To betray, or not to betray, that is the question

The auteurs are under attack and no one seems to be coming to their defense, well no one is defending them with words that is. Instead it would seem filmmakers are just going about their business dropping gems of beauty and intrigue proving that theorists are not the judicial board which can dismiss a consistently neglected theory such as auteurism. In the film The Grapes of Wrath critics find avenues in which the auteur theorist can be dismissed. They accuse John Ford and Greg Toland of compromising the integrity of the original novel the film is based on, and thus discredit auteur theory as a theory which undermines the creativity of other arts. Sounds pretty ridiculous to me, because if Ford and Toland are guilty of anything its recreating the Mona Lisa. Constantly there are these arguments which throw filmmakers under the proverbial bus for compromising the integrity of the original source work, but for every theorist who discredits an auteur for his or her version of an adaptation there is a film which proves them wrong. The Grapes of Wrath is such a film and while at times it completely departs from its original source material, it still vehemently maintains the spirit and essence of the works intent. In every shot of every frame my insides are violently ripped out and I feel the destitute, despondent, and utterly tragic experiences of life in the depression era mid-West. One poignant scene which stood out to me most is when the farmer is telling the tale of when his home was run over by the tractor. It is my understanding that this scene is also represented in the novel, but it is the technique and skill which Ford uses that truly makes me feel the pain of these lowly blue collar farmers more than the novel ever could. The expressions on each of their faces, the disbelief and anger in the face of the farmer when the tractor threatens his home, and the boy himself who sits atop the tractor seeming somewhat scared and disillusioned by the whole situation yet resolute by fear of having no work. The novel is an excellent source and is in no way inferior to the film, but it is in Ford and Toland’s work that we can watch and interact on a level text cannot suitably provide which elevates one’s understanding from sympathy to empathy. Then finally the tractor moves forward and the family flees like terrified ants, as they witness the destruction of the home they built and fought for so many years and generations be destroyed in a manner of seconds. These images in motion and backed by a brilliant narrative expresses emotion and understanding that a piece of text just cannot replicate or handle. And regardless of how one may feel about the auteur, it is in my opinion that no other type of filmmaker would be able to adequately recreate an original source work. Auteurs certainly have their place among the pantheon of theorist and they should not be denied credit and prestige simply because they are willing to impose their own understanding of a source material in the final cut of the film. Auteurs are not inherently tone deaf of the desires of the audience and they are more than capable of acknowledging those desires and presenting a film in a manner which both expresses their own views while relating to those of the audience. What Ford and Toland accomplished with The Grapes of Wrath was a recreation, not replication, of a brilliant piece of source material. They elevated certain meanings and ideas which could not be expressed in simple words, yet maintained the integrity and spirit of the novel itself.