The Shining Stanley Kubrick

Social interpretations

Film critic Jonathan Romney writes that the film has been interpreted in many ways, including addressing the topics of the crisis in masculinity, sexism, corporate America, and racism. "It's tempting to read The Shining as an Oedipal struggle not just between generations but between Jack's culture of the written word and Danny's culture of images", Romney writes, "Jack also uses the written word to more mundane purpose – to sign his 'contract' with the Overlook. 'I gave my word', ... which we take to mean 'gave his soul' in the ... Faustian sense. But maybe he means it more literally – by the end ... he has renounced language entirely, pursuing Danny through the maze with an inarticulate animal roar. What he has entered into is a conventional business deal that places commercial obligation ... over the unspoken contract of compassion and empathy that he seems to have neglected to sign with his family."[161]

Native Americans

Among interpreters who see the film reflecting more subtly the social concerns that animate other Kubrick films, one of the early viewpoints was discussed in an essay by ABC reporter Bill Blakemore titled "Kubrick's 'Shining' Secret: Film's Hidden Horror Is The Murder of the Indian", first published in The Washington Post on July 12, 1987.[162][b] He believes that indirect references to American killings of Native Americans pervade the film, as exemplified by the Amerindian logos on the baking powder in the kitchen and the Amerindian artwork that appears throughout the hotel, though no Native Americans are seen. Stuart Ullman tells Wendy that when building the hotel, a few Indian attacks had to be fended off since it was constructed on an Indian burial ground.[162]

Blakemore's general argument is that the film is a metaphor for the genocide of Native Americans. He notes that when Jack kills Hallorann, the dead body is seen lying on a rug with an Indian motif. The blood in the elevator shafts is, for Blakemore, the blood of the Indians in the burial ground on which the hotel was built. The date of the final photograph, July 4, is meant to be ironic. Blakemore writes:[162][163]

As with some of his other movies, Kubrick ends The Shining with a powerful visual puzzle that forces the audience to leave the theater asking, "What was that all about?" The Shining ends with an extremely long camera shot moving down a hallway in the Overlook, reaching eventually the central photo among 21 photos on the wall, each capturing previous good times in the hotel. At the head of the party is none other than the Jack we've just seen in 1980. The caption reads: "Overlook Hotel – July 4th Ball – 1921." The answer to this puzzle, which is a master key to unlocking the whole movie, is that most Americans overlook the fact that July Fourth was no ball, nor any kind of Independence day, for native Americans; that the weak American villain of the film is the re-embodiment of the American men who massacred the Indians in earlier years; that Kubrick is examining and reflecting on a problem that cuts through the decades and centuries.

Film writer John Capo sees the film as an allegory of American imperialism. This is exemplified by many clues, such as the closing photo of Jack in the past at a Fourth of July party, or Jack's earlier reference to the Rudyard Kipling poem "The White Man's Burden", which was written to advocate the American colonial seizure of the Philippine islands, justifying imperial conquest as a mission-of-civilization.[164]

The artwork of Indigenous Canadian artist Norval Morriseau can be seen throughout the film, including the paintings The Great Earth Mother (1976), and Flock of Loons (1975).[165]

Geoffrey Cocks and Kubrick's concern with the Holocaust

Film historian Geoffrey Cocks has extended Blakemore's idea that the film has a subtext about Native Americans by arguing that the film indirectly reflects Stanley Kubrick's concerns about the Holocaust (both Cocks's book and Michael Herr's memoir of Kubrick discuss how he wanted his entire life to make a film dealing directly with the Holocaust but could never quite make up his mind). Cocks, writing in his book The Wolf at the Door: Stanley Kubrick, History and the Holocaust, proposed a controversial theory that all of Kubrick's work is informed by the Holocaust; there is, he says, a holocaust subtext in The Shining. This, Cocks believes, is why Kubrick's screenplay goes to emotional extremes, omitting much of the novel's supernaturalism and making the character of Wendy much more hysteria-prone.[166] Cocks places Kubrick's vision of a haunted hotel in line with a long literary tradition of hotels in which sinister events occur, from Stephen Crane's short story "The Blue Hotel" (which Kubrick admired) to the Swiss Berghof in Thomas Mann's novel The Magic Mountain, about a snowbound sanatorium high in the Swiss Alps in which the protagonist witnesses a series of events which are a microcosm of the decline of Western culture.[167]

