Hutcheon argues that adaptations are an important aspect to all works of art. He believes adaptations offer different perspectives of the piece of art. Many times, Hutcheon argues, a new adaptation of an old work with revitalize and bring new life to the work, and often bring the work of art into a new generation. It is clear that he does not agree with fidelity, because he states that art is not always meant to be imitated, and rather, an adaptation is open to expand on the work. Hutcheon also talks about how technology has opened up different and new forms of mediums for art and story telling, but also how it affected imagination and fidelity. A good point about fidelity he makes, is that when a work is adapted from a classic, people are much more critical of it, and afraid to lose the "meaning", however, when monetary gain is on the line, producers and film screen adapters are more likely to change the adaptation in order to make a more successful film and more money. I know, personally, that I get upset when seeing a movie of a favorite book and it has been drastically changed, or cut, not for adaptive change, but because it will help the backers of the movie become more successful.
Questions:
1). Are different-media adaptations more successful than same-media?
2). If so, does this affect classic works or more modern works? If not, why might same-media adaptations have a harder time gaining an audience than the original work?
No comments:
Post a Comment