{"id":2906,"date":"2016-01-20T10:57:38","date_gmt":"2016-01-20T08:57:38","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.16-9.dk\/?p=2906"},"modified":"2020-05-22T16:52:22","modified_gmt":"2020-05-22T14:52:22","slug":"hannibals-tasty-paradox","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.16-9.dk\/3\/2016\/01\/hannibals-tasty-paradox\/","title":{"rendered":"Hannibal’s Tasty Paradox"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"078_00\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
Why do we rarely see him carry out the actual act of killing while we often get to see him eat a fancy dinner? Whenever the sadistic cannibal Hannibal Lecter enjoys another gourmet meal, this broadcast TV series displays culinary cannibalism with luxurious aesthetics that could rival most cooking shows. But why? The purpose of this article is to analyze the many appeals of NBC\u2019s Hannibal<\/em> and especially its food strategies.<\/h5>\n\n\n\n

Origin<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The stories about Hannibal Lecter begin with Thomas Harris\u2019 four books Red Dragon<\/em> (1981), Silence of the Lambs<\/em> (1988), Hannibal<\/em> (1999) and Hannibal Rising<\/em> (2006). This tetralogy has since been adapted and made into five different films: Manhunter<\/em> (dir. Michael Mann, 1986), Silence of the Lambs<\/em> (dir. Jonathan Demme, 1991), Hannibal<\/em> (dir. Ridley Scott, 2001), Red Dragon<\/em> (dir. Brett Ratner, 2002), and Hannibal Rising<\/em> (dir. Peter Webber, 2007).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

All the films have been produced by Dino and Martha De Laurentiis \u2013 except Silence of the Lambs<\/em> which won five Academy Awards (Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor, Best Actress and Best Adapted Screenplay) and was arguably the most successful of the films. After the disappointing Manhunter<\/em> Dino and Martha De Laurentiis still owned the film rights to the characters from Red Dragon<\/em> including Hannibal Lecter. So when director Jonathan Demme approached the De Laurentiises to borrow the rights to the Hannibal character, they gave it away for free (Bernstein, 2001). This may have been a mistake at the time considering the earnings and success that Silence of the Lambs<\/em> generated. But in the long run Hannibal Lecter has become a very popular, valuable, and long-running asset (also for these producers).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After a dormant period with no new adaptations of the Hannibal Lecter franchise, in 2013 the American broadcast network NBC decided to bet on Bryan Fuller to successfully reinterpret the Hannibal universe into a broadcast TV series. By being a part of this larger intertextual franchise a series like Hannibal<\/em> can make large or small changes to the existing mythology, create anticipation and curiosity, assume a basic viewer awareness of the central characters, and provide hidden intertextual references and \u201cEaster eggs\u201d for dedicated fans of the books and film adaptations (Mittell 2015, p. 173). But by having the series start as a prequel taking place before<\/em> the Red Dragon<\/em> events, Fuller\u2019s TV interpretation also allows itself to create new and previously unexplored stories.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Some central characters have also been added or changed, making the TV show stand out from the books: Dr. Bedelia Du Maurier (new), Dr. Alana Bloom (now a woman, was named Alan Bloom in the books), Miriam Lass (new, a trainee somewhat reminiscent of Clarice Starling, who could not be included in the TV series because of copyright issues), Freddie Lounds (now a woman, was a man in the books), and Dr. Abel Gideon (new). So we can deduce that four women and one man have been added to the menu (maybe to make the show\u2019s gender balance more equal and modern).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Genre and style<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

