Lawrence of Arabia: The Film as Biography

Reel Lawrence (Peter O'Toole) vs. Real Lawrence (T.E. Shaw)

With Lawrence of Arabia's 50th anniversary re-release approaching, fans may appreciate some perspective on this classic film. This will be the first of (hopefully) several pieces analyzing the film, from both historical and cinematic perspectives, in the coming weeks.

A logical starting point is the portrayal of T.E. Lawrence. I groped towards this theme in an old essay here, but since then I've read nearly 30 biographies of Lawrence, many reviewed on this blog. I feel qualified as a learned amateur if not expert to analyze the film's historicity. While authorized biographer Jeremy Wilson is harshly critical of its historical errors, I'm inclined to take a more nuanced view, viewing it through a dual prism as history buff and movie lover.

Is the film's Lawrence a reasonable interpretation of the historical figure or a complete invention? Before examining the character himself, we must consider briefly the film's background: who made it and when it was made. With all due respect to director David Lean, producer Sam Spiegel and Peter O'Toole, I feel the screenwriters are most central to this analysis.

Background

The Screenwriters

Imagining Lawrence: Michael Wilson (left) and Robert Bolt. (Wilson picture c/o Gary Crowdus)

Both Michael Wilson, who wrote early drafts of the script, and Robert Bolt, who delivered the final product, left a personal mark on Lawrence. The two writers differed in their approach: Wilson hoped for a broader political portrait of the Arab Revolt, while Bolt's focus was Lawrence himself. Both harbored left-wing sentiments that influenced their view both of Lawrence and the Arab Revolt generally.

Wilson's screenwriting career (producing classics like Salt of the Earth and Friendly Persuasion) was aborted by HUAC. His Communist affiliations led Wilson to be blacklisted through most of the '50s. After co-writing (uncredited) Lean and Spiegel's Bridge on the River Kwai he was eager to receive recognition for a major film. Wilson, however, couldn't accommodate Lean's vision of Lawrence, and Robert Bolt received sole credit on the finished film. Not until 1995, after Spiegel, Lean and Bolt were all deceased, did Wilson receive credit.

Bolt was a school teacher-turned-playwright who'd just hit it big with his twin successes of The Tiger and the Horse and A Man for All Seasons - plays which examined historical/political issues through an individual lens. Spiegel initially planned for Bolt to "touch up" Wilson's script, but Bolt spent over a year reshaping the screenplay. He was an active member of the Committee for Nuclear Disarmament, a political commitment which jeopardized the film: Bolt was arrested for an anti-nuclear demonstration while writing the script. A furious Spiegel bailed Bolt out, humiliating the socialist playwright.

The controversy of "who wrote Lawrence of Arabia" is definitively examined by Joel Hodson's Cineaste article. Suffice it to say Wilson provided the script's narrative outline while Bolt contributed the dialogue and interpretation of Lawrence. Both, however, viewed Lawrence as "a romantic fascist" (Bolt) who mixed personal motives with military duty and love for primitive Arab culture; the Revolt itself as a classic case of imperial perfidy. In the midst of the Cold War, when the Middle East was again a battleground for great powers, and the aftermath of 1956's Suez Crisis, where Abdel Nasser's Egypt humiliated post-imperial Britain, Lawrence's message held deep contemporary resonance.


Biographical Context

Critical biographers: Richard Aldington (left) and Anthony Nutting

In his Apologia (pp. 505-509 of Adrian Turner's Robert Bolt: Scenes From Two Lives), Bolt claimed Lawrence's Seven Pillars of Wisdom was his only major source for the film. This seems hard to credit, however. The movie roughly owes its narrative contours to Seven Pillars but draws heavily on the contentious biographical debate of 1962. Two biographies in particular, written shortly prior to the film, likely influenced Bolt and Wilson.

In 1955, novelist Richard Aldington published Lawrence of Arabia: A Biographical Inquiry. Aldington brutally deconstructed the Lawrence legend, depicting his subject as every shade of cad: a liar, egomaniac, neurotic, homosexual and literal bastard. Aldington had a valid point that biographies up to then were uncritical and uniformly flattering. But his vitriolic tone, evident personal grudge against Lawrence ("the appropriate hero for his class and epoch") and willingness to always believe the worst of his subject led to bitter denunciation. Nonetheless, his claims seeped into public consciousness, difficult to dislodge even today.

