As I was enrolled in a class that focused solely on adaptation this semester (English 4167, Bill Kerwin’s Shakespeare on Film) I could not help but read Emma in this type of mindset. You’re probably thinking, an adaptation of Emma? That can only go in one direction… and yes, I am going to briefly discuss Clueless.
Unfortunately, I saw the movie before I read Austen’s text. Although I knew one was based off of the other, I did not approach the book with a mindset of, “How will each character correspond to one in the other medium?” because so many 1990’s-2000’s teen flicks claimed to be based on classic novels but rarely adhered to the original plotline without major deviations (James Cameron claiming Titanic was Romeo and Juliet, for example). I was shocked, and kind of sad, that Clueless followed even insignificant plot points down to the last detail, even things like Tess (Harriet) coming clean on objects she’d kept that reminded her of her unrequited love, Elton (Mr. Elton).
I suppose what my ultimate question is, do you think it is a positive or a negative thing that Clueless so closely adheres to the plot of Emma? I can see the issue from both ways. As someone who read the book after seeing the movie, I felt like the ending of Austen’s novel was ruined for me. I knew that Cher Horowitz would stand in front of a water fountain and exclaim, “I like Josh!”, and so I knew that Emma would marry Mr. Knightley, as profane as that comparison might sound. However, when discussing it with my roommate, she argued that it was better because it might get people who would otherwise not care about Austen’s texts to consider picking one up, since they knew the plotlines were relatable. Personally, I will maintain that if someone wasn’t interested in Austen before Clueless, they probably won’t be afterward, but I cannot fully dismiss an optimist’s opinion. What do you guys think? Is loyalty to the original text a constructive attribute to the viewer?
No comments:
Post a Comment