| |
Dramatica Theory Book
Chapter
39: Storytelling--Reception & Adaptation
A Word About Adaptation
"Read the book;
see the movie!" "Now a major motion picture!" "A novelization..."
"A new musical based on the stage play..." "...based on
the book..." "...based on the hit movie!" "The timeless
story of..." "...a classic tale..." "...updated for
today's audience..." "...colorized..." "...reformatted
to fit your screen..." "edited for television."
It's the same old story. Or is it? Is a story really the same when translated
from one medium to another and if not, how is it different? What qualities
must be changed to maintain a story's integrity? To adapt adeptly
an author needs to know the answers to these questions.
Before we can investigate answers, it would be prudent to define some
terms. First, what do we mean by "adaptation?" Simply, adaptation
is the process of translating a story from one medium to another. What
is a "medium?" A medium is a physical facility for storing information
and the processes involved in retrieving it. Finally, what is "story?"
For our purposes we shall define story as any information an author wishes
to communicate to an audience (including considerations, experiences,
and feelings).
So, putting it all together, adaptation is the process of translating
information from one physical facility for storage and retrieval to another
in such a way that it can be communicated to an audience. Sounds pretty
cold, doesn't it. That's because this is simply the logistic description
of adaptation.
A more organic description might be: Adaptation is the process of reproducing
an audience experience in another medium. That has a better feel to it,
but is much less precise. Also, we can clearly see a difference in the
purpose of each approach, as indicated above when we spoke of the new
story's identity versus its integrity. One seeks to maintain the parts,
the other to be true to the whole. And that is the paradox at the heart
of the adapter's dilemma: should authors strive to accurately recreate
the structure or to faithfully reproduce the dynamics? More to the point,
why can't we do both?
The answer lies with the media themselves. Every medium has its own strengths
and weaknesses. Often what can be easily accomplished in one medium is
either difficult or even impossible to achieve in another. Books are not
very good at directly communicating sounds or visual atmospheres. The
motion picture, on the other hand, is a poor medium for directly communicating
a characters' inner thoughts and feelings.
In each case, indirect means must be employed to accomplish what might
be directly communicated in the other medium. To successfully adapt a
work, an author must determine what to add or remove in order to achieve
the same effect as the original medium.
It would seem that adaptations will always fail to capture some aspect
of the original, either in substance or essence. That is true, but it
does not have to be a fatal problem. An audience tends to regard certain
aspects of a story as being essential. As long as an adaptation retains
and/or recreates those essential elements, the audience will find the
effort successful.
Beyond the essential, other elements may be more or less fully developed
than in the original, providing something of the same flavor while allowing
the latitude to tailor the piece for the new medium. The question then
becomes how to determine which items are essential and how deeply they
need to be developed, on a case by case basis.
The first step is to do a complete analysis of the original work.
Just reading the book a hundred times or watching the movie until images
are imbedded on your retina is not good enough. You don't want to know
a work just from the inside out, but you want to know it from the outside
in as well -- the way the audience sees it. To develop both an understanding
and an empathy for the story, it helps to examine it in terms of the Four
Stages of Communication.
The Four Stages of Communication describe the manner in which the author's
original intent makes its way from his mind into the minds of his audience.
Stage one is Story forming, in which the author first defines the
message for himself. Stage two is Story encoding, where the author
comes up with images and events to symbolize the message. Stage three
is Story weaving, which is the process of arranging these images
into scenes and acts. Stage four is Story Reception, which describes
the relationship of the audience to the work. By analyzing how each of
these stages functions in a story, an author can make sure that the adaptation
will connect at all levels of appreciation.
|