Blog Response Post: Bride and Prejudice

1. Analysis of the Book

Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice was published in 1813, her second novel after Sense and Sensibility, another social commentary on marriage and class. Austen’s use of free indirect speech engages the reader to become fully apart of Elizabeth’s thoughts. Although the novel’s basis is more satire than romanticism, as the sister’s marriages are akin to business ventures, there is an undeniable romance to it that has lasted through the two centuries the novel has been in publication. Screenwriter Deborah Moggach has said about the novel “It is so beautifully shaped as a story – the ultimate romance about two people who think they hate each other but who are really passionately in love” (Focus Features). Austen banks on the idea that pride and prejudice has been the cause of  Elizabeth’s societies’ woes, and Elizabeth and Darcy may only get together if they rid themselves of their own pride and prejudice. This is similar to Frances Burney’s Cecilia, where Austen got her title from:

“The whole of this unfortunate business, said Dr Lyster, has been the result of PRIDE and PREJUDICE. […] if to PRIDE and PREJUDICE you owe your miseries, so wonderfully is good and evil balanced, that to PRIDE and PREJUDICE you will also owe their termination.” (Dexter).

2. Analysis of the Film

British Asian director Gurinder Chadha’s 2004 adaptation of the novel, Bride and Prejudice is a crowd-pleasing, romantic comedy, Bollywood-inspired musical that many critics and film goers wave off as silly. Although the film has some awkward moments and a flimsy plot, it is also is a great commentary on post-colonialism and the Indian diaspora, and has arguably started the trend of fusing Bollywood and western musical numbers.  Bollywood is a diverse industry, and although the musical numbers are somewhat contrived in this film, Chadha has treated it with respect compared to others, who abuse Indian culture and Bollywood as commodities for entertainment purposes, such as Ashton Kutcher’s advertisement for Popchips, the music video for “Bounce” by Iggy Azalea, Mike Myers’ The Love Guru, and many more. By using common issues of the South Asian diaspora, such as creating a niche ad midst culture clash in Bend it Like Beckham, trying to find a husband in a shallow and selective Southall society in It’s a Wonderful Afterlife and a family’s struggle to remain respectable and marry up their daughters in Bride and Prejudice, Chadha proves that she is well versed in Bollywood and it’s unique motifs and themes.

For example, the song “Dola Dola,” shown below, depicts a traditional dandiya /raas/ garba folk dance that is often used in Bollywood.

An example of this type of dance in a popular, critically acclaimed Bollywood film (that also features Aishwariya Rai) is the song “Dholi Taro Dhol Baaje” from Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s 1999 film Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam – Link here.  

Depiction of garba – a typically Gujarati dance.

3. Analysis of the Adaptation

Pride and Prejudice‘s romantic side is usually played up in it’s adaptations, and this is no different regarding Chadha’s film. However, unlike BBC’s 1995 miniseries and Joe Wright’s 2005 film, which are very true to Austen’s novel, Bride and Prejudice offers a new scenario where the love story can play out.Others have adapted the novel to modern society, such as Bridget Jones’s Diary, where Darcy is a barrister and The Lizzie Bennett Diaries,  a Youtube series where Darcy is the heir to an entertainment business, but these productions fail to add something new besides the time period. By comparison, Chadha adds another layer to Austen’s story, by creating a post-colonial narrative: India is the base of conflict in the film. Lalita is outspoken about her distrust of those who want to capitalize on India, and is quick to call Darcy an “imperialist,” while Darcy is quick to be annoyed by Amritsar on arrival. Although Darcy is wealthy compared to the Bakshi’s, like in the novel, the conflict seems to be refocused on the Western/Eastern divide instead of the class divide.