Cocks claims that Kubrick has elaborately coded many of his historical concerns into the film with manipulations of numbers and colors and his choice of musical numbers, many of which are post-war compositions influenced by the horrors of World War II. Of particular note is Kubrick's use of Penderecki's The Awakening of Jacob to accompany Jack Torrance's dream of killing his family and Danny's vision of past carnage in the hotel, a piece of music originally associated with the horrors of the Holocaust.[168]

Cocks's work has been anthologized and discussed in other works on Stanley Kubrick films, though sometimes with skepticism. Julian Rice, writing in the opening chapter of his book Kubrick's Hope, believes Cocks's views are excessively speculative and contain too many strained "critical leaps" of faith. Rice holds that what went on in Kubrick's mind cannot be replicated or corroborated beyond a broad vision of the nature of good and evil (which included concern about the Holocaust) but Kubrick's art is not governed by this one obsession.[169] Diane Johnson, co-screenwriter for The Shining, commented on Cocks's observations, saying that preoccupation with the Holocaust on Kubrick's part could very likely have motivated his decision to place the hotel on a Native American burial ground, although Kubrick never directly mentioned it to her.[170]

Literary allusions

Geoffrey Cocks notes that the film contains many allusions to fairy-tales, both Hansel and Gretel and the Three Little Pigs,[166] with Jack Torrance identified as the Big Bad Wolf, which Bruno Bettelheim interprets as standing for "all the asocial unconscious devouring powers" that must be overcome by a child's ego.

The saying "all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy" appeared first in James Howell's Proverbs in English, Italian, French and Spanish (1659).[171]

Artworks in the film

Numerous paintings and sculptures appear throughout the film. Several paintings by Group of Seven artists appear including The Solemn Land (1921) by J.E.H. MacDonald, Northern River (1914) by Tom Thomson, Stormy Weather, Georgian Bay (1921) by Frederick Varley, Red Maple (1914) by A. Y. Jackson, Mist Fantasy, Sand River, Algoma (1920) by J.E.H. MacDonald, Maligne Lake, Jasper Park (1924) by Lawren Harris, Beaver Swamp (1920) by Lawren Harris, and Arpeggio (1932) by Frederick Varley.[172] Two paintings by Indigenous Canadian artist Norval Morriseau can be seen in the film including The Great Earth Mother (1976), and Flock of Loons (1975)––Morriseau was part of the Professional Native Indian Artists Inc. (PNIAI) which came to be informally known as the "Indian Group of Seven".[173][165][174]

Many of the paintings that appear include depictions of Canada or are painted by Canadian artists including Le Campement du Trappeur (1931) by Clarence Gagnon, December Afternoon (1969) by Hugh Monahan, Log Hut on the St. Maurice (1862) and Paysage d’hiver, Laval (1849) by Cornelius Krieghoff, After The Bath (1890) by Paul Peel, Site du “Combat de la Grange” 25 Sept. 1775. (1839) by Louise-Amélie Panet, Starlight: Indian Papoose (n.d.) and Chief Bear Paw (n.d.) by Nicholas Raphael de Grandmaison, Montreal from the Mountain (1838) by William Henry Bartlett, Makah Returning in their War Canoes (1845-1859) by Paul Kane, Mill on the Cliff (n.d.) by Nicholas Hornyansky, The Johnson House, Hanover (1932–42) by Carl Schaefer, and Cooper's Hawk (1974) and Glaucous-Winged Gull (1973) by J. Fenwick Lansdowne.[165][175]

A number of paintings by Alex Colville make appearances including Woman and Terrier (1963), Horse and Train (1954), Hound in Field (1958), Dog, Boy, and St. John River (1958), and Moon and Cow (1963).[165][176][177]

Several portraits by Dorothy Oxborough of children from the Bearspaw band of the Stoney/Nakoda people appear in the film.[165][178] Oxborough's portraits were often reproduced as decorative prints, framed souvenirs, greeting cards, novelties, and calendars.[179] Oxborough, born in Calgary, Alberta, was criticized for infantilizing and culturally insensitive depictions of indigenous people.[179][180][178]

Four etchings by John Webber appear in the film, A Man of Nootka Sound (1778), A Woman of Oonalashka (1784), A Woman of Prince William Sound (1784), and A Man of Van Diemen's Land (1777).[181] Webber accompanied James Cook on his third voyage to Hawaii, New Zealand, and Vancouver Island.[182][183]

Ambiguities in the film

Roger Ebert notes that the film does not really have a "reliable observer", with the possible exception of Dick Hallorann. Ebert believes various events call into question the reliability of Jack, Wendy and Danny.[68] This leads Ebert to conclude that:

