Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Adaptation and Illustr - NEWELL

    Uploaded by

    Anonymous gp78PX1Wcf
    13 views17 pages

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    13 views17 pages

    Adaptation and Illustr - NEWELL

    Uploaded by

    Anonymous gp78PX1Wcf

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 17
    CHAPTER 27 ADAPTATION AND ILLUSTRATION A Cross-Disciplinary Approach KATE NEWELL ‘Wer the field ofadaptation studies, “adapiation” has come to signify a range of media transactions, No longer limited to novel-to-ilm transpositions, adaptation encom- ‘passes negotiations between novels, comics, films, games, songs, animation, radio, ‘and a host of other media vehicles. Yet within this collective advancement, few stu ies have considered or even mentioned illustrations in illustrated novels as adaptations. Illustrations have been identified as precursors to film adaptations, as Kamilla Eliott, has observed (Rethinking 31-76), but are rarely theorized as adaptations in their own, right. This oversight reflects a tendency Lass Flletrom has noticed in academic writ- ing to speak of intermedial phenomena in isolation. As he points out: "Most studies of illustration ate performed within the context of illustration only... Furthermore, most stadies of adaptation prefer not to discuss anything but adaptation, which is generally ‘understood as nove-to-film-adaptation” Adaptations” 14). Even the many scholars responding to Linda Hutcheon’ invitation °o move beyond the novelfilm dyad (xii) hhave seldom considered the relation between adaptation andillustration. While discussions of illustration in adaptation studies are rare, the few instances, indicate an increasingly complex view ofthe impact of ilustated novels on film adap. tations, References to illustration in early adaptation studies tended to be dismissive. Geoffrey Wagner, for example, describes Hollywood's “least satisfactory” and “puer ‘adaptations as “book illustration{s}" (222-23). More recently, however, writers like ‘Kamilla Elliot Jadith Buchanan, and Thomas Leitch have located illustrated novels and. film adaptations alonga spectrum of intermedia practices. In Rethinking the Novell Fm Debate Eliott demonstrates that worcV/imaze, novellfilm debates are not particular to studies of film adaptation but have moorings in literary and at historical debates on the formal and aesthetic qualities ofart, many of which played outin nineteenth andearly- ‘wentieth-century conversations about the ole of illustration, Buchanan and Leitch 478_ ADAPTATION AND INTERTEXTUALITY examine methods by which film adaptations sgaal fidelity to a source text by approxi mating the composition or visual tne of tsllastations (Buchanan 23; Leitch, Fil 38, 209; see also Newell 304-6). Te insights ofthese writers provide a backdrop for some of| the issues considered here ‘Thiesay evolves rom two related questions: Why hasillustration generally not been brought under the rubric of adaptation, and why have adaptation studies and lustra tion studies taken largely diverging paths? To addess these questions, 1 tuen fist to definitions of “adaptation” and “illustration” and argue thatthe fanctions highlighted in particular definitions have shaped the tone of the discourse on film adaptation and {lkstrations in novels and have contributed to the insularity oftheir study. Nxt, polnt to issues common to both studies of adaptation and illustration —such as fidelity to a source text and the audience’ role in interpreting and authenticating particular word {mage relationships—in order to demonstrate tat despite ostensble ferences, stud- ies of film adaptation and ofilustrated novels foreground similar concerns. The greater part ofthe esay explores thre dichotomies thatrevel three common misperceptions concerning adaptations and illsteations and argues that assumptions related to the capabilities and limitations of media bave contributed to divisions i the study of film auaptations and ustrated novels Definitions of “adaptation” and “ilustaton” are surprisingly sarce in adaptation studies and illustration studies. As Sarah Cardvell and Thomas Leitch have pointed out, few writers actually define adaptation; instead, most describe the process by which adaptations come into being or astess the result (Cardwell 10-15; Li “Adaptation? 87-89). Linda Hutcheon is one exeption: she defines adaptation as" stended, deliberate, announced revisation of «particular worl” (170). She demas-

    You might also like