4. Online Research on the Film

• snobbymrdouchey.tumblr.com is a  tumblr that creates .gifs comparing different characters and scenes in various Pride and Prejudice film and television adaptations. Link to tumblr here.
• Wikipedia has a very thorough chart on the relationships between the characters in Jane Austen’s novel. Link to character map here.
• This article from The Times of India addresses the trend where when Western literature is adapted to Bollywood, the film often flops at the box-office. Recent adaptations that have not done very well include Emma, Othello, White Nights, and Macbeth, as well as Chadha’s film. The author hints that the films may not be “Indianized” enough, for example, Bride and Prejudice was set partially in Amritsar, but the film did not feel Punjabi enough. Link to article here.
• The article “From British “Pride” to Indian ‘Bride'” by Suchitra Mathur in M/C Journal discusses, at length, what the film means in a world still influenced by lingering colonial sentiment, and how that relates to Bollywood conventions. Link to article here.

Kholi saab overtly trying to prove how Western he is to woo Lalita.

In one aspect of Mathur’s article, where the film “fits in” to film categories is discussed. Although Chadha has made Bride and Prejudice to be a “complete Hindi movie,” Mathur offers a new opinion- the film is a “complex hybrid that does not fit neatly into binary hyphenated categories such as ‘Asian-American cinema.'” Because of its cross cultural, global aspects and its setting in Amritsar, Los Angeles, Goa and London, Mathur believes the film falls into a “third space” between east/west, Bollywood/Hollywood and pre/post colonial. Mathur believes that by uniting all of these motifs, Chadha’s film “successfully undermines (neo)colonial hegemony.”

5. Critical Argument Paragraph

Darcy and Wickham fighting in a cinema, mirroring the Bollywood film playing in the background in Bride & Prejudice.

The fight scene in Bride and Prejudice represents what Gurinder Chadha is trying to do with the film at large, which is to mirror both Hollywood and Bollywood in one film. In many ways Wickham and Darcy’s fight scene is ridiculous: there is no fighting in Austen’s novel, the character’s do not seem like the violent type, and the characters had only shown mild disdain  for each other earlier in the film. Bollywood is notorious for its impossible but crowd pleasing and entertaining fight scenes like the one below (which also features a young Aishwariya Rai).

Darcy and Daniel Cleaver (Wickham) also fighting with an audience in Bridget Jones’s Diary.

By superimposing this scene with a Bollywood scene, Chadha is giving an homage not only to Bollywood, but to a popular British novel and film also loosely based on Pride & Prejudice: the 2001 film Bridget Jones’s Diary, where the Darcy and Wickham characters, played by Colin Firth and Hugh Grant, similarly fight over Bridget/Elizabeth. The scene reflects not only Bollywood entertainment culture, but also British entertainment culture. In an interview Chadha has said on the film:

What I hope to do with Bride And Prejudice is make the Hindi language familiar to the world. After all, Bollywood is much bigger than Hollywood. Hopefully, it will work both ways. It will spur Westerners to watch more Hindi movies and also inspire Bollywood filmmakers towards better narratives. (Jha)

Darcy’s vision in “Show Me the Way” is a nod to Grease’s “Hopelessly Devoted to You.”

A poster for Kuch Kuch Hota Hai in “A Marriage Come to Town.”

The fight scene is not the only time Chadha references these two hemisphere’s – there is a reference to Grease (when Darcy, in a leather jacket, looks into the water and sees a vision of Lalita – link to the scene in Grease here) and a reference to Karan Johar’s extremely popular 1998 Bollywood film Kuch Kuch Hota Hai on a billboard in Amritsar, which became one of the first Bollywood films to be part of the UK’s top ten films in the box-office, unsubtitled (Chohan).These meta references throw Hollywood and Bollywood culture in the audience’s face – Chadha wants the audience to walk out of the film conjoining the East and West.

Works Cited

—————————————————————————-

Primary Sources: 

Jane Austen
Pride and Prejudice
(BROWSE hypertext)
http://www.pemberley.com/janeinfo/pridprej.html

Secondary Sources:

Chohan, Satinder K. “Idol Moments.” The Guardian. 28 May 1999. Web. 10 June 2013. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/1999/may/28/features?INTCMP=SRCH>

Dexter, Gary. “How Pride and Prejudice got its name.” The Telegraph. 10 August 2008. Web. 8 June 2013. <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/3558295/How-Pride-And-Prejudice-got-its-name.html>.

