1975's "Jaws" as WW2 Allegory

Yes: I'm Here to Ruin Classic Movies with Overanalysis

As a kid, I had an unhealthy obsession with this movie.

Some kids watch cartoons on repeat. I watched Steven Spielberg’s 1975 “Jaws” on repeat. I don’t know why. It’s a good movie, but it’s not as good as the degree to which I rewatched the movie.

Elite opinion says that all texts have subtexts. Those subtexts can be intentional or unintentional. They can be contextualized by time, events, even by accidents.

Author Peter Benchley wrote the novel “Jaws” in 1974, which was a best-seller and also wrote the screenplay adaptation of his own work. Benchley was a typical neoliberal and a former speechwriter for Lyndon Johnson while LBJ was President from 1967-1969.

LBJ reading instructions on how to drown a dog without a nearby child noticing

So among people of Benchley’s disposition and era, the choice of villains is easy and obvious, it’s at the forefront of their minds.

Not only are the evil Germans the cultural boogeymen of all-time, but especially among neoliberals in the post-war period, they were the ultimate villains: educated people who looked like neoliberals who were murderous madmen. Every leftist since 1933 has maligned their political opponents by awkwardly and imperfectly linking them to National Socialism.

If you are a man of the left, there is no greater present evil than the Nazis. It’s a political indulgence even though actual Nazis have been extinct since 1944 or so. But it’s such a powerful argument, that federal agent provocateurs even today still dress as costume Nazis in order to entrap foolish and reckless contrarians.

It’s a meme that the left will never give up on. It infects their thinking, arguments, and understanding of the world.

Any writer, director, studio, will have this meme to some extent on their conscious and subconscious as they evaluate a work.

Author Peter Benchley

Notably, author Benchley later in life wrote a novel in 1994 called “White Shark.” White Shark is not about a shark at all, it’s about a Nazi amphibious commando creature hidden at the bottom of the Atlantic which is revitalized by scientists.

So I think it’s safe to say that the themes I’m about to posit here aren’t exactly that hard to connect between Benchley’s mind and the text on the page or within the screenplay.

These themes were likely present as Benchley decided to write 1974’s “Jaws” and also present when he adapted his work for Spielberg’s 1975 “Jaws.”

So let’s consider the basic script:

Three men go out despite their obvious differences, so that they can vanquish the great animal from the depths who threatens all of their survivals and livelihoods, everything they hold dear. Despite their many differences, they have to hold together through sacrifice and loss, as they work to extinguish the beast.

It’s both the basic plot line to Jaws and also a neoliberal read on the second World War.

The more I think about it, the less I think that’s a coincidence.

So here’s my rundown:

• Amity Island is Britain, harassed for its economic survival by an underwater threat.

• The shark’s initial deaths are the sinking of ships in the Atlantic like the SS City of Benares and the SS Athenia.

• The Great White Shark represents national socialism. It hunts in the same way that a submarine hunts.

• Brody is the foreign Sheriff who doesn’t understand the Island. Brody is a stand-in for FDR and America.

• The feckless Mayor represents the Isolationists. He has political power, but he doesn’t understand the nature of the threat.

• Brody initially tries neutrality: to balance the needs of the Island with the needs of the selfish and short-sighted Merchants.

• The Sheriff’s own child has a close call with the enemy while out at sea, similar to Elliott Roosevelt’s combat missions.

• Hooper gives repeated warnings about the shark and that it won’t just go away. Hooper has experience from years on the water and with sharks. Hooper is clearly the most intellectually capable one for understanding and fighting the beast. Hooper is a stand-in for Churchill and Britain.

• Quint is the ruffian whom no one wants to deal with, but has the temerity to fight the beast. Quint is the stand-in for Stalin and the Soviets. His all-wood shacks even look Russian.

• Eventually they have to pay Quint whatever he wants to kill the beast, which represents both limitless lend-lease aid and, quietly, the atomic bomb.

• Quint relates the horrors of seafaring, and the way in which casualties can happen when the war is brought to you during the infamous U.S.S. Indianapolis monologue, perhaps the best writing and delivery in movie history. I would argue this represents both the true stories of atrocities on the Eastern Front in WW2, but also the war propaganda that personalized the conflict and also raised the stakes of the conflict for the three powers once engaged in the conflict. The men are at sea, they are committed to fighting the beast, and now they are learning that the graphic details of what they are fighting.

• The beast requires major sacrifices, most notably from Quint, just as Soviet soldiers took the brunt of casualties in the war.

• Brody attempts to shoot the beast with a handgun, representing small-scale pre-D-Day operations, but only when he uses a rifle representing all-out commitment, in this case a WW2-era M1 Garand, is he able to slay the beast.

• In the end, bombings are the only thing that silences the beast.

• The battle ends with Brody and Hooper swimming back safely to land, the seas are once again free for commerce without risk from the beast.

Now this might just be a case of making connections that aren’t there, but there do seem to be a lot of plot points and steps to the story that track pretty strongly with the second World War.

Anyway, I’m curious as to what you think. FDR was a monster and Elliott Roosevelt was the 1940’s Hunter Biden, so I’m not endorsing the factual interpretation herein, just making the connection to what it seems like other people think.

Just wait until I do this same rundown on Jaws 4.