In the following genre comparison, I will compare Hannibal<\/em> (NBC, 2013-15) to similar American TV shows from the same period. At first glance the TV series Hannibal<\/em> might look like a fairly harmless police procedural<\/em> show. The first couple of shots of the pilot episode show iconic police procedural images like a house teeming with police officers, a pool of blood on the floor, two dead bodies, a body being put in a body bag (fig. 1), all of which suggests a home invasion. This sort of scene could point to an episodic police procedural like CSI: Crime Scene Investigation<\/em> (CBS, 2000-15) or Bones<\/em> (Fox, 2005-), a subgenre within detective fiction where most episodes start with the discovery of a new crime scene and focus on the forensic and police-related details of crime solving (Nichols-Pethick 2012, p. 155).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a>
Fig.1: The opening scene of the pilot episode.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The following images show an investigator (the character Will Graham played by Hugh Dancy) observing the crime scene with dramatic music and flashing police lights in the background. As Will slowly closes his eyes, the color-grading becomes warmer, the sirens disappear, and the sound of a heartbeat follows. Three light flashes wipe over the screen \u2013 a setup mimicking a pendulum involved in Will\u2019s personal therapy sessions later in season 1. These three pendulum lights become the signature of Will\u2019s keen ability to reconstruct and reenact horrific crimes. This (almost superhuman) mental ability to solve crimes is reminiscent of crime\/mystery protagonists like Patrick Jane from The Mentalist<\/em> (CBS, 2008-15) but also classic puzzle-solving detectives like Sherlock Holmes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A less conventional character trait follows as Will quite literally puts himself in the killer\u2019s place and replays the horrific events in which he enters the house and shoots the couple living there while stating his catchphrase \u201cThis is my design\u201d (1:58, 2:37). This mirror dialectic<\/em> of crime fiction \u2013 where the detective has to mirror the killer in order to understand and solve the crime \u2013 has been a central appeal within the genre for a long time (Agger 2010, p. 171). Will\u2019s ability to empathize and identify with the killer leads to him killing the real perpetrator, Garret Jacob Hobbs, in the end of the pilot episode. Thus, Will becomes an actual killer himself and he has a lot of mental anguish about this because he seemingly liked the act of killing. In this way, Will is somewhat like Dexter<\/em> (Showtime, 2006-13): An anti-hero protagonist with a killer\u2019s instinct who kills the real bad guys \u2013 thereby blurring the lines between good and evil.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Up to this point in this genre analysis of the pilot episode, Hannibal<\/em> does not seem to be a particularly innovative show but rather similar to other police procedurals and crime dramas in American broadcast TV at the time (in 2013). And as the pilot episode progresses, the only clear-cut surprise is maybe that the presentation of the show\u2019s title character Hannibal Lecter is delayed until about halfway through the episode (20:59). During the presentation of Hannibal\u2019s character he is implicitly (and falsely) linked to the serial killings of eight different girls and the show\u2019s images indicate that Hannibal ate their organs (a false trail when it was in fact Hobbs who did it). At this moment when Hannibal is introduced, the show\u2019s aesthetics change (fig. 2): Low-key lighting, classical piano music, and upper-class vibes make him stand out compared to the bright procedural scenes from FBI headquarters in Quantico, Virginia (fig. 3). His plate of food looks like delicious haute cuisine (fig. 4) while the dark images suggest moral decadence. Hannibal is stylistically introduced as an aesthete, an aristocrat (of noble descent, his father was a count), and a gourmet (and gourmet magazine author). Even though he could be eating human flesh, the food looks paradoxically gorgeous. The images create a distinction between the police procedural genre and style on one side and Hannibal\u2019s upper-class style on the other side \u2013 as if he may bring something unusual to this TV genre.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a>
Fig. 2: In this TV show Hannibal Lecter (played by Mads Mikkelsen) is often linked to the darkness.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/a>
Fig. 3: The bright images, the witty and peculiar dialogue, and the forensic characters Price, Zeller, and Katz are all bearers of the police procedural genre.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/a>
Fig. 4: Most images of gourmet food in Hannibal<\/em> suggest the possibility of cannibalism but the true nature of the meat is seldom disclosed. As Lecter himself would say: It would ruin the surprise.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Narrative<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