“Flop parade: Hindi films on Western literary classics crash at the box-office.” The Times of India. 25 August 2010. Web. 10 June 2013. <http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-08-25/india/28318266_1_aisha-bride-and-prejudice-rajshree-ojha>

Foxy Loxy (username). “Pride and Prejudice Character Map.” Wikipedia. 21 July 2007. Web. 10 June 2013. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pride_and_Prejudice_Character_Map.png>.

Jha, Subhash K. “Bride and Prejudice is not K3G.” Rediff.com. 30 August 2004. Web. June 10 2013. <http://inhome.rediff.com/movies/2004/aug/30finter.htm>

Mathur, Suchitra. “From British ‘Pride’ to Indian ‘Bride’.” M/C Journal (May 2007). Vol. 10, Issue 2. Web. 10 June 2013. <http://journal.media-culture.org.au/0705/06-mathur.php>

“Pride & Prejudice: The Production.” Focus Features. 1 November 2005. WebCite. Web. 8 June 2013. <http://www.webcitation.org/67l7wgH0m>.

snobbymrdouchey (tumblr user). “William Darcy, Total Snob.” Tumblr. Web blog post. 10 June 2013. <http://snobbymrdouchey.tumblr.com/tagged/parallels>.

Blog Response Post: Sherlock Holmes

1. Analysis of the Book

Sherlock Holmes is a very popular character created by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, appearing in his work from the 1880’s to the 1920’s. Holmes is an incredibly intelligent detective skilled in logic, reason, disguise, Victorian-era technology, and forensic science as well as physical skill. The character is also memorable for his eccentricities: Holmes is witty, sarcastic, but at times moody with “bouts of mania and depression” (Wilson). “The Mazarin Stone,” published in 1921 is a short story where Holmes solves a crime that involves a stolen jewel, a murderous count, henchmen, and a life like dummy all within the confines of his apartment complex, 221B Baker Street. This story shows Holmes’ strengths in physical agility, his ability to dupe his adversaries, his readiness to use a gun, and it shows that he has an element of fearlessness, as he sends Watson away to get the police (which takes a while), even when he knows the Count is keen on murdering him. Conan Doyle’s Holmes has certain traits that have been added to and distorted often in various novels, television series, and film, making the character a larger cultural presence compared to the Holmes in Doyle’s stories.

2. Analysis of the Film

Guy Ritchie’s 2009 film Sherlock Holmes is a darker, more violent version of Conan Doyle’s characters. The film is set in Victorian London, with actors Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law playing Sherlock Holmes and Watson with unique chemistry, highlighted by their bickering dialogue. It also emphasizes the physical ability of both characters, often absent in other Sherlock adaptations or re-boots. The film seems to be overly concerned with creating a picturesque Victorian London, complete with secret societies, the occult, “gypsies,” and an overabundance of top hats, canes, monocles, pocket watches and waistcoats – a steampunk dream reminiscent of Barry Sonnenfield’s 1999 film Wild Wild West (another action-packed film that has two opposing personalities teaming up to save the world from a mutinous sociopath).

Note the too-perfect typography of these late Victorian protesters in Sherlock Holmes.

The film is also obviously influenced by Ritchie’s past work as a director, and has a similar visual style as his modern day crime films, such as Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (1998) and Snatch (2000). For example, these two images compare Ritchie’s “boxing scenes”- the first from Snatch the second from Sherlock Holmes. 

Brad Pitt getting punched in Snatch.

Robert Downey Jr. punching in Holmes.

Note the similarities in lighting, the very excited and fairly well dressed male crowd, and the dirtiness, sweat and blood in Ritchie’s versions of London’s underground boxing rings, even in films set almost a century apart. Also similar is the camera style – the films both use slow motion to emphasize the boxing techniques and give the scenes a sense of thrill.

