1
Miss Havisham in Film
How Her Image Has Changed from 1946 to 2012
Anne Dirks
3942106
BA Thesis English Language and Culture
Utrecht University
December 2014
Supervisor: Roselinde Supheert
2
3
Contents
Contents…………………………………………………………………………. .3
Introduction……………………………………………………………………… .4
Chapter one: The first Encounter………………………………………………... .8
Chapter two: Miss Havisham’s Surroundings…………………………………
16
Chapter three: Miss Havisham’s Backstory…………………………………….... 25
Conclusion………………………………………………………………..………. 33
Works Cited………………………………………………………………………..37
4
Introduction
Great Expectations has spoken to the imagination of many people; Pip’s struggle with
society and the struggles he faces combined with an unreachable love, make the story both
realistic and fairy tale like. Great Expectations was first published in All the Year Round
(1859-93) in serialised form, from 1 December 1860 to 3 August 1864 (Jordan et al.). It
received mainly praise from the critics. In The Times, for example, the critique was "Great
Expectations is not, indeed, [Dickens's] best work, but it is to be ranked among his happiest
(Dallas)" and it instantly became popular among contemporary readers. This bildungsroman
in which Pip’s journey to adulthood is depicted can truly be regarded as a Victorian classic. It
has been adapted many times, the earliest film dating back to 1912 and into many mediums
including film, opera,1 prequels,2 television series3 and plays.4
This paper will focus on three adaptations which all have some special distinguishing
features. The oldest of them is a British production, targeted at a British audience. It is
directed by David Lean in 1946 starring John Mills as Pip, Valerie Hobson as Estella and
Martita Hunt as Miss Havisham. This adaptation credits Charles Dickens as the writer and the
screen writers are credited for having “adapted [the novel] to the screen.” This film tries to be
almost painstakingly faithful to the novel, and nearly all the dialogues are direct quotations
from the novel. The second adaptation is directed by Alfonso Cuarón in 1998, an American
production for an American target audience, and it stars Ethan Hawk as Pip,5 Gwyneth
Paltrow as Estella and Anne Bancroft as Miss Havisham.6 In this adaptation, the novel’s
historical and geographical aspects have been changed to present day New York; locations,
Miss Havisham’s Fire. Written by Dominick Argento. Libretto by John Olon-Scrymgeour. 1979. Opera.
Roe, Sue. Estella; Her Expectations. Branch Line, 1989. Print.
3
Great Expectations. Dir. Brian Kirk Perf. Douglas Booth, Gillian Anderson, Ray Winstone. British
Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), 2011. Mini-series.
4
Great Expectations. Dir. Declan Donnellan and Nick Ormerod Perf. Royal Shakespeare Company. 2005. Play.
5
In this adaptation renamed Finn.
6
In this adaptation renamed Miss Nora Driggers Dinsmoor.
1
2
5
names and motives are altered. In an interview with Jean Nathan for the The New York Times
Cuarón explains that he made these changes because he wanted to modernise the story rather
than make a literal adaptation. The most recent adaptation is directed by Mike Newell in
2012, a British production for an international audience. It stars Jeremy Irvine as Pip,
Holliday Grainger as Estella and Helena Bonham Carter as Miss Havisham. This adaptation
lists both Charles Dickens and David Nicholls as the writers, Dickens receiving credit for his
novel and Nicholls for the screenplay.
In Dickens’s novel Miss Havisham appears to be a rather flat, short-sighted character
who only receives some depth when she apologises to Pip after she realises how badly she has
scarred Estella and wronged Pip. She dies fairly soon afterwards, yet she leaves a lasting
impression on the reader. When she is first introduced, she receives a generous description in
the otherwise rather concise novel; emphasis is placed on her outfit consisting of yellowed
fabrics and her person which looks like a cross between a skeleton and a waxwork. She is
perhaps the most memorable character of the novel, trapped inside her trauma and consumed
by hate and the resolve for revenge. Such an extreme character offers directors creative
freedom because she possesses a large variety of features which can be highlighted; is she
deceivingly innocent at first, or does she appear to be aggressive, does she look scary or more
like a lost old woman who needs help? Filmmakers take very different points of view towards
her, and their interpretations of Miss Havisham reflect on the target audience and are
interesting to investigate.
Lean’s adaptation has been discussed several times because of its unusual ending in
which, after Miss Havisham has died, Estella seems to become Miss Havisham and take her
place in the abandoned Satis House. Cuarón’s film, has also been analysed several times
because through his modernisation of the geographical and historical context Cuarón “chose
to deviate from the novel sufficiently for the novel to transcend adaptation (Anderson).” Not
6
much research, however, has been done on Newell’s adaptation. Miss Havisham’s character
has been the subject of much research and new conclusions about her character have been
drawn for a long time. Joseph Hynes draws parallels between Miss Havisham and some
characters to which she seems hardly connected: “both Miss Havisham and Pip require the
experience that is this novel, in order to see themselves and their acts in perspective”. Miss
Havisham is seen by some as a witch and by others as a victim of circumstance; she has been
the subjected to many different opinions which makes it all the more interesting to see how
she has been adapted in the films and how she grows in each adaptation.
This paper will focus on three aspects which are all important in the adaptation of
Miss Havisham’s character, namely her appearance, her surroundings and her backstory. Miss
Havisham’s appearance is an aspect which can be used and altered to achieve different effects
and reflect on the society for which the film is made. Her surroundings are also telling; they
open up the possibility to use symbolism, which can intensify Miss Havisham’s story or make
it more understandable for the audience. Different aspects, from the chosen china to the
lighting, can create certain effects. Miss Havisham’s rooms are also very significant because
they are the rooms in which she received the letter which broke her heart and caused her
trauma. So the surroundings are both important to the character and the adaptation. Miss
Havisham’s backstory helps shape the mysterious story-line concerning Estella, and it takes
most of the novel for Pip and the reader to understand what happened in the past. Filmmakers
have different options when it comes to these backstories; they can use a character to tell the
story, use flashbacks or minimise it by giving a very concise explanation so the focus of
attention can be put somewhere else. These three aspects will show how Miss Havisham’s
character is represented in these three adaptations of Great Expectations. They also reflect on
her changing appearances and motives in various settings and periods used in the films, and
the differences between Dickens’s novel and the films regarding Miss Havisham. Miss
7
Havisham’s character grows from the flat character which lacks nuances in 1946, to the
mentally disturbed Miss Dinsmoor in 1998, to eventually the well-rounded Miss Havisham of
2012 which is the most realistic and the easiest of the three to understand and emphasise with.
