Literature and Cinema from "Adaptation" to Re-creation: Coping with the Complexity of Human Recollection
Abstract
Early 20th-century avant-gardes put a premium on the notion of "originality" and so created a cultural context in which "adaptation" -- in particular, lit-to cinema adaptation -- later came to be construed by film theory as a kind of derivative, inferior notion. This article offers the proof, based on work on the little-known original Russian sources, that none other than Èizenshtein opined differently, so much so that he preferred to argue instead for the use of the term "re-creation"; and that later semiotic theory, especially thanks to Iurii Lotman, provides us with the tools to develop the "re-creation" concept fully.In the process of re-creation, which is always a process of cultural re-contextualization, the original literary complexity lost in the transmutation must be made up in specific cinematic ways, in order to offer a final re-created artefact worthy of recollection by human society. In times of an overburdened human ability to remember historic sufferings, re-created artefacts that lose information vis-a-vis the original will be quite justly forgotten.
On this basis, the article concludes with an elaboration on contemporary Italian cinema -- especially some commercially successful noirs -- drawn from literature (or rather, books of fiction) and pinpoints the nature of one of that type of cinema's recurrent shortcomings. The essential defect of such films is identified in their inability to make up by cinematic means for the loss of complexity which they endure in the transition from one medium to another. This is all the more true when, as in the case of the noirs examined here, complexity is already scant in the original books in the first place.
Downloads
References
Cartmell, Deborah – Whelehan, Imelda (eds.), Adaptations: From Text to Screen, Screen to Text, London, Routledge, 1999.
Dostoevskii, Fëdor Mikhailovich, Zapiski iz podpol’ia (1864), Polnoe sobranie sochinenii v tridtsati tomakh, Vol. 5: Povesti i rasskazy 1862-1866. Igrok, Leningrad, Nauka, 1973.
Id., Notes from Underground (1864). The Double, Ed. Jessie Coulson. Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1972.
Èizenstejn, Sergej M., Izbrannye proizvedeniia v shesti tomakh, Vol. 4., Moskva, Iskusstvo, 1966.
Id., Stili di regia. Narrazione e messa in scena: Leskov, Dumas, Zola, Dos-toevskij, Gogol', Eds. Pietro Montani and Alberto Cioni. Venice, Marsilio, 1993.
Fellini, Federico, Intervista sul cinema. Ed. Giovanni Grazzini, Ba-ri, Laterza, (Saggi Tascabili Laterza 96), 1983.
Id., Comments on Film, Ed. Giovanni Grazzini, Trans. Joseph Henry, Fresno, Ca., The Press at California State University Fresno, 1988.
Genette, Gérard, Palimpsestes: La littérature au second degré, Paris, Seuil Points, 1982.
Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von, The Permanent Goethe. Ed. Thom-as Mann. N.Y., The Dial Press, 1958 [1948].
Id., Faust, Trans. Walter Kaufmann, N.Y., Doubleday, 1961.
Id., Wilhelm Meisters Wanderjahre. Maximen und Reflexionen. Ed. Gonthier-Louis Fink et al. Vol. 17 of Sämtliche Werke nach Epochen seines Schaffens. Münchner Ausgabe. Ed. Karl Richter et al. Mu-nich, Carl Hanser, 1991.
Gottfried von Strassburg, Tristan. Eds. Karl Marold (1906) and Werner Schröder, Berlin, De Gruyter, 1969.
Griffith, James, Adaptations as Imitations: Films From Novels, Newark, Del., University of Delaware Press, 1997.
Heinrich von Aue, Der arme Heinrich, Eds. Hermann Paul and Ludwig Wolff, Tübingen, Max Niemeyer, 1966.
Hutcheon, Linda, A Theory of Adaptation, New York, Routledge, 2006.
Lotman, Iurii M., “K postroeniiu teorii vzaimodeistviia kul'tur (Semio-ticheskii aspekt)” (“Toward a Theory of Reciprocal Interaction Be-tween Cultures: Semiotic Aspect”), Trudy po romano-germanskoi filologii. 92-113. (Uchenye zapiski tartuskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta 646), 1983.
Id., La semiosfera. L’asimmetria e il dialogo nelle strutture pensanti, Ed. Simonetta Salvestroni. Venice, Marsilio, 1985.
Id., Kul'tura i vzryv, Moscow, Gnosis, 1992.
McFarlane, Brian, Novel To Film: An Introduction to the Theory of Ad-aptation, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1996.
Mitry, Jean, Esthétique et psychologie du cinéma, Vol. 1., Paris, Édi-tions universitaires, 1963.
Id., The Aesthetics and Psychology of the Cinema, Trans. Christo-pher King. Bloomington, Ind., Indiana University Press, 1997.
Nagel, Bert, Staufische Klassik. Deutsche Dichtung um 1200, Hei-delberg, Stiehm, 1977.
Naremore, James, Film Adaptation, New Brunswick, N.J., Rutgers University Press, 2000.
Orr, John, and Colin Nicholson (eds.), Cinema and Fiction: New Modes of Adapting, 1950-1990, Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press, 1992.
Pasolini, Pier Paolo, Empirismo eretico (1972), Milan, Garzanti, 1991.
Petrarca, Francesco, Le Familiari. Scelta, Ed. Enrico Bianchi, Intr. Guido Martellotti, Milan-Naples, Ricciardi, 1955; n.e. Turin, Einaudi, 1977.
Prédal, René, Le cinéma français depuis 1945, Paris, Nathan Uni-versité, 1991.
Shklovskii, Viktor, Literatura i kinematograf. Berlin: Russkoe uni-versal'noe izdatel'stvo. (Vseobshchaia biblioteka 51), 1923.
Id., “Letteratura e cinema.”, I formalisti russi nel cinema (1971), Ed. Giorgio Kraiski, Milan, Garzanti, 1987.
Stam, Robert, “Beyond Fidelity: The Dialogics of Adaptation.”, Nar-emore 2000: 54-76.
Testa, Carlo, “Dalla letteratura al cinema: adattamento o ri-creazione?”, Bianco & Nero 62:1 (Jan.-March, 2001): 37-51.
Id., Italian Cinema and Modern European Literatures, Westport, Conn., Greenwood Praeger, 2002a.
Id., Masters of Two Arts: Re-creation of European Literatures in Italian Cinema, Toronto, University of Toronto Press, 2002b.
Visconti, Luchino, Interview with Anne Capelle in Arts et loisirs, Apr. 1967, reproduced in Id., Luchino Visconti cinéaste, Eds. Alain Sanzio – Paul-Louis Thirard, Paris, Persona, 1984.
Copyright Notice
You are free to copy, distribute and transmit the work, and to adapt the work. You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
