INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. ProQuest Information and Learning 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Mi 48106-1346 USA 800-521-0600 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. “HOW’S THAT FOR HIGH?”: FAULKNER AND REPUTATIONS) IN THE EARLY 1930S DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Douglas Matthew Ramsey, M.A. ***** The Ohio State University 2002 Dissertation Committee: Approved by Professor Linda Mizejewski, Adviser Professor James Phelan Adviser Professor Jared Gardner English Graduate Program Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number: 3072923 Copyright 2003 by Ramsey, Douglas Matthew All rights reserved. _ ___ __® UMI UMI Microform 3072923 Copyright 2003 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ABSTRACT This dissertation addresses the slippery intersection of the popular and canonical William Faulkner: the Faulkner associated not only with Modernist “masterpieces,” but also film scenarios, mass magazine publications, and the more disreputable films adapted from his works. The examination of Faulkner’s various, often contradictory, reputations during the years 1931-33 queers Faulkner’s texts and reputations (in several senses), by applying a cultural studies approach to the fiction, films and biographical details. Attending to Faulkner’s pop culture dimensions complicates the traditional narrative of Faulkner’s career and works by recontextualizing them, while also illuminating the process that is being reversed. The Faulkner of the early 1930s is characterized by multiple reputations—author of the notorious (yet critically acclaimed) Sanctuary, frequent contributor to popular magazines, Hollywood screenwriter, and author whose works were being adapted for Hollywood. During this particularly telling time in Faulkner’s career, the boundaries between high and low and artist and hack were much less defined than most critics allow for. This dissertation explores the forgotten contexts of the production and reception of texts associated with Faulkner by focusing on three texts: The short story “Turnabout” {The Saturday Evening Post, 1932); the MGM film adapted from that story (by Faulkner ii Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. and others) in 1933, Today We Live , directed by Howard Hawks and starring Joan Crawford and Gary Cooper; and the 1933 Paramount version of Sanctuary, The Story o f Temple Drake, notorious for its censorship battles, as well as efforts to tap into the mystique of its bisexual star, Miriam Hopkins. Examining the criticism (or lack thereof) surrounding these texts demonstrates how an unburdening of Faulkner’s literary reputation opens up Faulkner’s high and low texts to further exploration and raises questions about the nature of adaptation theory and the value of interrogating the hierarchical relationship between source and adaptation. I suggest that the perceived linear motion—from book to film—is ultimately misleading and reductive, and that source and adaptation are more interrelated and connected than is usually recognized. Literature and film both operate, I argue, as part of a larger cultural context and the relation between them is dynamic; they share common components even as they are shaped by their individual mediums and economies of production and ultimately they illuminate each other and the culture from which they emerge. I bring insights gleaned from film theory (in particular, the status of the author and his/her operation as a “star”), cultural studies (the incorporation of “thick description”-advertising and publicity materials for the films, popular and academic criticism, as well as other cultural “artifacts” from the time period), and queer and gender theory (the use of rumor, gossip, and innuendo to explore biographical details largely unexamined in Faulkner biographies). Faulkner’s works—’’popular” and “literary”—offer compelling insights into early 1930s American culture, and illustrate the value of using cultural studies and queer theory to re-examine a canonical figure such as Faulkner. iii Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Dedicated to my father for his always-vocal support, and to my mother for her quieter encouragement iv Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank my adviser, Linda Mizejewski, for her belief, support, encouragement, and for making me believe I could actually find something new (and interesting) to say about Faulkner. I also want to express my gratitude for her patience and for always telling me I could do it. I am more than grateful to my dearest friend Susan Swinford, without whom this most definitely would not have been possible. I owe you big. My thanks to Jim Phelan, for always taking the time out of his ridiculously busy schedule to encourage me, to look at drafts, to promptly reply to panicky e-mails, and for more generally just being one of the good ones. I thank my dear friends and colleagues D. Scot Hinson and Jason Payne, who always (fruitlessly) offered to read my work, and who kept me sane, and Tom Williams, for many great discussions about Faulkner and memorable pilgrimages to Oxford, Mississippi. Thanks also to Jared Gardner for being so kind as to jump on board so late, and Debra Moddelmog for all her feedback and inspiration. Thanks especially go out to my family, including Cliff, Lessie, Walter, Bo, Betty, Lana, Howard, Amy, Joy, and Bob. To the Whistle Pigs, well, thanks, I guess. v Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. VITA November 24, 1964 ...............................Bom - Cincinnati, Ohio 1988 ......................................................B.A. English, Purdue University 1991......................................................M.A. English, The Ohio State University 1991 - present....................................... Graduate Teaching Assistant, Lecturer, The Ohio State University; Visiting Instructor, Wittenberg University PUBLICATIONS ‘“Lifting the Fog’: Faulkners, Reputations and The Story o f Temple Drake .” The Faulkner Journal 16 (2000/2001): 7-33. “‘Turnabout’ is Fair(y) Play: Faulkner’s Queer War Story.” The Faulkner Journal 15 (1999/2000): 61-81. FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: English Areas of study: 20lh-century American literature, Film, Cultural Studies, American Studies, Critical Theory vi Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract................................................................................................................. ii Dedication .............................................................................................................. iv Acknowledgments ................................................................................................. v Vita........................................................................................................................ vi List of Figures ....................................................................................................... viii Chapters: 1. Introduction ................................................................................................. 1 2. “Turnabout” is Fairy Play: Faulkner’s Queer War Story .............................. 33 3. Fighting the Good Fight: Authorial Control and Today We Live ................ 102 4. “Lifting the Fog”: Faulkner(s), Reputations and The Story o f Temple Drake 169 5. Conclusion ................................................................................................... 250 Works Cited ............................................................................................................ 266 vii Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.