No I didn’t proofread this – and yes it’s too late to make any changes.
Introduction
The idea and art, if you will, behind adaptations and the process of adapting is not a new phenomenon in mainstream media. Adaptations, defined loosely as mimicry, changes, even the disambiguation of an “original” composition, have been around for as long as there have been stories to share. If a story is being shared, it is most likely an adaptation of a story that was heard.
More popular definitions of the word “adaptation” include recasting compositions into new forms or genres. This could include Shakespeare turning his written work into a public performance, the transformation of the book “Jurassic Park” by Michael Crichton into a blockbuster, or DJ Freelance Hellraiser mashing up Christina Aguilera’s pop sensation “Genie in a Bottle” with Strokes’ “Hard to Explain,” to create the underground hit “Stroke of Genius.”
Though, arguably, it could be said that no art work or story is entirely original[1], adaptations within the context of this paper will refer to pieces of work that are obvious variations of a previous work. And it is within this specific context that the idea of adaptations not being as good as the original will be discussed. A quick look at the ethics behind such a value laden critique on the worth of an adaption will be followed by an analysis of the Jurassic Park, “Stroke of Genius” and the Grammy Award winning remix by Kanye West, “Diamonds from Sierra Leone” to show that value, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder and adaptations certainly are able to offer more worth than originals within specific contexts.
Adaptations are not as good as the original
The worth of art, or its intrinsic value, is found solely in the interpretation of said art. More simply put, art’s value is a matter of opinion. Music, art, literature etc. carry merit according to personal judgment, opinion and preference. Adaptations exist for this reason. They are attempts to take a piece of work and give it more meaning, more value. A book may hold a great deal of worth to the audience of book lovers, but holds no worth to those with no reading attention span. An adaptation of a book into a movie is the only way for the value of the original artwork (the book) to reach those whose attention spans only value visual imagery. Adaptations hold value based on the audience and there are no set standards or rules to assign worth or merit to artwork.
With this said, it is important to note that theorists arguing against the value of adaption state that on the basis of seniority alone, adaptations hold lesser value. Hutcheon argues if this were the case, adaptations would not be so widespread in our society.[2] Tony Osborne in his article “The Art of Adaptation” claims that 85% of all movies are adaptations in some form or another.[3] Is this because as a society we have ceased to be able to be original? Or because adaptations, as a form of intertextuality, have the potential to offer a synergy where the output is greater than the sum of the parts individually? Where one may lack in inventive originality, one may instead offer inventive adaptation which creates a work of art which positively impacts a larger portion of the population.
It is impossible to judge the merit worth of adaptations as a whole, just as it is impossible to judge whether the art of the entire Victorian era is good or bad. Adaptations, like art, must be evaluated on an individual basis. And as all judgments on art are based on interpretation and opinion, it is impossible to make a grossly generalized claim that adaptations are never as good as the original.
Film Adaptation: Jurassic Park
Jurassic Park was a breakthrough novel written by the late Michael Crichton, and it was purchased by Universal to be made into a film. The film was released on June 11th, 1993[4], and would go on to make nearly a billion dollars worldwide.[5] The essence of the novel is the imaginative, and thought provoking idea of using DNA to create a living dinosaur theme park.[6] The largest differences between the novel and the movie are the character connections and the detail of scientific data surrounding DNA. The novel focuses more on dinosaurs and science whereas the film focuses on human interaction and connectivity with the audience.
Jurrassic Park the movie was widely successful and if we take the value of stories as the meaning they give their audience, a movie which allows human connectivity, could be argued to be of more worth than a book which is hard on details which may lose the general public.
Mash-up: “Stroke of Genius”
As mentioned in the Introdruction, DJ Freelance Hellraiser produced the song “Stroke of Genius” a mash-up of a chart topping hit “Genie in a Bottle” by Christina Aguilera and a lesser popular hit “Hard to Explain by the Strokes.” The Strokes’ Hard To Explain” original track contained some lovely chord changes but rhythmically was somewhat harsh and staccato as well as having a rather rock edge vocally. By comparison, Christina Aguilera’s “Genie in a Bottle” was overall a widely successful commercial pop song and though it could be called “sexed-up” the underlying lyrics have a certain depth and inspiration. While both songs target specific demographics, ones whom under all other circumstances would have nothing to do with each other, the final product is what The New Yorker puts as “…so [delicious] you can’t imagine why the song didn’t always do that. After hearing it twice, you can’t remember when it didn’t.”[7]
Those who failed to appreciate the “Genie in a Bottle” or for whom the “Hard to Explain” didn’t appeal to, “Stroke of Genius” offers an adaptation (in the form of a mash-up) which arguably is better than the original. With the new background beat, listeners may be able to more closely identify and appreciate the lyrics of a pop song which originally was called outrageous.
Remix: Diamonds from Sierra Leone
A true look at the meaning an audience may derive from the “Diamonds from Sierra Leone Remix” may not be fully understood without a look at the original song this award winning song adapts. First, a look at the original song: Diamonds Are Forever.
