iterations
The penultimate semester of my undergrad career in fall of 1996, I found myself driving to campus one night a week for a 4 hour long seminar in Tudor-Stuart history. While I had had many evening classes, this was the first one that was formatted entirely as a lecture class, which was a different 4 hours than the ones I had spent in more workshop courses. I don't remember which Henry we started with, but my only memory was the several weeks where we talked about Henry VIII and all his wives. It was equal parts scholarship and gossip, and I looked forward to it, and would show up eagerly with a giant coffee and a notebook and pen. History was a humanities requirement at RC, so I didn't really take any classes in it beyond a semester of contemporary history (ie 1945-90s) during my community college semester. I was required, however, as an English major, even one who took far many more classes in American Lit and Drama than English ones, to take at least one British history seminar (I probably actually would have benefitted from US classes far more.). I 've been thinking of this semester and my enthusiasm for the more gossipy elements of history, the ones that add color and flavor to mere facts, as I've been obsessively listening to the SIX soundtrack. While I probably would have rolled my eyes at the pop songstress concept in my tighter-assed English major way, I cannot get enough now.
In the theaters, we are starting to see previews for the February adaptation of WUTHERING HEIGHTS, which looks true to the book only in characters, locale, and moody moor wandering, but also kind of smutty and winsome. This of course has the Bronte purists panties in a big bunch, but I am actually excited by its seemingly novel take. Similarly, I've been reading some unfavorable reviews about the production of Taming of the Shrew we saw a few weeks back, including one that called it the worse adaptation he'd seen of any Shakespeare play. I actually liked it a lot, though can reimagine a slightly better ending than the ones we got. It was almost perfect, but just not quite in some of the changes from the original. Since I don't usually find the comedies and romances all that interesting, this one was actually a delightful exception.
We've also been watching WELCOME TO DERRY, whose finale lands tonight, which takes many liberties, but also expands and unfolds parts of the book, parts of the world Steven King created. I fucking love this. I tried to do a much less extensive version of this with my OVERLOOK poems about THE SHINING. Of course, the usual calls for careful adherence to the books riddles Reddit fan forums and critical takes. But the adaptations of any media I love most do not stick carefully to the events, themes, characters, costuming, historical details, but spins them into something new that changes the text. Because, really anything is a text. Books, movie, pieces of art. Even history. As a writer who loves ekphrastic work and historical research, I think about this often.
What responsibilities and obligations do we have as those who reimagine and retell the same stories again with new twists and takes? What threads can be plucked or are worth plucking and weaving into something new? What's to be gained by using something that already exists in the public imagination? What is lost? I've been thinking about this as I contemplate both finished projects and others still in the notes and research stage and find I love to tread in the space between facts and fictionalization. (This is probably why fictionalized biographies may be my favorite genre. I also adore the mashups. Julius Caesar as a hip-hop musical. Taming of the Shrew as a comment on kink/sexual control. Richard III in Victorian asylum costuming/sets.
Comments