Analysis Of Vertigo By Alfred Hitchcock

The medium of film, while relatively new and unexplored compared to other visual arts, has proven itself time and time again to be extremely versatile and fascinating with regard to aesthetic properties. At times, film can be used to enhance or respond to another piece of art—for instance, the adaptation of novels or other works that inspire or serve as the basis for a film. An adapter by nature, Alfred Hitchcock often used other works as inspirations for his films. Hitchcock’s filmography contains predominantly adapted works, though these adaptations are usually loose and edited to fit Hitchcock’s aesthetic and common themes. For his acclaimed film Vertigo, Hitchcock drew from Pierre Boileau and Thomas Narcejac’s novel D’entre les morts (or

The Living and the Dead). In some ways, Hitchcock’s film surpasses the quality of the novel through its use of visuals and the condensing done by screenwriter Samuel Taylor, yet the book succeeds in other places. These successes or “failures” are simply due to the change in medium—the film is distinctly different from the novel, in the best possible way. While Hitchcock’s Vertigo succeeds due to the visual elements of film and the immersive nature of cinema, Boileau and Narcejac’s novel succeeds due to the mental and emotional immersion of narrative prose combined with free indirect speech.
The film, though based on the novel, differs from its source in many important ways. From wartime to peace, Paris to San Francisco, and neurotic to non-descript, Hitchcock and Taylor condensed many aspects of the novel in order to make it more palatable for moviegoers. Duration and clarity were important factors in the editing and writing process as well. The novel takes place over the course of years, whereas the film, running 128 minutes, covers a few weeks or months at most. Many separate encounters, experienced over several days, are condensed into a single day to allow for a faster-paced plot more suitable for the cinema. In the novel, the main character Flavières (or Scottie, played by James Stewart, in the film) is a neurotic, bitter, obsessed and unstable even before his experience with Madeleine (played by Kim Novak in the film). The novel’s characters are much less likable; the authors’ disdain for the characters and the world they exist in is clear.
Though Hitchcock and Taylor’s creative changes show stylistic differences between the novel and film, the similarities between the two works offer more interesting and complicated insight into the capabilities and shortcomings of their respective forms. Both pieces operate heavily on sight, appearance, and visual impressions, using them in a variety of ways to develop the love that Flavières /Scottie feels for Madeleine. In order to illustrate the importance of sight in the novel and the film, five scenes have been selected to analyze the different ways each medium utilizes sight. These scenes, presented in chronological order, are some of the most memorable and lasting images from the film that helped to make it such a successful, classic part of the filmic canon.
The first time Scottie sees Madeleine, the wife of an old acquaintance, Gavin Elster (or, in the novel, Gévigne), is in Ernie’s restaurant, a setting clad in rich reds and blacks.

Madeleine stands out because of her beauty, of course, but more notably because of her contrasting green wrap, which beautifully drapes onto the floor from her seat. In the novel, this first encounter is set in a theater instead, with Flaviéres, like Scottie, having “only to turn his head a little to see.” In both scenarios, the leading man “couldn’t see her features clearly, but [they had] the impression she was pretty, with something a bit fragile about her.” Both works also feature a “close-up view of her” as Madeleine and Gévigne/Gavin leave the scene. While the novel leaves us to imagine this close-up, the film is able to frame Madeleine in a tight profile. This key aspect of filmic form—the new visual capabilities offered through careful framing and composition of shots and montages—focuses the viewer on a particular aspect of a scene, often distinguishing a main character or showing detail/emotion that might be lost in a wider angle. Novak’s Madeleine appears less fragile than her novelistic counterpart here, her profile image projecting strength. (Appendix A) The lights seem to brighten as she steps into position as well, lightening her already ghost-white hair. This shot is reminiscent of a portrait, echoing Flaviéres’ (and by extension, Boileau and Narcejac’s) constant allusions to other works of art that Madeleine seems to resemble in her various

