Abstract
There can be no better examples of carving values in the classical period of Hollywood cinema than the films of John Ford. His reputation is secure. In recent years, a younger generation versed in issues around ethnicity and gender have enthusiastically turned to his work. Even in the 1970s ‘high theory’ period, with its anti-auteurism and fondness for modernism, Ford remained highly visible in the pages of Screen and Cahiers du Cinema.1 But his formidable reputation rests on broader characteristics. Studlar and Bernstein speak of his ‘gift for visual composition, his ability to use film as an eloquent, often wordless means of expression, his insight into human psychology, and the vigor of his storytelling’.2 But they are also quick to cite Robin Wood’s view that ‘the nature of [Ford’s] greatness has proved difficult to define’. Tag Gallagher has singled out ‘the intricate formal beauty and intelligence’ of Ford’s cinema. But it is also in the emotional resonance of his best work that Ford establishes his uniqueness. Melancholia, death and loss are confronted, rarely with despair but often by way of a broad knock-about comedy more reminiscent at times of low pantomime and commedia dell’arte; and ritual, by which there is an assuaging of loss, a means of repairing damage and a determination to insist on life and mourning proper.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Carving Values and John Ford
See P. C. Sutton, ‘Masters of Dutch Genre Painting’, in Masters of Seventeenth-Century Dutch Genre Painting ( Philadelphia: Philadelphia Museum of Art, 1984 ).
L. Jardine, Worldly Goods: A New History of the Renaissance ( London: Macmillan, 1996 ), p. 19.
See H. Osborne, Aesthetics and Art Theory: An Historical Introduction ( London: Longmans, 1968 ).
T. Gallagher, John Ford: The Man and his Films ( London; University of California Press, 1986 ), p. 50.
P. Bogdanovich, John Ford ( London: Studio Vista, 1967 ), p. 92.
G. Perez, The Material Ghost: Films and their Medium (London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998), p. 239. On Ford and feminisation, see Studlar and Bernstein, ‘Introduction’.
A. Sarris, The John Ford Movie Mystery ( London: Secker & Warburg, 1976 ).
Wollen, Signs and Meanings in the Cinema ( London: Secker & Warburg/BFI, 1969 ), p. 102.
L. Anderson, About John Ford ( London: Plexus, 1981 ), p. 207.
J. Baxter, The Cinema of John Ford ( London: Zwemmer, 1971 ), p. 78.
G. Wills, John Wayne ( London: Faber and Faber, 1997 ).
P. Bogdanovich, John Ford ( London: Studio Vista, 1967 ), p. 74.
Phil Hardy (ed.), Raoul Walsh ( Colchester: Edinburgh Film Festival/Vineyard Press, 1974 ), p. 47.
See Deborah Thomas, ‘John Wayne’s Body’, in The Movie Book of the Western (London: Studio Vista, 1996), p. 83 where she describes the image of ‘healing and recuperation’ at the end of Rio Grande.
T. Gallagher, John Ford: The Man and His Films ( London: University of California Press, 1986 ).
D. W. Winnicott, Playing and Reality ( Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1974 ).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2004 Michael O’Pray
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
O’Pray, M. (2004). Carving Values and John Ford. In: Film, Form and Phantasy. Language, Discourse, Society. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230535770_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230535770_8
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-38982-7
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-53577-0
eBook Packages: Palgrave Social & Cultural Studies CollectionSocial Sciences (R0)