Jeremiah Johnson on Manifest Destiny

"Jeremiah Johnson" is a film about a mountain man; it is also a film about a man who is dissatisfied with civilization and tries to escape it by "getting back to nature." Because the protagonist of the story is trying to get away from civilization, we can infer that there is an implied critique of American expansion and what is now often referred to negatively as the concept of Manifest Destiny. Typically, the negative connotation of Manifest Destiny centers on the displacement of Native American groups and the Nineteenth century preoccupation with expansion that came at the expense of Mexico following the Mexican-American War. Along with these grand and epic themes of nineteenth century American history (expansion, Manifest Destiny, the advance of civilization, Native Americans and their displacement, Industrialization, etc.), there is also the theme of a man in search of self-knowledge, a theme--like the grand themes just mentioned--that is also important in American history and is usually presented in stories as the search for the freedom and liberty necessary to gain self-knowledge or at least self-expression. While all of these themes are present in Jeremiah Johnson, there are alternative ways of looking at the film that might help us to analyze and evaluate these ideas from a broader perspective, and hopefully, therefore, come to a more complete understanding of what the film can teach us about American history.

Perhaps the most important alternative we can pursue is to analyze and evaluate the way in which Manifest Destiny is negatively represented in the film, and, in general, by most Americans today. Now, Manifest Destiny as believed by Americans in the 1800's was not simply the concept that America should expand and cover the continent from coast to coast, but also that the democratic system is the best system of government and it should be available to other people. This is a belief most Americans still have today. Americans believe this today for the same reason Americans in the 1800's believed it: beacause Enlightenment political philosophy teaches that all human beings have the natural and inalienable right to life and liberty, and that we should do our best to help others achieve liberty. Americans in the 1800's thought the best way to help others gain liberty was to make them part of America, thereby extending the benefits of the American dream to them.

Today most people in the West think along the same lines. Westerners still believe they ought to extend democracy and liberty; now, however, they do this without necessarily making those to whom liberty and democracy is extended part of the fatherland (but we do make them part of the global market economy so that we can trade with them). Does this make contemporary efforts to extend democracy more noble and legitimate than the efforts carried out in the name of Manifest Destiny simply because it is not now called Manifest Destiny but rather is called the spread of human rights? Both sides of the political spectrum in the United States, Democrats and Republicans (as well as the international community as represented by the United Nations), agree that democracy should be encouraged the world over; so it is not an issue of which party we choose to support. Differently stated, almost everyone agrees that we should promote democracy; the argument is only over how it is to be promoted.

This is pretty much the way Americans in the 1800's looked at the issue too. This being the case, perhaps we should not look so negatively at nineteenth century Americans who supported Manifest Destiny-as many present day academics tell us we should-without looking at ourselves and our own reasons for wanting to extend the "blessings of liberty." By doing this we may find that Manifest Destiny was not as bad as some would like us to believe; for if it was bad in all respects, we would be forced to conclude that extending democracy and liberty was bad too. This is not something very many people are willing to do, especially those who now criticize Manifest Destiny, for such criticism is usually made in the name of democracy and liberty.

Another way to look at Jeremiah Johnson is to view it as a film about a search or a quest for self-knowledge. Jeremiah becomes a mountain man because he is dissatisfied with modern Western civilization. Apparently Jeremiah hopes to find satisfaction in a life of solitude; however, he finds that he cannot remain in absolute solitude, and he also finds that he has even more trouble with non-Western people (i.e. Indians) than he had with Westerners. Ultimately, Jeremiah never finds the satisfaction or contentment he is looking for. He seems to finally enter into an uneasy peace with the Indians, but there is no indication that he fulfills the desire for contentment and self-knowledge that made him a legend.

My suggestion is that Jeremiah never attains self-knowledge because he never penetrates beneath a surface level of understanding of what it means to be a human. Like many modern Westerners who are products of the Enlightenment, Jeremiah seems unable to accept the fact that man as a social animal is simply incapable of perfection. He mentions a couple of times that things "ought to have been different." Just what he means by "different" we do not know. Had Jeremiah received a good education and familiarized himself with, say, the writings of Homer, he would have learned that almost all humans have many irrational tendencies. Odysseus, who also journeyed in search of a way home (and what else is Jeremiah looking for but a home?), learned that he had to be quite wily if not dishonest when dealing with less than noble characters. Jeremiah either refuses to accept this or is incapable of understanding it. If Jeremiah was unable to gain self-knowledge because he was simply incapable of reaching such levels of intellection, it was probably the result of an overabundance of physical courage combined with a lack of wisdom and moderation. Courage without moderation, while valuable in some instances, can be quite dangerous. This was in fact the case with Jeremiah.

Jeremiah Johnson

I bought this as a gift so I didn't watch it. If I am rating the service I received, it was exelent.

"Where you headed?" "Same place you are, Jeremiah...hell, in the end."