3. Analysis of the Adaptation 

With the incredibly large “canon” and “fanon” of Sherlock Holmes, problems in adapting Doyle’s beloved stories – and the culture it comes with- have to do with what parts of the culture to leave out of the film. Guy Ritchie arguably does the opposite of what the current adaptations House, BBC’s Sherlock and Elementary do. Instead of adapting the basis of the mysteries Holmes solves (i.e. medicine or modern day crime), Ritchie re-boots stories to focus on creating a setting, and a group of characters analogous to Doyle’s original story. Ritchie obviously appreciates Victorian-era London and recreate’s its lavish, dirty and dark atmosphere, albeit creating an exaggerated version of the time period. Ritchie also attempts to go canon with his characters. Unlike other adaptions, Sherlock Holmes presents Holmes and Watson as fairly young, able and agile, like Doyle’s stories. He also decides to go canon and avoid popular “fanon” motifs, such as the phrase “Elementary, my dear Watson,” and the deer stalker hat , both absent in the film. Ritchie does change the scale of the actual mysteries – creating larger-scale problems for Holmes to figure out.

4. Online Research on the Film

Roger Moore as Sherlock 1976.

• Nerve.com offers the argument that Ritchie’s Sherlock is more faithful to the original text compared to it’s bashing by critics for being too action-centered. The film is faithful because it does not depict Watson as a “portly idiot”, Holmes is both a “badass” and an “asshole”, the deerstalker hat and tweed cape isn’t uniform, and “Elementary, my dear Watson” was never said in the literature. Link to article here.
• Co.create presents a slide show of the various depictions of Holmes- from William Gillette in 1899, Leonard Nimoy (on stage) in 1976,as well as Roger Moore, John Clease, Christopher Plummer, Michael Caine, Charlton Heston and more. Link to slideshow.
• Sherlockology.tumblr.com is a guide to BBC’s Sherlock but also compares and contrasts the BBC series and Richie’s film here. Link to tumblr.
• Whatculture.com compares Robert Downey Jr.’s portrayal of Sherlock Holmes compared to clues about the appearance, behavior and personality of Doyle’s Sherlock. Link to article here.

Downey Jr. as a disheveled Holmes.

Whatculture.com’s Trevor Gentry-Birnbaum assesses Ritchie’s film’s Sherlock Holmes compared to the original texts. In appearance, Robert Downey Jr. gets a “C-” because Holmes is written to be tall, lanky and very into personal cleanliness – although Downey Jr. cannot help two of those traits, his portrayal is more messy and unkempt. In behavior, however, the film gets an “A.” The film’s Sherlock deduces quite  a lot from Luke Reordan’s pocket watch, and these lines are adapted directly from the literature. According to them, the film’s Sherlock is an appropriate way to represent the many styles of fighting, including bare knuckle boxing, that the literature’s Sherlock mentions. Furthermore, Holmes’ attachment to his violin (as in “The Mazarin Stone”) is apparent in the film.  In personality, the film receives a “B+.” The relationship between Holmes and Watson is more lovably-bickering in the films than in the books, where Holmes does not seem to get on Watson’s nerve as much. Also, in the film Holmes is depicted as a “tortured soul.” For example, in the restaurant scene shown below, he seems to have sensory overload so he focuses on random bits of information in his setting – the camera pans to a couple talking, then to a waiter stealing a spoon, then to a waiter straightening his tie, then the audio of people eating is amplified- as if Holmes has an attention deficit disorder or another type of heightened sensitivity. This is not mentioned in the literature. However, Holmes’ arrogance, sarcasm and curiosity were depicted accurately.

5. Critical Argument Paragraph

Director Guy Ritchie’s interest in London’s seedy underbelly in his Sherlock Holmes works in favor of creating a film true to Conan Doyle’s original literature, and highlights Ritchie’s focus on the relationship between Holmes and Watson.  According to Ritchie, Sherlock Holmes is an admirable hero because of his complex, flawed nature and his extreme inquisitiveness serves as both a blessing and a curse, and makes him able to do things that others in his society would not, including  the “ability to surf the classes” (Sancton). In the literature, he not only works for important rich men, but also works for those who may not be able to pay him: for Holmes, it’s all about which mystery is most interesting. Ritchie believes that his creative obsession with the uncouth part of London is due to his creative tendencies towards “subcultures … [they are a] fertile place for entertainment” (Fischer). By aligning Sherlock Holmes to these parts of London – to the communal jail cell, the boxing ring, the gypsy on the street- but also keeping Holmes’ “poshness” with his residence, manner of dress, and his use of the Queen’s English accent (also known as R.P., which is now spoken only by royalty), Ritchie emphasizes Holmes’ dynamic nature.   Furthermore, by having Watson marry a respectable lady, Ritchie creates another element to one of the driving forces of the narrative: their friendship. Before the film, perhaps the two characters were equally class “surfers.” But because Watson attempts to live a more respectable, less violent life, Holmes becomes paranoid that Watson will disavow their relationship because Holmes is aligned with the less respectable, more dangerous side of England.  If Watson becomes better, Holmes becomes worse: this idea is cohesive with Ritchies take on their friendship:

… one’s yin, one’s yang, and they work much better together than they do as individuals. The sum of their parts adds to more as a whole. So, it just seems like an injustice on both of their parts if the other half is taken away. To a degree, the narrative is hinged upon that premise. (Fischer)

 ——————————————————————-

Works Cited

Primary Sources

“The Mazarin Stone” by Arthur Conan Doyle
http://ignisart.com/camdenhouse/canon/maza.htm

Secondary Sources

Fischer, Paul. “Exclusive Interview: Guy Ritchie for ‘Sherlock Holmes’.” Dark Horizons. 22 December 2009. Web. 6 June 2013. <http://www.darkhorizons.com/features/1524/guy-ritchie-for-sherlock-holmes>

“Five Things Most Sherlock Holmes Movies Get Wrong (That Guy Ritchie Gets Right)”. Nerve.com. 13 December 2013. Web. 6 June 2013. <http://www.nerve.com/movies/five-things-most-sherlock-holmes-movies-get-wrong-that-guy-ritchie-gets-right>.

Gentry-Birnbaum, Trevor. “How Faithful is Guy Ritchie’s Sherlock Holmes to Arthur Conan Doyle.” WhatCulture! 21 November 2011. Web. 6 June 2013.

Hart, Hugh. “It’s “Elementary”: Your Guide to the Many Pop Culture Faces of Sherlock Holmes.” Co.Create. n.d. Web. 6 June 2013. <http://www.fastcocreate.com/1682678/its-elementary-your-guide-to-the-many-pop-culture-faces-of-sherlock-holmes#1>

Mary Hiddlesbatch (Youtube user). “Sherlock Holmes Scene ‘Dinner with Mary Morstan and Watson.” Youtube. 14 April 2011. Web. 6 June 2013. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=388-rOzD9SM>.

Sancton, Julian. “Q&A: Guy Ritchie on Sherlock Holmes.” Vanity Fair. 23 December 2009. Web. 6 June 2013. <http://www.vanityfair.com/online/oscars/2009/12/qa-guy-ritchie-on-sherlock-holmesem>

Sherlockology. “‘The Debate, Mrs. Hudson, Is On’.” Tumblr. 2012. Web. 6 June 2013. <http://sherlockology.tumblr.com/post/11108137810/sherlockdebate>

Wilson, Phillip. “Sherlock Holmes.” Encyclopedia Britannica Online Academic Edition.  Encyclopedia Britannica Inc., 2013. Web. 6 June 2013. <http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/269523/Sherlock-Holmes>.

*Images are links to their sources. 

Blog Response Post: Tristram Shandy

1. Analysis of the Book

The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman is a novel published in 9 parts in the mid 18th century by Laurence Sterne. As assumed by the title, the novel is narrator Tristram Shandy’s attempt to write his autobiography, a task that he seems to diverge from often. The novel encompasses many genres at once: it is in part satire, mockery, philosophy, and social commentary. It can be argued that the one overarching theme is humor, with absurd domestic events (such as Tristram’s accidental circumcision), and the comically oblivious characters (such as Doctor Slop and his insistence on using the forceps). A major point of the novel is that life cannot be properly written down, and so by the end, the reader has not learned much about Tristram Shandy. This has led critics to call the novel not only “unreadable” but also “unfilmable” (Rowson).

