Like other commenters, I feel that Tom’s hat is symbolic. Although interpreting what is means may be difficult, I do not think it is a riddle without an answer. I doubt that the Coehn’s would carefully craft such an amazing work of art around such a focal point simply to confuse.

The movie is primarily about ethics and character. Indeed, as a previous person has observed, even before the opening credits role we hear a lengthy monologue concerning ethics. Viewing the film through this lens, it seems to me, makes it far clearer.

As we all know, before the timeline of the movie itself begins, Leo is smitten with Verna and Verna is using Leo to protect her brother, Bernie. Tom and Leo are fellow Irishman and Tom has been loyal to him for many years, even when their future was unsure (”We’ve faced worse odds, Tom.” “Never without reason. It helps to have one [Leo].”)

However, Tom is guilty of having fallen for Verna. In the ladies room, while drunk, he tells her, “I love you, Angel.” She is his equal in terms of intelligence, wit and a cold hard ability to see all of the angles and make her play. Certainly, for the Tom of the fictional 1930’s, she must be like no other woman with whom he has been romantically involved.

Tom sleeps with Verna twice while she is seeing Leo — but only when his inhibitions are down because he is drunk. As anyone who is a heavy drinker knows, these are the times when you chase after your desires even if your better judgment would otherwise prevent you from doing so.

For just a couple days in the movie, Tom attempts to balance the conflict he is experiencing: his desire to be with Verna and his loyalty to Leo. Unfortunately, as is common when people caught in a love triangle, that cannot last.

This brings me to my favorite question: What is the meaning of Tom’s hat? Perhaps the answer can be found in the one time Tom discusses it. He admits that, after having had sex with Verna, he has just dreamed of his hat. Verna cuts in, asking — actually telling — Tom that, in his dream, he chased his hat, caught it, and that it then turned into “something wonderful.”

Verna is telling Tom that he has to chase after what he wants and grab onto it in order for it to turn into something more. In truth, she is telling Tom to chase after her and, if he does, their relationship will turn into “something wonderful.” But if this is the case, why doesn’t Tom simply agree?

I suspect it is because Tom is too proud to do so. He responds with words to the effect of, “No, I didn’t chase it and it didn’t turn into anything. There is nothing more embarrassing than a man chasing after his own hat.” I believe that Tom is lying and Verna was right about his dream — this is why he responds so harshly. But regardless of whether Tom is telling the truth, I think he has just told the audience why he will not chase after Verna: being a proud man of the 1930s, he feels it is foolish for a man to chase after a woman (perhaps all the more so because Verna is a “tramp” and a “grifter”).

I could be reading too much into that exchange but consider this: Verna also tells Tom, in another scene, “Why do you always take the long way around — why didn’t you just ask for what you want?” Tom inquires, “What did I want?” and Verna responds, “Me.” Tom does not deny this fact.

Moreover, despite his unflagging loyalty to Leo, the one thing Tom will not do is apologize for his relationship with Verna. When Leo tells Tom, in the last 10 minutes of the film, “Jesus, Tom, I forgive you,” Tom angrily retorts, “I didn’t ask for that and I don’t want it!” Tom cares for Verna and he will not apologize for his feelings. And he probably can reconcile his sleeping with her, despite Leo’s affection for her, because she has admitted to Tom (in the ladies room scene) that she is merely using Leo (Tom says, “There is a name for that kind of arrangement, [Verna].”)

So back to Tom’s hat: over the course of the film, Tom nearly loses his hat but never does. In the closing shot of the movie, Tom is seen with just has hat — looking out coldly at the world. Why?

I think the answer lies in another statement made by Verna. She tells Tom, “Admit that you have a heart, even though it might be small and feeble and you can’t remember the last time you used it.” Again, Tom doesn’t deny this — and he next sleeps with Verna for the second time.

Isn’t is strange that there is so much talk of Tom’s heart despite the fact that “he takes such pride in being a son of a bitch”? Indeed, Bernie convinces Tom not to kill him at Miller’s Crossing by crying, “We don’t bump guys! Look in your heart, Tom! Look into your heart!” It would seem that Tom does find something in his heart given that he lets Bernie go free.

At the film’s climax, Tom abandons his heart (i.e. he will not chase after his hat). In far, Tom creates a second chance to kill Bernie himself. When Bernie makes exactly the same plea that worked on Tom the last time, Tom kills him without hesitation — after saying he has no heart (Tom: “What heart?!”). Of course, Tom must know that in addition to becoming a cold blooded murdered, he also is giving-up any chance he has with Verna by doing this.

As the credits role, I believe that Tom has shown himself to be a man who held true to his ethics and paid a terrible price for it. He slept with the object of his friend and father-figure’s affections. But he admitted it. And, having made that mistake, he risked his own life to protect that man’s standing. He does this despite Leo’s having physically beaten him and all but threatened his life (Henchman to Tom: “Leo says if you end up on the wrong side, you take your chances like anybody else”).

Having done right by Leo, Tom still will not chase his hat. If Verna had chosen Tom over Leo, I suspect Tom would have tried to have had a relationship with her. Still, even though Verna does not know Tom fired the shots that killed Bernie (although she realizes he definitely had a hand it), Verna does not choose Tom. And so, heartless, Tom puts on his hat and ends up with nothing.