A more direct influence was Anthony Nutting. A former official in Anthony Eden's Conservative government, he resigned in the wake of 1956's Suez Crisis. David Lean enlisted Nutting as a Middle Eastern adviser on the film, but Nutting found his advice mostly discarded. Most specifically, Nutting objected strongly to Sherif Ali killing Lawrence's guide at the well, feeling it a gross distortion of Bedouin culture.

Nutting published a slim volume called Lawrence of Arabia: The Man and the Motive shortly before the film's release. It shows that while the filmmakers largely ignored Nutting's Middle East expertise, they gleaned much from his interpretation of Lawrence. Nutting's depiction of a Lawrence as a self-anointed "Kingmaker," a grandiose neurotic and "rabid masochist" driven over the edge by Deraa matches Bolt/Wilson's interpretation to a T. No doubt Nutting's personal experiences influenced his interpretation of Lawrence's political dilemma.

Whether intentionally or not, Wilson and Bolt appropriated many of Aldington and Nutting's analyses of Lawrence into their scripts. It's quite probably intentional with Nutting, given his early (albeit fractious) association with the film.

Edit (9/17/2012): Reading Steven C. Caton's book Lawrence of Arabia: A Film's Anthropology, it appears Michael Wilson at least studied Aldington while preparing his screenplay (pp. 110-111).

Lawrence as film character

"Do you think I'm just anybody Ali?" Lawrence as egomaniac

With this background in mind, we'll examine the film's Lawrence through his primary character traits.

Egomania/Exhibitionism

Lawrence's defining trait is egomania. He constantly asserts his own importance: "Of course I'm the man for the job!" "We won't rest until they know *I've* taken Aqaba!" At his high points, Lawrence suffers from a God complex. At one point he poses "like a Sun God" (Turner) on a wrecked train as his followers cheer, or when he and Ali walk into Deraa single-handed, evidently hoping by simple presence to provoke an uprising. This is matched with manic-depressive states of self-loathing, as in his return to Jerusalem: "The truth is I'm an ordinary man."

The film also devotes much time to Lawrence's relationship with Jackson Bentley, an American reporter standing in for Lowell Thomas. The two men seem to dislike each other, but find each other useful for their own ends. Bentley is "looking for a hero" to use in propaganda promoting America's entry into World War I. Lawrence is looking for an audience. For all his distaste for Bentley's vulgarity ("He thinks you're a kind of thief!") Lawrence relishes the chance to show off to the world.

Lawrence's ego proves both a blessing and curse. On the one hand, it provides the inspiration for his military achievements. His grandiosity is justified by the capture of Aqaba and his brilliant campaign against the Hejaz Railway. Yet it's also his Achilles heel, as it pushes him into irrational actions like continuing a campaign with a handful of men and strolling into Deraa alone. Most painfully, it allows Allenby to manipulate him for military ends, fanning his fragile ego into borderline dementia.

Outsider Status

Lawrence is depicted as a bumbling buffoon in British company, spilling a colleague's drink and earning the contempt of most. This is matched by Lawrence's ill-fitting uniforms and casual, unmilitary behavior. He's loathed by his superior officers, and his peers treat him as an oddity. Murray doesn't think him a "real man" and loathes his intellectualism. His illegitimate birth, a closely guarded secret, no doubt enhances his inability to fit in.

Lawrence initially seems keen to leave to Cairo, and finds himself at home amongst the Bedouin. Through his exploits he befriends Ali and earns the respect of Feisal, Auda and other Arabs. Yet he still doesn't truly seem to fit in, expressing contempt at low ebbs ("so long will (the Arabs) be a little people" etc.) and viewing himself as fundamentally British. Certainly his capture at Deraa, where he's singled out for complexion, ruins any such impression. Yet his later attempts at fitting in amongst the British are unconvincing.

As Lawrence's abilities come to the fore, he gains the attention (if not respect) of his superiors. Allenby and Dryden both recognize him as a useful tool for their respective military and political ends. The soldiers revere his accomplishments but find the man a puzzle ("I didn't know him well, you know!"). Only Colonel Brighton seems to truly appreciate Lawrence's ability, and still can't claim to truly "know" him. By the final campaign his only remaining cause appears to be himself.

Despite his best efforts, Lawrence remains an outsider. His peers still can't appreciate his dual image. The Damascus Medical Officer denounces Lawrence as a filthy wog at the hospital then shakes his hand in uniform. The Arabs are left bewildered by his self-destructive ennui ("There is only the desert for you"). And his superiors discard him with the war over, all parties "equally glad to be rid of him."

