Skip to main content

‘Fainomaic’ Adaptation from the Verbal to the Visual

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Anamorphic Authorship in Canonical Film Adaptation

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in Adaptation and Visual Culture ((PSADVC))

  • 194 Accesses

Abstract

The second part of the book is an extensive taxonomy of the drama of authorship which was introduced in the first half. The taxonomy uses Shakespearean films as a case study. Each part of the taxonomy conducts sustained textual analysis of key scenes from numerous Shakespearean adaptations which demonstrate different elements of adaptation’s anamorphism. This chapter addresses the most ubiquitous of these elements—the adaptation of some verbal dialogue, which foregrounds authorial origins, into visual images, which obfuscate those authorial origins. In order to distinguish this form of adaptation from a different form which is explored in the next chapter, I define the suppression of Shakespeare’s enunciating presence in favour of a seemingly ‘un-authored’ cinematic unfolding as a ‘fainomaic’ adaptation. I derive this from the Ancient Greek verb fainomai, meaning ‘to appear’, since it makes the verbal appear as the visual. The chapter breaks down this form of adaptation into a number of distinct categories.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abbate, Alessandro. 2007. “The Text Within the Text, the Screen Within the Screen: Multi-layered Representations in Michael Almereyda’s ‘Hamlet’ and Baz Luhrmann’s ‘Romeo + Juliet’.” In The Play Within the Play—The Performance of Meta-theatre and Self-reflection, edited by Gerhard Fischer and Bernhard Greiner, 377–92. New York: Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, Richard. 1995. Projecting Illusion: Film Spectatorship and the Impression of Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Almereyda, Michael. 2000. William Shakespeare’s Hamlet: A Screenplay Adapted by Michael Almereyda. London: Faber and Faber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderegg, Michael A. 2004. Cinematic Shakespeare. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrew, Dudley. 1984. Concepts in Film Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, Christopher. 2002. “Richard III on Film: The Subversion of the Viewer.” In Shakespeare into Film, edited by James Michael Welsh, Richard Vela, and John C. Tibbetts, 147–58. New York: Checkmark.

    Google Scholar 

  • Austen, Jane. 1813. Pride and Prejudice. London: Thomas Egerton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barthes, Roland. 1995 [1967]. “The Death of the Author.” In Authorship: From Plato to the Postmodern, edited by Seán Burke, 125–30. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baudry, Jean-Louis. 1985. “Ideological Effects of the Basic Cinematographic Apparatus.” In Movies and Methods: Volume II, edited by Bill Nichols, 531–42. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benveniste, Émile. 1970. Problems in General Linguistics. Translated by Mary Elizabeth Meek. Coral Gables: Miami University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, Tom. 2012. Breaking the Fourth Wall: Direct Address in the Cinema. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, Judith. 2005. Shakespeare on Film. Harlow: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buhler, Stephen M. 2000. “Camp ‘Richard III’ and the Burdens of (Stage/Film) History.” In Shakespeare, Film, Fin de Siècle, edited by Mark Thornton Burnett and Ramona Wray, 40–57. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buhler, Stephen M. 2002. Shakespeare in the Cinema: Ocular Proof. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calderwood, James L. 1971. Shakespearean Metadrama. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartmell, Deborah, and Imelda Whelehan. 2010. Screen Adaptation: Impure Cinema. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, Patrick J. 2011. Cinematic Hamlet: The Films of Olivier, Zeffirelli, Branagh, and Almereyda. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Coursen, H.R. 2000. “Filming Shakespeare’s History: Three Films of ‘Richard III’.” In The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare on Film, edited by Russell Jackson, 99–116. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, Anthony. 1988. Filming Shakespeare’s Plays: The Adaptations of Laurence Olivier, Orson Welles, Peter Brook and Akira Kurosawa. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dickens, Charles. 1861. Great Expectations. London: Chapman & Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, Peter. 1990. Shakespearean Films/Shakespearean Directors. London: Unwin Hyman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feuer, Jane. 1993. The Hollywood Musical, 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, Gerhard, and Bernhard Greiner, eds. 2007. The Play Within the Play: The Performance of Meta-theatre and Self-reflection. New York: Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, Janet Burnett. 2003. Looking at Greek and Roman Sculpture in Stone. Los Angeles: Getty Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatchuel, Sarah. 2004. Shakespeare, from Stage to Screen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Heath, Stephen. 1985. “‘Jaws’, Ideology and Film Theory.” In Movies and Methods Volume II, edited by Bill Nichols, 509–14. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, James E. 2003. Shakespeare and the History of Soliloquies. London: Associated University Presses.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, Peter. 1994. “Two-dimensional Shakespeare: ‘King Lear’ on Film.” In Shakespeare and the Moving Image: The Plays on Film and Television, edited by Anthony Davies and Stanley Wells, 50–68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornby, Richard. 1986. Drama, Metadrama and Perception. London: Associated University Presses.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howlett, Kathy M. 2000. Framing Shakespeare on Film. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, Russell. 2000. “From the Play-script to Screenplay.” In The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare on Film, edited by Russell Jackson, 15–34. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jorgens, Jack J. 1977. Shakespeare on Film. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann, Courtney. 2002. Shakespeare Remains: Theatre to Film, Early Modern to Postmodern. London: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindley, Arthur. 2002. “Scotland Saved from History: Welles’s ‘Macbeth’ and the Ahistoricism of Medieval Film.” In Shakespeare into Film, edited by James Michael Welsh, Richard Vela, and John C. Tibbetts, 141–5. New York: Checkmark.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loehlin, James N. 2000. “‘These Violent Delights Have Violent Ends’: Baz Luhrmann’s Millennial Shakespeare.” In Shakespeare, Film, Fin de Siècle, edited by Mark Thornton Burnett and Ramona Wray, 121–36. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacCabe, Colin. 1985. Theoretical Essays; Film, Linguistics, Literature. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McFarlane, Brian. 1996. Novel to Film: An Introduction to the Theory of Adaptation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasmus, Agnieszka. 2001. “‘I Could a Tale Unfold…’ From Metatheatre to Metacinema: Films within the Films in Shakespeare on Film.” Cadernos de Traduçäo 1, no. 7: 147–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothwell, Kenneth. 1999. A History of Shakespeare on Screen: A Century of Film and Television. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Semenza, Gregory. 2018. “Towards a Historical Turn? Adaptation Studies and the Challenges of History.” In The Routledge Companion to Adaptation, edited by Dennis Cutchins, Katja Krebs, and Eckart Voigts, 58–66. London: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, Ayanna, and Laura Turci. 2016. Teaching Shakespeare with Purpose: A Student-Centred Approach. London: Bloomsbury.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Todorov, Tzvetan. 1977. The Poetics of Prose. Translated by Richard Howard. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, Robert F., Jr. 2000. Shakespeare in Hollywood, 1929–1956. London: Associated University Presses.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wollen, Peter. 1985. “Godard and Counter Cinema: ‘Vent D’Est’.” In Movies and Methods Volume II, edited by Bill Nichols, 500–9. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worthen, W.B. 2003. Shakespeare and the Force of Modern Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Filmography