Kubrick is telling a story with ghosts (the two girls, the former caretaker and a bartender), but it isn't a "ghost story", because the ghosts may not be present in any sense at all except as visions experienced by Jack or Danny.[68]

Ebert concludes that "The movie is not about ghosts but about madness and the energies it sets loose in an isolated situation primed to magnify them". The film critic James Berardinelli notes that "King would have us believe that the hotel is haunted. Kubrick is less definitive in the interpretations he offers." He dubs the film a failure as a ghost story, but brilliant as a study of "madness and the unreliable narrator".[184]

Ghosts versus cabin fever

In some sequences, there is a question of whether or not there are ghosts present. In the scenes where Jack sees ghosts, he is always facing a mirror or, in the case of his storeroom conversation with Grady, a reflective, highly polished door. Film reviewer James Berardinelli notes "It has been pointed out that there's a mirror in every scene in which Jack sees a ghost, causing us to wonder whether the spirits are reflections of a tortured psyche."[185] In Hollywood's Stephen King, Tony Magistrale wrote,

Kubrick's reliance on mirrors as visual aids for underscoring the thematic meaning of this film portrays visually the internal transformations and oppositions that are occurring to Jack Torrance psychologically. Through ... these devices, Kubrick dramatizes the hotel's methodical assault on Torrance's identity, its ability to stimulate the myriad of self-doubts and anxieties by creating opportunities to warp Torrance's perspective on himself and [his family]. Furthermore, the fact that Jack looks into a mirror whenever he "speaks" to the hotel means, to some extent, that Kubrick implicates him directly into the hotel's "consciousness", because Jack is, in effect, talking to himself.[186]

Ghosts are the implied explanation for Jack's seemingly physically impossible escape from the locked storeroom. In an interview of Kubrick by scholar Michel Ciment, the director made comments about the scene in the book that may imply he similarly thought of the scene in the film as a key reveal in this dichotomy:

It seemed to strike an extraordinary balance between the psychological and the supernatural in such a way as to lead you to think that the supernatural would eventually be explained by the psychological: 'Jack must be imagining these things because he's crazy.' This allowed you to suspend your doubt of the supernatural until you were so thoroughly into the story that you could accept it almost without noticing ... It's not until Grady, the ghost of the former caretaker who axed to death his family, slides open the bolt of the larder door, allowing Jack to escape, that you are left with no other explanation but the supernatural.[187]

Two Gradys and other doubles

Early in the film, Stuart Ullman tells Jack of a previous caretaker, Charles Grady, who, in 1970, succumbed to cabin fever, murdered his family and then killed himself. Later, Jack meets a ghostly butler named Grady. Jack says that he knows about the murders, claiming to recognize Grady from pictures, but the butler introduces himself as Delbert Grady.

Gordon Dahlquist of The Kubrick FAQ argues that the name change "deliberately mirrors Jack Torrance being both the husband of Wendy/father of Danny and the mysterious man in the 1920s July Fourth photo. It is to say he is two people: the man with choice in a perilous situation and the man who has 'always' been at the Overlook. It's a mistake to see the final photo as evidence that the events of the film are predetermined: Jack has any number of moments where he can act other than the way he does and that his (poor) choices are fueled by weakness and fear perhaps merely speaks all the more to the questions about the personal and the political that The Shining brings up. In the same way Charles had a chance – once more, perhaps – to not take on Delbert's legacy, so Jack may have had a chance to escape his role as 'caretaker' to the interests of the powerful. It's the tragic course of this story that he chooses not to."[188]

Dahlquist's argument is that Delbert Grady, the 1920s butler, and Charles Grady, the 1970s caretaker, rather than being either two people or the same are two 'manifestations' of a similar entity; a part permanently at the hotel (Delbert) and the part which is given the choice of whether to join the legacy of the hotel's murderous past (Charles), just as the man in the photo is not exactly Jack Torrance but nor is he someone different. Jack in the photo has 'always' been at the Overlook; Jack the caretaker chooses to become part of the hotel. The film's assistant editor Gordon Stainforth has commented on this issue, attempting to steer a course between the continuity-error explanation on one side and the hidden-meaning explanation on the other; "I don't think we'll ever quite unravel this. Was his full name Charles Delbert Grady? Perhaps Charles was a sort of nickname? Perhaps Ullman got the name wrong? But I also think that Stanley did NOT want the whole story to fit together too neatly, so [it is] absolutely correct, I think, to say that 'the sum of what we learn refuses to add up neatly'."[188]