8
The First Encounter
A first impression can be definitive, so looking at the first impression Miss Havisham
leaves behind in the adaptations indicates how the filmmakers wanted to represent her; it
shows what features were to be highlighted or what had to be changed. The first encounter
with Miss Havisham tells the audience what sort of character she is, and what part she might
play in Pip’s future.
The 1946 adaptation by David Lean is
perhaps the most famous adaptation of the
novel; the film takes a classic approach to the
story, and also to Miss Havisham. She wears an
old wedding dress and on Pip’s first encounter
with her, she is found sitting at her dressing
table. Almost all of her speeches are direct
quotes from the book, the scenarists changed
hardly anything; all nuance relies on the
delivery by the actors. Miss Havisham, also
shows some features which are quite
interesting; she is portrayed in a very static
manner. Miss Havisham is not only restricted to
her dressing table in this first scene, but she
Figure 1 First close-up of Miss Havisham
seems able to sit only in a particular way and
she hardly moves. Perhaps this shows that she is stuck in in her past and her ways in general.
She also seems fatigued and when she asks Pip to play, she does so in a quiet, pleading tone.
She seems tired and old, yet the actress who plays her has no makeup on to age her as can be
seen in Figure 1. Martita Hunt was in her mid-forties when the film was shot and hardly looks
9
like the mixture of a
waxwork and a
skeleton Dickens
describes in his novel.
She makes up for this
by acting in an elderly
fashion. Hunt’s
Figure 2 Close-up of Miss Havisham’s dressing table
portrayal of Miss Havisham relies on her movement and behaviour rather than make-up that
could show the audience how old Miss Havisham is. This makes the character seem less
realistic because she does not look the part.
Figure 2 shows a close-up of Miss Havisham’s dressing table; most of the things look
relatively clean compared to the rest of the room, a little dusty yet still useable, but the focal
point of the shot is an old unused prayer book. The Bible is covered in cobwebs and has
obviously not been touched in a very long time. This symbol signals to the audience that Miss
Havisham has forsaken her religion. In the 1940s religion played a big role in the everyday
life of the vast majority of people in Britain as almost 70 percent of all new-borns where
baptised and millions of people attended mass every Sunday (Crabtree), so this must have had
a big impact on the contemporary audience. It is also interesting to see that the other articles
on the table do not seem to be overtaken by cobwebs, while the rest of the room is; this can be
seen as an indicator that Miss Havisham spends most of her time sitting at her dressing table.
Perhaps the most interesting feature about the appearance of Miss Havisham in this
adaptation is her dress, for it does not conform to the nineteenth- century convention of
wedding dresses. As can be seen in Figure 1 the dress has dramatic sleeves, lavish
embellishments and it contains a fair amount of lace. In the 1860s, in which the story is set,
most wedding dresses had a tight bodice with short sleeves and a big hooped skirt. The
10
embellishments would be sparse because of the costs and the sober Victorian culture. This
dress appears to be inspired by an early twentieth century silhouette with the bell sleeves and
the fairly straight skirt (O'Gorman Klein).The audience would perceive the silhouette of this
dress as old-fashioned because it was fashionable only 30 years before the film premiered.
The embellishments, however, can be explained by comparing it to contemporary wedding
fashion. During the Second World War “[c]itizens were asked to conserve raw materials for
the boys overseas (Gutmann)” both in England and in the US. So after the war there was a
wedding dress frenzy, in which all the decorations which could be fitted on the fabric, where
added to the dress. All of a sudden everything was possible and the women had had to wait
for their fiancées who were fighting over seas, so there was a huge demand for wedding
dresses. The uncharacteristically lavish decoration on Miss Havisham’s dress can therefore be
explained by the conventions of the time in which the adaptation was made.
The 1989 adaptation by Alfonso Cuarón stands out from the others because it changed
the historical and geographical setting from nineteenth- century England to the United States
in the 1980s, and Miss Havisham’s
character is adjusted accordingly. As
can be seen in Figure 3; she is not
restricted to her dressing table and
does not wear a wedding dress, and
her name is not even Miss Havisham.
Figure 3 Miss Dinsmoor and Finn dancing at their first encounter
For this adaptation she was re-named
Miss Nora Digger Dinsmoor and Pip was renamed Finn along with some other name changes
to Americanise this film. Cuarón explains in an interview that it was his intent to change the
names because he wanted to avoid making a literal remake of the novel (Nathan). The name
change is unusual not only because of the Americanisation Cuarón tried to achieve but also
11
because the Miss Havisham character is given a first name; Dickens does not provide a first
name for this most eccentric character.7 This first name is also common knowledge for most
of the other characters, and she is addressed by it regularly. To have such a prominent first
name for this character is very unusual in the history of adaptations of this novel.
Miss Dinsmoor also possesses some unusual character traits when she is compared to
her literary counterpart. She for one seems not as disconnected from the world as Miss
Havisham. Miss Havisham says to Pip: “I know nothing of days of the week; I know nothing
of weeks of the year. Come again after six days. You hear? (48)” she refuses to deal with time
and reality in this deflective way, yet in the film she makes an appointment to meet with Fin
on a Wednesday. This indicates that perhaps she is not as estranged from reality as she
appears. She also leaves her house later in the film and goes to New York to be at Estella’s
wedding, which would be inconceivable for Dickens’s Miss Havisham. These two minor
changes to the character have a huge impact on the audience’s perception of this character;
Miss Dinsmoor seems more aware of the world
around her and she is not as stuck in her traumatic
past as she appears to be in the novel.
The very first image the audience sees of
Miss Dinsmoor is of her back in a pose which
indicates that she is about to dance, wearing bright
green Indian inspired garments, with happy music in
the back ground (Figure 4). The camera makes a
close-up of the back of her head while we can hear
her sing along to the music and a sudden turn of her
7
Figure 4 First image of Miss Dinsmoor, who is
about to start dancing
In the 2012 adaptation Miss Havisham is also given a first name of Eleanor on paper, but she is never
addressed as Eleanor by anyone. Argento’s opera Miss Havisham’s Fire from 1979 is the earliest adaptation in
which she receives a first name: Aurelia.
12
head shows a heavily painted face. Miss Dinsmoor breaks into dance and pulls Fin along, but
mid-dance she does not recognise who Fin is and it appears she has been unaware that she has
been dancing with this partner. She seems to have been in some sort of trance which broke
when she noticed her dancing partner was not who she thought it was. The first thing which
stands out is that she does not wear a wedding dress. The filmmakers broke away from the
iconic image of a deranged Miss Havisham in an old yellowed wedding dress with an overall
air of neglect hanging about her. This image is replaced with a Miss Dinsmoor in bright
clothing with extreme make up and immaculate hair. Throughout the film she changes her
outfit, her makeup and even her hair colour. She does not desperately hold on to a single look.
