"In An Artist's Studio" Illustrated

In An Artist's Studio

One face looks out from all his canvasses,

One selfsame figure sits or walks or leans;

We found her hidden just behind those screens,

That mirror gave back all her loveliness.

A queen in opal or in ruby dress,

A nameless girl in freshest summer greens,

A saint, an angel; -- every canvass means

The same one meaning, neither more nor less.

He feeds upon her face by day and night,

And she with true kind eyes looks back on him

Fair as the moon and joyful as the light;

Not wan with waiting, not with sorrow dim;

Not as she is, but was when hope shone bright;

Not as she is, but as she fills his dream.

Description

This collage, made with Christina Rossetti's poem and portraits and details by Botticelli would seem an unlikely match. Not only did they work in different periods but also under different artistic paradigms. However, it is the content which makes them compliment each other.

The poem is Rossetti's reaction to her brother, the Pre-Raphalite painter Dante Gabriel Rossetti's use of his female models. She notes, somewhat disdainfully, how each paining takes something away from the model and how the artist's relationship can be an exploitiative one. She explains how the painter's obsession with his model ("feeds upon her face" "not as she is, but as she fills his dream") has become detached from her and intimates that the model might have some unreturned romantic interest in him.

This ties in well with the Botticelli paintings. All of them depict the same model, Simonetta Vespucci, regarded as the most beautiful woman of Renaissance Florence. It has been suggested that she and Botticelli had an affair, although there is no evidence to prove this. She does, however frequent his paintings at an astonishing rate. Simonetta died in 1476 from tubercholosis, only 22 years old having turned the heads of artists and statesmen alike. When Botticelli completed his Birth of Venus, from which the first detail is taken, nine years later, he was very much doing what Rossetti described in the poem. Who knows, perhaps he might have been doing so all the time.

At any rate, the fascination led Botticelli to request to be buried at her feet when he died. Their graves can be seen in the Church of Ognissanti in Florence. 

Lydia and Wickham

This essay aims to provide a close analysis of the representations of the sub-plot concerning Lydia and Wickham from Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice in two film adaptations of the novel (i). These two films will be the 2005 film Pride & Prejudice by director Joe Wright and director Gurinder Chadha’s 2004 Bride & Prejudice. Throughout, comparisons and investigations into the adaptive relationship to the original will be made and the terminology used in this endeavour will be taken from Deborah Cartmell et.al. and Julie Sanders (ii). Seeing as the analysis of the representations of the sub-plot in these two adaptations would be highly deficient without a similar one of characters and characterisation, such will also be provided. Mise-en-scène will only be treated indirectly and when relevant.

Jane Austen’s hypotext sports a number of sub-plots all of which can be labelled based on their protagonists. The primary plot, of course, concerns Elizabeth Bennet’s relationship with Mr. Darcy, while a number of sub-plots, like the Elizabeth-Collins sub-plot or the Jane-Bingley sub-plot work in conjunction with the primary plot. However, due to this interconnectivity, there are some challenges concerned with considering sub-plot as distinct from primary plot or indeed other sub-plots. This essay will consider the sub-plot where Lydia and Wickham elope and are made to marry with relevant instances of foreshadow and indications of the affair. It must, however, at times refer to the Darcy-Wickham sub-plot since this is defining the Wickham character in hypo- and hypertext. Furthermore, while elements of the sub-plot affect the primary plot, so do elements from the primary plot affect the sub-plot. When Darcy exposes Wickham for a scoundrel, he lays the foundation for the Lydia-Wickham sub-plot while this in return gives Darcy an opportunity to show his virtue.

Finally, it is worth noting how the sub-plots serve a purpose in relation to the primary plot. In many cases, the protagonists of sub-plots function as foils to those if the primary plot emphasising different qualities in these. The sub-plot in question is certain to appear in adaptations, because the relationship between Elizabeth and Darcy is explained in contrast to the relationship between Lydia and Wickham through the way these relationships engage with each other.

