TY - JOUR

T1 - Stage adaptations of novels

T2 - ‘affordances’ of theatre in two stage adaptations of Kafka’s Metamorphosis

AU - Sunderland, Jane

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Theatre – whether in the form of an ‘adaptation’ or not – is theatre. Following much of the current critical literature on film adaptations (e.g. Bortolotti and Hutcheon, 2007; Leitch, 2008; Hutcheon, 2006), in this paper I am thereforerejecting as far as possible any sort of ‘fidelity discourse’, i.e. that the stage adaptation should be ‘faithful’ to its novel sourcetext in terms of plot, characters, dialogue and resolution, or even, arguably, in ‘theme’ or spirit. In some ways a stage adaptation, as a recontextualisation in a new medium, cannot be faithful to its sourcetext, in part because of the ‘epistemological commitments’ (Kress, 2003) of theatre. More interestingly and constructively, I argue that because of theatre’s multiple and enriching ‘affordances’ (Bezemer and Kress, 2008), many of which are not shared with the novel, it should not even try. I illustrate this with two non-deferential stage adaptations of Kafka’s Metamorphosis, to both of which the affordance of digitalisation is key. In one, a small TV-like screen facilitates representations of interiority (longseen as a challenge for theatre). In the other, sophisticated and extensive digital projection allows abstract and concrete images which go beyond visual enhancement of the mise en scène to foregrounding aspects of this particular retelling, and which give an appropriate nod to modernity and, in both the narrow (e.g. technological) and broad senses, to the value of change.

AB - Theatre – whether in the form of an ‘adaptation’ or not – is theatre. Following much of the current critical literature on film adaptations (e.g. Bortolotti and Hutcheon, 2007; Leitch, 2008; Hutcheon, 2006), in this paper I am thereforerejecting as far as possible any sort of ‘fidelity discourse’, i.e. that the stage adaptation should be ‘faithful’ to its novel sourcetext in terms of plot, characters, dialogue and resolution, or even, arguably, in ‘theme’ or spirit. In some ways a stage adaptation, as a recontextualisation in a new medium, cannot be faithful to its sourcetext, in part because of the ‘epistemological commitments’ (Kress, 2003) of theatre. More interestingly and constructively, I argue that because of theatre’s multiple and enriching ‘affordances’ (Bezemer and Kress, 2008), many of which are not shared with the novel, it should not even try. I illustrate this with two non-deferential stage adaptations of Kafka’s Metamorphosis, to both of which the affordance of digitalisation is key. In one, a small TV-like screen facilitates representations of interiority (longseen as a challenge for theatre). In the other, sophisticated and extensive digital projection allows abstract and concrete images which go beyond visual enhancement of the mise en scène to foregrounding aspects of this particular retelling, and which give an appropriate nod to modernity and, in both the narrow (e.g. technological) and broad senses, to the value of change.

KW - affordance

KW - epistemological commitment

KW - Kafka

KW - stage adaptation

M3 - Journal article

VL - 2013

SP - 140

EP - 157

JO - Ekphrasis

JF - Ekphrasis

IS - 2

ER -