my parents were looking down on me from Heaven throughout my work on this thesis, their presence – and eternal love and support – were always felt. And, for that, I am most grateful. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First of all, I would like to thank God and the academy, which seems only fitting for a thesis based on two Hollywood films. I thank God for instilling in my soul the passion that drives me, especially in my academic career, and for the wisdom and focus to never lose sight of my passion in life. In this case, “the academy” refers to the school of life, where I have had some formidable teachers and tough lessons over the years. I must say, however, that I have learned more from my enemies and the adversity I have faced than any best friend or blissful times could ever come close to teaching me. Overcoming the adversity and ignoring the naysayers in my life, especially in the past four years, have made my academic achievements that much sweeter. More importantly, it has taught me that love is the greatest definer of all people, no matter how difficult they seem to be. I would also like to thank the members of my thesis committee. My major professor, Dr. Jay Hamilton, who always had encouraging words to say to me and smiley faces to include in his e-mails, especially toward the end, which is when I needed them the most. Despite the personal challenges I faced during the creation of this thesis, Dr. Hamilton never wavered from his support and guidance. And thanks are also in order for my committee members, Drs. Carolina Acosta-Alzuru and Dwight Brooks, who never once asked how long it would take me to finish and were only too happy to stick it out with me, no matter what. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS........................................................................................................... v CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................1 Purpose of Study .......................................................................................................5 2 LITERATURE REVIEW..............................................................................................7 Overview of Literature Review.........................................................................10 Representation of Scientists ....................................................................................11 Representation of Science .......................................................................................17 Representation as Stereotype...................................................................................21 Representation as Myth...........................................................................................26 Summary .................................................................................................................28 3 THEORY AND METHODOLOGY............................................................................30 Theoretical Framework ...........................................................................................30 Research Questions .................................................................................................34 Methodology ...........................................................................................................34 Language and Saussure .....................................................................................35 Signifiers, Signifieds, and Signs........................................................................36 Semiotics as Method .........................................................................................38 Materials Selected ...................................................................................................40 vi Method Procedure – Films ......................................................................................42 Method Procedure – Magazines..............................................................................43 Summary .................................................................................................................44 4 ANALYSIS..................................................................................................................45 Overview of Films...................................................................................................45 Analysis of Films.....................................................................................................48 Film Analysis Summary..........................................................................................58 Socio-Historical Background ..................................................................................59 The Early 1960s.................................................................................................60 The Mid-1990s..................................................................................................65 Overall Conclusion..................................................................................................71 5 CONCLUSION............................................................................................................80 Implications of Study ..............................................................................................85 Limitations of Study................................................................................................86 Suggestions for Future Research.............................................................................87 REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................................89 vii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Scientists are a curious lot. As a reporter at a small daily newspaper, I have had the opportunity to meet a few. I once interviewed the leading researcher at a USDA aquatic animal health research lab for a story about how he and two other scientists had discovered a cure for two catfish diseases that cost the catfish farm industry millions in losses each year. I talked with the lead researcher – a microbiologist – in his office for about an hour and then toured several of the buildings that housed fish tanks filled with current and future research subjects. Later that same day, one of the newspaper’s photographers stopped by the USDA lab to take pictures of the lead scientist and another scientist involved with the catfish research. When I first viewed the photographs, I immediately noticed something interesting – the two men were wearing white lab coats