Film-Philosophy 16.

1 (2012)

Phyllis Frus and Christy Williams, eds. (2010) Beyond Adaptation: Essays on Radical Transformations of Original Works. London: Macfarland Press, 216pp. Frances Smith1
The recent success of much-lauded British picture The Kings Speech (Tom Hooper, 2010) at this years Academy Awards surprised few who observed the unstoppable wave of support for the film. Scholars of adaptations however will have noted with interest David Seidlers award for Best Original Screenplay. Of course, as director Tom Hooper noted in his speech for Best Film, that apparently the original screenplay was inspired by an unproduced play, which in turn borrowed from the recently discovered diaries of maverick speech therapist, Lionel Logue. The designators Adapted and Original no longer as iron-clad as once thought, this slim volume of essays on radical adaptations edited by Phyllis Frus and Christy Williams seems timely. As the title suggests, their book aims to move scholarship on adaptations beyond its conventionally understood manifestations in order to develop a study of transformation. Often conceived as a mysterious hinterland between literary and film criticism, (see Cartmell and Whelehan 1999, 4) research on adaptations from novel to film are by no means a new area of scholarship. Indeed, a steady stream of such work has been published since George Bluestones influential Novels into Film in 1957. Bluestone was the first to problematise what has come to be known as the fidelity paradigm, which continues to dominate popular and critical judgements on the merits of the adapted text in relation to its source. Whereas popular opinion tends to favour the source text, and to treat its corresponding adaptation with a degree of derision, Bluestone argued that if a film succeeds on its own merits, [fidelity to a source text] ceases to be problematic (Bluestone 1957, 114). Since then, work on adaptations carried out by both proponents of literary criticism and film studies have been influenced by the significant theoretical paradigms of those two disciplines, notably structuralism and narratology. The work of Brian McFarlane, for example, takes up Roland Barthes system of descriptors wholesale from S/Z to designate the function of narrative elements in a given text. Functions proper, and indices referring to narrative events and descriptive information respectively are used to examine whether it is ever truly possible to adapt a narrative conveyed in a literary signifying system, to that of a film (McFarlane 1996, 13).
1

University of Warwick: smithfce@yahoo.com 281

Film-Philosophy ISSN 1466-4615

Film-Philosophy 16.1 (2012) Robert Stams work likewise follows the structuralist tradition, with his assertion of tracks of signification. There, the single written track offered by the literary novel is contrasted with the multiple tracks of the cinemas audio-visual experience. As a result of these widely differing signifying systems, these structuralist critics concluded, alteration of the literary source was inevitable. Equally though, following Bluestone, fidelity was of little concern if the resulting film was successful on its own terms. Unintentional adaptations were addressed by critics influenced by Grard Genettes work on intertextuality, which allowed for the possibility of the audience participating in the reading of a text and find their own connections with other, unrelated works regardless of the authors expressed intent. Frus and Williams aim to provide examples of texts which relate to their sources in a manner currently unaccounted for under existing scholarship. The editors assert that these texts are transformations, since they move beyond mere adaptation and transform their source text into something new that works independently of its source (Frus and Williams 2010, 3). Under this new system, adaptation is figured as a text changed to suit a new purpose or environment but...the new text is recognisable as a relation of the earlier text (Frus and Williams 2010, 3). To illustrate, Frus and Williams invite the reader to consider Clueless, (Amy Heckerling, 1995), where the narrative of Jane Austens Emma is loosely transposed to a 1990s Los Angeles high school. In contrast, the 1996 film Emma, (Dir. Douglas McGrath, 1996) starring Gwyneth Paltrow as the eponymous heroine in 1880s England, is very clearly signalling its intention to remain as true as possible to the plot, setting and dialogue of its literary precedent. Contrasting the two, Frus and Williams observe that as the transformation text, Clueless takes up the broad narrative of Jane Austens novel as a platform to create another work entirely. Indeed, the editors point out that it is possible to view and enjoy Clueless without being aware of its literary inspiration. It is then this loose relation between two texts, observable and enriching though not essential to the reading or viewing experience which finally distinguishes the transformation from the adaptation. Transformation as a new critical category has the advantage of allowing the editors to bypass the existing scholarship on adaptations since by definition such work does not address this newly-created class of text. The study of transformation, say the authors, calls attention to the process of change and interrelation between two or more different texts and media. As such, the fidelity criterion that has dogged so many researchers working on adaptations is usefully obfuscated. More interestingly still, Frus and Williams evidently intend transformation as an umbrella term to cover all manner of relationships between two different texts, dismissing what they describe as the fancy terms proffered by Julia Kristeva and Genette (Frus and Williams 2010, 5) which describe a specific textual association. The Film-Philosophy ISSN 1466-4615 282

