No Man is an Island: The Theory of Minor Literature in "Dead Man"

Hello everyone!

Today we’re going to be taking a look at Jim Jarmusch’s “psychedelic western”, Dead Man starring the interminable Jonny Depp. Let’s begin, shall we?

Objective Review

First, let’s take a look at what scene we’re going to be dealing with from the movie. Now, I do have to beg your pardon here because we are going to be dealing with themes that appear throughout the movie, as well as a few events that happen outside of this scene. I know normally we stick to one moment in the film, but I’m confident that stepping outside of these bounds will allow me to illustrate my point further. So, on to our scene.

Towards the end of the movie, we travel with our main character, William Blake (WB), and his First Nations companion, Nobody. At the juncture of our reunion, WB and Nobody are just entering a white man’s trading post. As WB enters, he is greeted warmly (although slightly facetiously) by the missionary inside. When Nobody enters however, the tone turns as the missionary refers to the newcomer as one of the “heathens and philistines”. No worries though- in my favorite line of the film Nobody shoots his hypocritical, condescending language right back at the missionary by quoting William Blake’s (the poet this time) The EverlastingGospel. As the scene continues, Nobody is refused tobacco (one of his greatest desires) because of his race and is even offered a disease ridden blanket instead. WB then proceeds to ask for tobacco, which he will surely give to his friend as WB doesn’t smoke. The missionary then recognizes WB and, under the ruse of asking for his autograph, pulls a gun on him. 

WB, in typical bad-@$$ fashion, then stabs a fountain pen into the missionary’s hand and then shoots him. Interestingly enough in the chest, which I imagine would be more painful, rather than the head, which would be pretty instantaneous.  WB and Nobody then leave, after shooting one more pesky loiterer.

Reaction

I actually really loved this film. I appreciated the skill it took to place WB’s actual poetry into the script and also appreciate the art and culture it brings to the table. The film is also absolutely hilarious. It seems to contain that dark humor that you know you possess, but don’t exactly want to bring up at a cocktail party as suddenly the whole room just goes silent but for the awkard sound of someone’s finger against their glass. You can almost hear everyone thinking, “Did he really just make a leper joke?”. Not that I have that humor…

The only thing that I think this film possibly lacked was a bit more “craft” in the production. I got the feeling that things were placed and structured very intentionally, but there was a certain production value that seemed lacking. I would have preferred more shots for each scene, less awkward fade in/outs, and honestly more color. I get that Jarmusch was probably trying to communicate something through the black and white, but honestly to me it just seems like a cheap film school trick to try and seem more artsy.

Analysis

Now let’s get to the meat of the matter. Normally, when we think of “minor literature” as described by Deleuze and Guattari, we think of art that is created by a minority in order to communicate some sort of marginalized agenda. However, I will now show that in the case of Dead Man, the “literature” is of a different sort.

Minor literature is a concept developed by Deleuze and Guattari to describe an attempt by a minor group (distinct from a numerical minority and rather something much more to do with lack of power) to deterritorialize common elements of the major (again, not a numerical group but essentially not the minority) in order to express the minority predicament. Typically, this minor literature is embodied in some sort of art form, although an argument can be made that action is in itself a form of minor literature. For this, we conjure up memories of Gandhi and his peaceful revolution.

In Dead Man, however, we discover something quite different- I argue that WB himself, and the character that is developed around him, is in fact a form of minor literature. To verify this, we need only to look at the three defining characteristics of minor literature. First, Deleuze and Guattari tell us that minor literature is a collective work. The reason for this necessity is that “talents do not abound in a minor literature, the conditions are not given for an individuated utterance which would be that of some "master" and could be separated from collective utterance” (1983). Essentially, there is no Beethoven to compose the master orchestra; in order to fully encapsulate the minor predicament the work itself must be a public work, open for interpretation and even alteration by everyone. We clearly see this characteristic evident in Dead Man. When tasked with the job of determining who exactly causes WB to metamorphosize into the dastardly outlaw he becomes, one is faced with a myriad of answers. It could be argued that Nobody (WB’s First Nation compadre, not the absence of any one person) directs WB along his path. At the same time, it can be equally well argued that WB’s pursuers (including Robert Mitchum’s character Dickinson) have forced Blake to transform. But then, we are turned 180 degrees again as we consider that perhaps Thel, the wonderful woman who had a significant part in setting this whole story in motion, is at the helm. So many options! This is indicative of a collective work – the meaning of the work is not encompassed entirely in one individual, but is understood and influenced rather by the larger group- a collective. If we were to attempt to trace these influences down to their individual sources we might suggest that:

• Charlie makes WB a dead man
•  Dickinson makes him a bad man
• Nobody makes him into a poetry man
• The relentless pursuit of others makes him into an outlaw manand finally…
• Nobody and the Pacific Northwest tribe make him into a spirit/legend man

An interesting facet to this idea of a collective work is the contributions that different groups make to the minor literature. In particular, Nobody seems intent on connecting WB to his poet namesake, whether through reincarnation, jokingly or simply through comparison or allusion. This is in line with an idea that scholar Shu Mei Shih uses to describe when a minor group incorporates their nostalgia for the past within a minor literature. Shih calls this "structuration of the collective memory of the past" (Shu-mei Shih, 2010). Shih uses this to describe the nostalgia felt by certain ethnic groups within China before the reigning dynasty assumed control, but the concept still stands in this context.

Next, we are told that minor literatures are inherently political. This is seen clearly in Dead Man through at least three different aspects. First, WB’s struggle is characterized by his desire to find justice for himself. As a character that committed manslaughter in self defense, his sentence (to be captured dead or alive) certainly does not fit his crime. He then acts this out by disposing of those who unlawfully pursue him. Secondly, WB fights for the equality of his companion, Nobody. This is shown through his interaction with the missionary at the trading post and his request to buy tobacco (clearly for his friend) since the missionary is bigoted and will not sell it directly to Nobody. Thirdly, we see WB attempting to show value to the prostitute Thel by helping her up in the street after she has been deemed unworthy by townsfolk.

Lastly, we know that minor literature seeks to deterritorialize themes of the major literature in order to explain the minor predicament. In Dead Man, we see this through the realignment of WB (and the struggle of Nobody and Thel) according to their definition as provided by the major society. In other words, we see that WB is working to show that Nobody is not a heathen and Philistine but, in actuality, worthy of being traded with and furthermore a valuable human being. Again, this is shown through WB’s interaction with the missionary.

Finally, Deleuze and Guattari clarify that “minor literature is not the literature of a minor language but the literature a minority makes in a major language” (1983). Sadly, in the world of Dead Man, the major language is that of violence. Therefore, WB must take up arms in order to express the minor situation through the language of the majority.

So, now you know a bit of how I saw the film! What do you think? Do you think I’m completely off base? Are there portions of my analysis that can be expounded on? I’m looking forward to hearing your opinions!*

*by all means, argue with me. Seriously. Let’s debate and challenge each others’ analyses – that’s how great work is developed!

Cheers,

Nate