This paper compares Tennessee Williams's text with Elia Kazan's movie version from 1951 as well as with the so-called 'restored version' from 1993 which contains additional scenes that had been removed by the censors in the 1951 version. It examines the differences between text and film, considering changes which were made for merely artistic respectively medium-typical reasons, as well as changes which were made due to censorship, and it analyses which effects those changes had.
Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION
2 THE MOVIE’S BACKGROUND: MAKING A FILM OUT OF A PLAY
2.1 THE CAST
2.2 DIRECTOR ELIA KAZAN
2.3 CENSORSHIP
2.3.1 THE PRODUCTION CODE ADMINISTRATION
2.3.2 THE CATHOLIC LEGION OF DECENCY
2.3.3 THE RESTORED 1993 VERSION
3 CHANGES MADE FOR ARTISTIC REASONS
3.1 SCENE ONE
3.2 FURTHER OPENING UP THE SETTING
3.3 MUSIC
3.4 CONCLUSION
4 CHANGES CAUSED BY CENSORSHIP
4.1 STELLA’S STAIRWALK 1951 AND 1993
4.2 ALLAN’S HOMOSEXUALITY
4.3 STANLEY RAPES BLANCHE
4.4 THE ENDING
5 CONCLUSION: STREETCAR - A PHOTOGRAPHED PLAY?
Research Objectives and Core Themes
This paper investigates the adaptation of Tennessee Williams's play "A Streetcar Named Desire" into Elia Kazan's 1951 film, focusing on how both artistic choices and censorship regulations shaped the cinematic version compared to the original stage production.
- The influence of the Production Code Administration (PCA) and the Catholic Legion of Decency on narrative content.
- Artistic modifications made to adapt stage material for the visual medium of film.
- The impact of the 1993 "restored version" on audience perception of deleted scenes.
- Comparative analysis of character development and thematic elements in play versus film.
Excerpt from the Book
4.2 Allan’s Homosexuality
In Scene Six of the play, Blanche tells Mitch about Allan Grey, her dead husband: She tells how he had always been different from other men: “. . . a nervousness, a softness and tenderness which wasn’t like a man’s . . .” (Williams 183) Later she catches him together with another man and discovers that Allan is homosexual. They go out dancing, but Blanche, unable to control herself, tells him: “’I know! I know! You disgust me!’” (Williams 184) Shortly afterwards Allan shoots himself.
In 1951, homosexuality was still regarded as a sexual perversion, therefore the PCA changed the film dialogue according to the Production Code’s provision: “4. Sex perversion or any interference of it is forbidden.” (Quigley and Lord, qtd. in Doherty 352-353) In the film, no mention is made of Allan’s homosexual relationship with another man. However, Allan is described – like in the play – as a sensitive boy who writes poetry but what causes him to commit suicide is Blanche saying: “You’re weak. I’ve lost respect for you. I despise you.”
Because the script itself had been altered by the PCA, this change could not be restored in the 1993 version. Other measures than re-adding formerly cut scenes would have been necessary to restore this line, such as voice-dubbing.
Summary of Chapters
1 INTRODUCTION: Outlines the historical context of adapting literary works to film in the 1950s and defines the scope of comparing the original play with the 1951 and 1993 film versions.
2 THE MOVIE’S BACKGROUND: MAKING A FILM OUT OF A PLAY: Examines the casting decisions, the director's philosophy regarding adaptation, and the regulatory institutions that imposed censorship during production.
3 CHANGES MADE FOR ARTISTIC REASONS: Discusses modifications in setting, scene structure, and music that were implemented to utilize the unique visual and auditory capabilities of cinema.
4 CHANGES CAUSED BY CENSORSHIP: Analyzes specific narrative alterations—such as the portrayal of Stella's relationship, the omission of Allan's homosexuality, the depiction of rape, and the ending—mandated by external moral authorities.
5 CONCLUSION: STREETCAR - A PHOTOGRAPHED PLAY?: Synthesizes the findings, arguing that while censorship altered the explicit content, the core emotional and thematic essence of the play remained intact.
Keywords
Tennessee Williams, Elia Kazan, A Streetcar Named Desire, Film Adaptation, Censorship, Production Code Administration, Catholic Legion of Decency, Artistic Changes, 1951 Film, 1993 Restored Version, Blanche DuBois, Stanley Kowalski, Stella Kowalski, Narrative Shifts, Motion Picture Conventions
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this academic paper?
The paper examines the differences between Tennessee Williams's original stage play "A Streetcar Named Desire" and Elia Kazan's film adaptation, specifically analyzing how censorship and artistic choices influenced the final product.
What are the primary thematic areas explored?
Key areas include the role of film censorship institutions in the 1950s, the adaptation of stagecraft to cinematic techniques, and the impact of these changes on character portrayal and narrative.
What is the central research question?
The study aims to determine how and why the film deviated from the original play and what specific effects these changes—whether artistic or imposed by censors—had on the final cinematic narrative.
Which scientific methods are employed in this analysis?
The author uses a comparative analysis method, evaluating the original text against the 1951 movie version and the 1993 restored cut to identify systematic deviations.
What is covered in the main body of the work?
The main body details the historical background of the film's production, categorizes changes into those made for artistic adaptation versus those mandated by censorship, and contrasts specific scenes from the play with the films.
Which keywords best characterize this publication?
The work is defined by terms such as censorship, adaptation, film history, 1950s cinema, and the works of Tennessee Williams.
How did the PCA influence the film's ending?
The Production Code Administration mandated that Stella leave Stanley in the film's conclusion as a form of punishment for his behavior, contrasting with the play's more ambiguous and complex ending.
Why could Allan's homosexuality not be restored in the 1993 version?
Because the dialogue regarding his sexual orientation was fundamentally altered in the original script during the 1951 production phase, re-adding cut scenes was insufficient to restore the original meaning, which would have required re-dubbing the dialogue.
- Quote paper
- Henriette Plienow (Author), 2008, Art and Censorship, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/127508