2. Analysis of the Film 

Micheal Winterbottom’s 2006 film Tristram Shandy: A Cock and Bull Story is a film about filming Sterne’s novel where Steve Coogan plays a fictionalized version of Steve Coogan who is cast as Tristram Shandy. The film is post modern in that it is non linear and is conscious that it is a film. For example in the opening seen Steve Coogan and Rob Brydon are getting their movie makeup applied while discussing who is really the lead actor in the film.  The film’s focus is on the human aspects of adaptation – all adaptations are inherently flawed as factors of life get in the way.  This is exemplified in the following clip from the film:

Coogan’s previous attempt was “too contrived” according to himself, using the real hot chestnut produced profanity unseen in the 18th century, and the scene is scraped from the film. Even what is possibly the most realistic recreation of an event in Sterne’s Tristram Shandy is flawed.

3. Analysis of the Adaptation

The conventional approach to adapting a novel to film is to create the same plot, characters and setting of the novel in moving images.  A Cock and Bull Story, however, decides to work with the “spirit of the novel.”  In an interview, Micheal Winterbottom has said that he has no obligations to the original novel, but instead decided to work with the idea of the problems of actually creating something. In the book, Shandy complains that life is too messy and complicated to be written down properly, and the film shows, in a similar fashion, the problems with making a film (Ulaby). Since Tristram Shandy was a novel that used relevant 18th century culture, it only makes sense to create A Cock and Bull Story with the cultural connotations of the 21st century. The film has references to the Al Pacino, The X-files, Pavlov, Hollywood, Fassbinder, macchiatos and more in order to express the spirit of Tristram Shandy in the current time period.

4. Online Research on the Film

• In this discussion forum, users discuss the “fictionalized” Steve Coogan. Interestingly Coogan played British music mogul Tony Wilson in Winterbottom’s 2002 film 24 Hour Party People. In A Cock and Bull Story the actual Tony Wilson interviews the actor Steve Coogan. This is strangely reminiscent of Sterne’s habit of going out in public as the characters he written for entertainment. Link to discussion board here. 
• In this interview with Liese Spencer in Sight & Sound Magazine, Steve Coogan discusses Winterbottom’s intentional blurring of the three characters he plays in the film – Tristram, Walter, and Steve. Link to interview here.
• Neda Ulaby on NPR discusses unfilmable novels that have been filmed, including Tristram Shandy, with director Micheal Winterbottom and others. Link to NPR audio and transcription here.  

Ulaby quotes Professor J.D. Conner saying  that Winterbottom “creates a filmic parallel to the book’s literary tricks and it works.” This way, the audience does not have to sit through hundreds of pages and footnotes of 18th century culture that they will not understand, but they get the essence of it. Winterbottom asserts that this method of interpreting the novel to film works because he assumes no one has read the entire novel, as it is very long and filled with 18th century connotations. That way, there is no real pressure to leave or include certain things in the film. Of course, Winterbottom hints at this in the film itself, creating the character of Jenny – one of the few characters close to Steve who has read the book.

One thing that Winterbottom does choose to include is Sterne’s infamous black page.

5. Critical Argument Paragraph

Sketch of a narrative transgression in Sterne’s Tristram Shandy.

The allusion to the War in Afghanistan in Micheal Winterbottom’s A Cock and Bull Story serves to underline the theme of the film, which is, as Stephen Fry’s character announces, that “life is too chaotic and amorphous to be written,” or filmed. Like the novel, Winterbottom visualizes “digressions” from the main narrative linear story. The main narrative is supposed to be Sterne’s Tristam Shandy, but eventually digresses into other plot lines, such as Steve Coogan’s personal life and obtaining Gillian Anderson to play the Widow Wadman. According to Winterbottom, “the whole modern day plot is really a digression” (Porton 30). Including a few seconds of radio coverage of the war is a hint at another possible digression: a digression of a digression. Winterbottom wants this film to feel like its as real as life – most of the actors play actors with the same names. The war is part of the list of chaotic things in the film’s portrayal of “real life” – such as Coogan’s complicated love life, his public image, and the fact that he is constantly interrupted. Including the war is also part of the ironies that are apparent in the real chaos of life. All of the characters have something to say about the Battle of Namur scene, but no one comments about the real war.

