Alyce Wilson's Blog: Dispatches from Wonderland, page 4
January 11, 2011
Writing as Adaptation
In my personal blog (Through the Looking Glass), I have been writing an Oscar series, based on my impressions of all the movies that have won Best Picture. I've finally reached the millennium and have watched both "The Fellowship of the Ring" and "The Two Towers" in preparation for watching the Oscar-winning third film in the trilogy, "The Return of the King."
Completist that I am, I'm also watching all the extras on the extended versions of the film my husband owns. In particular, I was struck by a short documentary about the translation of Tolkien's work into a screenplay.
Some changes were, of course, legend, such as eliminating the popular character Tom Bombadil. The filmmakers also contemplated giving Arwen more screentime by having her help with the fighting at the Battle of Helm's Deep. Due in part to a negative reaction from fans, they deep-sixed this idea in favor of incorporating flashbacks to tell more of her love story with Aragorn.
They also made more subtle changes, such as changing which character said a specific speech. For example, they gave a passage about Eowyn, said by Gandalf in the book, to Grima Wormtongue. This, of course, made the passage seem dark and threatening rather than compassionate.
As any writer who has borrowed from real life knows, whether writing fiction or a memoir, we do this sort of thing all the time. We borrow things that one person says and put it in another person's mouth, or our own. We move locations, heighten situations, modify characters.
I have done it in my own columns and essays, and as long as I adhere to the essential truth of a situation, I rarely hear complaints from family and friends.
The question I have for you, as readers, is this: how much can an author change the facts and still call a work nonfiction? Or even creative nonfiction?
And for the writers among us, how much do you borrow from real life?
Completist that I am, I'm also watching all the extras on the extended versions of the film my husband owns. In particular, I was struck by a short documentary about the translation of Tolkien's work into a screenplay.
Some changes were, of course, legend, such as eliminating the popular character Tom Bombadil. The filmmakers also contemplated giving Arwen more screentime by having her help with the fighting at the Battle of Helm's Deep. Due in part to a negative reaction from fans, they deep-sixed this idea in favor of incorporating flashbacks to tell more of her love story with Aragorn.
They also made more subtle changes, such as changing which character said a specific speech. For example, they gave a passage about Eowyn, said by Gandalf in the book, to Grima Wormtongue. This, of course, made the passage seem dark and threatening rather than compassionate.
As any writer who has borrowed from real life knows, whether writing fiction or a memoir, we do this sort of thing all the time. We borrow things that one person says and put it in another person's mouth, or our own. We move locations, heighten situations, modify characters.
I have done it in my own columns and essays, and as long as I adhere to the essential truth of a situation, I rarely hear complaints from family and friends.
The question I have for you, as readers, is this: how much can an author change the facts and still call a work nonfiction? Or even creative nonfiction?
And for the writers among us, how much do you borrow from real life?
Dispatches from Wonderland
Author Alyce Wilson's blog, providing both writer's thoughts and reader's comments.
...more
- Alyce Wilson's profile
- 15 followers
