The mutiny on the Bounty has captured the imaginations of men for over two hundred years. What is it about this one single event that has made it such an enduring symbol? A symbol of what is the next question that can be asked? The mystery surrounding the Bounty is that no one knows the true motives behind Fletcher Christian's seizure of the ship. Because of that, the causes of the mutiny have been open to interpretation by anyone who feels like making an interpretation. Perhaps this openness is the true significance of the Bounty mutiny. Greg Dening writes in Mr. Bligh's Bad Language that "any question worth asking about the past is ultimately about the present."(Dening 366) Modifying that statement a bit, it is also legitimate to say that any commentary worth making about the past is ultimately about the present. Thus Nordhoff and Hall's novel, the 1935 film, and 1984 film versions of the mutiny are ultimately comments about the present, specifically about the society that produced them.

Nordhoff and Hall's Bligh is a harsh, tyrannical man. Not only that, but he is corrupt. However, Bligh is harsh because the system made him harsh. In discussing the sailor who had been flogged round the fleet, Captain Courtney admonishes young Byam to "remember, as Mr. Bligh says, that no laws are more just than those governing the conduct of men at sea."(Nordhoff and Hall 27) Bligh backs up Captain Courtney saying, "Yes our sea law is stern, but it has the authority of centuries."(Nordhoff and Hall 27) The man was flogged to death for hitting an officer. His punishment was prescribed by tradition. That was the way it had always been done. Why change now? Nordhoff and Hall's Bligh was a product of that tradition, and because he rose through the ranks he felt that he had to hide behind the authority that this tradition of discipline and strictness provided. Bligh constantly felt that he had to prove himself worthy to hold the position of a captain. Consequently, he was always wary of those around him. Nordhoff and Hall write that "This unwillingness to trust those under him to perform their duties is apt to be the defect of the officer risen from the ranks"(Nordhoff and Hall 39) In addition to this inability to delegate, Bligh also feels that he must constantly remind the crew who is boss. The traditions and rituals of the navy allow him to do this.

In understanding Nordhoff and Hall's Bligh, it is crucial to understand the forces that shaped Nordhoff and Halls' personalities. The single most important event of their generation was World War I, a war in which they were active participants. Like most soldiers and flyers, the reasons behind the war were most likely not clear to them. They were fighting Germany because England and France had an alliance with someone who had an alliance with someone else. They were drawn into the war not because Britain was directly threatened, but because the traditions and institutions that had sprung up from Britain's position as a world power dictated that she must fight. As pilots, they probably did not have first hand experience with the horrors of trench warfare, but they had undoubtedly heard how men were sent over the top to their deaths in head on charges. These attacks were made not because they were effective against new weapons like the machine gun, but because the traditions of war dictated that that was how war was to be fought. Like many, Nordhoff and Hall were profoundly effected by this war. Their attack on the institutions of the British Navy of the 18th century was also an attack on the society of the 20th century that gave birth to the horrors of World War I.

The 1935 film version, "Mutiny on the Bounty", starring Clark Gable and Charles Laughton, was derived from Nordhoff and Hall's Mutiny on the Bounty. Because it is based on fiction, the commentary contained in the movie is not only a product of the producers and scriptwriters who worked on the film, but also the product of Nordhoff and Hall. Bligh's evil nature is highlighted in the film to the extent that he becomes so evil that he is out of bounds even by the standards of the institutions of the Navy. All the brutality that Nordhoff and Hall place on institutions and traditions is firmly transplanted onto Bligh's shoulders in the film. Bligh flogs the dead instead of Captain Courtney. Bligh returns on the Pandora instead of Edwards. The Pandora runs aground because Bligh will not give up his fruitless pursuit of the Bounty. The capture of Byam, Morrison, and the others is taken away from the Navy's need to punish mutineers and attributed to Bligh's blind lust to avenge the loss of his ship. Bligh is evil, and with his round face cocked to the side, narrow lips, bushy eyebrows and withering stare, Laughton plays the part perfectly. Dening's assertion that the institution comes off as the savior of Byam, and by association all the other seamen in the Navy seems particularly astute. Bligh's evil is extraordinary, beyond the comprehension of even the most high ranking officers. The Navy recognizes this and changes its ways to end the abuse of those like Bligh.

Dening, however, does not give enough attention to one of the possible reasons for this change. He mentions in passing Irving Thalberg's visit to Germany to rest and undergo surgery on his tonsils. Thalberg was the second in command at Metro-Goldwin-Meyer, and was the primary force behind the production of "Mutiny on the Bounty" Dening writes that "In Germany [Thalberg] saw violent anti-Semitic demonstrations outside his hotel and discovered that his German doctor was reluctant to operate on him, fearing the consequences should an internationally famous Jew come to harm under his knife."(Dening 348) Thalberg's visit comes just before the Nazi's rise to power in 1932. The movie was released in 1935. By this time, the Nazis were in control of Germany and within four years the Germans would be at war with the world for a second time. As a Jew, one wonders why Thalberg went to Germany in the first place. That is beside the point, however. Since he was Jewish, one would be surprised if the trip did not leave an impression of some sort on Thalberg. The 1935 "Mutiny on the Bounty" is Thalberg's social commentary. Bligh's character is strikingly Hitleresque.

