Uncovering Cinematic Adaptations of James Joyce’s The Dead

Pegah Marandi, Alireza Anushiravani

Abstract


The relationship between literature and film is the subject of plentiful analyses and reflections within the general framework of Comparative Literature. A comparison between a literary work and its adaptations shows how filmmakers adhere to the principles of intertextuality. Exploring various adaptations of James Joyce’s The Dead (1914) and comparing them against each other are the main objectives of this research. This study examines how John Huston (1987), Travis Mills and William Ivey Long (2013) adapted James Joyce’s The Dead (1914) culturally, geopolitically, and sociologically. This study demonstrated that Huston’s adaptation was faithful to Joyce’s text in terms of character, costume, culture, and language, whereas Mills and Long’s adaptation was not fully loyal to Joyce especially in terms of character and culture. However, Mills and Long have attempted to create a language similar to Joyce’s. Further, consciousness and interior thoughts as subtle issues precisely shown in the novel were not illustrated wholly in both adaptations. Huston’s creativity was maintained in the last scene, picturing Gabriel’s monologue, whereas Mills and Long’s creativity was shown in creating new postmodern characters and culture. 


Keywords


Adaptation theories, Cinematic adaptation, intermediality, intertextuality

Full Text:

PDF

References


Aragay, M. (2005). Books in motion: Adaptation, intertextuality, authorship. NY: Rodopi.

Barolsky, P. (1989). Joyce’s distant music. The Virginia Quarterly Review, 65(1), 111-118.

Bluestone, G. (1957). Novels into film. California: University of California Press.

Bortolotti, G. R., & Hutcheon, L. (2007). On the origin of adaptations: Rethinking fidelity discourse and “success”—biologically. New Literary History, 38, 443-458.

Cardwell, S. (2002). Adaptation revisited: Television and the classic novel. UK: Manchester University Press.

Cartmell, D., & Whelehan, I. (2007). The Cambridge companion to literature on screen. UK: Cambridge University Press.

Cartmell, D., & Whelehan, I. (2010). Screen adaptation: Impure cinema. London: Palgrave MacMillan.

Cartmell, D. (2012). A companion to literature, film, and adaptation. USA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Casetti, F. (2004). Adaptation and mis-adaptations: Film, literature, and social discourses. In R. Stam, & A. Raengo, (Eds.), A companion to literature and film (pp. 81-91). USA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Chatman, S. (1980). What novels can do that films can’t (and vice versa). Critical Inquiry, 7(1), 121-140.

Connor, J. D. (2007). The persistence of fidelity. Adaptation Theory, 10(2), 1-5.

Constandinides, C. (2010). From film adaptation to post-celluloid adaptation: Rethinking the transition of popular narratives and characters across old and new media. New York: The Continuum International Publishing Group.

Corrigan, T. (2017). Defining adaptation. In T. Leitch (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of adaptation studies (pp. 1-16). USA: Oxford University Press.

Corseuil, A. R. (2001). John Huston’s adaptation of James Joyce’s The Dead: The interrelationship between description and focalization. Cadernos de Tradução, 1(7), 67- 79.

Cutchins, D. Bakhtin, intertextuality, and adaptation. In T. Leitch (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of adaptation studies (pp. 17-36). USA: Oxford University Press.

Elleström, L. (2010). The modalities of media: A model for understanding intermedial relations. Media Borders, Multimodality, and Intermediality (pp. 11-48). UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010.

Eliot, T. S. (1919). Tradition and individual talent. The Egoist, 4(VI).

Elliott, K. (2003). Rethinking the novel/ film debate. UK: Cambridge University Press.

Ellis, J. (1982). The literary adaptation. Screen, 23, 3-5.

Fulton, A. R. (1977). From novel to film. In J. Harrington (Ed.), Film and/as literature (pp. 151-155). USA: Prentice-Hall.

Genette, G. (1982). Palimpsestes: La littérature au second degré. Paris: Seuil.

Gibbons, L. (2002). The cracked looking glass of cinema: James Joyce, John Huston, and the memory of The Dead. The Yale Journal of Criticism, 15(1), 127-148.

Grobstein, P. (2011). A citique of the criticism of film adaptations. Retrieved September 25, 2017, from http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/thebeliever/critique-criticism-film-adaptations.