Among Kubrick's other doubling/mirroring effects in the film:[189]

• In the U.S. version, Jack's interview with Ullman, whose confident affability contrasts with Jack's seemingly forced nonchalance, is paired with Wendy's meeting with a female doctor, whose somber and professional manner contrasts with Wendy's nervousness.
• During the interview, Jack and Ullman are joined by a hotel employee named Bill Watson, who looks similar to Jack from behind, creating a pseudo–mirror image effect as they sit in chairs to the front-left and front-right of Ullman's desk.
• The Grady sisters look so similar that they appear to be twins, though they are different ages (Ullman states that he thinks that they were about eight and ten).
• On two occasions, Ullman says goodbye to two young female employees and in the second case, they closely resemble each other.
• The film contains two mazes, the hedges outside and, per Wendy's characterization, the Overlook. The hedge maze appears in two forms, the 13-foot-high version outside and the model inside the Overlook. In the overhead shot zooming down on Wendy and Danny in the center of the maze, the maze differs from the map outside and from the model having far more corridors, and the left and right sides are mirror images of each other. The Overlook significantly breaks down into two sections, one old and one remodeled; one past, one present.
• Two versions of the bathing woman inhabit Room 237.
• In Hallorann's Miami bedroom, two paintings showing similar nude black women are seen on opposite walls just before he experiences a "shining".
• There appear to be two Jack Torrances, the one who goes mad and freezes to death in the present and the one who appears in a 1921 photograph that hangs on the gold corridor wall inside the Overlook.

Photograph

At the end of the film, the camera moves slowly toward a wall in the Overlook and a 1921 photograph, revealed to include Jack seen at the middle of a July 4, 1921, party. In an interview with Michel Ciment, Kubrick said that the photograph suggests that Jack was a reincarnation of an earlier official at the hotel.[190] This has not stopped alternative readings, such as that Jack has been "absorbed" into the Overlook Hotel. Film critic Jonathan Romney, while acknowledging the absorption theory, wrote:

As the ghostly butler Grady (Philip Stone) tells him during their chilling confrontation in the men's toilet, 'You're the caretaker, sir. You've always been the caretaker.' Perhaps in some earlier incarnation Jack really was around in 1921, and it's his present-day self that is the shadow, the phantom photographic copy. But if his picture has been there all along, why has no one noticed it? After all, it's right at the center of the central picture on the wall, and the Torrances have had a painfully drawn-out winter of mind-numbing leisure in which to inspect every corner of the place. Is it just that, like Poe's purloined letter, the thing in plain sight is the last thing you see? When you do see it, the effect is so unsettling because you realise the unthinkable was there under your nose – overlooked – the whole time.[140]

Spatial layout of the Overlook Hotel

Screenwriter Todd Alcott has noted:

Much has been written, some of it quite intelligent, about the spatial anomalies and inconsistencies in The Shining: there are rooms with windows that should not be there and doors that couldn't possibly lead to anywhere, rooms appear to be in one place in one scene and another place in another, wall fixtures and furniture pieces appear and disappear from scene to scene, props move from one room to another, and the layout of the Overlook makes no physical sense.[191]

Artist Juli Kearns first identified and created maps of spatial discrepancies in the layout of the Overlook Hotel, the interiors of which were constructed in studios in England. These spatial discrepancies included windows appearing in impossible places, such as in Stuart Ullman's office, which is surrounded by interior hallways, and apartment doorways positioned in places where they cannot possibly lead to apartments.[192] Rob Ager is another proponent of this theory.[193][194] Jan Harlan, an Executive Producer on The Shining, was asked about the discontinuity of sets by Xan Brooks of The Guardian and confirmed the discontinuity was intentional, "The set was very deliberately built to be offbeat and off the track, so that the huge ballroom would never actually fit inside. The audience is deliberately made not to know where they're going. People say The Shining doesn't make sense. Well spotted! It's a ghost movie. It's not supposed to make sense."[195] Harlan further elaborated to Kate Abbot, "Stephen King gave him the go-ahead to change his book, so Stanley agreed – and wrote a much more ambiguous script. It's clear instantly there's something foul going on. At the little hotel, everything is like Disney, all kitsch wood on the outside – but the interiors don't make sense. Those huge corridors and ballrooms couldn't fit inside. In fact, nothing makes sense."[196]