I admire Tom for his fierce loyalty to his code of ethics. Although he is incredibly flawed, he held true to his fealty to Leo. His life may have been far easier if he abandoned Leo or secretly betrayed him so that he could have Verna to himself. But he knowingly chose not to chase his own hat — he chose to give up on having “something wonderful” — rather than betray his friend for a woman.

The hat is a symbol of manhood. Men all wore hats in those days, back in the 20s and 30s, and in the gangster subculture of the movie, a subculture that is all about proving one’s toughness and manhood, through violence and twisted conceptions of honor (see Johnny Caspar’s absurd speech about ethics at the very opening of the movie). Men don’t wear hats in our softer era.

Tom has a nightmare about losing his hat (his manhood), a fear of failure.

When Leo beats him up, his hat flies off and someone picks it up and hands it to him (the old cliche “having your hat handed to you” means being beat up, IE being “outmanned” by a tougher man).

Johnny accuses Leo of giving him the high hat – IE, acting like a bigger man than Leo.

The guy Verna shoots has his toupee (his “hat”) pulled off by a little boy.

The big tough guy Drop Johnson is too big and tough to have the tiny hat in his apartment, which actually belongs to scrawny Mink.

The homosexual, captured and defeated (IE, unmanly) Bernie is taken out to Miller’s Crossing by Tom and the two henchmen to be killed. He begs for his life, for which he later confesses to feeling unmanly (”I guess I made kind of a fool of myself out there, bawling away like a twist”). He is not wearing a hat, while the 3 others are.

At the end, Tom has won by engineering the deaths of all his enemies, and he confidently and ostentatiously pulls his hat down very firmly and securely over his head.

To me the hat seems to signify deception/concealment — of weakness, of the truth, emotions etc. Each character has a weakness which they need protect, and which draws them into the convoluted story as other characters try to exploit them. Leo protects Verna, Verna protects Bernie, Bernie protects his income, Casper his “ethics” (?), and Tom, well… Leo? Gambling? this is ambiguous.
Either way, I think ambiguity is a major theme of the movie, as fits the “hat” motif and the noir genre as a whole. As one of the characters remarks “whats black becomes white and white white becomes black”. Also, did anyone else think of “Chinatown” when you see the Chinese characters on a sign outside of Casper’s house? Fun stuff

It’s a beautiful film.

You hide your emotions (under your hat) and everytime Tom loses his (cool and emotional control) it, the hat flies off. Slick, but they still will have issues with loyalty, which the Celtic people have plenty and how they express it and their deep emotions.

Tom knows Verna, and he knows Leo, he want’s them both in a way and without hurting either one of them, and that is his game. Yet he knows Verna is “damaged goods” and her loyalty is to her brother and he knows Leo’s loyalty to Verna and so he knows what he must do to protect his old friend Leo. Give up the girl and put himself in danger to protect him.

All of the characters are ethical to a degree with different levels of loyalty. Yet in the end, Tom is the one with the most heart by ending his friendship with Leo for the sake of all envolved.

A great complex film and the concept of loyalty and love in human relationships. The film is also to me about Tom, who moves from logic to his ability to rely on his “gut” for the best solution to a problem, that is Celtic all the way.

Ah Freud, you will never figure us out.

I really believe the Coen’s put things like the hat, the rug, the wallpaper etc in movies so they can sit back and watch people make things more than they are. It’s the man on the grassy gnoll and the lunar landing…we just want there to be more to it than what appears to be.

It’s a hat.

Hmmmm. I’ll have to think on that a bit more.

One of the Coens greatest strengths is their ability to straddle the fence when it comes to tone and mood. Some see nihilism, some see humor. I saw ambiguous symbolism, you saw a simple hat. More than any other filmmaker working today, multiple interpretations of their work seem equally valid.

Agreed with you on the music. Carter Burwell and the Coens mix like Kahlua and milk – perfectly.

Great comments. Hope you drop your two cents in the hat more often.

I love the scene where Tom beans the hood with a chair, prompting the little old guy to come in and kick his ass. Every scene with Jon Polito is gold, too.

I don’t think the hat was a major theme in the story. I think you might be trying to overanalyze a little bit. The hat is just a hat. Watch the scene again where Marcia Gay Harden jumps to conclusions about the dream – “No I didn’t chase after it. There’s nothing more foolish than a man chasing after a hat.” Or something like that.

The music is really top-notch. In particular, the scene where they shoot up Leo’s bedroom and the scene where they take Tom out to Miller’s Crossing.

Minor spoiler:

Rug (the guy with the toupee) was killed by Mink (Steve Buscemi). I think that was explained pretty explicitly in the film. It can certainly be confusing on the first viewing, though.

At the same time, there’s something very existential about him. Very much like Albert Camus’ The Stranger (L’homme Absurde). He just does whatever strikes him in the moment. Which is kind of what Chuck is saying.

Is it possible for him to be both controlled by his feelings and disconnected by them at the same time?

I think you’re right about the hat – it represents the fickle uncertainty of Tom’s character which, in a way, is almost the same thing as saying it exists for ambiguity’s sake.

Thanks for your thoughts!

Honestly, we could sit all day and discuss what that blessed hat means, but I feel like the Coens would snicker behind our backs if they knew. And that’s just irritating.