Gurinder Chadha’s Bride & Prejudice

Chadha’s film Bride & Prejudice is a complex adaptation of Austen’s hypotext influenced by both Bollywood and Hollywood cinema. It is set primarily in modern India, but also in England and the US. It follows the plot of the original closely, centring on the adapted Bennet family, the Bakshi, and their quest for acceptable marriages for the Bakshi daughters. Like Chadha’s 2002 film Bend it like Beckham, it enters into a complex social discourse addressing issues such as multiculturalism post-colonialism and globalisation. It also comments on heritage cinema versions of the hypotext with its own brand of national cinema (iii). It thus closely engages with its literary hypotext in a variety of ways. This chapter will study the representation of the Lydia-Wickham sub-plot in Chadha’s adaptation, here identifiable as the Lakhi-Wickham sub-plot.

Like the hypotext, the film contains a number of sub-plots amongst which the Lakhi-Wickham sub-plot figures. The adaptation of a plot from literature into the film medium often entails a shortening of both the plot itself and the reduction and sometimes omission of subplots. This is because directors would find that the timeframe available is unable to cater for all the plot elements present in the hypotext. In Bride & Prejudice, the Lydia-Wickham sub-plot is maintained but relegated further to the margins and somehow altered in order to suit the medium. All the basic constituents of the sub-plot are present; the exposition of characters, the elopement and the resolution but much of what is represented through the spoken and written dialogue and internal monologue of other characters in the hypotext is substituted for brief visual or significant spoken representations in the hypertext. Thus, the exposition of the characters, the signifiers of their romantic involvement and the resolution are shown rather than told (iv). This technique condenses the sub-plot and allows the primary plot to fit within the timeframe of the film.

The film also alters the original sub-plot somewhat. It includes a growing affair between Lakhi and Wickham. This might be a necessary addition in order to explain the transition of Wickham’s affections from Lalita, the adapted Elizabeth, to Lakhi or a commentary on the lack of such in the hypotext, where the elopement appears suddenly. Furthermore, the resolution appears on a level which is visually more available to the audience than a more “faithful” representation of the equivalent in the hypotext would indicate (v). In the film, the adapted Darcy and Lalita tracks down Wickham and where he in Austen’s novel is made to marry Lydia, he loses a fistfight against Darcy in the film and Lakhi recognises her folly as opposed to Lydia. This is an approximation of the resolution to a modern setting and a modern audience where the crucial involvement of Darcy is retained. Finally, the fundamental conflict in Lydia and Wickham’s elopement, the romantic union outside cultural norms, is maintained although not as explicitly as in the hypotext because this would require more playtime. The extra flaw, Wickham’s moral deficiencies and his earlier elopement with Georgiana Darcy, was in Austen’s novel introduced well before his elopement with Lydia. In the film, however, these faults had to be altered. They had to be introduced closer to the actual elopement in order to keep the suspense of the plot and within the time frame of the film. Also, more of the faults from the hypotext had to be approximated, despite time concerns, in order to make the unsuitability of the union apparent to a modern, Western audience who unlike a more traditional Bollywood audience would not necessarily consider the union immoral. After the elopement has taken place, Darcy reveals that Wickham had earlier made his sister pregnant at the age of 16 as compared to them having an affair when she was 15 (vi). In this manner, Chadha approximates the conflict and restructures the plot in order to accommodate modern, Western sensibilities and the altered medium, but it is worth noting that the significance of the Darcy-Wickham sub-plot is maintained as crucially intertwined with that of the Lydia-Wickham sub-plot.

Film Poster

Seeing as the sub-plot is defined by character, a brief introduction to characters and characterisation is in order. The hypertext has received the Austen characters in a new cultural context. There is, in general, a one-to-one relationship between the received and the original characters (although a few minor characters are left out and Mary and Kitty are combined into the comparatively flat character of Maya). Lydia, then, becomes the flirtatious and socially naïve Lakhi while George Wickham becomes Johnny Wickham. Nomenclature does, in other words, play a role in presenting adaptive fidelity to the hypotext. Furthermore, as evidenced by the Wickham character, the characters are approximated for a modern audience and a modern setting in terms of names. This does not merely concern names, as Wickham’s defining vocational characteristic, being a soldier, is received in the new setting as a backpacking and seemingly unemployed Casanova, his social weight retained in contrast to the adapted Darcy’s position as a corporate executive. This change is made because a soldier would not hold the same attractions for Lakhi in the hypertext as he would for Lydia in the hypotext. Finally, it is worth noting that the relationship between Lakhi and Wickham appears in the film as noticeably secondary to that between Lalita and Wickham. This can be seen as a result of the limitations of the medium, for because of the limitations in play time, Wickham’s role in relation to Lalita and Darcy needs to be visualised more directly and succinctly than in the sub-plot in question here.