  • Cat Ballou. 1965. Directed by Elliot Silverstein. USA: Columbia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cesare Deve Morire (Caesar Must Die). 2012. Directed by Paolo Taviani and Vittorio Taviani. Italy: Kaos Cinematografica.

    Google Scholar 

  • Great Expectations. 1946. Directed by David Lean. UK: Cineguild.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamlet. 1948. Directed by Laurence Olivier. UK: Two Cities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamlet. 1964. Directed by Grigori Kozintsev. USSR: Lenfilm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamlet. 1990. Directed by Franco Zeffirelli. USA: Warner Bros.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamlet. 1996. Directed by Kenneth Branagh. UK: Castle Rock/Columbia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamlet. 2000. Directed by Michael Almereyda. USA: Double A Films.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henry V. 1989. Directed by Kenneth Branagh. UK: Renaissance Films.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaws. 1975. Directed by Steven Spielberg. USA: Universal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Julius Caesar. 1953. Directed by Joseph L. Mankiewicz. USA: MGM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macbeth. 1948. Directed by Orson Welles. USA: Mercury Productions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pride and Prejudice and Zombies. 2016. Directed by Burr Steers. UK/USA: Cross Creek Pictures.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richard III. 1955. Directed by Laurence Olivier. UK: London Film Productions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richard III. 1995. Directed by Richard Loncraine. UK: United Artists.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romeo and Juliet. 1954. Directed by Renato Castellani. UK/Italy: Rank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romeo and Juliet. 1968. Directed by Franko Zeffirelli. UK/Italy: BHE Films.

    Google Scholar 

  • Titus. 1999. Directed by Julie Taymor. USA: Twentieth Century Fox.

    Google Scholar 

  • William Shakespeare’s Romeo + Juliet. 1996. Directed by Baz Luhrmann. USA: Twentieth Century Fox.

    Google Scholar 

Paintings

  • Millais, John Everett. 1851–1852. Ophelia. Oil on canvas. London: Tate Britain.

    Google Scholar 

  • Velázquez, Diego. 1656. Las Meninas (The Maids of Honour). Oil on canvas. Madrid: Museo del Prado.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert Geal .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Geal, R. (2019). ‘Fainomaic’ Adaptation from the Verbal to the Visual. In: Anamorphic Authorship in Canonical Film Adaptation. Palgrave Studies in Adaptation and Visual Culture. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16496-6_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics