I wanted to add a bit to the class discussion from Friday about the different “feels” of Yojimbo and The Glass Key. Dr. Campbell told us “feel” didn’t quite encapsulate what we were trying to articulate, and I’d like to propose an alternate word – aesthetic. According to the OED (Oxford English Dictionary), when used as an adjective, aesthetic describes a sensuous perception. So the way we perceive things, the sense we get about the story, changes with the film. The Glass Key fills the plot lines of the novel, but Yojimbo gives us more the novel’s aesthetic, if not the same plot structure and events. Interestingly, an alternate definition of aesthetic is, (noun) “of or pertaining to a late nineteenth-century movement in England of artists and writers who advocated a doctrine of ‘art for art’s sake.’” Now, I know neither film was made in 19th century England, but I do think this gives us a window of insight. We have established that Yojimbo is a much more “self-conscious” film, one that wants to call attention to the fact it is an art form rather than pretending to portray reality. This is, at least it is my understanding, of the concept of “art for art’s sake.” So, perhaps it is better to say that Yojimnbo captures the aesthetic of Hammett’s Glass Key, while the film The Glass Key, captures more of its plot structure.
I want to talk a bit more about adaptations, but I’m late for a phone date, so that will have to wait ‘till tomorrow. Also, we haven’t really talked about Miller’s Crossing in class yet, so I’d like to wait and see if my ideas on adaptations will pan out after we discuss the film in more detail.