——————————————————————————————————————

Works Cited

Primary Sources

Sterne, Laurence. The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman. Hypertext. <http://www.tristramshandyweb.it/>

Secondary Sources

alt130487. “Steve Coogan – Hot Chestnut.” Online video clip. Youtube. Youtube, 8 June 2007. Web. 4 June 2013. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tb8dsRo0iao>

Porton, Richard. “In Praise of Folly: An Interview with Michael Winterbottom.” Cineaste (Spring, 2006). Vol. 21, Issue 2. p. 28-31. Web. 4 June 2013. <http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy-um.researchport.umd.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=f3h&AN=20356769&site=ehost-live&gt;

Rowson, Mark. “Mission impossible.” The Telegraph. 22 January 2006. Web. 4 June 2013. <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/3649565/Mission-impossible.html>

Spencer, Liese. “Steve Coogan: Slightly Less-Obsessed Jerk, Aha!” Sight& Sound. February 2006. Vol.16, Issue 2. Web. International Bibliography of Theatre and Dance. 4 March 2013. <http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ibh&AN=19784271&site=ehost-live&gt;

tryavna (2005, March 30). “Tristram Shandy: A Cock and Bull Story (Winterbottom, 2005)” Message posted to: <http://ww.criterionforum.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4742>

Ulaby, Neda. “‘Tristram Shandy’: Filming the Unfilmable.” NPR. 26 January 2006. Web. 6 June 2013.<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5172762>

*Images are links to their sources.

Blog Response Post: Alice in Wonderland

1. Analysis of the Book

Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland is a novel by British author Lewis Carroll, published in 1865. The novel follows a young girl, Alice, as she travels through a rabbit hole into a strange world, Wonderland, where she is surrounded by anthropomorphic animals and objects, and where peculiar, nonsensical events occur. The novel is one of the major works that are considered to be “literary nonsense”, which “frustrates the reader’s deep-seated need for meaning” – works of literary nonsense communicate their message by, essentially, not following an order (Millikan). Carroll is more interested in using symbolism, logic, and wordplay over plot; there is no satisfying ending as Alice abruptly wakes up from her dream about Wonderland. Carroll uses his story of Alice again in the sequel Through the Looking Glass and What Alice Found There.

 

2. Analysis of the Film:

Tim Burton’s 2010 film Alice in Wonderland is a reboot of Carroll’s two Alice novels. Burton’s film portrays the coming of age story of 19 year old Alice who must choose her own path. Burton frames Alice’s journey in Underland with a narrative of an uncertainAlice confused about whether or not she should follow societies suggestions and agree to marry over her own want to establish herself in her deceased father’s trade business. Along with a feminist theme, Burton also alludes to the idea of fate vs. free will: through must of the film, Alice is doubtful that she is the “right Alice” in the Oraculum, but when she decides to slay the Jabberwocky she becomes the Alice that saves Underland. In Alice in Wonderland, Tim Burton’s unique directing style can be seen- this film, like his others, includes a timid protagonist, “creepy” images intertwined with overtly theatrical elements (such as his version of the Chesire Cat), outlandish hair, makeup and costumes, and his “artistic partnerships” with actress Helena Bonham Carter, actor Johnny Depp and composer Danny Elfman, all who are a part of this film.

The Chesire Cat

3. Analysis of the Adaptation:

The biggest problem in attempting to adapt Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland into a film is its literary nonsense factor. The novel offers little sensible plot to film; Alice meets strange creatures in Wonderland, but they do not matter if Alice is simply dreaming and will be woken up by her sister as the same person, in the same situation. Burton tackles this problem by inventing a frame that complements Carroll’s Wonderland characters,  and adding an ending that satisfies the popular audience: the monster is slain, good triumphs over evil, and the protagonist sails off to a promising future. In the film, the character of Alice grows into a young woman with self confidence who knows what she wants. Furthermore, “Underland” is depicted as not only a dream – Alice in the “real world” retains her scars from the Bandersnatch, and she greets Absolem, now a butterfly, on the ship. Burton makes a sensible and satisfying plot out of Carroll’s “nonsense.”