She is not portrayed as scary at first, as she is in the novel and in most adaptations. This film
uses her behaviour and her moods rather than her looks to achieve this effect. This fits better
with the contemporary setting of the film and elevates her from a flat character which relies
on gimmicks to achieve effects to a more well-rounded character; overall it shows her in a
more realistic way.
Figure 5 shows the moment in which Dinsmoor snaps out of her dance and realises
that she has no idea who Finn is. She makes her eyes big and uses her length to lean in over
Finn. She stays in this position for a few seconds, during which her movements and the bright
green colours of her clothing create an image remarkably like that of a praying mantis. It is
well known that the females of these species bite off the heads of their male counterparts, and
this could be an early clue as to Miss Dinsmoor’s true nature. She also shows other traits of
cruelty; when she demands Finn to dance for her and when he refuses, she gets very upset.
13
She also says her cat eats other cats and that is how it has become so big, and most of all she
seems to enjoy the thought of Finn’s heart being broken by Estella.
Figure 5 Miss Dinsmoor standing over Finn in a Praying Mantis like fashion when she realises who he is.
In the 2012 adaptation of Great Expectations Mike Newell uses different elements to
set the mood for Pip’s first encounter with Miss Havisham: light, music and sound effects,
and especially camera angles. When Pip first follows Estella into Satis House, where Miss
Havisham resides, the surroundings are very dark, the only source of light being a little lamp
Estella carries. This absence of light, combined with eerie slow violin music and the howling
sound of the wind, cause a definite build up in tension. Pip seems nervous and insecure and
because of the visual and auditory elements that are used, the audience shares these feelings.
When Pip is left alone in Miss Havisham’s room, close-ups are shown of a clock and images
of withered rose petals and discarded sheets of paper on the floor. These images represent
decay and disorder, and although the significance of the items shown is not yet known to the
audience, they are the first piece in the puzzle of Miss Havisham’s story.
In the novel Dickens has the freedom to use a slow build up in describing Miss
Havisham; he starts with describing a bride wearing a lavish wedding dress and ends with the
14
terrifying image of a combination between a “wax-work and skeleton [that] seemed to have
dark eyes that moved (71).” Dickens uses in his novel a slow build-up, in which an image
changes as the features are added. In a film this is hardly possible because pictures are far
more definitive than words. There are, however, other ways in which Newell tries to
incorporate a slow build-up and attempts to mirror Dickens’s literary device to create
suspense. The camera zooms out from Pip, shifts to Miss Havisham’s face in a close-up and
slowly changes focus. In this first image all the
audience sees is her head, and none of her
surprising attire. In this first shot she appears
almost doll like; her eyes are closed at first and
open slowly, and her features are relaxed under a
soft light. In the next shot a startling effect is
created by a sudden movement of her head
towards Pip, accompanied by a change in
camera-angle and a sudden bass chord which is
Figure 6 Miss Havisham at her dressing table
used to announce danger (Kelleghan). The music has been building up to this sudden basschord climax. The camera shifts from a close-up of Miss Havisham’s face to Pip and back
again. After that a full body image of Miss Havisham is shown, as can be seen in Figure 6. In
this shot light plays an important role. A beam of light glides across the dressing table and
highlights her dress, yet her face remains obscure; all the attention is focused on Miss
Havisham’s attire and her direct surroundings. This usage of light assures that not even her
face could distract the audience from it.
The emphasis on her attire remains, as the next shot is a close-up in which Miss
Havisham puts down her veil in a theatrical way, after which the camera shifts and rotates
around Miss Havisham and Pip to showcase the room and its decay. As Pip moves in closer,
15
Miss Havisham uses her broken glasses to examine him. These glasses can be seen as a
symbol for her blindness to reality, which is personified in Pip, and her short-sightedness. It
also gives the audience the chance to take in what she looks like now that the initial shock is
gone; her rotten teeth, ratty dress and uncombed hair show that she does not take care of
herself. The audience are also given a close-up of her feet to show that she only wears one
shoe, after which the camera slowly shifts upwards to give a more detailed view of her dress.
The shot takes its time to emphasise her attire and the unusualness of it. Her laugh appears to
mock all those around her and she seems to be a rather snobbish person, but after the initial
scare Miss Havisham is not portrayed as threatening or scary; in this adaptation she does not
play the role of scary witch, although this might seem the to be case at the very beginning of
the scene.
In conclusion, the 1946 Miss Havisham seems a less realistic character than the other
two Miss Havishams because she does not really look the part and is portrayed in a very static
manner. 1998 Miss Dinsmoor does not share several traditional features with her novel
counterpart like her name, outfit or the place where she lives, but she shares the larger themes
like the underlying cruelty and the sense of being wronged in her past. The 2012 Miss
Havisham shows duality in her first appearance; she is scary or threatening one moment and
seemingly innocent or confused the next. Miss Havisham’s appearance has developed from
1946 to 2012; she turned from the static one dimensional character in 1946, to Miss Dinsmoor
who is adjusted to the 1990s, to the complex layered character in 2012.
16
Miss Havisham’s Surroundings
Miss Havisham’s house is a crucial piece to the puzzle of her past; it is her main tool
for stopping time and it is why she stays strongly intertwined with her trauma. The
surroundings of Miss Havisham play an important role in the novel and they set the mood for
the type of person she is. Filmmakers can create new environments to showcase Miss
Havisham and to highlight certain aspects of her character. Dickens does not give a very
detailed description of Statis House; he tells the reader about the darkness and the decay but
he does not give many concrete details apart from the clocks having stopped at twenty to nine.
The surroundings are open to interpretation by the filmmakers, and it is interesting to see what
choices are made and what their effect is.
In the 1946 adaptation David Lean uses a lot of symbols which Dickens also uses in
the novel; he creates a gloomy atmosphere in the house by enlarging the pointers Dickens
gives in the novel. In this film the house is not shown from a distance, only relative close-ups
of the gate, garden, clock and a window; this was probably done because of the costs of
Figure 7 Pip’s first arrival at Satis House
17
outdoor shootings and the relative small budget of only £350.000 (estimated, IMDB). Several
things have been done, however, to give the estate an air of neglect and abandonment
accompanied by a spooky atmosphere. As can be seen in Figure 7; the garden is completely
overgrown with plants, but what is even more striking is the use of the gargoyles perched
upon the high wall surrounding the estate. Due to the angle of the shot in Figure 7, Pip
appears to be rather small, by comparison this makes the garden and its walls and gargoyles
appear bigger and more threatening. The inside of the house is very dark, and it seems to
consist entirely of dark stairs and corridors. There is some decoration in the form of paintings
and busts but those are not really visible because of the darkness. Throughout the house there
are clocks hidden everywhere at strategic spots, and Pip explicitly mentions the big clock on
top of the house; after this explicit mention there are several clocks in the corridors and in the
backgrounds of several shots which are also stopped at twenty past nine.
