Big thanks to Allygator and leona for concrit on LA.
Will try to incorporate some of the stuff in later essays.
This is my context essay for On the Waterfront.
The plight of the common man against corruption and adversity has been well documented throughout time in both history and fiction. Through his use of monochromatic Film Noir style, Elia Kazan’s iconic film On the Waterfront is one such documentation, telling the story of the union boss’ monopoly over the longshoremen on the 1950’s waterfronts. The waterfront, a cold and harsh environment, is the ideal breeding ground for corruption amongst the union mob; murder and extortion are just some of the illicit activities that occur. However, whilst Kazan paints a bleak and dire picture for the longshoremen, the film provides a glimpse of hope in its protagonist, Terry Malloy. While others have failed before him, Terry finds the courage to take a stand and challenge the oppression despite all hardships. Even so, his eventual triumph is not without the aid of his two supporting figures, Edie and Father Barry. Through his film and its ambiguous conclusion, Kazan also raises the question of whether corruption can truly be eliminated; or will the ordinary people continue to be pawns in the games of the elite?
Through its protagonist, Terry Malloy, Kazan’s film shows that a single man is able to overcome adversity to seek justice against corruption. At the outset of the film, Terry is portrayed as a “bum”: an individual lacking in purpose or any deeper understanding in life. His failure to succeed in life is highlighted by Kazan’s use of down-shots to signify his lack of self-confidence and moral standing; although he is aware of his complacency in the murder of Joey Doyle and the corrupt nature of the mob, Terry still relents when he accepts the “present from Uncle Johnny”. Terry is merely a spectator in life and as one of the longshoremen, is subjected to the workers’ code of “D and D”. Furthermore, Terry has an intimate connection with the mob as he is the “kid brother” of Charley and the mob leader “bought a piece” of him. As such, Terry is the quintessential anti-hero; under the rule of the mob, he feels a reluctance to be a “stool pigeon” and his view that “ratting” would mean his “life ain’t worth a nickel” act as obstacles he must overcome to fulfil his role. These reasons universally resonate amongst the men of the waterfront as they are afraid of the repercussions of challenging the corruption. However, the mist around Terry eventually dissipates and he discovers where his loyalties lie. As a result, Terry finds the strength to listen to his conscience and stand up for what is morally correct and righteous. At the end of the film, Terry’s actions of testifying in court and physically attacking the mob greatly damage the mob’s power. He not only provides evidence for the court to persecute the mob, but his defiance against Friendly and his men bring about a revolution amongst the men; even Pop Doyle is shown to by physically empowered and pushes Friendly into the dirty water. The courage of one man inspires the others to act, “we don’t work unless Terry does”. Suddenly, Kazan depicts the two groups of men in different light: Terry and the longshoremen are framed in upwards camera shots and accompanied by dramatic, orchestral music, and the down shots of the mobmen highlight their humiliation and fall in status. Thus, On the Waterfront presents the idea that an individual can eliminate oppression by influencing a group revolt.
However, it can also be said that Terry’s revelation and empowerment to stand up against corruption is brought on by the two positive influences in his life, Edie and Father Barry. It is through Edie that Terry learns forgiveness and discovers personal empowerment. Edie is a “real friend” to him; someone that he feels a responsibility to care for, just as his brother looks out for him. Under her influence, Terry shifts away from his “animal”-like lifestyle and adopts her philosophy that “everyone should care for everyone else”. Kazan’s use of framing shots and romantic flute music highlight the adoration Edie has of Terry and their growing connection. Her support and his desire to help her in the quest to find justice for her brother’s murder are major catalysts in his decision to forget self-preservation and challenge corruption. Father Barry, too, acts as a driving agent in Terry’s change in attitudes. Whilst he thinks that eliminating corruption is “simple” and is willing to manipulate Terry for the greater good, Father Barry acts as a much needed paternal figure for Terry. As a priest, Kazan portrays him as a God-like figure, looking over the events occurring. He provides much needed spiritual guidance for Terry, who while “pushing thirty” would rather spend time hiding on the rooftop with his Golden Warriors. The influence of both Edie and Father Barry, often seen together in the same shot, allow Terry to shake off the “monkey on his back” and listen to his conscience. His testifying in court finally relieves him of his guilt. Nevertheless, Terry’s plight against corruption is not completely morally motivated. In the style of a typical outlaw hero, Terry’s challenge to Friendly is also caused by the cold-blooded murder of his brother, Charley the Gent. Immediately after discovering the betrayal, Terry desires to “take it out of their skulls” and turns his back on Edie, still cowering the darkness, suggesting that revenge plays an important role in his decision. As such, Kazan stresses that corruption cannot be overcome without supporters and guiding figures.
Although Terry succeeded, the failures of the men before him must not be forgotten. The jacket, a symbol for taking the courage to stand up against oppression, was first worn by Joey Doyle, Edie’s brother. Even though he was an individual whom “everyone loved”, Joey’s decision to speak out against the mob resulted in his death. Kazan fully conveys the cold and harsh environment of the waterfront by his statement, “I gotta watch myself these days”; the repercussions for challenging the mob can be fatal. The director further depicts the waterfront culture in the subsequent reactions of the bystanders after Joey was pushed off. As the police question the spectators, even Pop Doyle sticks to being “deaf and dumb” and shushes the woman who speaks up. Clearly, the threat of the mob can sever family ties. The same “D and D” attitude is displayed after the crushing murder of Kayo Dugan, the second “cheese-eater”. Despite the camaraderie between the longshoremen, they do not react or avenge their colleague’s death, but ignore it as they themselves are scared. Without the support of a large group, the powerlessness of the single man is evident. In addition, while the film may seem to suggest a positive end for the longshoremen at the conclusion for the film, Kazan shows an element of ambiguity. As Terry staggers into the hold, the camera becomes fuzzy and unfocused; the future is uncertain. While the music is triumphant as a man shouts “Let’s go to work”, his suited attire has connotations with the flashy dress adopted by the mobmen. Terry and the longshoremen have overcome Friendly and his gang, but other corrupt groups will “be back”. Corruption will still remain, even under the good intentions of a few individuals.
Elia Kazan’s On the Waterfront comments on a single man’s power to enforce change. Through Terry Malloy, the film seems to suggest that on the whole, an individual is able to combat corruption with the help of supporters and reinforcements. Nevertheless, Kazan maintains the idea that it is inevitable that some will be powerless against the oppression and that corruption is a neverending cycle. After all, as the saying goes, “power corrupts”.
Home
Help
Search
Login
