Emotions in Ben-Hur: Dynamics of Emotion in Texts, Reception Contexts, and Audience Responses in the United States (1880-1931) Emily Clair Lord-Kambitsch University College London (UCL) Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Classical Studies ! 1! ! ! 2! I, Emily Clair Lord-Kambitsch _______________________, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. ! 3! ! 4! ! ! ABSTRACT This thesis explores emotions in the composition, circulation, popular cultural reception, and performance adaptations of Lew Wallace’s novel Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ (1880) from the late nineteenth to the early twentieth century in the United States. Initial mass consumption of the novel on an unprecedented scale gave way to a keen cultural desire to re-experience Wallace’s narrative, a desire that persists to this day, with a third major motion picture adaptation anticipated for release in 2016. Perpetuation of this ‘Ben-Hur phenomenon’ demonstrates the significance of Ben-Hur to the history of American receptions of ancient Rome, yet scholarship is only beginning to engage comprehensively with these texts and their functions within American popular culture. The aim of the thesis is to understand this phenomenon of cultural engagement with Ben-Hur through the lens of emotions. The centrality of audience perspectives in this study lies both in the analysis of the textual invitations for audiences’ emotional engagement, and in the survey of actual audience responses. The priority then is to evaluate subjective realms of audience interpretation within a complex interdependency of text, medium, reception context, and audience. This work thus speaks to current scholarly movements toward a greater concern for the audience’s experience of classical reception. Texts central to this project are Wallace’s novel and the performance adaptations that are directly inspired by the novel, and occur in immediate chronological succession, namely Klaw and Erlanger’s stageplay (1899-1920) and MGM’s film (1925). Textual analysis engages approaches from research in the history of emotions, and incorporates methods of reading representations of emotions specific to the media through which Ben-Hur is manifested in these texts. Evaluation of emotions in audience responses employs documentary evidence from a significant store of archival material that reveals evolving patterns of audiences’ engagement with the classical world in Ben-Hur. ! 5! ! 6! ! ! To Felix, ‘the husband of my youth’ ! 7! ! 8! ! ! TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements.........................................................................................................11! Index of images...............................................................................................................13! Index of abbreviations for featured archives ..................................................................15! Introduction.....................................................................................................................17! Chapter 1: The novel (1880) and its invitations for emotional engagement...................41! 1.1.! Introduction ...................................................................................................41! 1.2.! Wallace’s generic models and their cultural function in the American reception context......................................................................................................45! 1.3.! Emotions in Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ (1880) .......................................61! 1.4.! Conclusion .....................................................................................................81! Chapter 2: Responses to the novel (1880-1920) .............................................................83! 2.1.! Introduction ...................................................................................................83! 2.2.! Methodology: Documenting emotional communities of reception...............84! 2.3.! Patterns of reception through direct readership (‘appreciators’) ...................88! 2.4.! Patterns of reception through derivative productions (‘conveyors’) .............94! 2.5.! The ‘Wallace persona’ and reception of the novel ......................................100! 2.6.! Conclusion ...................................................................................................106! Chapter 3: Ben-Hur in dramatic performance and early silent cinema (1889-1920)....109! 3.1.! Introduction .................................................................................................109! 3.2.! Emergence of Ben-Hur on stage..................................................................114! 3.3.! The Klaw and Erlanger Ben-Hur (1899-1920): Dynamics of emotion in the text .....................................................................................................................119! 3.4.! Promotional solicitations, and audience responses to Klaw and Erlanger’s Ben-Hur (1899-1920) ............................................................................................146! 3.5.! Alternatives to Klaw and Erlanger: Kalem Studios’ Ben-Hur (1907).........161! ! 9! 3.6.! Conclusion ...................................................................................................172! Chapter 4: Emotions in MGM’S Ben-Hur (1925): Production, text, and reception.....175! 4.1.! Introduction .................................................................................................175! 4.2.! Emotions, production process, and the historical spectator.........................178! 4.3.! Patterns of emotional engagement in Ben-Hur (1925)................................187! 4.4.! Audience reception of Ben-Hur (1925): Promotion, consumption, criticism, and reframing.........................................................................................................221! 4.5.! Conclusion ...................................................................................................243! Conclusion ....................................................................................................................245! Appendix.......................................................................................................................251! Bibliography .................................................................................................................253! Primary Sources.....................................................................................................253! Secondary Sources.................................................................................................258! ! ! 10! ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis is the result of research undertaken in eleven archives, and in two countries, and I would like to acknowledge the support of all who played an important role in its development. The Department of Greek and Latin at University College London has given me the opportunity and the encouragement to pursue this project with valuable resources, training, and chances to share my research with a wonderfully supportive community of students and scholars. I give special thanks to my primary supervisor, Professor Maria Wyke, for her expert and thorough oversight, and her instrumental guidance of the methodological direction and creative vision for this project, and to my secondary supervisor, Professor Gesine Manuwald, for providing vital perspective and feedback regarding the structure and development of the thesis. I recognise the UCL Doctoral School for granting an award from the Research Projects Fund to support my research in archives throughout Indiana and in New York City. The integration of materials vital to the discussion of the remarkable relationship between Lew Wallace and his readers was made possible through an Everett Helm Visiting Fellowship from the Lilly Library at the University of Indiana, Bloomington. I would also like to thank the following archives for granting me physical access to the materials documenting audience response to Ben-Hur in print, on stage, and onscreen, and for permitting me to feature the material from their collections in my analysis: Margaret Herrick Library, Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences; Bill Douglas Cinema Museum, University of Exeter; British Film Institute; Crawfordsville District Public Library Marian Morrison Local History Collection; Indiana Historical Society; Lilly Library, University of Indiana, Bloomington; Billy Rose Theatre Division, New York Public Library for the Performing Arts; Music Library, Stanford University; and the Cinematic Arts Library, University of Southern California. Special thanks go out to David Frasier at the Lilly Library, Suzie Baldwin at the Crawfordsville District Public Library, Ned Comstock at the Cinematic Arts Library (USC), Dr. Phil Wickham at the Bill Douglas Cinema Museum (University of Exeter), and Ray Heigemeir at the Stanford Music Library for their helpful guidance during my navigation through their collections. I would also like to appreciate Director Larry Paarlberg and Associate Director Amanda McGuire of the General Wallace Study and Museum in Crawfordsville, Indiana, for giving me a special tour of Lew Wallace’s Study (an essential destination for every Son or Daughter of Hur). ! 11! I thank Professor Jon Solomon at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign for his valuable comments on drafts of my first and second chapters, and