When comparing the 1946 adaptation to the other films, it becomes clear that this
adaptation does not have some of the technical advantages the other films have because film
had not been around long enough to develop the technique for basic things like colour and
outdoor shots with sound. This film really relies on the sets, lighting and editing to achieve
effects. Miss Havisham’s room has not been cleaned in thirty years and has an air of neglect
about it. This film uses cobwebs to compensate for the lack of colour. The filmmakers cannot
use colour to create stains or moulds, nor can they use darkness to create a spooky atmosphere
because the film is in black and white; if various shades of darkness had been used, many
details would have been lost in the darkness due to the stark contrast between light and dark
of black and white film combined with the lower quality of film which was available in the
1940s
18
The Ballroom is one of the most important rooms in the novel, and it receives a
detailed description. In this adaptation it fulfils the same role as in the novel and it is
decorated in a faithful and traditional way. The ballroom is, like Miss Havisham’s room,
overtaken by cobwebs as can be seen in Figure 8. It is interesting to see that candles are lit for
the lighting of the room, but these candles also indicate recent activity because of their length.
Perhaps this was simply not thought through by the filmmakers, but it is interesting to
consider that someone, either Miss Havisham or Estella, lit the candles not long before Pip’s
arrival. This could indicate that this room frequently has visitors although the cobwebs prove
differently. On the left a considerable fireplace can be seen; later a big fire is built there.
Most adaptations use darkness and the warmth and light of a fire seems out of place in this
room which has seen so much
sadness; here the black and
white actually comes in handy
because the fire does not
illuminate anything nor does it
add warmth. The prominent
place for the fireplace can also
be seen as a foreboding of Miss
Figure 8 Miss Havisham’s ball room overtaken by cobwebs
Havisham’s death. The room tries to incorporate little details from the novel as well; the
bride’s cake is hardly recognisable as one, and a mouse is perched on top of it gnawing at it.
The novel refers to the mice and spiders that have overtaken this room, this film really tries to
reflect that.
In Alphonso Cuarón’s 1989 adaptation the entire house is radically different from that
in the novel; its name is Paradiso Perduto, literally Lost Paradise, and the property truly lives
up to this name. Cuarón’s house seems idyllic almost, and especially compared to the other
19
adaptations or the novel. The bright green garden is a jungle of flowers and greenery with
angelic statues scattered around. A close-up is given of the doorbell, which is elaborately
decorated with an Arabic inscription around it and an ornamental capital N in the middle,
either for Nora Dinsmoor or some previous inhabitants which are unknown. These accents
show the wealth the house must have known at some point in the past, and the location so
near the southern border of the US perhaps explains the Hispanic influences. Inside the house
it becomes clear that these rich Arabic influences have found their way into the design of the
house. In Estella’s tour of the house she says that “the entrance is based on the Alhambra
castle in Spain and a ceiling is inspired on Gallerie dell'Accademia in Venice (19.05)”. It
shows that the original inhabitants of this house where educated and enjoyed art as much as
the current inhabitants do.
Cuarón uses various recurring motives throughout the film, one of the most obvious
ones is the colour green. The inside of the house incorporates various shades of green, and
plants from outside have found their way into the house. Alfonso Cuarón explains in an
interview why green is an important colour in the film: “I have to say that green is the only
colour I understand. I can really frame it; I know how to work with it. I see other colours, and
they feel alien. I cannot give you a rational explanation why (Nathan).” This does explain his
intentions somewhat but green also has many symbolical meanings. It could refer to the
jealousies Finn experiences throughout the film towards different people, or it can be seen as
the colour of innocence and youth. Innocence is an important motif in Miss Dinsmoor’s story;
she has lost her innocence in the traumatic events in her past and because of her
overprotection towards Estella and feelings of revenge towards men; she has taken Estella’s
and Finn’s innocence in the process.
Even though Paradiso Perduto does not show the decay as much at first sight, as in the
other adaptations, there are from the very beginning on, subtle indicators that it already has
20
some unseen decay on the inside. Finn describes the atmosphere of Miss Dinsmoor’s house
through the sense of smell; “the room smelled of dead flowers and cat piss (19.34).This
utterance is very important because it provides for the audience an aspect of the room which
cannot be seen or heard, and without it the room would seem like a pleasant place. The room
looks a little out of date but also clean and colourful and not such a terrible place to be
confined to. So this seemingly insignificant sentence shows that there is already an air of
neglect about the room. Later, when Estella has left and Finn goes to visit Miss Dinsmoor to
say he will leave for New York, the room has undergone a change for the worse; it is filled
with sheets of crumpled paper everywhere and everything seems to be broken. The light has
gone out of the room and out of the house. It is clear that Miss Dinsmoor needed Estella to
keep her life together and without her everything falls into chaos and the neglect is foreboded
by Finn’s comment.
In this adaptation stopped clocks are not used as a tool for Miss Dinsmoor to block out
time itself; she actually acknowledges time, which is reflected in her using the days of the
week. The filmmakers have decided to use an innovative modern way to stop time: they put a
record on replay. The song “Bésame Mucho”8 is played over and over again, and around the
record machine are multiple copies of this famous 1940 Mexican bolero (Fox). Using music
in addition to visual elements is a creative way to contemporise the story because it does not
have to be in the shot like a clock to claim attention from the audience. The chosen song is
also highly significant; the singer begs someone to kiss her and to shower her with love “For
I'm scared to lose you, to lose you afterwards (Velázquez).” The choice of the song is perfect
because it suits Miss Dinsmoor’s story, and it is also sung partly in Spanish which ties in the
Spanish influences that can be seen throughout the house.
8
Literally translated; Kiss me a lot.
21
Cuarón also tries to incorporate symbols to reflect Miss Dinsmoor’s state of mind, like
Mike Newell does through his close-ups in the 2012 adaptation. Just outside Miss Dinsmoor’s
room there is a large golden cage with a green bird inside it. Finn is very interested in the bird
and his first view of Miss Dinsmoor is through the bars of the cage; the cage is highly
symbolic. The colour green is very important and both Miss Dinsmoor and Estella are always
dressed in different shades of green, so a parallel between them and the bird is easily drawn.