After the short eating scene the next shot displays an extended hand, a man begging for mercy: \u201cPlease\u201d (21:36). Combined with the presentation of a character which audiences might already remember from the books and movies as a famous serial killer, one might expect to see him kill someone. But instead Hannibal hands him a tissue as it is a therapy session with Hannibal as the psychiatrist. Again this TV show plays with potential genre expectations. The patient Franklyn is afraid of being eaten by an imaginary lion and Hannibal reassuringly says: \u201cYou have to convince yourself the lion is not in the room\u201d (22:16). This is just one of many examples of narrative irony in this show and here it illustrates the ignorance of Franklyn and the FBI in the beginning of the series: Neither of them is aware of the hungry killer in the room. This psychiatrist appointed to help people is in fact a serial killer. And the knowledgeabilty (Bordwell 1985) of this circumstance is used to achieve narrative equality between Hannibal and the audience: Only the audience knows his secret. The possibility of his exposure and eventual capture creates the show\u2019s primary narrative suspense where it uses retardation (ibid.) by repeatedly postponing this event: When will they discover that he is the killer and catch him?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hannibal<\/em> has some episodic narratives in its three 13-episode seasons, more precisely in season one in episodes 2, 4, 5, 8, 9 and 10, in season two in episodes 2, 4, 6, 8 and 9. And in season three the episodic structure is strikingly absent in favor of a more complex serial structure. By starting season one with half of the season dedicated to episodic narratives Hannibal<\/em>\u2019s narrative structure is seemingly not that complex. But as it turns out this might be a part of its strategy to play \u201cthe long game\u201d and wait until the end of the second season before revealing how Lecter has been at least three steps ahead of Will, Jack Crawford, the other characters, and even the audience the entire time. The mix of episodic and serial narratives (and these long suppressed story arcs), hidden references, a second season that starts with an intense flash-forward to the season finale\u2019s epic stand-off in Lecter\u2019s kitchen, different types of gaps and hidden cues (fig. 5), and examples of lost time (experienced through the perspective of the protagonist Will) mimic a more complex narrative (Mittell 2006) which would normally be found in cable TV (HBO, Showtime, AMC, FX etc.). The \u201c13 episodes per season\u201d that Hannibal<\/em> has is also sometimes referred to as \u201cthe cable model\u201d. Therefore Hannibal initially lives up to certain genre expectations connected to broadcast network television but then goes above and beyond those expectations by mimicking cable television fiction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a>
Fig. 5: An example of a hidden cue\/clue: The stag sculpture in Lecter\u2019s office points to his guilt and that he is the nightmarish \u201cStagman\u201d in Wills dreams.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Serial killing, cannibalism, and monsters<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe serial killer\u201d as a character enjoys much attention these days in American TV and this character is particularly useful in TV fiction where the serialized nature of this type of fiction \u2013 and especially the episodic crime\/mystery shows \u2013 requires an ongoing murder spree in order to sustain the narrative. But Lecter is both a serial killer and a cannibal. The ritual of humans eating humans, also called anthropophagy<\/em>, has been one of humanity\u2019s morbid fascinations for a long time. In order to specify the cannibalism in Hannibal<\/em> it can be categorized as A) gastronomic cannibalism<\/em> \u2013 killing someone for food and not because of starvation, honor, war or medicinal reasons \u2013 and as B) sadistic cannibalism<\/em> where individuals are killed and eaten because of sadistic or psychopathological motives (Ullyatt 2012, p. 9).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cannibalism is typically deemed uncivilized and often connected to primitive tribes living in some distant jungle far away from the white man. But in Hannibal Lecter\u2019s case it is the white man himself \u2013 even a very sophisticated version of him \u2013 that has become cannibalistic. Maybe it is not accurate to call Lecter a \u201csavage\u201d because he is always in control and never careless. But he does display unruly<\/em> behavior and loves to play games with the people around him. This is highlighted whenever he has dinner guests that are unknowingly eating human flesh (sometimes this is revealed to the audience and sometimes it\u2019s only discretely suggested). Lecter as a character takes pleasure in the knowledge of tricking people into taking part of one of the modern world\u2019s last taboos.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This unruly and yet controlled aspect of him is most apparent when his victims are found. Lecter is presented as an artistic serial killer that makes elaborate installations out of his victims, making them into works of art. An example of this occurs in season 2, episode 5, when a body is found sliced into sections and put on display (fig. 6). These sadistic serial killings done by Lecter and other \u201cguest killers\u201d provide a sprinkle of horror to the show\u2019s genre mix. Hannibal could be called a melodrama because of the focus on emotional, tragic, violent, and intriguing relationships and a crime\/mystery show because of the focus on puzzle solving and murder investigation (Cawelti 1976). But the element of horror<\/em> is also present and in a quite gory manner with lots of blood, guts and horrific details. Cawelti\u2019s version of horror called \u201calien beings or states\u201d requires a monster and in Hannibal<\/em> the monster is obviously the title character. But the protagonist Will is also at times awarded some of these monstrous qualities. Where Jack Crawford is the solid and sound policeman signifying normalcy and goodness, Hannibal and even Will often play with the boundaries between good and evil. The horror of Hannibal<\/em> relies partly in the fact that the seemingly reliable psychiatrist turns out to be a manipulating psychopath and partly in the fear of the potential urges within Will. They each represent these two versions of the monster. And as the show progresses, it presents the possibility of Will succumbing to Hannibal\u2019s influence resulting in the unification of the two (which is a different and maybe more progressive version of the story than in the books and films).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Fig.<\/a>
Fig. 6: This is just one of many scenes where a gory and at the same time artistic crime scene is discovered. These scenes function as a way of establishing Lecter\u2019s status as an artistic serial killer.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Making cannibalism look tasty \u2013 food strategies in Hannibal<\/em><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