poses.
The novel, unlike the film, is able to seamlessly travel from the point-of-telling to Flaviéres’ memories, often framing them with his eyes opening and closing. In this same scene, Flaviéres “shut[s] his eyes and let[s] his mind run back to the days when he and Gévigne had shared a room to save money.” He remembers advice from his friend on how to attract women, and his inability to do so due to his own nerves. This small flashback gives the reader insight into their previous relationship and into Flaviéres’ character, making their investigative arrangement more plausible and credible. The film omits this background information, leaving the relationship between Scottie and Gavin Elster more ambiguous. The ability of the novel to jump from time to time is not exclusive to the form, of course, but seems easier and more smoothly done on the page than on the screen. In film, this could be achieved through the use of non-diegetic elements such as voiceovers, marked editing transitions that communicate the nature of the “flashback,” or through expository dialogue. However, Hitchcock’s film stays mostly in the present, deviating only to show Scottie’s vertigo-induced terrors. This allows Hitchcock to maintain a certain rhythm and forward progression throughout the film, connecting the past and the present through strong visual cues and parallels.
Madeleine’s connection to her “past life,” her great-grandmother Pauline Lagerlac (or Carlotta Valdes, in the film) is shown through devotional errands, including graveyard visits, purportedly drifting in and out of her ancestor’s consciousness and, in the film, Madeleine’s admiration of the portrait of Carlotta. In the book, Flaviéres observes these occurrences over a longer period of surveillance; while Scottie follows her for only one day, observing all of these important moments. Madeleine’s signature grey suit is seen here for the first time, and she is described as follows: “She was wearing a grey suit, very tight at the waist, and her black handbag was tucked under her arm. She looked round her as she finished putting on her gloves. Some delicate white lace fluttered at her throat.” This grey suit is of paramount importance, as it is one of the ways Scottie/Flaviéres later attempts to “recreate” his Madeleine. Hitchcock’s Madeleine dresses and behaves similarly, but rather than walking to her sacred places, she drives a green car. This thematic green, appearing in Madeleine’s wrap, the car, and as lighting in significant scenes, gives a subtle ghostly impression—ghoulish, odd, and immediately noticeable in most situations.
In both works, the first contact between Scottie/Flaviéres and Madeleine occurs at a crucial moment—Madeleine’s initial suicide attempt. In the novel, Madeleine has “wandered down to the edge of the quay” and, after tearing up her suicide letter, she “calmly [takes] a step forward” into the water in an attempt to drown herself. Hitchcock takes advantage of his San Francisco setting, having Madeleine walk into the water just beneath the San Francisco Bridge, creating a beautifully framed and composed shot. While Hitchcock’s Madeleine carries no letter, the action in the script describes her as “mechanically tearing off the lace-edged paper from the nosegay.” In the film, Novak simply scatters the flowers from Carlotta’s signature bouquet. At the heroine’s splash, the leading man leaps into action and pulls her out of the water. In the novel, the scene is as follows:
“Realizing she had stirred, he collected himself, sat up, and looked at her. She was a pitiful sight, her hair plastered on her cheeks, her skin blotchy. Her eyes were open, gazing pensively at the sky, as though trying to recognize something.
‘You’re not dead,’ said Flaviéres simply.
The eyes turned towards him, her thoughts seemed to come back from some other world.” –Boileau and Narcejac, p. 41-42
Rather than simply saying that Madeleine looked at the sky, the writers separate her eyes from herself, perhaps as a way of distancing the body from the soul that occupies it—a fitting choice given Madeleine’s identity issues. The phrasing “the eyes” is also odd, and again makes vision and ocular perception a key aspect of an integral moment. In the film script, there are several action descriptions that follow the novel quite elegantly—for instance, “Madeleine's staring eyes begin to close as she is moved away” and “Her eyes show no sign of recognition or response; they move past his face and stare out.” The script directions are not intended to give deep insight into the emotions churning beneath the surface of the character, and in the film itself, Madeleine barely opens her eyes. However, these scenes run parallel to one another, translating well from page to script to screen due to the focus on the vision of both the characters and the audience.
Madeleine’s appearance is obviously key to both narratives; with each personality seeming to have it’s own distinct “look.” After her swim in the quay/San Francisco Bay, Flaviéres/Scottie takes Madeleine to another location for her to get changed and dry. For Scottie, this is his apartment whereas for Flaviéres, it is merely to the nearby cafe. In the novel, an interesting moment occurs when Flaviéres sees Madeleine wearing different clothing. He is surprised when “[i]n a cheap print dress, her bare feet in sandals, she was another Madeleine altogether, and one that was not in the least intimidating.” The film seems not to express this moment as obviously, perhaps because this sort of realization is not as easily translated into actions without the aid of voice-over or some unnatural, non-diegetic element to be later added in. In this way, the novel is able to communicate intricate thoughts and feelings to the reader’s experience. By allowing the reader to see Madeleine and the world around Flaviéres through more or less his perspective, Boileau and Narcejac increase the mutability of Madeleine’s character and develop Flaviéres’ neuroses.