The bird could represent Estella; in her green clothes trapped in the golden palace of Paradiso
Perduto and Miss Dinsmoor’s teachings. The bird could also represent Miss Dinsmoor
trapped inside her comfortable home where she on the one hand is kept safe from the outside
world but on the other hand is depriving herself of her freedom.
In Dickens’s novel Miss Havisham has left the ballroom untouched ever since her
wedding feast was laid out in there, the wedding cake is left to rot and all sorts of vermin have
taken advantage of the foods which had been laid out. In this adaptation, however, there is no
Figure 9 Disgarded wedding party in Miss Dinsmoor’s garden
ballroom and no wedding cake. To replace them a party has been laid out in the garden as can
be seen in Figure 9 and in Figure 10, which shows a close-up of one of the tables. The garden
has remained untouched and is a constant reminder of the party which did not take place, yet
unlike the ballroom in the novel Miss Dinsmoor does not revisit the garden constantly nor
22
does she have plans of being laid on a
particular table when she dies. She
actually hires a gardener at the
beginning of the film, Joe, to sort the
garden out so that might be a sign that
she wants to get rid of her trauma, but
Figure 10 Close-up of one of the tables
there are plenty of clues which prove
the opposite.
When Pip visits Miss Havisham’s mansion for the first time in Mike Newell’s 2012
film adaptation, Newell tries to show the decay of the house and garden, and Miss
Havisham’s seclusion. The garden appears overgrown, there are vines and weeds everywhere,
and the clock at the front of the house has stopped at twenty minutes to nine, but the audience
does not know at this moment that the clock has stopped at all. When Pip visits Miss
Havisham, the grey lighting outside indicates that it could very well be morning, so the time
on the clock is not something which is very noticeable when the audience sees the house for
the first time. When the camera moves closer to the house, the first thing the audience sees
about the house is a large chain which is wrapped around the front door. The chain is very
thick and has to be pulled from the inside to open the front door. The chain is symbolic in two
ways; it keeps the outside world out, but it also locks the inhabitants of the house in. The big
chain is an early indication of Miss Havisham is shunning the world and all forms of reality. It
also shows that Miss Havisham and Estella are trapped inside; both women are trapped inside
Miss Havisham’s world and trauma; both physically and mentally.
Lighting is one of Newell’s most used attributes in this film; it helps set the mood, and
it guides the audience to what is most important. The house is decorated in a classical style,
with columns and vases placed all around. These create shadows and nooks which add to the
23
spooky dark atmosphere. The entire house upon entering is very dark, the windows are
boarded; hardly any natural light finds its way into the house and no candles are lit. All the
chandeliers are covered in wax however, so at one point there must have been light in this
house but not any more. The only real source of light in the beginning is a little lantern Estella
carries. This changes when Miss Havisham wants to present Estella to Pip, after she has
returned from her education in France. Estella has grown up to be a very beautiful lady and
this is reflected in the gentle lighting of the scene. The setting could not be more different
from when Pip first arrived at the house; candles are lit everywhere. A warm soft glow
illuminates the entire room and it creates a stark contrast to earlier shots, which have very
little colour. The lack of colour in the beginning made Estella stand out even more with her
bright red hair and colourful dress. Now it is Estella’s paleness which stands out; many
different effects are achieved with the lighting of Miss Havisham’s room.
Perhaps the most important room in the novel is the ballroom in which the feast for
Miss Havisham´s wedding was laid out about thirty years ago. Newell uses lighting, cameraangles and close-ups to create an eerie atmosphere; he tries to recreate the feel of the book by
highlighting certain things in the room which have fallen into decay. The first shot in the
ballroom, is of a rat scurrying between cobwebbed crystal glasses which sparkle underneath
the dust because of their golden accents. In this one shot the expected lushness of the party,
the decay and the long time which has passed since Miss Havisham received her emotional
scars are all combined. The golden accents in the glasses show how magnificent the table
must have been at some point. In Figure 11, a full view of the table is shown; among the many
details it is especially interesting to see that the bride’s cake still resembles a wedding cake
rather than in the novel where Pip describes it as “a black fungus (66)” and Miss Havisham refers
to it a “heap of decay (69)”. It is also a nice touch that there is a mouse sitting on the bride´s
cake. In the novel there are several references to mice and spiders in the ballroom so it is a
24
nice touch to incorporate them so literally. In this room the play of light is also very
important; the light is focused on the table and the rest of the room remains dark. This really
causes the table and the crystal to become the absolute focus of attention. Newell uses various
techniques to create and maintain a spooky and eerie atmosphere throughout Miss
Havisham’s house.
Figure 11 Miss Havisham’s wedding feast
All three adaptation take a very different approach to the surroundings of Miss
Havisham. The 1946 adaptation is somewhat limited by the available techniques compared to
the other adaptations, it tries to reflect the novel as closely as possible, and Miss Havisham is
represented in a very traditional setting. In the 1998 adaptation Paradiso Perduto differs
greatly from the novel; it is updated to modern day southern US. It is also very light and
lushly decorated; rather than being the spooky, dark and cold house Dickens describes, this
estate aspires to be a paradise. In the 2012 adaptation lighting and camera angles are used to
set the mood and guide the audience, and Statis House tries to resemble Dickens’s description
of the house. This house is also an attempt at symbolising Miss Havisham’s past. Just like
Miss Havisham’s appearance, her setting has also changed; from a traditional setting which is
faithful to the novel in 1946, to a symbol-packed loose interpretation of the novel in 1998 to a
combination of traditional and symbolic in 2012.
25
Miss Havisham’s Backstory
Miss Havisham’s backstory is the key to understanding how she reasons and why she
does the things she does, like never taking off her wedding dress or training Estella to “wreak
revenge on all of the male sex (202).” Through Miss Havisham’s history the filmmaker could
turn her into a more rounded character, whose choices and actions are better motivated. Like
the appearance and the surroundings of Miss Havisham, this is another aspect which gives the
filmmaker freedom; it shows the filmmaker’s interpretation of this character and her story.
These adaptations all use different techniques to show Miss Havisham’s backstory and they
show a certain development; it starts with a monologue like in the novel in the 1946
adaptation, then in 1998 the backstory is told in a straight forward and quick way, and it ends
with the elaborate and visually exciting flashbacks used in 2012. In all three cases the
filmmakers have had to make choices to achieve the different effects they try to create.