Gronstad, A. (2002). The gaze of Tiresias: Joyce, Rossellini and the iconology of The Dead. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 1(2), 233- 248.

Haberer, A. (2007). Intertexuality in theory and practice. Literatura, 49(5), 54-67.

Huston, J., & Huston, T. (Directors). (1987). The Dead (Film). America: Chris Sievernich and Weiland Schulz-Keil.

Hutcheon, L. (2006). A theory of adaptation. New York: Routledge.

Johnson, D. T. (2017). Adaptation and fidelity. In T. Leitch (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Adaptation Studies (pp. 37-53). USA: Oxford University Press.

Joyce, J. (1990). Dubliners. New York: Bantam Classic.

Kael, P. (1976). Reeling: Film writings, 1972-1975. USA: Little Brown.

Kaye, N. (1994). Postmodernism and performance. London: The MacMillan Press Ltd.

Kellner, D. (2004). Culture industries. In T. Miller, & R. Stam (Eds.), A companion to film theory (pp. 202-220). USA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Kilbourn, R. J. A., & Faubert, P. (2014). Introduction: Film adaptation in the post-cinematic era. Journal of Adaptation in Film & Performance, 7(2), 155-158.

Kristeva, J. (1980). World, dialogue and novel. In L. S. Rudiez, & Trans. T. Gora (Ed.), Desire in language: A semiotic approach to literature and art (pp. 64-91). New York: Columbia UP.

Leitch, T. (2003). Twelve fallacies in contemporary adaptation theory. Criticism, 45(2), 149-171.

Leitch, T. (2017). The Oxford handbook of adaptation studies. USA: Oxford University Press.

Manovich, L. (2001). The language of new media. Massachusetts: MIT.

Meikle, K. (2013). Rematerializing adaptation theory. Literature/Film Quarterly, 41(3), 174-183.

Meljac, E. P. (2009). Dead silence: James Joyce’s The Dead and John Huston’s adaptation as aesthetic rivals. Literature/Film Quarterly, 37(4), 295-304.

Metz, C. (1977). The imaginary signifier: Psychoanalysis and the cinema. Translated by C. Britton, A. Williams, B. Brewster, & A. Guzzetti USA: Indiana University Press.

Meyers, J. (2011). Writing film biography: John Huston. The Antioch Review, 69(1), 86-100.

Mills, T., & Long, W. I. (Directors). (2013). The Dead (Film). America.

Olsen, V. (1999). On the page/on the screen: Two ways of reading Joyce. English Language and Literature Studies, 9, 99-108.

O’Regan, T. (1999). Cultural exchange. In T. Miller, & R. Stam (Eds.), A companion to film theory (pp. 262-295). USA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Pederson, A. (1993). Uncovering The Dead: A study of adaptation. Literature/Film Quarterly, 21(1), 69-70.

Petho, A. (2010). Intermediality in film: A historiography of methodologies. Film and Media Studies, 2, 39-72.

Scholz, A. M. (2009). Adaptation as reception: How a transnational analysis of Hollywood films can renew the literature-to-film debates. Amerikastudien / American Studies, 54(4), 657-82.

Shout, J. D. (1989). Joyce at twenty-five Huston at eighty-one. The Dead. Literature/Film Quarterly, 17(2), 91-94.

Silva, C. A. V. (2013). Modern narratives and film adaptation as translation. Acta Scientiarum: Language and Culture, 35(3), 269-274.

Singer, I. (2004). The Dead: Story and film. The Hudson Review, 56(4), 655-665.

Slethaug, G. E. (2014). Adaptation theory and criticism: Postmodern literature and cinema in the USA. London: Bloomsbury.

Stam, R. (2000). Beyond fidelity: The dialogics of adaptation. In J. Naremore (Ed.), Film adaptation (pp. 54-76). London: Athlone.

Stam, R., Burgoyne, R., & Flitterman-Lewis, S. (1992). New vocabularies in film semiotics: Structuralism, post-structuralism and beyond. London: Routledge.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7575//aiac.ijclts.v.5n.4p.38

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2013-2019 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD.

International Journal of Comparative Literature and Translation Studies

You may require to add the 'aiac.org.au' domain to your e-mail 'safe list’ If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox'. Otherwise, you may check your 'Spam mail' or 'junk mail' folders.