As a writer myself, I completely understand Alice Walker's use of family as inspiration, and desire for an intimacy with her ancestors. Even though she never met most of them, writing about them makes her feel as though she knows them.
I both agree and disagree with Bobo, for different reasons.
I agree with her that Steven Spielberg weakened the film. Although he is an accomplished director and perfectly capable of producing a great film, he could never have the intimacy with the characters that Walker had. His ancestors had different experiences. This is probably why Bobo felt Spielberg displaced the focus of the film--he didn't truly understand the focus, because he didn't have a personal connection with the film.
In another way, I disagree with Bobo. She was harsh on Spielberg, despite the fact that Walker allowed him to make the film. Doesn't the author's opinion mean something? Also, most movie adaptations of books fall short of the actual book. In this case, race happens to be a fact, but it is not a factor in many other adaptations.
However, I did find Bobo's arguments about gender very interesting, and supportive of her argument.
very well rounded response. and it got me thinking again about the experience issue. i could direct the film and it could be a huge disaster. you could direct it and could be a beautiful piece of cinema. i don't think experience in the subject will always translate into a successful project -- it can, but as stuart hall says, there are "no guarantees." what i like about your journal response is how you take the whole into account -- what is strong in her argument, what is weak, and you grapple with that thorny issue of situatedness and representation.
ReplyDelete