In the novel Miss Havisham’s backstory is part of a bigger mysterious plot concerning
among others Mr. Jaggers, Magwitch and Estella. Miss Havisham had grown up to be quite a
spoilt young lady, as her father, a wealthy brewer, could not refuse her anything after her
mother died. Her father secretly married his cook and they conceived Miss Havisham’s
illegitimate half-brother. Several years later after her father had died, a man tried to court
Miss Havisham and she fell passionately in love with him, so when he proposed to her she did
not have to think twice about her answer. Her fiancé persuaded Miss Havisham to buy her
half-brother’s share of the brewery for an exorbitant amount of money; that way the fiancé
would be able to manage it all when they were married. At the day of the wedding, in the
midst of her preparations Miss Havisham received a letter from her fiancé in which he
explained that she had been deceived and the wedding was all a big hoax to swindle her out of
her money. The phoney fiancé and Miss Havisham’s half-brother quickly ran off with the
money and left Miss Havisham behind broken hearted and mad with grief. These affairs are
26
the beginning of a chain of events which eventually lead to Magwitch’s incarceration and
Estella’s adoption by Miss Havisham.
In David Lean’s 1946 adaptation, it is In London that the full telling of Miss
Havisham’s backstory takes place; here Herbert Pocket will recount all he knows about Miss
Havisham’s history and he will answer some questions the audience will have as well. His
story starts when Herbert shocks Pip by asking him whether he knows Estella “was adopted
and brought up by Miss Havisham to wreak revenge on all the male sex? (202)” This is the
first time for both Pip and the audience to hear this information. Pip appears to be quite
startled, and he repeats the last part of the question with utter disbelief. This first shock is very
important to rouse the audience’s attention for the following scene, in which Herbert tells a
story which explains Miss Havisham’s story. That scene is not particularly exciting visually,
but by sparking the interest of the audience by introducing the topic on the hand of this
strange question regarding Estella, the scene does not become a lull in the film’s pace. The
tension is built up even more because the audience does not receive immediate gratification
for their roused curiosity; it takes almost a full minute during which dinner is laid out and
pleasantries are exchanged before the topic of Miss Havisham is discussed again.
Herbert’s telling of Miss Havisham’s story is very interesting when compared to the
novel. The film tries to offer some comic relief by paying attention to Pip’s table manners and
emphasising them. Pip, for example, wants to mimic Herbert’s use of his napkin but then tries
to tuck it into his collar rather than placing it over his knees, an error he attempts to fix before
Herbert notices. Herbert also points out to Pip that it is not customary “to fill the mouth to its
utmost capacity” (53.06) after he has taken several bites of food without chewing or
swallowing them. These little hints of comedy are added to prevent the dullness which might
be felt by the audience if the backstory was given in one long monologue. Herbert’s telling of
the story is also quite interesting; it is a simplified version of Dickens’s story but it is built up
27
almost exclusively of quotations taken directly from the novel. However, Miss Havisham’s
upbringing, youth and half-brother, among other things, are omitted. The story starts when
Miss Havisham was an heiress and therefore considered a great match, Herbert then jumps to
the suitor and his pursuit of Miss Havisham’s affections and then to the wedding which was
completely arranged except for the bridegroom who never showed up. The last piece of the
puzzle is the letter Miss Havisham received from her groom and which shattered her world
and caused her to stop all the clocks. This concise explanation is all which is provided but it
touches upon all the most essential elements. It tells the audience what is necessary and
explains any question they might have had, but it does not add anything and, contrary to the
other two adaptations, no real explanation is given as to why the groom decided to run away.
In the 1998 adaptation Alphonso Cuarón has taken a different direction for Miss
Dinsmoor’s backstory; it is a well know tale to all the inhabitants of the Gulf. Miss
Dinsmoor’s very commonly known backstory is briefly summarised in as little as one
sentence by Finn when he is wandering through the garden of Paradiso Perduto for the first
time; “Nora Driggers Dinsmoor, the richest lady in the gulf, she’d lost her mind thirty years
ago when her fiancé left her standing at the altar (14.32).” This sentence itself also
contextualises the story, because Miss Dinsmoor was left standing at the altar rather than
receiving a letter which like in the novel. The utterance is given more strength because the
scene is set in the garden where the wedding party had been laid out many years ago and a
brief image of an old bride cake topper is shown. This clarity about Miss Dinsmoor’s past has
two effects; on the one hand, it holds the promise of a crazy person who will appear swiftly,
while on the other hand, it takes away the suspense Dickens uses in his novel. Dickens first
gives the reader Miss Havisham and much later lets Herbert Pocket give Pip an explanation as
to how she has become this way and why. This one sentence by Finn has great significance
and gave the director the freedom to do away with the traditional image of a Miss Havisham
28
in a wedding dress. The audience already knows that she is a bride who has lost her mind on
her wedding day so a wedding dress would not be a necessity for the story to continue. This
brief recounting of the backstory also ties in the garden, where a wedding party has been laid
out many years ago.9 The garden plays the role the ball room has in the novel, so after this
sentence there is no need to explain the garden which again gives the freedom to the
filmmaker to not show the garden so extensively any more.
When Finn meets Miss Dinsmoor for the first time and several years later, just after
Estella has left for France, Finn finds himself alone with Miss Dinsmoor for the second time.
He describes her to be “weirder than usual” (36.28). Miss Dinsmoor appears to be in shock,
she goes to parts of the house she normally never visits and she tells from her own point of
view what happened and why she thinks all men ought to be punished. This is quite unique as
in most adaptations and the novel as well Miss Havisham’s tale is told by other people, who
have heard it from other people. Miss
Havisham is hardly ever allowed to express her
emotions and her trauma, which makes her a
fairly flat and distant character with whom the
reader or audience cannot really empathise. In
this adaptation it becomes clear that the
Figure 12 Miss Dinsmoor elaborating on her backstory
with Finn
betrayal she felt was not so much because her
fiancé left her at the altar, but more because he took her virginity and then disappeared. Sex
plays a bigger role in this film than it does in most adaptations; in the novel Pip is allowed to
kiss Estella on the cheek and he holds her hand 400 pages later, this very slow development of
their relationship would seem rather odd the historical and geographical context of modernday America. Miss Dinsmoor also reveals that she was 42 years old when her fiancé left her;
9
Further explanations about the garden can be found in Chapter 2 of this paper.
29
this is much older than Miss Havisham would have been in the novel and it also indicates that
the trauma she experiences was given to her fairly late in life. In Figure 12, Miss Dinsmoor is
depicted when she reveals all this personal information from her past to Finn. She admits to
him that she was still a virgin when the ordeal with her former fiancé happened, so it is safe to
say that she never had much experience when it came to the opposite sex. This scene elevates
Miss Dinsmoor from a rather flat though eccentric character to a rounded character with a
complicated history and extensive emotional problems.