To get to the core of the reinterpretation that this TV series presents, let us ask ourselves: What food-related strategies does Hannibal<\/em> employ? I would argue that this TV show goes to great lengths to highlight the food-related aspects of the narrative and does this to a higher extent than the films do. This choice displays the paradoxes regarding Lecter and his exquisite and yet cannibalistic cooking.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A) Instead of only focusing on the horrific consequences of his eating ritual the show chooses to highlight his culinary knowledge, perfect surgical technique, flawless preparations, and beautifully arranged meals (fig. 7). These cooking and eating scenes have so far been repeated again and again in the TV series and they seem to offer many different appeals to the viewer. A common pattern that first occurs in season 1, episode 7 and is repeated thereafter is that Lecter first goes through his neat box of hand-written recipe cards and chooses a gourmet recipe. Next he goes through a rolodex with lots of business cards from rude people and he chooses a rude person to kill and devour. This is his preparation ritual where he procures meat while making the world a more polite place to live in.
The first time Lecter is introduced in the series, he is eating. But we rarely get to see him actually kill someone. Often the images just show him returning to the fridge with a vacuum-packed piece of meat and later we see him cooking it. And so the show deliberately chooses to accentuate the planning and cooking of this cannibalistic cuisine but not the murder (fig. 8).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Fig.<\/a>
Fig. 7: The table is set and dinner is ready. In the show\u2019s promotional posters like this one it\u2019s easy to see the prominent role that food plays.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\"Fig.<\/a>
Fig. 8: In season 2, episode 6 we see Lecter making these delicious appetizers that look like something from a cooking show. But the aesthetics in these cooking scenes are still both dark and stylish.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

