When we say "adaptation", we often recall certain types of formulas that turn from literature to film. In recent years, however, adaptation has been taking place across literature-film-TV shows, and the distinct starting point of originality has been blurred. According to Darwin's definition, adaptation is "a process by which an animal or plant species is fitted to its environment.” If we expand the aperture to the field of humanities-based on this definition, adaptation is no longer merely an additive function that supports the original and extends its vitality to a minimum, rather, it has a new value in itself, and at the same time provides a healthy circulation in which the original can survive in a changing socio-cultural environment. This session examines the theories and practices of adaptation. Our aim is to move beyond superficial comparisons on the pros or cons of the originals and adaptations. Moreover, we will explore the dynamic dialogues between multiple versions of adaptations, asking how and why adaptations recorded and modified their sources in a particular manner.
The session will be including these questions but not limited to:
Why adaptations were made in the first place? Does film have a “language” of its own and is adaptation thus a form of translation? Or do stories necessarily change when they are projected rather than printed? What are the perceptual differences in the relationships of the reader to book and spectator to film? What does it take to turn a failed novel into a bestselling movie? What does it take for a filmmaker to preserve the aesthetic value when they turn it from page to screen? What are the intrinsic natures and conventions of different narrative forms? And could a “transmedial” adaptation be considered a prototype of adaptations to come?