Speaking to people, and being asked some interesting questions, definitely helps firm up one's ideas on a project. After my last post I came to realise my concern with the original ending had far more to do with the way it was dealt with, both in terms of the style and the heavy handed manner, than the concept of promoting certain values.
In that light I've been working on the redraft, and while it's still in the early stages I'm happy (or as happy as any writer is at this stage) with how it's coming along. I felt strongly that the story needed a positive ending. After the sacrifices of the two characters for the greater good, they needed some form of reward even if the people in the story were unable to give it to them. So yes, they go to heaven. But I felt it had to be about them, their friendship and their reward than the original ending which focused far more on praise for God.
So that's where I'm at with the adaptation.
I'm closely moving toward the point where I need other eyes to see the play from a fresh perspective. It's all to easy when writing to overlook problems or mistakes in the text, but on the same hand, it's too easy to begin to think there's nothing right with it either. There's definitely a point in any piece that I write where I lose perspective with it. But apart from that, sometimes you just need a person with whom you can discuss the various ins and outs. Talking through plot concerns, or character motivations, with an actual real live person instead of being wrapped in your own head is incredibly important. Not just for the development of the piece of writing, but for the sanity of the writer.
For this project I could really use they eye of someone with an understanding of classic literature or theatre. So if anyone has time to read over a ten page children's play let me know...
Sunday, 1 April 2012
Saturday, 17 March 2012
Adaptation: How Important is Authenticity?
Rather than doing the 'oh look, I've started a new blog about my writing' spiel, I thought I'd jump right in with what's been going on in my head recently.
I came across this article today http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/theatreblog/2012/mar/16/noises-off-theatre-faithful-texts which talks about an issue I've been contemplating recently with regard to a play I've been working on.
I have a passion for adaptations. I love to see how a story is interpreted by someone new, how it evolves and why stories continue to resonate with audiences decades and even hundreds of years after their creation. I could go on about contemporary adaptation/appropriation theory, but that would be getting off topic. Suffice it to say I've done a fair amount of academic work in this field so I have a solid background when it comes to debating the issue. I may know current thinking, but I'm still having an issue with my particular project.
Anyway, to get back on track this article hit home because I'm currently working on writing a stage adaptation of the children's story The Happy Prince by Oscar Wilde.
Now, the story centres around the statue of a Prince and a swallow about to migrate for winter. The Prince sees all the misery in the town and persuades the swallow to help him help the poor townspeople in need. The swallow does, but by doing so he stays until the weather becomes too cold and he dies. The Prince's heart breaks when this happens and he 'dies' too. It's a beautiful story, but rather sad. However, at the very end God sends one of his angels to bring back the 2 most precious things in the town. The angel brings back the broken heart of the Prince and the little swallow.
It feels as if this ending was tacked on by the author as a way of giving the story a happy ending. It is after all a children's story.
I've tried to remain faithful to the original dialogue as much as possible, because I feel that Wilde always had a beautiful way with language and I want to preserve that. But the ending doesn't sit quite right with me. I find it too abrupt for one. But the biggest reason is centred around how I feel about adding in religion into a contemporary children's play.
Here are some of my concerns:
If I leave it in, will that make it less likely to be producable? I feel like it would in the UK, but maybe not in the US.
Should I be faithful to the original text? Is that important? I do feel the story deserves a happy ending, but is having God step in and have them brought to heaven the best way to do it? Does that alienate those who don't share in those beliefs?
How do I tackle the ending with sensitivity to the original text if I do change it?
I think at the moment I need to sit with it a while longer and let my unconscious ponder these issues. Maybe do some deeper research into the story itself and see if that yields any information that helps.
I came across this article today http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/theatreblog/2012/mar/16/noises-off-theatre-faithful-texts which talks about an issue I've been contemplating recently with regard to a play I've been working on.
I have a passion for adaptations. I love to see how a story is interpreted by someone new, how it evolves and why stories continue to resonate with audiences decades and even hundreds of years after their creation. I could go on about contemporary adaptation/appropriation theory, but that would be getting off topic. Suffice it to say I've done a fair amount of academic work in this field so I have a solid background when it comes to debating the issue. I may know current thinking, but I'm still having an issue with my particular project.
Anyway, to get back on track this article hit home because I'm currently working on writing a stage adaptation of the children's story The Happy Prince by Oscar Wilde.
Now, the story centres around the statue of a Prince and a swallow about to migrate for winter. The Prince sees all the misery in the town and persuades the swallow to help him help the poor townspeople in need. The swallow does, but by doing so he stays until the weather becomes too cold and he dies. The Prince's heart breaks when this happens and he 'dies' too. It's a beautiful story, but rather sad. However, at the very end God sends one of his angels to bring back the 2 most precious things in the town. The angel brings back the broken heart of the Prince and the little swallow.
It feels as if this ending was tacked on by the author as a way of giving the story a happy ending. It is after all a children's story.
I've tried to remain faithful to the original dialogue as much as possible, because I feel that Wilde always had a beautiful way with language and I want to preserve that. But the ending doesn't sit quite right with me. I find it too abrupt for one. But the biggest reason is centred around how I feel about adding in religion into a contemporary children's play.
Here are some of my concerns:
If I leave it in, will that make it less likely to be producable? I feel like it would in the UK, but maybe not in the US.
Should I be faithful to the original text? Is that important? I do feel the story deserves a happy ending, but is having God step in and have them brought to heaven the best way to do it? Does that alienate those who don't share in those beliefs?
How do I tackle the ending with sensitivity to the original text if I do change it?
I think at the moment I need to sit with it a while longer and let my unconscious ponder these issues. Maybe do some deeper research into the story itself and see if that yields any information that helps.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)