4. Online Research on the Film:

Helena Bonham Carter as the Red Queen

• Lisa Mullen in Sight &  Sound argues that Burton has to invent a storyline for Carroll’s story in order to avoid it’s 1951 predecessor’s mistake: the animated Alice in Wonderland left its mid-century audience unsatisfied with its lack of a linear plot. Link to article.
• Marguerite O’Hara in Screen Education presents an argument for the use of colors and costume in Tim Burton’s film: each character is strange in their own right, so in order to separate these various peculiar characters, he assigned them a color. The white queen obviously is dressed in white and the red queen is dressed in red, but also the Knave of Hearts is in black, Alice is in blue, the Mad Hatter is very orange, and so on.  These colors and costumes are directly related to the 1951 animated version of the novel. Link to article.
• Kevin Slaten in RealClearWorld criticizes the film for showing the heroine’s involvement with the British Empire in a positive manner. Link to article.

RealClearWorld is a website that focuses on international news and politics, so Burton’s blunder was a big one to be mentioned in this site. Slaten discusses the most peculiar aspect of the film: not the Hatter’s hair or Burton’s use of gothic images, but the fact that Alice becomes involved in the Opium Wars. Although screenwriter, Linda Woolverton, does not explicitly mention opium, the film is set in England during the Victorian Era, during the height of the British Empire, so Alice’s “trade” with China would most likely have been involved with the opium trade. China at this time had greater silver reserves than Britain and would only trade silver for luxury items, so Britain began importing opium from India even after it became illegal due to increased drug addiction and societal harm. Soon the British Empire had increased domination over China, and the Victorian Era of the Empire is viewed as a historical embarrassment for China, which influenced the success of the nationalistic (and anti-foreign) roots of The Communist Party. Alice using her new found power to get involved in the opium trade should not be seen as a good thing, when it caused a great amount of harm to the country. As Slaten says, the end of the film feels like “a celebration of the exploitation that China suffered for a century.”

Mia Wasikowska as Alice on the trading ship at the end of the film.

5. Critical Argument Paragraph

Tim Burton’s reliance on Alice’s “daddy issues” in his adaptation Alice in Wonderland is an unnecessary distraction that takes away from the feminist theme of the film. Many reviewers have applauded Burton’s retelling of Alice in a feminist light, and although his Alice does act on her own wants compared to that of society, her self awareness is shadowed by the fact that she is simply following in her father’s footsteps. Alice’s father can also be seen as the driving force of the plot. It can be argued that his death, which Alice is presumably troubled by, causes her to have a mental breakdown and imagine the White Rabbit and the rest of Underworld. It is her father’s previous advice, that a pinch will wake her up from a dream, that causes her to believe Underworld is real. Her ideas for trade is based on her father’s ideas of expanding to Rangoon, Bangkok and Jakarta, which she had previously overheard as a nine year old who could not sleep because of a nightmare. If these ideas had been her own, and not her fathers, perhaps Burton’s film would have a truer feminist ring to it.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————

Works Cited:

Primary Texts:

Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll (Ebook )http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/c/carroll/lewis/alice/

Alice by Linda Woolverton (Script) http://web.archive.org/web/20110717234736/http://www.waltdisneystudiosawards.com/aliceinwonderland/script-alice.pdf

Secondary Texts:

Millikan, Lauren. “Nonsense Literature”. Curiouser and Curioser: The Evolution of Wonderland. 1 March 2011. Web. 30 May 2013. <http://www.carleton.edu/departments/ENGL/Alice/CritNonsense.html&gt;.

Mullen, Lisa. “Alice in Wonderland.” Sight & Sound (20.1). May 2010. International Bibliography of Theatre & Dance. Web. 30 May 2013.

O’Hara Marguerite. “O Frabjous Day!” Screen Educations. Issue 59. Spring 2010. Pages 14-23. Web. 30 May 2013.

Slaten, Kevin. “Who Else Might Be Mad at Alice? China.” RealClearWorld. 12 March 2010. Web. 30 May 2013. <http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2010/03/12/who_else_might_be_mad_at_alice_china_98853.html&gt;

* Image sources can be found by clicking the image.