The most recent adaptation of Great Expectations, by Mike Newell, in 2012, uses
perhaps the most elaborate way to depict Miss Havisham’s backstory; flashbacks are used to
capture the audience’s attention. Just like in the novel, Pip hears this tale from Herbert Pocket.
The film takes a rapid pace and shortly after Pip’s arrival at his loggings in London, it is
revealed that Herbert is the “pale young gentleman”, the film then swiftly proceeds to Miss
Havisham’s backstory. Herbert begins his story by telling Pip how Estella was raised to wreak
revenge on all the male sex by Miss Havisham and how he was in hindsight very lucky to
have been disapproved of by Miss Havisham, which saved him from a possible marriage to
Estella. While he is saying these things diner is laid out, so the story continues without the
interruption of dinner. In the novel the telling of the backstory is interrupted several times for
descriptions of the food and the current etiquette rules of London, in the adaptation Herbert
gives Pip a few some advice on etiquette at the beginning and then proceeds with his story. In
this adaptation Miss Havisham’s story is told in its entirety, including; her upbringing, halfbrother, and complete complot. The filmmakers did not use a more simplified version as
many of the earlier adaptations do. This part of the story is told at the dinner table, but when
Herbert arrives at the events which occurred on the wedding day; a flashback is used which is
narrated by Herbert, and which sometimes cuts away to show him talking or to show Pip
30
making a comment. By cutting away to the story teller, the link between the flashback and
place it has in the present story is reinforced.
The style of the flashback is very striking; as can be seen in Figure 13 the picture is
not very sharp, most of the lines and contours have been fuzzed slightly. These blurred edges
indicate the difference between the present and the past and they set the flashback off from
the rest of the film. It also gives the flashback a dreamlike, surreal effect; the details in the
background fade away and the persons or items in the middle become the focus of attention.
The focus is always shifted to the items of importance, like the bride’s cake or the letter Miss
Figure 13, Young Miss Havisham at her dressing table on her weddingday
Havisham receives from her fiancé, even if they are not centred in the shot. This is a clever
way of guiding the audience’s attention, as there are minimal distractions in visual and audio
aspects. The sound is reduced to Herbert’s voice, some non-intrusive background music and
muted background sounds. During the flashback no person who makes an appearance in it
utters any sounds aside from Miss Havisham’s scream when she receives the letter. All these
different aspects are used to guide the audience’s attention to what is most important for the
story and the effect it has on Miss Havishams and the other characters.
During the flashback the audience receive some answers to questions they might have
and it provides certain details which could only be achieved with a flashback. The audience
gets a peek at Miss Havisham’s dress before it became yellowed and old, as can be seen in
31
Figure 13. The bride’s cake, groom and the way the house used to look before the neglect are
also shown during the flashback. The remains of the party have given the audience some idea
as too how splendid the party must have been when it was first laid out, but through the
flashback the audience can see what it used to look like. The lightness of the house in the
flashback creates a stark contrast with the current state of the house. The very end of the
flashback, however, actually shows the darkness which has found its way into the house after
Miss Havisham’s tragedy. The last image the audience sees is of Miss Havisham standing all
alone near her dressing table in a grey room, the camera zooms out and two people close a
black curtain over the entrance to the room. This flashback is the first of a series of flashbacks
throughout the film. Mr Jaggers, Magwitch and in the end even Miss Havisham herself have
their stories accompanied by a flashback in the exact same style as the first one; this way the
audience can piece the story together. This film makes Dickens’s novel easier to understand
without simplifying the plot; it sets apart the important moments so the audience has an
overview of the rather complicated plot. The story, however, is not told in one piece; there is
still a built up to the big finale in which Pip is told exactly what happened, so hardly any of
Dickens’s mystery is lost.
In these three adaptations, different strategies are used to depict Miss Havisham’s
backstory. The 1946 adaptation uses a monologue to give a concise explanation to Miss
Havisham’s past, it tries to stay as faithful to novel as possible. The 1998 adaptation provides
a backstory which differs from the backstory in the novel, it makes Miss Dinsmoor more
realistic, and well-rounded. It also gives the audience the opportunity to empathise with her in
a way which is not possible in the other adaptations or the novel. In the 2012 adaptation and
elaborate sequence of flashbacks is used to tell Miss Havisham’s backstory, this is used
consistently throughout the story and creates consistency in a visually interesting way. It also
creates more empathy for Miss Havisham because the audience gets to see and experience
32
what she has been through. The adaptations changed from the bare minimum required to keep
the plot in order in 1946, to creating empathy and understanding for Miss Havisham´s
personality and her actions in 1998 and 2012.
33
Conclusion
Dickens’s style of writing was revolutionary in his day, for his choice of depicting the
lives of ordinary people and some not so ordinary people and their hardships. Miss Havisham
is perhaps his most eccentric and memorable character and the way she is represented in
adaptations can create different highlights in the story or lead to new insights regarding her
life, hardships and the choices she makes.
The David Lean’s 1946 adaptation really tries to showcase Miss Havisham the way
she is represented in the book; her lines, for example, are almost exact quotations from the
novel. It is interesting, however, to see how the English 1940s post war society can be seen in
this film as well; the wedding dress combines a silhouette which was out of fashion, so the
audience would think it outdated as the film is set in the nineteenth century but, with lush
decorations which where the fashion at that time so it would be recognisable as a wedding
dress for the audience. Post-war society can also be seen through the cobwebbed prayer book
which lies on her dressing table; this can be seen as a symbol for her abandoning her religion,
something which is not emphasised in the novel. This symbol reflects more on the
conventional opinions of the time than on the novel. These indicators show that despite trying
to follow the novel religiously, contemporary society found its way into the film. The
monologue used in this adaptation to tell her backstory would not have worked in any of the
other adaptations because they have a more rapid pace and a monologue would break the
audience’s attention. The budget for this film, however was only £350.000 (estimated, IMDB)
so more elaborate solutions where not possible. This Miss Havisham, however, seems a less
realistic character than the other two Miss Havishams because she does not really look the
part because of the limited use of make-up and is portrayed in a very static manner. Despite
being somewhat limited by the available techniques compared to the other adaptations, this
34
adaptation aspired to reflect the novel as closely as possible, and Miss Havisham is shown in
the most traditional setting of the three.