Effeminacy/Homosexuality

One of Richard Aldington's most contentious claims was that Lawrence was a homosexual. At a time when homosexuality was still illegal in Britain, this was an explosive charge, which Lawrence's family and supporters vehemently denied. Though evidence is scarce, it quickly caught on with the public, through Aldington's book and popular media like Terrence Rattigan's play Ross. Sex sells, and an historical figure like Lawrence is hardly immune to gossip or innuendo.

David Lean later claimed "Lawrence was very, if not entirely, homosexual" and Lawrence is as clear as a 1962 film could be. As portrayed by Peter O'Toole, Lawrence displays awkward, effeminate mannerisms. He seems out of place in British uniform and is shown bumbling around Army headquarters, spilling drinks and mincing towards colleagues. When Lawrence receives his Bedouin robes, he prances around laughing giddily, even examining himself in the reflection of his dagger. More stereotype than nuance, the message is nonetheless obvious.

Lawrence's relationship with Farraj and Daud (his mischievous servants) and Sherif Ali also suggest this to a degree. Lawrence's friendship with Ali is central to the drama, with some viewing it as a literal romance. The absence of a female lead, and Lawrence's femininity, lend some credence to this view. However, Ali's proclamations of love towards the end are likely admiration and feeling of kinship than homosexuality. One must be careful not to over-apply critical analysis where a surface level is sufficient.

Sadomasochism

Another key ingredient in Bolt/Wilson's portrait is Lawrence as masochist. Lawrence's first major scene has him putting out a match, proclaiming that "the trick... is not minding that it hurts!" While pondering the Arabs' predicament in the desert, he squeezes a rock in his hand until he bleeds. After Daud's death in quicksand, he staggers through the desert on foot, ignoring Farraj's pleas to share his camel. He also seems fairly unfazed by a Turkish bullet.

This takes a nastier form in later scenes. After Lawrence executes Gassim, he finds to his horror that he "enjoys" killing. This prefigures his torture and rape at Deraa, which he's implied to have enjoyed as well. It finally reaches his apotheosis when he unleashes the Arabs at Tafas, slaughtering a column of Turkish stragglers. Lawrence is shown as a crazed participant in the killing, shooting and stabbing unarmed men with evident glee. After fighting it throughout the film, Lawrence finally gives way to bloodlust after the "citadel of [his] integrity" is violated at Deraa.

Servant of Two Masters

A theme that surely appealed to both Bolt and Wilson is Lawrence's devotion to "England... and to other things." Bolt made a career of characters who tried to "have it two ways," both on stage and screen. Wilson certainly sympathized with Lawrence's being forced to compromise personal belief for state goals.

The film's Lawrence is shown an outcast in British society but seemingly at home in Arabia. Despite his loyalty to the crown and respect for Allenby (whom he views as a father figure), he falls in love with the Bedouin lifestyle and feels personal responsibility to help "gain their freedom." Ultimately he convinces himself that if the Arabs beat the British to Damascus, independence will be theirs. Unfortunately the Arab Council collapses amidst infighting and incompetence, the British calmly waiting to take over. Defeated morally and spiritually, Lawrence is forced off-stage while Allenby and Feisal work out an expedient compromise.


Accuracy

"The most shameless exhibitionist since Barnum and Bailey": the real Lawrence with Lowell Thomas

In sum, Lean, Bolt and Wilson craft an extremely neurotic, tortured and eccentric Lawrence. How accurate is their portrayal? Taking the specific points into account:

• Lawrence's "egomania" is a matter of debate. Depending on the biographer, Lawrence was either a self-promoting charlatan, relatively honest or playfully exaggerating his exploits. In Seven Pillars Lawrence pens a chapter entitled Myself, where he examines his achievements and personality. He writes of his "craving to be famous... and horror to be known to like being known." This is shrewd self-assessment given his ambivalence towards Lowell Thomas, and hiding out in the Royal Air Force while dining with Bernard Shaw and E.M. Forster. Certainly, however, the film's extreme God complex is a gross exaggeration. The circumstances of Lawrence's capture at Deraa were much more banal than the film suggests, and Lawrence's writings (though subjective) generally credit Arabs and fellow British officers where appropriate. An extreme interpretation but in keeping with then-contemporary biographies.
• Lawrence was hardly an eccentric outsider. In fact Lawrence was affable and made friends easily; he got on with most of his colleagues in Cairo, and was respected by his superiors and elders. After the war he found it as easy befriending literati and political leaders as rankers in the RAF and Tank Corps. Nor was Lawrence ill-used, when he'd been entrusted with responsibilities beyond the average Lieutenant: interrogating Turkish POWs, analyzing Arab tribes and attempting to ransom the besieged garrison at Kut.
  Bolt apparently gleaned this from a passage in Seven Pillars where Lawrence claimed to make a nuisance of himself to avoid an undesired posting. Lawrence's penchant for practical jokes rubbed many the wrong way. But this was just one part of his character. He was not an unappreciated genius languishing in a useless job, but a well-respected, experienced junior officer with considerable charm. He was a logical choice for an Arab liaison.
• Lawrence's sexual leanings are impossible to prove. Many find passages of Seven Pillars of Wisdom homoerotic, as when Lawrence describes Bedouin man love in some detail. His relationships with Arab servant Dahoum before the war, and R.A. Guy while serving in the RAF, seem suspect to many. Against this can be weighed his flirtations with Janet Laurie and Clare Sydney Smith, and his claim that he died a virgin.
  Certainly though few have depicted Lawrence as a mincing effeminate. He was strong for his small size and considered tough and masculine. In this regard, the filmmakers go for sensationalism with a shade of unfortunate stereotype.
• Lawrence's masochism is well-established. In the late 1960s John Bruce, one of Lawrence's Tank Corps colleagues, told Sunday Times reporter Philip Knightley that Lawrence had Bruce flog him regularly as punishment for (imagined) sins. Lawrence's brother felt this self-punishment rather than sexual release. Despite this, most biographers are disinclined to view Lawrence as a masochist before Deraa, though he harbored a love of "testing" himself physically with exercise and strict diet.
• Sadism however is unlikely. Nowhere in Seven Pillars does Lawrence claim to have "enjoyed" executing Hamed or the massacre at Tafas. This more resembles Nutting's view of Lawrence unleashing the Arabs in murderous revenge for Deraa than Lawrence's writings. The real Lawrence harbored a "horror of bloodshed," for both practical and personal reasons, but not from secretly liking to kill.
• While many biographers insist on painting Lawrence in absolute terms, harboring one strict loyalty or another, the film's Lawrence torn between British loyalty and promises to the Arabs is reasonably accurate. Certainly Lawrence's writings, from Seven Pillars to diaries and correspondence, evince a great deal of anguish over convincing the Arabs to "fight for us on a lie," leaving him "continually and bitterly ashamed." The portrayal's flawed in particulars (eg., showing Lawrence as ignorant of the Sykes-Picot Agreement) but generally convincing.

The film's major omissions can be briefly summarized. Lawrence's pre-war adventures as an archaeology student go unmentioned, along with his involvement in an "archaeological" survey of the Sinai Peninsula just before the war and previous intelligence work with the Arab Bureau. He did not have the best relationship with General Murray, but then he reported to Generals Clayton and Wingate, not Murray. Of course his post-war career is also omitted. On a superficial level, Peter O'Toole is nearly a foot taller than the historical Lawrence!

Conclusion

"There was something about it I didn't like." - Lawrence as sadist.

The movie's portrayal of Lawrence is, historically, a mixed bag. Undoubtedly it leans heavily on then-contemporary analyses of Lawrence as opposed to Seven Pillars of Wisdom. Seeking the cinematically sensational and dramatically effective, Lean, Bolt and Wilson emphasize (and exaggerate) Lawrence's psychological foibles over his political dilemma. The sadism angle seems particularly suspect at 50 years' distance.

On the other hand, the movie gets more right than its credited for. Lawrence is most convincing showing Lawrence's personal conflict at "serving two masters" and feeling betrayed at war's end. Lawrence's ambivalence towards notoriety is well-captured, and his personal heroism ably portrayed. In many of its essential episodes, such as Gassim's rescue and his military leadership, the film does its subject justice.

Overall, Lawrence of Arabia's T.E. Lawrence is a fair, if exaggerated, portrait based on what was known in 1962. Many new discoveries and interpretations, from the release of War Office records in 1968 to testimony of previously-unheard witnesses (John Bruce, Janet Laurie) to biographies and released family correspondence, have challenged its depiction. But its view of a deeply tortured, larger-than-life hero remains largely convincing to this day.