Film-Philosophy 16.1 (2012) volumes essays attest to this intent, since further to the conventional novelto-film manifestation, they address multiple genres of transformation. The flexibility and seeming universality of transformation the great strengths of this new critical category - unfortunately lead to one of its more significant flaws. Indeed, grouping parallel texts, such as Valerie Martins 1990 novel, Mary Reilly, in the same rubric as, say, American McGees successful video game, Alice, and indeed feminist revisionist fairytales, necessarily incurs a loss of nuance of the specificities of the media and narrative transformed. The volumes structure reflects this conceptual difficulty; arguing that the essays could not be grouped, the editors have left to the reader the tricky task of navigating fifteen apparently haphazardly-ordered essays. As previously discussed, the editors are dismissive of what they believe to be unnecessarily precise terminology favoured by literary theorists. However, the books central thesis would arguably have benefitted from more particular conceptualisations sitting under transformation as an overarching umbrella term. Categorising the essays according to this scheme would have enabled the editors to examine the threads underlying different types of transformation in greater depth and specificity. Frus and Williams are nonetheless to be congratulated on having amassed such a diverse range of essays, which demonstrate the validity of transformation as a discrete critical category with varying degrees of success. Despite the editors expressed reluctance to categorise their contributors, broadly speaking, its possible to identify six types of transformation in the volume: transformations dealing with unusual media, essays on multiple texts transformed to single or multiple media, unintentional transformations, Disney-fication, parallel literary texts and the novel to film transformation. In terms of their ability to demonstrate the need for a category that moves beyond mere adaptation, the most successful essays of the volume are those of Cathlena Martin and Julia Round, whose work deals with transformations of canonical texts into unusual and regrettably illexplored - media. Martins Wonderlands become quite strange deals with the transformation of Lewis Carrolls canonical Alice In Wonderland, and Alice Through the Looking Glass into a successful adult-oriented video game. Likewise, Julia Rounds essay covers the transformation of Shakespeares plays into Neil Gaimans acclaimed comic strip, The Sandman. In their treatment of significantly disparate media, and the conversion from high, canonical culture to mass-market product, these essays both demonstrate the potential reach of transformation, and highlight a significant area for further research. Commendable though their endeavours at highlighting media that are so often overlooked in adaptations, neither Martin nor Round adequately explore the effect of this media on the transformed text. For instance, Film-Philosophy ISSN 1466-4615 283

Film-Philosophy 16.1 (2012) though Martin notes that Alice has assumed an adult appearance in the video-game, she does not explore the potential effects that controlling the avatars movements and exercising (albeit limited) decisions on her behalf arguably the central pillars of gaming - might be to the relationship with the literary-informed player, or with its source text. Likewise, Round does not discuss the specific effects that the choice of media has on the Shakespeare play texts. Transformation further provides the opportunity to explore how a single narrative trope has been taken up across a variety of media over time. Alissa Burgers essay for instance, studies the multiple transformations that have occurred from L Frank Baums childrens book The Wizard of Oz, to its eponymous MGM musical adaptation; from Gregory McGuires novel Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West, to the hit Broadway musical Wicked. Both Burger and Deborah Ross, whose essay deals similarly with the M Butterfly narrative across multiple media, are keen to draw attention to the changes in the narrative that occur in their transformation. Likewise, both Burger and Ross analyse the evolving representations of femininity and orientalism respectively, over time. Here again, changes in narrative across multiple media are discussed at the expense of the specificities of the media concerned, bringing a mythic effect to the narratives discussed. Though the introduction makes much of the unintended transformation in the form of intertextuality, only one, Phyllis Frus essay on the potential intertextual readings offered by Jane Campions film The Piano, appears in the volume. Though Frus oddly does not cite Genettes work on transtextuality, her piece effectively demonstrates how an attentive viewer can participate in the reading of the film and observe the instance of multiple prior texts in an otherwise apparently original screenplay. Indeed, Frus argues that the cinematic style of the film the dramatic lighting, stated intention of the production designer and costume of the central protagonist, Ada - lends itself well to an interpretation as a transformation of the Bluebeard narrative. Deploying numerous examples from the film, Frus argument is certainly plausible. However, the introduction of intertextual reading as a form of transformation arguably renders the concept too broad to bear critical use-value. Since the Walt Disney animated film versions of popular fairy tales have come to subsume the original in popular consciousness, it is perhaps to be expected that several essays in the volume deal with this particular type of transformation, termed Disneyfication (Frus and Williams 2010, 16). Of these, the most successful is Lan Dongs exploration of Mulan (Tony Bancroft and Barry Cook, 1998); the transformation from Chinese folk tale to globalised Disney musical for children. Dong observes how greater gender subversion is allowed for in the Disney film than exists in the original tale since Mulans greatest successes are accomplished as a woman, Film-Philosophy ISSN 1466-4615 284

