Analyzing Film Adaptations From Literature English Literature Essay

To this date, the employment of adaptation theories to novels has yet to reach its true potentials’. Although The Harry Potter novel series are popularly known around the globe and has attained the world’s best seller status, sadly, there are not many critical studies relating to its adaptations. Most critics examine and evaluate each adaptation rigorously conforming to the principle of how faithful the adaptation remains to the text. This gives emphasis to the fundamental approach, fidelity. Hypothetically, a critic may naturally compare an adapted film to his or her own interpretation rather than to its source. In such a case, the critic’s view often contradicts with other critics, especially with a novel as complicated as Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone. In other words, each reader tends naturally to “adapt” a book that he or she reads and then think of the novel in a certain way. “The novel tells the tale of a young wizard” or, “The novel focuses on the wizardry society in a magical world” or a synthesis of any number of views. Each view, each reading or each adaptation-is unique and remarkable, and none of these perceptions can be considered right or wrong. These perceptions are similar to the ideas presented in a renowned film adaptation article entitled “The Resistance to Theory”, written by concept theorist Paul De Man. The idea presented by de Man concentrates on the bond between a text and its meaning, ultimately ascertaining that it is unfeasible to attain a definitive meaning for whichever text. De Man stresses that

As we can see, adaptation is as old as the film itself and shows no indication of weakening. Greg Jenkins, one of the authors of Kubrick and the Art of Adaptation: Three Novels, Three Films, considers adaptation “as a presence that is woven into the very fabric of film culture” (Jenkins 8). Even though, Jenkins’s statement is in accordance with the theory of adaptation but a definite theory does not exist. Scholars and critics constantly excogitate on adaptation, yet they don’t seem to reach a definite conclusion on what constitutes an adaptation to be a success or a failure.

“[Adaptation] represents such a dark and enigmatic thread that it has elicited disparate and sometimes diametric opinions. Even among those who champion faithful adaptations, there is no clear formula concerning how generally to implement the procedure, or afterwards how to evaluate the procedure’s success or failure” (Jenkins 8).

The predicament of adaptation depends on many external sources. Plagued by indefiniteness and uncertainties the field of adaptation constantly struggles to address questions such as what is an Author? Who is the author of this work? What is a Text? Which text should be given importance: the novel or the film? Should an adapted film be indebted to its source, if this is true then how is this possible? Should a film remain faithful to its source? Is an adapted film merely a version of the source text or can it be perceived as an autonomous work of art? Over the years, these and many others questions have endlessly tormented the processes involved in the study adaptation.

This dissertation does not pretend to acknowledge all the ambiguities of adaptation, nor does it profess to offer resolutions to the never ending issues pertaining to the works of adaptation. Yet, it does attempt to offer a possible solution in terms of theoretical and practical. It is theoretical in the sense that it probes the viewers to consider what a particular adaptation is doing with a film; Practical in the sense that it attempts to bring about a method by applying the theory to a sample case study.

For many years studies pertaining film adaptation focused mainly on how faithful adaptations were towards their sources and naturally fidelity at that point was their prime concern. As Linda Hutcheon affirms in her book A Theory of Adaptation, it has only been this way by tradition and that “an adaptation’s double nature does not mean…that proximity or fidelity to the adapted text should be the criterion of judgment or the focus of analysis”( Hutcheon 6). Inspired by Hutcheon’s statement, this dissertation examines the adaptation of Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, the film and the novel. The dissertation’s theoretical discussion is based on Linda Hutcheon’s ideas about originality and how adaptations can be treated as literally adaptations and not as a parasite feeding of the novel. I will begin the introduction of the dissertation with a short presentation of the novel and the film and their respective author and screen writers.

Jenkins, Greg, et al. Stanley Kubrick and the Art of Adaptation: Three Novels, Three Films. Jefferson: McFarland & Company, 1997.

University Microfilms, University Microfilms International. Dissertation abstracts international: The humanities and social sciences. Michigan: University Microfilms International, 2007.

It makes complete sense to say that any discussion pertaining to a text, an adaptation takes place. The existence of literary criticism stems from this principle. The study of film adaptation allows researchers and scholars the opportunity to study film adaptations using precise and tangible boundaries. To be more accurate, by examining and studying the processes involved in adapting a novel to film would be highly beneficial to critics. They will have the opportunity to better drawback understand the processes by which texts are adapted. Ironically, Majority of adaptation critics choose to overlook this fact because these critics feel the study of adaptation somehow threatens their analysis. Then again, this ambiguity can be seen as an advantage rather than a drawback. Awareness of the basic history of film adaptation and its supporting theories helps in bringing this principle into focus.

Jenkins, Greg. Stanley Kubrick and the Art of Adaptation: Three Novels, Three Films.

Jefferson: McFarland, 1997. Pg 8.

(Jenkins, Nabokov and King)

McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers; illustrated edition