The Shawshank Redemption

I was going to start a topic on sexuality in Literature, which is a subject that genuinely interests me. However I could not think of introducing it in a way that would provoke comments. So, instead I have started a topic on the Film we covered in the Scottish Higher for English.

The Shawshank Redemption

I get the impression that it is popular amongs ESOL students and teachers. Personally I found it so objectionable, that in the exam I answered the question using another Film: 'The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie'.

<<However I could not think of introducing it in a way that would provoke comments.>>

I could re-write this sentence as:

However I could not think of a Topic Heading on 'Sexuality in Literature' that would provoke comments, rather than sink without trace like my "Manchester Guardian" post.

what do you find objectionable about it? it's a great movie.

I like the Shawshank Redemption. It's one of two repeating movies on TV (the other is "Office Space"). I especially like it when they play the duet from The Marriage of Figaro and the two ladies are plotting to play a trick with a letter. I wonder about that. The opera is all about tricking the Count and in a away the character that Tim R. plays could be seen as a kind of Figaro.

What don't I like about the movie?

Number One: The highly improbable ending!

Number Two: I do not like these grim prison type dramas.

With the exception of say 'Prisoner Cell Block H' or 'Bad Girls' which are more like Soaps, and possibly 'The Prisoner'.

Number Three: I did not like the Homosexual Rape scene or the scene where someone is very badly beaten up.

Number Four: I had the misfortune of going to a Boy's School. I don't like single sex institutions.

I just found the whole thing objectionable. The local College of Education prides itself on being Politically Correct. Yet instead of having something with a Scottish theme, they have a relatively obscure American movie.

I just think that it gave them an opportunity to show 'rape' as something that the victim does not enjoy, and does not willingly consent to, with running the risk of being 'voyeuristic' and encouraging 'rape fantasies'.

For me, the overall impression was 'grim'. Prison is a bad place where there are bad people, and nasty things happen. Don't be bad or this is where you might end up!

I know it is billed as a truimph of hope of adversity, but I found that the 'Hope' was far-fetched and unrealistic.

Personally I liked the hope over adversity slant to the movie but he was lucky to get the same cell at one end of the prison for years on end and I suspect finding an odd stone in a unfamiliar field would take ages.

Shawshank Redemption is anything but obscure -- I think it was up for some Oscars! -- and the novella it is based on, "Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption", is a beautifully written and compelling read. The ending is taken straight from the author's version and while it may be improbable*, it is the entire POINT of the whole story -- that the convict's entire prison stay has been a masterful case of misdirection (aided and abetted by a poster of Rita Hayworth that neatly hides the evidence) -- as is most of his other behavior. It is also a testament to the character's inner strength and resolve that he never gives up his quest and endures so much until its attainment. And, in fact, I would treat it as much as a character study as a prison drama. (And it's fun to say "Zihuatanejo".)

It's also almost impossible to have a prison movie without a rape scene, at least in the US. Rape is extremely prevalent in that environment, and its appearance is downright expected. To not have it would be unrealistic, and again, untrue to the written word. (And if you really want to see prison rape in all its repellent glory, go rent yourself American History X. Eek!)

It was also a necessary part of the story, as it was part of the chronicle of unfairness and humiliation and degradation that this man was subjected to. It wasn't gratuitous at all.


*Although really no more so than, say "Escape from Alcatraz" -- which, no matter how improbable, was based on a completely true story!

Dear Uriel

I had the opportunity to see this movie on Late Night TV and I declined, rightly suspecting that it would be unpleasant. I was forced to watch it in an English lesson, and 'Yes' it was unpleasant. I just have a natural aversion to unpleasantness.

I like your choice of phrase:

-- that the convict's entire prison stay has been a masterful case of misdirection


So what do you think of the theory that 'Shawshank rhymes with Wank'?

I know that Stephen King is popular, but so was Geoffrey Archer until he was imprisoned.

(I am just trying out my new computer: Quad Speed!)

Bye for now

It's good for what it is I suppose. If you don't like unpleasant movies you probably should not have seen it in the first place though... I don't like happy movies and so I never watch them and if I do watch them I don't complain about them because I should have known what to expect...

Shank is only ever pronounced one way, that I know of!

I read the novella long before they turned it into a movie, so I was interested to see what the had done with it, aside from shortening the title. I thought they did a fabulous job with it. As good a job as Rob Reiner did turning "The Body" into the movie "Stand By Me". I mention that because both stories were published in the same collection, "Four Seasons". A third tale from that collection, "Apt Pupil", was also made into a movie of the same name, which just leaves the last story, "Breathing Lessons" unfilmed (as far as I know). Since it's really the weakest of the four in terms of plot and premise and character development, I don't expect to see that rectified. (But hey, they filmed "Cat's Eye", so what do I know?)

All contain fairly disturbing elements -- the death of a young boy in "The Body", Nazism in "Apt Pupil", inprisonment in "Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption", and decapitation in "Breathing Lessons". It is Stephen King, after all. However, when he is not writing straight horror, he can be pretty lyrical and evocative and almost perfect in capturing a time and a mood and a sense of place. And none of these stories are overtly horror stories, although they contain dark elements; all monsters in them, however, are of the ordinary human kind.