Film-Philosophy 16.1 (2012) rather than in male disguise. Likewise, though she fears chastisement for her deception and cross-dressing, Mulan instead receives military honours, and thus institutional acceptance, from the Emperor as a transgressing woman. The result, Dong contends, is a transcultural text (Frus and Williams 2010, 165) which is neither Chinese nor fully American. More problematic is Marc DiPaolos piece on the transformation of Disney heroine Belle, of Beauty and the Beast (Gary Trousdale and Kirk Wise, 1991) into part of the Disney Princess product line. DiPaolos thesis is that Belle, a liberated woman in the Disney narrative, (Frus and Williams 2010, 169) has been transformed into the dead-eyed brunette component of a Disney Princess product line, comprising dolls Halloween costumes, DVDs and video games (Frus and Williams 2010, 168) and embodying idealised, heteronormative femininity. DiPaolos assertion that the Belle of the 1991 film was ever a feminist heroine is distinctly questionable. However, it is the lack of consumer research methodology which renders the essay barely credible. Indeed, without engaging with the Disney Princess target market, we cannot know what use-value these dolls and video games represent for the young girls at whom such products are aimed. Frus and Williams have included a number of essays examining parallel texts; that is, literary texts which bring marginal characters of canonical works to the centre so as to illuminate the assumptions and omissions made in the original. A key example from the volume is Laurie Leechs essay on the Mary Reilly novel, a parallel text exploring Robert Louis Stevensons The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde from the point of view of Jekylls servant. Certainly, Leechs piece, and indeed, those of Stella Bolaki and Gauthier Marmi, highlight some interesting points. Nonetheless, its debatable whether explorations of parallel texts from literary source to another literary work - belong in the same volume as others dealing with radical transformations between different media. As with intertextual reading, the possibility that the editors current conceptualisation of transformation is simply too broad to bear any use value is again raised. Essays demonstrating transformation least successfully are those which examine what might otherwise be described as unusual novel to film adaptations. The contributions themselves were certainly of interest, however their inclusion in the volume obfuscates the aims otherwise clearly stated in the books introduction. Indeed, though Antje S Anderson states that the Alfonso Cuarn film Great Expectations, is a transformation of the Charles Dickens novel of the same name, her essay treads familiar territory, exploring the differences between novel and film. Anne M Reefs study of the implications of using the Tsotsi-taal in Gavin Hoods award-winning film Tsotsi has greater potential. Since the book on which the film is based was written in English, clearly the dominant language of international Film-Philosophy ISSN 1466-4615 285

Film-Philosophy 16.1 (2012) cinema, Reef considers the film to be a potent post-colonial statement (Frus and Williams 2010, 57). Conceptualised on a spectrum rather than defined precisely, its perhaps not surprising that the editors have compiled such a variety of texts with which to demonstrate transformation. The wide range of essays certainly makes the volume a satisfying, esoteric read. However, if the promotion of transformation as a new area of study is the aim, then it may have been preferable to focus on fewer contributions and grant those writers greater space to explore their texts to their fullest potential. Certainly, where the essays come in at around ten pages each in length, the reader is often left with many unanswered questions. Nonetheless, those researching adaptations will certainly find this volume of interest for the broad range of media and texts not otherwise considered elsewhere. Researchers with a specific interest in any of the texts addressed in the volume will likewise find the corresponding essay an interesting supplement to their reading. With transformation, Frus and Williams have undeniably made a significant contribution to adaptation studies. The definition and conceptualisation of this critical category is by no means complete. Indeed, as the sheer breadth of the essays in the volume demonstrates, transformation will require the imposition of more specific sub-categories before literary critics and film scholars alike can move, as the editors clearly have, beyond adaptation.

Bibliography Bluestone, George (1957) Novels into Film, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press Cartmell, Deborah and Whelehan, Imelda, eds. (1999) Adaptations: From Text to Screen, Screen to Text, London: Routledge Frus, Phyllis and Williams, Christy, eds. (2010) Beyond Adaptation: Essays on Radical Transformations of Original Works, London: McFarland McFarlane, Brian (1996) Novel to Film: An Introduction to the Theory of Adaptation, Oxford: Clarendon Press Naremore, James, ed. (2000) Film Adaptation, London: The Athlone Press

Film-Philosophy ISSN 1466-4615

286