In Alphonso Cuarón’s 1998 adaptation Miss Dinsmoor differs on various points from
Charles Dickens’s novel; she seems groomed, her house is old-fashioned yet not in a complete
state of decay and her backstory is not part of some bigger plot. Almost everything is done to
contemporise Miss Havisham; her name, look, outfit, house and even her backstory are
altered so they can blend in with this updated version of the classic novel, but there are also
certain thing which have remained the same. The larger issues like her betrayal and her
aspiration to revenge herself on all the male sex have remained intact; Miss Dinsmoor might
not appear to be the same character as Miss Havisham at first sight, but it are solely the
superficial factors which have been altered drastically to fit in with the new historical and
geographical contexts of modern-day America the 1998 adaptation portrays. Paradiso Perduto
also differs greatly from the novel; it is very light and lushly decorated. It does not resemble
the dark, spooky house Dickens describes; it truly looks like a lost paradise. The backstory
provided in this adaptation differs from that in the novel. It gives more details and allows
Miss Dinsmoor to give her point of view; it makes her more realistic, and well-rounded.
Things have been altered about her but the big issues she is dealing with have remained the
same.
Mike Newell shows different sides to the 2012 Miss Havisham; she can appear scary
or threatening at one moment and innocent and helpless the next. At times she even appears to
be affectionate towards Pip and Estella; this can be viewed as manipulative behaviour or as an
indication that she does not fully understand the world around her any more. This Miss
Havisham is also portrayed most elaborately; she receives more screen time than the other
Miss Havishams. Perhaps Miss Havisham is put in the spotlight because she is so strange and
interesting to watch, but could also be because Helena Bonham Carter is one of the top billed
35
actresses and she has a fairly large fan base. In an interview with The Telegraph Helena
Bonham Carter explains how she approached Miss Havisham’s character, she read and reread the book and approached her as a women stuck in a psychological trauma. She really
tried to portray Miss Havisham in a realistic light, rather than the one dimensional witch some
other adaptations portray. This adaptation puts emphasis on Miss Havisham´s clothing, house
and looks. In this adaptation lighting and camera angles are the main tools used to set the
mood and guide the audience. The setting of Statis House tries to resemble Dickens’s
description of the house with its darkness and daunting atmosphere. This house is also used as
a tool to reflect what has happened to Miss Havisham in the past by using props and close-ups
as clues to her backstory. The Flashbacks that are used to tell the full backstory show that
Miss Havisham is important to the plot and they add some consistency to the style of the film
and understanding for Estella’s mysterious background. Because of this, 2012 Miss Havisham
is probably the most well rounded character of the three..
Miss Havisham is a far more complex character than she appears upon a first reading;
she has a duality in her character, torn between bitterness and the need to love and be loved.
All three adaptations chose to highlight certain features of Miss Havisham and her image has
changed from the scary witch in 1946, to the lonely bitter woman of 1998 and eventually the
scarred yet well-rounded character of 2012. Over the decades she has been given more
substance; directors truly tried to motivate her choices and to allow the audience to empathise
with her. Each adaptation shows a different take on this most memorable and eccentric figure.
How Miss Havisham is portrayed showcases how the filmmakers read the novel, how they
wanted to present her in a slightly different way or alter her attitude. The choices the
filmmakers made reflect on the target audience and the time period of the shootings. These
differences can have very mundane reasons like the budget or the available techniques or
from more artistic visions like approaching Miss Havisham as a person stuck in trauma rather
36
than a witch. In all three films and in the novel as well Miss Havisham shows an extreme of
humanity in her bitterness and her trauma, something which ought to be avoided at all costs.
She can be seen as both a lesson and a warning about how bitterness can affect a person.
37
Works Cited
Anderson, Antje. “Transforming Great Expectations: Dickens, Cuaracón and the
Bildungsroman.” Beyond Adaptation: Essays on Radical Transformations of Original
Works. Ed. Phyllis Frus and Christy Williams. Jefferson: McFarland, 2010. 69-82.
Print.
Crabtree, Vexen. "Religion in the United Kingdom; Diversity Trends and Decline."
Vexen.co.uk. N.p., 12 Dec. 2012. Web. 18 Dec. 2014.
Dallas, E. S. "Great Expectations." Thetimes.co.uk. N.p., 17 Oct. 1861. Web. 5 Dec. 2014.
Dickens, Charles and Clare West. Great Expectations. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2000. Print.
Fox, Margalit. "Consuelo Velázquez Dies; Wrote 'Bésame." The New York Times 30 Jan.
2005. Print.
Great Expectations. Dir. Alfonso Cuarón. By Charles Dickens. Screenplay by Mitch Glazer.
Perf. Anne Bankroft, Ethan Hawke, Gwyneth Paltrow. Twentieth Century Fox Film
Corporation, 1998. DVD.
Great Expectations. Dir. David Lean. By Charles Dickens. Screenplay by Kay Walsh and
Cecil McGivern. Perf. Martita Hunt, Valerie Hobson, Tony Wager. Universal Pictures,
1946. DVD.
Great Expectations. Dir. Mike Newell. By Charles Dickens. Screenplay by David Nicholls.
Perf. Helena Bonham Carter, Toby Irvine, Ralph Fiennes. BBC Films, 2012. DVD.
"Great Expectations (1946)." Imdb.com. N.p., 20 Sept. 2005. Web. 20 Jan. 2015.
Gutmann, Stephanie. "The Wedding Gown: Revealing the Nation's Mood." The New York
Times 15 June 1997. Print.
Hynes, Joseph. "Image and Symbol in Great Expectations." ELH 30.3 (1963): 258-59.
JSTOR. Web. 11 Dec. 2014.
38
Jordan, John, John Bowen, Murray Baumgarten, JoAnna Rottke, Jon Michael Varese. "The
Dickens Project." Dickens.ucsc.edu. N.p., 1981. Web. 11 Dec. 2014.
Kelleghan, Fiona. "Sound Effects in Science Fiction and Horror Films." Filmsound.org. N.p.,
21 Mar. 1996. Web. 26 Nov. 2014.
Miss Havisham's Fire. By Dominick Argento. Cond. Julius Rudel. Dir. Wesley Balk. Comp.
New York City Opera. New York. 23 Mar. 1979. Performance.
Nathan, Jean. "The Title Is From Dickens, The Look From Donna Karan." The New York
Times 27 Oct. 1996. Print.
O'Gorman Klein, Kristen. "Weddings Through the Ages: From the 1900s to Today." Bridal
Guide (n.d.): n. pag. Web. 26 Nov. 2014.
Preston, John. "Behind the Scenes on 'Great Expectations'" Www.telegraph.co.uk. N.p., 30
Oct. 2012. Web. 20 Jan. 2015.
Velázquez, Consuelo. Bésame Mucho. Emilio Tuero. 1940. MP3.