William Makepeace Thackeray’s self proclaimed “novel without a hero,” Vanity Fair, chronicles the lives of five Victorian citizens searching for their place in society. Although Thackeray asserts that the novel has no hero, protagonist Rebecca Sharp is certainly a central figure in the story. Rebecca is a focused, determined and keenly intellectual woman. She has her sights firmly fixed on becoming an accepted member of the Vanity Fair that she sees around her.
Rebecca is ruthless and will do whatever it takes to achieve her goals. Thackeray’s portrayal of Rebecca as a scheming, yet appealing woman has made her an integral part of literary history. In 2004 Hollywood decided to bring the complex story of Vanity Fair to the big screen. Starring the popular actress Reese Witherspoon, the film version of Thackeray’s masterpiece featured many plot and characterization differences.
One of the most recognizable character differences is in the portrayal of Rebecca Sharp. These differences are evidenced in the film’s depiction of several key relationships that Rebecca has with the other characters. As a result, the 2004 cinematic Rebecca Sharp is a mere shell of the manipulative vixen crafted by Thackeray in his novel.
Rebecca Sharp and Amelia Sedley are friends from the Pinkerton School. In fact, Amelia is the only friend that Rebecca has at the school. Rebecca knows that she is not considered an equal of her peers, and it bothers her deeply: “The happiness-the superior advantages of the young women round about her, gave Rebecca inexpressible pangs of envy…`I am a thousand times cleverer and more charming than that creature, for all her wealth. I am as well-bred as the Earl’s granddaughter, for all her fine pedigree; and yet everyone passes me by here'” (Thackeray 15).
Jealousy, envy and that she has no one else to look out for her, motivates Rebecca to take charge of her own life. She is determined to do whatever it takes, regardless of consequence. This includes using people to get to the next social level.
After her endeavor to marry Jos Sedley, Amelia’s brother, is thwarted, Rebecca moves on. The scene in which she leaves the Sedley home is described in two completely different manners in the original novel and in the film. Thackeray’s depiction gives some insight into Rebecca’s motivation for the friendship: “Finally came the parting with Miss Amelia, over which picture I intend to throw a veil. But after a scene in which one person was in earnest and the other a perfect performer…Rebecca and Amelia parted” (Thackeray 60).
The narrator’s suggestion that Rebecca’s goodbye was that of a “perfect performer” implies that her relationship with Amelia may be more out of necessity than of true friendship. This implication is in stark contrast to the parting scene in the movie. The cinematic Rebecca unselfishly tries to repay her generosity by giving Amelia a painting:
Rebecca: Here, this is for you.
Amelia: Oh
Rebecca: It’s one of my father’s. I’ve nothing else to give.
Amelia: Oh, I couldn’t.
Rebecca: Take it. I want you to have it. At least I know it will be safe with you. (Vanity Fair)
The filmmakers seek to show Rebecca as a giving and caring friend who is motivated by nothing more than genuine friendship. This softer version of Rebecca negates that cunning creature that Thackeray penned in his novel.
Rebecca’s relationship with Lord Steyne in the movie version of Thackeray’s novel begins as a series of random encounters that culminate in an illicit affair. In the movie, they meet when Rebecca was a child demanding money on her father’s behalf for one of his paintings. They are reacquainted when he out-bids Rawdon for another Francis Sharp painting. Finally in adulthood, he becomes a suitor to Rebecca. He recognizes her unyielding desire to be a part of the aristocratic society. In the original novel, Rebecca uses her feminine powers to seduce Steyne.
However in the movie it is Steyne who is the manipulator. He convinces Rebecca to send her son away to school so that they may spend more time together. The movie portrays Rebecca as an innocent woman who becomes a pawn in Steyne’s game. She is framed as a puppet and even performs in his provocative dance production. He has complete control over Rebecca. He explains his position to Rebecca:
Steyne: You remember the child who set a high price on this picture before she could bear to see it go?
Rebecca: Not high enough.
Steyne: The trouble is Mrs. Crawley, you’ve taken the goods. It’s too late to query the price. (Vanity Fair)
Steyne is in control of the relationship, leaving Rebecca powerless against him. In the scene where Rawdon returns home after being released from debtor’s prison, Steyne is characterized as an aggressive attacker. He nearly forces himself upon Rebecca. She is seen as a victim of circumstance who is attacked by an over-zealous lover. This depiction of their relationship does not parallel the situation created in the novel. Thackeray reveals Rebecca as a woman who is in full control of her situation. In the novel, it is Rebecca who uses and manipulates Steyne for personal gain. Again, the movie attempts to create a Rebecca that is less wicked than her literary creator intended.
Perhaps the most distinguishable difference between the novel and the movie occurs in the depiction of the relationship between Rebecca and Rawdon. The film shows the audience a romanticized journey of a secret love affair. However, Thackeray wrote it as a strategic and calculated move on Rebecca’s part to gain entry into the lifestyle she believed she deserved. Rebecca was even willing to forsake her friendship with Rawdon’s aunt to get what she wanted. When Rawdon questions the impact their elopement will have on his aunt and his inheritance, Rebecca replies: “`I’ll make you fortune,’ she said; and Delilah patted Samson’s cheek (Thackeray 161).
Thackeray’s likening Rebecca to Delilah further exemplifies his characterization of her as a woman who will do anything, including betrayal of the one she claims to love, to get what she wants. However, in the movie Rebecca is a devoted and loving wife. Upon learning that her dear husband was to go off to war, she reveals her heart to him:
Rebecca: You won’t do anything brave will you? Promise.
Rawdon: What? Tears? Tears from my strong little Rebecca?
Rebecca: I’m a woman in love, aren’t I? (Vanity Fair)
Rebecca is seemingly in love with and devoted to her husband. Even after her indiscretion with Steyne is revealed, Rebecca is still rendered a victim. Rebecca’s heartfelt pleas for forgiveness and understanding are rebuked and she is left alone and penniless. She tells Rawdon, “In my way, I’ve loved you” (Vanity Fair). Rebecca is deeply wounded by the loss of her loving husband. Again, she is portrayed as a woman who because of her circumstances-her upbringing and background-was incapable of truly loving her husband.
Because the movie industry is profit based, there is a desire to create characters that are completely likeable and relatable to the general public. As a result, classic literary characters are often changed to make them more accessible. In the case of Rebecca Sharp, she is softened to a point that she is vaguely recognizable to readers of the original Vanity Fair novel. Until the end of the film, Rebecca is seen as unselfish and thoughtful, especially in regards to her relationship with her son: “No, Jane would not keep me from him. But Rawdy has become a great man. I love him and wish him well, but my place is no longer with him” (Vanity Fair).
In the novel, Rebecca showed little concern for Rawdy or his well-being. This is just another example of the filmmaker’s desire to create a sympathetic character that the audiences would enjoy. However, in the process they managed to change the essence of a classic character.
Works Cited
Thackeray, William Makepeace. Vanity Fair. New York: Barnes and Noble Classics, 2003.
Vanity Fair. Prod. Janette Day, Donna Gigliotti and Lydia Dean Pilcher. Dir. Mira Nair. Perf. Reese Witherspoon, Eileen Atkins and Jim Broadbent. DVD. Focus Features, 2004.