B) These elaborate dishes also owe much to the show\u2019s food stylist Janice Poon who designs all the meals and food arrangements. Poon\u2019s blog<\/a> delivers many insights on food design from a technical perspective by showing her work process and many spectacular sketches like this one (fig. 9) Poon\u2019s food-related production design is not only about making stuff look like human flesh (although this is a recurring subject throughout her blog) but a central part of the show\u2019s efforts to make cannibalism look tasty (fig. 10). That the food design is this elaborate and central is a testament to the emphasis this series seems to put on food as an essential theme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Fig.<\/a>
Fig. 9: From season 2, episode 11 where they eat ortolans (a small songbird that is eaten whole including the beak) as a gourmet delicacy.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\"Fig.<\/a>
Fig. 10: Poon\u2019s lavish and unsettling rack of lamb from the season 2 finale. Notice how the skulls are incorporated and how the upper ribs have been tied together to resemble a pair of praying hands.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

C) Another part of the food-related strategies has to do with the episode titles. In season 1, the titles are borrowed from the French culinary vocabulary (Ap\u00e9ritif etc.), season 2 uses the Japanese culinary vocabulary (Kaiseki meaning a certain multi-course culinary artform honoring taste and aesthetic etc.), and season 3 starts with an Italian culinary vocabulary (Antipasto etc.) but then goes on to use phrases related to William Blake\u2019s Red Dragon-paintings for the last half of season 3. Besides the episode titles, food is even a central part of the dialogue where it is frequently used as a metaphorical language along with hunting and fishing analogies (fig. 11).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

D) Furthermore, Lecter\u2019s kitchen and dining room are central places in the show. It is here that he is first introduced and it is also the stage for the final confrontation in the season 2 finale. And the very last seconds of the season 3 finale take place around a well-decorated dinner table. So even in the choices of the locations for the most crucial scenes food appears to be somewhat highlighted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

E) And lastly, the show\u2019s title sequence shows Lecter\u2019s face created by a red liquid resembling blood or wine connecting food with mortality (fig. 12).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Fig.<\/a>
Fig. 11: The \u201cstagman\u201d and the raved-feathered stag are two nightmarish images about hunting that keep appearing in the show. Here Will is imagining fishing in a stream when he is interrupted by the stagman, symbolizing Lecter.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\"Fig.<\/a>
Fig. 12: This very short title sequence establishes Hannibal as a creature made of blood and\/or wine, maybe insinuating both his mortality and his monstrous superiority.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Conclusion<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Hannibal<\/em> as a case exemplifies how a theme like food can permeate many different aspects of a TV series. By highlighting food as a theme in many different ways this TV reinterpretation delivers an unexpected insight into Hannibal Lecter as a multi-faceted character. He is a psychiatrist, an aristocrat, a gourmet, an artist, an art historian, a musical sophisticate, and a harpsichord player. But he is also an unruly cannibalistic serial killer with a keen love for eating, decapitating, and disemboweling people \u2013 especially the rude. And this complex nature of his is obvious in the show\u2019s cooking and eating scenes through the use of narrative irony. Hannibal<\/em> uses food as a theme that combines two seemingly incompatible aspects: gourmet food and cannibalism. This is the first and clearest paradox. But by doing this, the show also displays an awareness of the \u201cterrible beauty\u201d (Turnbull 2007, p. 58 f.) of Hannibal Lecter and Thomas Harris\u2019 stories about him. And this terrible beauty is the second and more subtle paradox. The choice of placing the show on an undecided and narrow line between the terrible and the beautiful where the decadent resides could be interpreted as an effort to stay true to the nature of the narrative. All of this makes Hannibal<\/em> more similar to complex and progressive cable shows than the episodic police procedural that has dominated the American broadcast networks\u2019 take on the crime genre. That the show was cancelled due to low ratings, could be the unfortunate fate of trying to innovate network television. Hannibal<\/em> can also serve as an example of how food design can play a major role in production design in modern TV and fiction film. The impressive longevity of this complex character might be because of his many nuances and therefore we probably haven\u2019t seen the last of Dr. Lecter yet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

* * *<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Facts<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Hannibal<\/em> (NBC, 2013-15), created by Bryan Fuller, 3 seasons, 39 episodes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Literature<\/h3>\n\n\n\n