Without a clear narrative voice, the Bride & Prejudice characterisation diverges from that of the original novel. Whereas the novel’s point of view catered for the direct comments of a third person omniscient narrator in addition to the characterisations afforded by written and spoken dialogue, the hypertext has to represent the protagonists of the sub-plot through different means. While the rest of the film makes widespread use of a characteristic Bollywood feature, diegetic songs and item numbers, for characterisation, Lakhi and Wickham is primarily characterised through action as well as apparel, being in the margins of the primary plot.

Joe Wright’s Pride & Prejudice

Wright’s Pride & Prejudice, launched in 2005, ten years after Andrew Davies’ iconic fusion adaptation for television, is an adaptation for a new target audience. It is set in 1797 when First Impressions, the first version of Austen’s 1813 hypotext, was published. It thus distances itself from earlier adaptations, all centred on the latter version, whose formality would alienate the younger target audience intended for this film. This approximation entails some degree of rejection of the Laura Ashley school of filmmaking, “chocolate box England” and heritage aspects of earlier adaptations and incorporates Hollywood-style elements, which would appeal more to a younger audience (vii). This, coupled with the change of medium discussed above, affects all levels of the film, including the sub-plot of Lydia and Wickham.

The first foreshadowing of an affair, and a platonic one at that, is given immediately after the introduction of the Wickham character (viii). After initially having made Lydia and Kitty’s acquaintance, he joins them in shopping for ribbons. In offering to pay for Lydia’s ribbon, he strokes her cheek and produces a formerly palmed coin from behind her ear. This is a signifier of physicality with connotations to prostitution and the gesture has no ready equivalent at that point in the hypotext plot (ix). However, where the book indicates the platonic aspects of the relationship in the possibility of Lydia’s coming “upon the town” or being “secluded from the world, in some distant farm house”, i.e. prostitution or giving birth in hiding, this very visual representation approximates that aspect for a younger, more modern audience (x).

The film’s representation of the sub-plot goes on to follow the hypotext relatively close. As opposed to the Chadha adaptation, this adaptation allots the appropriate amount of play time needed to make the Lydia-Wickham sub-plot a considerable factor in the primary plot. On the commentary track, Wright recognised that once Elizabeth and Darcy had been brought together at Pemberley, taking centre stage in earnest, the sub-plot had to be made appropriately prominent to appear relevant (xi). Its relevance, as mentioned in introduction, stems from its comparative role, allowing for Darcy’s consolidation of his virtue, morality and place in Elizabeth’s heart. The Lydia-Wickham sub-plot works further here to define both Lydia and Wickham as negative foils outside the primary plot protagonists’ subjective spheres. This means that all the major elements of the hypotext sub-plot, the conflict; the news of the elopement, the resolution; the marriage settlement and even the, from a narrative point of view, consolidating stay at Longbourn can be found in the film.

The points of divergence from the hypotext, then, appear only in a number of smaller instances and do not constitute a decisive rewrite of the original sub-plot. As often as not these divergences can be explained by the above mentioned factors of medium and audience. The news of the elopement is brought by letter, as in the hypotext (xii). However, the corresponding scene not only includes both the Gardiners in addition to Elizabeth but also Mr. Darcy (xiii). This was probably done to limit the play time whilst still incorporating the protagonists of the primary plot, establishing the above mentioned function of the unravelling sub-plot for viewers. Elizabeth’s comical circling of the wall might be a ploy to appeal to those younger viewers unaware of the implications or unimpressed by the social magnitude of such an elopement.