One can draw parallels with Hitler in Bligh's extraordinary and often irrational brutality and fundamental distrust of those below him. In addition, Bligh and Hitler were not well bred. Bligh worked himself up through the ranks and Hitler started out as a house painter. Thus, Laughton's Bligh comes to stand for the evils of fascism. He must be stopped somehow. Christian remedies the immediate situation through the mutiny, but it is the institution of the navy that ultimately saves the day. By pardoning Byam and putting him back to sea, the Navy is banishing fascism from the fleet. The 1935 film, while commenting on the past, is also Thalberg's warning against the dangers of fascism and rule through the use of force and intimidation.

Based on Richard Hough's Captain Bligh and Mr. Christian, the 1984 film "The Bounty" is an entirely different interpretation of the mutiny. From the beginning, Bligh is seen as a caring husband and loving father. He is thought to have the welfare of the crew in mind as is shown through his requirement of dancing every evening, though the crew mocks him during this time. The important thing is that Bligh's image as a harsh disciplinarian is gone. Bligh is seen as a man who is bent upon circumnavigating the globe to make a name for himself, but he is by no means harsh. This film, following the lead of Hough's book, deals primarily with the relationship between Bligh and Christian.

To highlight their relationship, Fryer is made out to be the harsh one on the ship. All the issues regarding discipline that the 1935 film attributed to Bligh are now put on Fryer's shoulders. What, then, is the nature of the relationship between Bligh and Christian? We know from the beginning that they are friends and have sailed together before. This fact implies that Bligh thinks highly of Christian as both a sailor and a person. On the voyage to Tahiti nothing seems to be out of the ordinary between the two of them. Bligh even promotes Christian just before they give up on their attempt to round the tip of South America. It is on Tahiti where their relationship begins to go awry. Christian spends more and more time ashore with his Tahitian woman. Meanwhile, Bligh stays on the ship overseeing the transplanting of the breadfruit trees. The first real break in their relationship comes when Christian shows up late for dinner with officers and is not dressed properly because of the tattoos that he has received. Bligh's disapproval is obvious, and one assumes it is because he believes Christian is not behaving as an officer in the British Navy should behave. During and after the Bounty's stay at Tahiti, Bligh becomes increasingly temperamental. It is as if he's losing his mind. Upon leaving Tahiti, Bligh is more prone to outbursts of anger. Most of these are directed at Christian. The crew becomes more and more uneasy with Bligh and they let Christian know that they will follow him should he choose to mutiny. It is now up to Christian to choose between staying loyal to Bligh or taking over the ship.

This film is essentially a study of the relationship between two men. The film, like Hough's book, plays up the potential of a homosexual relationship between Bligh and Christian. Unlike the book, however, the film does not argue that a relationship of that nature was inevitable. It is left up to us to decide whether or not Christian is a spurned lover. We are also left with the possibility that Bligh is jealous that Christian is enjoying a relationship while he is alone and 10,000 miles away from his family. Based on the film's earlier portrayal of Bligh as a loving family man, this scenario is entirely possible. In any case, Bligh grows mentally unstable. Christian and the crew soon reach the breaking point and it is here that the mutiny occurs. "The Bounty" is less cut and dry than the 1935 film version. Since this film delves into the workings of the human mind it is understandable that this is the case. Bligh's insanity seems to be the cause of the mutiny, but there is still room for the audience to decide for itself. We are still left asking questions at the end of the film. However, since this is a commentary on the inner workings of the human mind and on the nature of human relationships, areas where nothing is clear, it is only natural that we will emerge with questions.

The Bounty is still relevant to spectators two centuries later precisely because the motives behind the mutiny were so murky. It remains such a popular topic because such a wide variety of interpretations can be drawn from the act. Historical accuracy in dealing with the Bounty is not really an issue. The Bounty left Portsmouth England with 44 onboard. Its mission was to transplant breadfruit trees to the West Indies. Bligh tried to go round the tip of South America but failed and turned around to sail around Africa. The Bounty stopped in Tahiti for five months to transplant breadfruit trees. After leaving Tahiti, there was a dispute over stolen coconuts, and in late April 1789 Fletcher Christian led a mutiny, seizing the ship from Bligh. All of these are historical facts, and to judge accuracy by these events then both films and Nordhoff and Hall's book are historically accurate. Accuracy is not really the point, though. The Bounty remains significant because of its ability to be modified to fit the times. All the various accounts of the Bounty mutiny are products of the societies that produced the authors of those accounts. They have built their own commentaries of their times into their stories of the Bounty mutiny. If the audience comes away from these different stories understanding the commentary contained within and is able to see that that commentary relates to the society around him or her, then the Bounty still has meaning and is still significant despite the great divide of time.

Dening, Greg. Mr. Bligh's Bad Language. Cambridge University Press, New York: 1992

Nordhoff, Charles and James Norman Hall. Mutiny on the Bounty. Little, Brown, and Co. Boston: 1932

Mutiny on the Bounty, 1935

The Bounty, 1984