While watching Jeremiah Johnson (1972), I wondered as to what, within my own self, would drive me to choose such as life as Robert Redford's character did in the film, that of a mountain man. Living in near complete isolation, subsisting almost entirely off the land, enjoying the best while often surviving (sometimes not) the worst nature has to offer...the idea of escaping civilization, throwing off the shackles of conventionalism, and communing with nature can be an appealing I suppose, but it would never work for me if for but one reason...I surely do enjoy my indoor plumbing...and toilet paper...adapted from two sources (a novel called "Mountain Man" by Vardis Fisher and a story titled "Crow Killer" by Raymond W. Thorp and Robert Bunker) by John Milius (Apocalypse Now, Conan the Barbarian) and Edward Anhalt (Panic in the Streets), the film was directed by Academy Award winning producer/actor/director Sydney Pollack (Tootsie, Out of Africa), and is the second of six films he worked on in some manner with Academy Award winner Robert Redford (Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, The Sting), who also stars as the title character. Also appearing is Will Geer (Winchester '73, The President's Analyst), who's probably familiar to most as 'Grandpa' Zebulon Walton from the TV series "The Waltons", Stefan Gierasch (High Plains Drifter, Cornbread, Earl and Me), Josh Albee (Oliver Twist), Allyn Ann McLerie (They Shoot Horses, Don't They?), Joaquín Martínez (Joe Kidd), and Delle Bolton, in her one and only silver screen appearance.

Set in the mid 1800s, the story begins as we meet, through narration, a character named Jeremiah Johnson (Redford), "a man of proper wit and adventurous spirit suited to the mountains". His manner of dress indicates he was once in the army, but apparently no longer as he arrives in a frontier town, looking to outfit himself and head off into the Rocky Mountains, leaving behind all the trapping of civilized man, to which he does. Extremely hard times follow, but Johnson finds a friend (and perhaps kindred spirit) in a fellow mountain man named Bear Claw Chris Lapp (Geer), who takes him in and teaches Johnson enough to get by...the two eventually split up (a mountain man is a solitary creature), and Johnson eventually finds himself saddled with a mute boy (one of two settlers who survived an attack by some unfriendly Native Americans), and a Native American wife named Swan (Bolton), given to him as an honor by a local tribe (they thought he a great warrior for killing some of their enemies, those in a neighboring tribe). This family phase doesn't last too long as Johnson is enlisted by some gooberment types to help them locate a lost settler party, the only way to reach them by trespassing across sacred Native American lands, and thusly gains some powerful enemies who hound him on a continual basis... "some say he's dead...some say he never will be..."

Apparently the character of Jeremiah Johnson was actually based on a real person named John Johnston aka Crow Killer aka Liver Eater Johnston (his nicknames came about due to a long standing feud with a tribe known as the Crow, and his penchant for cutting their livers out and eating them...lovely). I'm not familiar with the individual, but I really enjoyed the movie, despite a sense of romanticism infused within the story here...I can't help but feel the actual man Redford's character was based on to be much different, much more `mountainy', less `Robert Redford', but regardless (Redford actually did a lot of his own stunt work, but being the hell of a guy he is, not wanting to put anyone out of work, insisted the production still paid his stunt double what he would have gotten if Redford hadn't done the dangerous stunts himself)...two things that stuck out in my mind after watching this film...one, the exquisitely beautiful backdrop of the Utah landscape throughout (some of the film was shot on Redford's expansive Utah estate...must be nice), and two, how little actual dialog there was in this nearly two hour film. Pollack and Redford present here an engaging story, full of interesting characters, framed against gorgeous backgrounds. The story, to me, was essentially broken down into three parts, the first being Johnson's indoctrination into being a mountain man (stripping away much of his `civilized' accoutrements), the second his family phase, and then thirdly going it alone again...by the end of the film I found myself asking if his trials and hardships were worth it, but then realized those weren't actually applicable questions because Redford's character didn't have a choice. Yes, he chose to leave behind his life among men and cities, but it was a decision based on an intense desire from within to live life on his own terms and survive the dangerous of the wilderness based on his own abilities. Even now I wouldn't understand his specific choice to live amongst the trees, critters and such, but I do understand the idea of actually living a life worth living, the rewards enjoyed from going your own way, doing what feels natural and right within yourself...many people never find this desire, and thus never experience the harmonious totality of completely freeing ones spirit. Does that make sense? Perhaps not, but it came through in the story for me...my favorite sequence in the film was near the beginning as Johnson became friends with the older trapper called Bear Claw, played by Geer...the two men were out hunting and Bear Claw was showing him how to use a horse as cover (hide behind it) when hunting elk. Johnson asks "Won't he see my feet?" to which Bear Claw replies "Elk don't know how many feet a horse has!" It was much funnier in the film, only because the delivery of the lines is as important as the lines themselves.

Warner Brothers provides the fullscreen (Pan & Scan) and widescreen (2.35:1), enhanced for 16X9 TVs, picture formats on this DVD, both of which look excellent, and the Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround audio comes through very clear and strong. There are some special features including cast and crew bios/filmographies, video liner notes for the film, a theatrical trailer, a featurette titled `The Saga of Jeremiah Johnson", and some Reel Reccomendations, which are pretty silly, as they're supposed to be recommendations made towards one liking this film, but are really just Warner Brothers touting whatever DVD releases they had at the time...I mean really, how in the world do they link this film with Ace Ventura: When Nature Calls (1995)? I did, as others, thought it was unnecessary that studio include the intermission segment on this DVD release, but if they hadn't, someone would have complained about its exclusion, especially if it was present in the original theatrical release...I guess, if anything, it offered me the chance to get up and take a leak without actually having to push the pause button on the DVD player remote...

Cookieman108

By the way, if'n some old mountain man ever asks you if you know how to skin griz while following him into his cabin, just say no, you surely don't...