Film Poster

Furthermore, Mr. Bennet does not show the same feelings of guilt in Lydia’s fate as he does in the hypotext (xiv). In the novel, Bennet comments on his guilt in between correspondence by letters with Mr. Gardiner and Mr. Collins. The omission of all this is a part of a larger process of limiting the narrative to the essentials and even commenting on the sheer amount of correspondence in the interval between the rise of the conflict and the resolution. Also, in terms of narrative levels, the added dimension of Bennet’s feelings would complicate the levels above, i.e. the sub-plot and the primary plot, and confuse younger viewers. Therefore, the film contents itself with visual representations of exasperation which can easily be neglected or missed without much consequence for the sub-plot. The only indication of Bennet’s regret in his method of raising his daughters is given when he in the film, like in the book, becomes stricter with Kitty as a result of the Lydia-Wickham sub-plot.

When the Wickhams arrive for their stay at Longbourn, Lydia reveals Darcy’s role in the resolution with considerably less candour in the hyper- than in the hypotext. In a scene which in many ways shares some characteristics with the elopement letter scene in terms of reduction of narrative space, Lydia performs the role originally assigned to Mrs. Gardiner (xv). Thus, in the interest of narrative space and flow, for the hypotext letter from Mrs. Gardiner would certainly disrupt the dinner scene, the same agenda for simplification is pursued for much the same reasons as above.

The last alteration in the representation of the sub-plot to be found consists of an added element. Apart from the presence of the soldiers, whose belligerent vocation is toned down in favour of appearance, Austen’s novels have little room for physical violence, and yet the adaptation hints at such. When the Wickhams are leaving, the novel only remarks Wickham’s vivacity compared to Lydia, but the film clearly shows him violently pushing Lydia down into the seat of the carriage (xvi). This could both emphasise the artificiality of the affair and hint at future domestic abuse. The use of violence, if noticed by viewers, would provide a commentary on the absence of such in the hypotext and to some extent anchor the sub-plot in a social context.

Rupert Friend plays Wickham

In terms of characters and characterisation, much remain similar to the hypotext and the deviations can largely be explained by the introduction to this chapter. The social status of each character is reflected in his or her attire and surroundings. Despite the rejection of revealing Laura Ashley style dresses, a certain physicality to the characters is maintained by the inclusion of dressing scenes, untidy hair and more physical contact than what the hypotext sanctions. The already mentioned foreshadowing of the affair as well as Lydia’s physical display of affection; touching and dancing about, could serve as examples in addition to the above extension of the sub-plot. This approximation of characters and the visual characterisation is mirrored by the characterisation through auditory communication. Though the use of letters, so prominent in the hypotext, is maintained to some extent in the hypertext, the narrative would suffer both in space and flow without the substitution of some letters for dialogue. One effect of this is that characters appear more outspoken. Lydia’s verbal narration of her affair at Longbourn gives her an air of lacking in sensibility which excels that given by the letter in the novel (xvii). Another effect is that in order to maintain the level of intimacy the letter offers, the mise-en-scène would have to create the atmosphere of intimacy a letter has, which would be a natural transition for an adaption into a visual medium. A further signifier of intimacy could be the use of language, body language and posture which is used extensively for purposes of characterisation in the adaptation. In contrast with earlier adaptations and the hypotext, the characters use modern polite language diverging from the original dialogue, modern body language like slouching or expressive airs and looks. The language, attitudes and facial expressions of Lydia in the final scene at Longbourn and her and Elisabeth’s surreptitious play with the glass of wine are both aspects of a visual form of narration and an approximation to a younger audience (xviii). This element in the representation of sub-plot thus mirrors the overarching agenda for the entire sub-plot as well as the adaptation in its entirety; to update Austen’s novel for a new audience, both in terms of form and medium.

Conclusion

Both these film adaptations can be seen as approximations and commentaries on the hypotext and the representation of the Lydia-Wickham sub-plot mirrors this. The Chadha hypertext performs a cultural transposition as well as a modernising approximation and receives the sub-plot in a more visual medium. This process allows for commentary, most prominently a post-colonial one, i.e. in terms of the cultural background of the protagonists and their encounters with cultural settings closer to the hypotext. In the Wright adaptation, the sub-plot is more faithful to the hypotext. It is more prominent and disconnected from Elizabeth’s person in than in Chadha’s adaptation, the resolution is similar but closer to that of Austen and the elopement is not shown as it is in Bride & Prejudice. Thus, the divergences in Wright’s film are less apparent but, as seen above, do serve a purpose.

What is shared by the sub-plot representation in both adaptations are media-specific characteristics, a recognition of a new target audience and the realisation that the sub-plot serves as the primary channel through which the Lydia and Wickham character show their significance for the primary plot. While the two former are shown in the formal and social aspects of the film, the latter is shown by mere inclusion. In terms of narrative, the sub-plot could easily have been left out with a few adjustments to the primary plot, but this would have left the primary plot deficient because of the Lydia-Wickham sub-plot’s relevance for the primary plot and its protagonists in terms of characterisation and plot progress.

Endnotes: 
(i) Jane Austen, ed. by Donald J. Gay: Pride and Prejudice, 3rd ed. New York/London, 2000, Joe Wright: Pride & Prejudice, [2005] (DVD), Gurinder Chadha: Bride & Prejudice, [2004] (DVD)
(ii) Deborah Cartmell et.al.(eds.): The Cambridge Companion to Literature on Screen, Cambridge, 2007, Julie Sanders: Adaptation and Appropriation, London 2006
(iii) See Bill Nichols: Engaging Cinema – An Introduction to Film Studies, New York/London, 2010: 147-153
(iv) See examples of of the exposition of Lakhi and Wickham in Chadha 2004: (02:30-02:57) ,(28:55-33:36), of the elopement in Ibid: (01:31:20-01:31:57) and of the resolution in Ibid (01:33:20-01:36:14).
(v) For comments on the problematic nature of fidelity, see Cartmell et.al. 2007: 108
(vi) Austen 2000: 133, Chadha 2004: (01:33:00-01:33:10)
(vii) For more on the characteristics of these, see Cartmell et.al. 2007: 75-87
(viii) Wright 2005: (29:50-31:22)
(ix) See Austen 2000: 49-50
(x) Ibid: 201
(xi) Wright 2005: (01:31:30-01:31:43)
(xii) Austen 2000: 176-180
(xiii) Wright 2005: (01:27:40-01:28:50)
(xiv) Austen 2000: 194-195
(xv) Ibid: 207-211, Wright 2005: (01:33:05-01:33:25)
(xvi) Austen 2000: 214, Wright 2005: (01:34:30-01:34:32)
(xvii) Austen 2000: 189
(xviii) Wright 2005: (01:31:45-01:34:32)

Bibliography:
Literature:
Austen, Jane ed. by Donald J. Gay: Pride and Prejudice, 3rd ed. New York/London, 2000
Cartmell, Deborah et.al.(eds.): The Cambridge Companion to Literature on Screen, Cambridge, 2007
Nichols, Bill: Engaging Cinema – An Introduction to Film Studies, New York/London, 2010
Sanders, Julie: Adaptation and Appropriation, London 2006
Films:
Chadha, Gurinder: Bride & Prejudice, [2004] (DVD)
Wright, Joe: Pride & Prejudice, [2005] (DVD)
Pictures: 1, 2, 3

The Story of Another Riff

In September and December 2010, I presented a number of songs built over the same riff. This is quite a common phenomenon. Easy to come by just about sums it up. The good thing about that is that if you like one of the songs, you will probably like a few of the others. In this spirit, I'd like to present the story of another riff.

The Beatles - Blackbird

Written by Paul McCartney early one morning in 1966 in the back garden of his house at Cavendish Avenue.

Eva Cassidy - American Tune

Composed by Paul Simon in 1975 and sung by Eva Cassidy, it is difficult not to be moved by American Tune.

Keb' Mo' - I'll Be Your Water

From the 2005 album Suitcase, the song is an interesting mixture of the melodies of Blackbird and American Tune and the motif of Simon and Garfunkel's Bridge Over Troubled Water.

Why the US isn't French - A Mosquito's Tale

In November 1801, Napoleon had a plan. Unbeknownst to the rest of the world, France had just annexed the massive 828.800 square miles Louisiana Territory. As far as the rest of the world knew, Louisiana was still Spanish. Meanwhile, the French revolution had granted the slaves of future Haiti their freedom, resulting in the rise of Toussaint L'Overture. He had, however, shown a regrettable tendency to cooperate with the Americans and with the state coffers rapidly drying out, Napoleon was in need of money. It was time for an overseas empire.

The Louisiana Territory,
here represented in white

He sent his brother-in-law, General Charles Leclerc, to regain administrative control of Haiti before swiftly moving on to New Orleans. This city was the outlet for most of the cotton, farm produce and other export from the American interior and the key to the Louisiana territory. If successful, this would both create a self-sufficient French American-Carribean territory but also control the trade in the area, which would supply the funds for Napoleon's plans for the old world.

Generals L'Overture and Leclerc

All was set for the takeover. American Southerners feared the spread of a Haitan slave rebellion and were also increasingly opposed to President Jefferson's policies. Central US figures were on Napoleon's payroll, such as "Agent 13", Brigadier General James Wilkinson. The commander in chief of the US army had been in Napoleon's pocket since 1787 and George Rogers Clark, conqueror of the Northwest Territory also recieved an annual payment.

Considering this support, it is not unlikely that Napoleon would be able to establish a foothold in the Americas. If the war in the old world should fail, as it did, he could well escape from Elba to the American territory where his skills and fame would rally central and competent characters and legions to his cause. He could then possibly move on to expand the territory towards Mexico, like the US ended up doing, and even emerge from a potential war with the US and Britain fairly victorious. This would change history as we know it.

Haiti before L'Overture

Everything hinged on the successful subjugation of Haiti, however. Nobody evisaged any problems in that venture. Initially, the war was going well and L'Overture's forces were driven back from the coast. However, clandestine supplies from the US and Britain was brought in which made the conflict drag out in time. It was in these uncertain times that French soldiers started succumbing to a strange malady.

Initially, the soldier would lose strength, soon becoming to weak to walk. Then, black vomit, yellow skin and convulsions would herald death. With the onset of the April showers, the frequency of these cases would increase dramatically. Leclerc's original force of 20.000 would be diminished to just a few thousand with casualties including Leclerc and 18 other generals. Reinforcements would arrive which who succumb to the same illness. At the French capitulation in December 1803 an estimated 50.000 French had died from the disease.

Aedes Aegypti

It turned out to be the old scourge of Caribbean colonies, yellow fever. The disease had originated in Africa and spread with the slave trade. A viral disease, it was spread by Aedes Aegypti, the Yellowfever Mosquito. The April rains led to enormous swarms originating from the swamps and mires abundant on the island and the French, who had never before been exposed to the disease and were vulnerable to the environment died in droves. Furthermore, the appropriate social and medical measures were not taken. Moving the army into the mountains and away from the swamps, prohibited by Napoleon, probably would have reduced the casualties.

Ironically, it was a disease introduced by the slave trade that defeated the army sent to subjugate former slaves. Also, the European diseases which decimated Native American populations found a counterpart in a disease from the colonies. The army that was to augment a French overseas empire failed to do so and as a result, rather than making America French, Napoleon had to sell the Louisiana Territory for a pittance to Jefferson in 1803, who gained the political victory of his life. However, the real credit for the Louisiana Purchase does not lie with the president, but with a mosquito the French did not know how to handle.

Sources:
Cowley, Robert (ed.): More What If?, Oxford 2002
Peterson, Robert K. D.: Insects,disease, and military history: the Napoleonic campaigns and historical perception, in American Entomologist 1995, 41:147-160 at link 
Pictures: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Top Three Dances

These are the three dances I would most like to learn and the music that made me want to learn them. See if you aren't similarly inclined:

1. Jive

This is the dance as presented by Stefano Di Filippo and Anna Melnikova, 2008 World Champions. The dance itself lasts from 1:40 to 3:43.

I would very much like to dance the jive to this song from Hairspray:

2. Argentine Tango

I want to dance the tango like Deborah Quiroga and Carlos Barrionueva did at the 2006 Mundial de Tango in Buenos Aires...

so I can dance to this, Gotan Project's Mi Confesion:

3. West Coast Disco

Just want to expand my swing skills to cover more musical genres such as these:

Benji and Heidi, as posted before:

and the Canadian West Coast Swing champions, Myles Monroe and Tessa Cunningham.

Sources: as given

Collins and Goya's Candle Hat

This is Fransisco Goya, most famous for Los Fusilamientos del Tres de Mayo 1808. I am thinking of buying a reproduction of this painting, mainly for its playfulness but also because of the following poem by American poet Billy Collins.

Candle Hat

In most self-portraits it is the face that dominates:
Cezanne is a pair of eyes swimming in brushstrokes,
Van Gogh stares out of a halo of swirling darkness,
Rembrant looks relieved as if he were taking a breather
from painting The Blinding of Sampson.

But in this one Goya stands well back from the mirror
and is seen posed in the clutter of his studio
addressing a canvas tilted back on a tall easel.

He appears to be smiling out at us as if he knew
we would be amused by the extraordinary hat on his head
which is fitted around the brim with candle holders,
a device that allowed him to work into the night.

You can only wonder what it would be like
to be wearing such a chandelier on your head
as if you were a walking dining room or concert hall.

But once you see this hat there is no need to read
any biography of Goya or to memorize his dates.

To understand Goya you only have to imagine him
lighting the candles one by one, then placing
the hat on his head, ready for a night of work.

Imagine him surprising his wife with his new invention,
the laughing like a birthday cake when she saw the glow.

Imagine him flickering through the rooms of his house
with all the shadows flying across the walls.

Imagine a lost traveler knocking on his door
one dark night in the hill country of Spain.
"Come in, " he would say, "I was just painting myself,"
as he stood in the doorway holding up the wand of a brush,
illuminated in the blaze of his famous candle hat.

Sources: 1, 2

Peter Pan - From Literature to Screen

This article is a brief analysis of the intertextual relationship between Paul J. Hogan’s 2003 film Peter Pan and its hypotext, James Matthew Barrie’s 1904 play Peter Pan; or, The Boy Who Would Not Grow Up (i). (For my review of the film, click here). The terminology used is taken from Julie Sanders’ Adaptation and Appropriation (ii).

Hogan’s Peter Pan shares a number of intertextual relationships with its hypotext. Perhaps most tangibly, it is a generical transposition of J.M. Barrie’s original play. Also, and partially related to this, it incorporates a number of elements of approximation from the original which can not entirely be understood as products of a generical transposition. Finally, the hypertext forms a bricolage of analogies to other, though arguably less prominently treated, hypotexts. This bricolage can, for obvious reasons, not be seen as a replication of a similar bricolage in Barrie’s original as will be shown below.


J.M. Barrie

Hogan’s film is an obvious transposition in terms of genre. Although Peter Pan appeared as both novel and a variety of plays in Barrie’s lifetime, the original Peter Pan is a dramatic one. Thus, the transposition from one dramatic genre to another should be a comparatively easy one. This, of course, is belied by the several editorial choices Hogan would have to make. Which dramatic elements in the hypotext are so central that they should be received in the new genre and which can be excluded? As the next paragraphs will show, the simultaneous process of approximation would necessarily interfere in this process of transposition.

Both Barrie’s continually revised versions of the play and the arguably most defining dramatic representation of these, the 1953 Disney version, are indicative of the constant need of approximating elements in the hypotext. So too with Hogan’s film. Characters, visual representation, plotlines and social relationships are updated with the aim of courting not only a modern audience but also a teenage one.


The Wendy character becomes more central as more time is allotted for her characterisation before Peter’s appearance and this process of making her more active and decisive is an approximation of gender roles. The Peter Pan character in appearance and personality represents a return to those of the hypotext after the moderation of the Disney version (iii). He appears older than in the hypotext; while he frequently describes himself as very young in the play and “has all his baby teeth”, he is played by a 14-year-old with a breaking voice in the film (iv). This is probably a move to make the character more relevant to a teenage audience. The Hook character appears more sinister, which partially is a similar return to the hypotext after Disney’s moderation, though Hogan’s Hook surpasses the original in cruelty. This may be due to changing tolerance for violence in the audience. Finally, the Aunt Millicent character is interpolated by Hogan to take on the disagreeable aspects of the parents, especially the father’s authoritative qualities. This process of making the parents more appealing might be in order to further emphasise the conflict between child- and adulthood so prevalent in the target audience.



Hook and Wendy

Similarly, a light hue following Peter and the changing light reflecting Peter’s state of mind might be a more extensive approximation of the stage lights which would have been used in a staging of the original play (v). This and the increased use of digital animation caters for an audience accustomed to modern standards. It also helps reflect social relationships. The very vague romantic connection between Peter and Wendy in the play becomes a prominent feature in the film. Accompanied by romantic images and light their relationship receives a dimension which caters for teenage sexual tension (vi). Furthermore, the interpolated plotline of the kiss becomes a tool of approximation used to achieve this end.

Seeing as almost a century passed between the publication of the play and the release of the film it was inevitable that other cultural products would influence the film. The term bricolage, as defined by Julie Sanders, means a compilation of different hypotexts or allusions in a hypertext (vii). In Hogan’s film, the representation of pirates seem to allude to that of Robert Louis Stevenson’s Treasure Island, perpetuated visually through scores of pirate-themed films throughout the 20th century. This echoes a motif which is also present in the Barrie’s play. Additionally, of course, the film clearly echoes the Disney version at several junctures, but also Hook (1991) which was produced by Dodi Al-Fayed (to whom Hogan’s film is dedicated) and which features a “proto-Hook” to Hogan’s. Finally, although the lost boys have similarities to those in the Disney version, they also owe a lot to the characters of William Golding’s Lord of the Flies. This novel was published after both Barrie’s play and the Disney film and must have affected the non-animated representation in Hogan’s film.

Paul J. Hogan’s Peter Pan’s adaptive relationship to Barrie’s play is a complex one which has yet to be adequately discussed. The above paragraphs have shown how the editorial choices associated with the change of genre was determined by several processes of approximation. Hogan’s film appears more adapted to an pre-teen/ teenage audience with more romantic, sinister and violent features than the hypotext. Furthermore, technological advances has allowed Hogan to overcome some of the limitations of the stage, which must have influenced Barrie, but also retain and improve some of the features from the hypotext. Finally, the hypertext does draw on other sources than just the hypotext. As with Barrie’s protagonist, the representation of characters alludes to defining cultural products within particular areas, such as Stevenson’s Treasure Island.

Endnotes
(i) Hogan, P.J.; Peter Pan, 2003 (DVD). James Matthew Barrie;Peter Pan; or, The Boy Who Would Not Grow Up in James Matthew Barrie; Peter Pan and Other Plays, Oxford 2008.
(ii) Julie Sanders; Adaptation and Appropriation, London 2006
(iii) See Deborah Cartmell’s essay in Deborah Cartmell and Imelda Whelahan (eds.); The Cambridge Companion to Literature on Screen, Cambridge 2007: 167-180 for more on this.
(iv) Barrie 2008: 123, 145. In fact, in the novel Peter and Wendy Barrie also frequently draws attention to Pan’s “first teeth”.
(v) Hogan 2003: 1.23.00-1.33.00
(vi) Ibid: 53.00-56.00
(vii) Sanders 2006: 4
Pictures: 1, 2

Bibliography
Literature:
Barrie, James Matthew; Peter Pan; or, The Boy Who Would Not Grow Up in James Matthew Barrie; Peter Pan and Other Plays, Oxford 2008
Cartmell, Deborah and Whelahan, Imelda (eds.); The Cambridge Companion to Literature on Screen, Cambridge 2007
Sanders, Julie: Adaptation and Appropriation, London, 2006
Film:
Hogan, P.J.; Peter Pan 2003 (DVD)