“Diamonds Are Forever” was originally and performed by Shirley Bassey (1971). It became the title song for the wildly popular James Bond film, “Diamonds Are Forever.” According to the lyrics, diamonds represent all that men are unable to deliver in a relationship. Diamonds, unlike men, can satisfy a woman. [8]
Besides the literal importance of the lyrics, the song carries additional textual value as the theme for a James Bond film. James Bond emulates male dominance, free sexuality, violence power, and obsessions with wealth, fancy cars, expensive liqueur, the latest technology. James Bond and what he represents, as well as the metaphorical meaning in the lyrics of “Diamonds are Forever” are the texts which this song bring to its audience.
In this new version, West speaks about his claim to fame and how his accomplishments have allowed him to purchase the ultimate status symbol, diamonds. He plays on the original song by showcasing he has reached the ultimate status height, that of being a James Bond-ish figure, despite his black skin. However, he calls a deeper accountability for this status into account, “I thought my Jesus piece was so harmless, ‘Til I seen a picture of a shorty armless,”[9]
West reinterprets the meanings behind diamonds. Blacks, like whites, have been seeking the accumulation of diamonds or “bling” as a status symbol. It may have begun with James Bond and the white-super-agent but it has been perpetuated by black hip-hop superstars. Diamonds which satisfy us, may come at the high cost of innocent lives. Without the original song, the listener would be unable to fully appreciate all of the intertextuality and meaning put forth by Kanye West in the final remix project.
Conclusion
Overall, adaptations as pieces of art are not able to be judged as a whole. Each adaptation must be looked at individually and within the context of the audience. The three examples I have given within this paper demonstrate how adaptations may be seen to have wider reaching effect and more cultural impact and significance than their original works.
I believe Janet Murray is best able to summarize the importance of looking at the interpretation value as opposed to the medium hierarchy in saying:
… narrative beauty is independent of medium… We need every available form of expression and all the new ones we can muster to help us understand who we are and what we are doing here… The real literary hierarchy is not of medium but of meaning …
In our ordinary lives, we do not experience the world as a succession of signifiers any more than we experience it as a succession of car chases. In our ordinary lives, we turn to stories of every kind, again and again, to reflect our desires and sorrows with the heightened clarity of the imagination.[10]
I believe Jurassic Park, “Strokes of Genius,” and “Diamonds are from Sierra Leone Remix” are three good examples of how various forms of adaption (film, mash-up, and remix) can be better than the original.
Works Cited
Barry, J. & Black, D. “Diamonds are Forever” lyrics. Performed by: Shirley Bassey, Diamonds are Forever Soundtrack, [Emi Unart Catalog Inc. 1972]
Box Office Records – http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/series/JurassicPark.php viewed on March 18, 2009
Crichton, Michael, Jurassic Park [London, UK: Arrow Books, 1990]
Frere-Jones, Sasha, “1+1+1=1: The New Math of Mash-ups” The New Yorker Online. http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/01/10/050110crmu_music?currentPage=1 viewed on March 17, 2009
Hutcheon, Linda, A Theory of Adaptation [New York: CRC Press, 2006]
Murray, Janet, “Hamlet on the Holodeck.” [Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,] p. 275
Peters, Michael, “Film Adaptation: Do Film and Literature Trule Coincide with One Another?” Suite101.com, [Feb. 14, 2008] http://filmtvindustry.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_film_adaptation, viewed on March 19, 2009
Spielberg, Steven, Jurassic Park, Universal Studios, 1993
West, Kanye, “Diamonds are from Sierra Leone Remix,” Diamonds are from Sierra Leone Remix Album, Rock-a-fella Records, 2005
[1] Hutcheon, Linda, A Theory of Adaptation [New York: CRC Press, 2006] p. xxi
[2] Hutcheon, Linda, A Theory of Adaptation [New York: CRC Press, 2006] p. 17
[3] Peterse, Michael, “Film Adaptation: Do Film and Literature Trule Coincide with One Another?” Suite101.com, [Feb. 14, 2008] http://filmtvindustry.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_film_adaptation
[4] Spielberg, Steven, Jurassic Park, Universal Studios, 1993
[5] Box Office Records – http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/series/JurassicPark.php
[6] Crichton, Michael, Jurassic Park [London, UK: Arrow Books, 1990]
[7] Frere-Jones, Sasha, “1+1+1=1: The New Math of Mash-ups” The New Yorker Online. http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/01/10/050110crmu_music?currentPage=1
[8] Barry, J. & Black, D. “Diamonds are Forever” lyrics. Performed by: Shirley Bassey, Diamonds are Forever Soundtrack, [Emi Unart Catalog Inc. 1972]
[9] West, Kanye, “Diamonds are from Sierra Leone Remix,” Diamonds are from Sierra Leone Remix Album, Rock-a-fella Records, 2005
[10] Murray, Janet, “Hamlet on the Holodeck.” [Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,] p. 275
