LOOKING FOR HETEROGLOSSIA AND CHRONOTOPE IN NEW YORK AND LONDON: PACINO AND LONCRAINE’S ADAPTATIONS OF RICHARD III
Vol.5, Issue 1, 2019, pp.59-76 Full text
DOI https://doi.org/10.33919/esnbu.19.1.3 ☍
Author: Mohammad Reza Hassanzadeh Javanian
University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
The relationship between a cinematic adaptation and its literary source has sparked scholarly debates in the field of adaptation studies. Developed by the Russian literary critic, Mikhail Bakhtin (1895-1975), dialogism can shed new light on the adaptation-source tie as it highlights the mutual interaction between the two sides. The present study argues that Al Pacino and Richard Loncraine’s versions of William Shakespeare’s Richard III (1593) stress such a dialogic aspect of the adaptation process. Within this dialogic framework, Pacino’s Looking for Richard (1996) establishes a heteroglossial relation with the play as it seeks to eliminate the gap between Shakespeare and the movie’s modern viewers. Loncraine’s Richard III (1995), however, is marked by a significant chronotopic strategy which situates Richard in new social and political contexts through a change in the play’s temporal and spatial elements.
Keywords: dialogism, heteroglossia, chronotope, adaptation studies, Mikhail Bakhtin, William Shakespeare
Received: 30 November 2018;
Reviewed: 7 March 2019;
Accepted: 18 April 2019;
Published: 1 June 2019
Hassanzadeh Javanian, M. R. (2019). Looking for Heteroglossia and Chronotope in New York and London: Pacino and Loncraine’s Adaptations of Richard III. English Studies at NBU, 5(1), 59-76. https://doi.org/10.33919/esnbu.19.1.3 ☍
Copyright © 2019 Mohammad Reza Hassanzadeh Javanian
This open access article is published and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0), which permits non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. If you want to use the work commercially, you must first get the authors' permission.
Alexander, L. (2007). Storytelling in Time and Space: Studies in the Chronotope and Narrative Logic on Screen. Journal of Narrative Theory, 37(1), 27-64. https://doi.org/10.1353/jnt.2007.0014 ☍
Aronowitz, S. (1995). Literature as Social Knowledge: Mikhail Bakhtin and the Reemergence of the Human Sciences. In A. Mandelker (Ed.), Bakhtin in Contexts: Across the Disciplines (pp. 119-137). Illinois: Northwestern University Press.
Aune, M. G. (2006). The Uses of “Richard III”: From Robert Cecil to Richard Nixon. Shakespeare Bulletin, 24(3), 23-47. https://doi.org/10.1353/shb.2006.0045 ☍
Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The Dialogic Imagination. (M. Holquist and C. Emerson, Trans.) Texas: University of Texas Press (Original work published 1975).
Best, J. (1994). The Chronotope and the Generation of Meaning in Novels and Paintings. Criticism, 36(2), 291-316.
Boozer, J. (2008). Introduction: The Screenplay and Authorship in Adaptation. In J. Boozer (Ed.), Authorship in Film Adaptation (pp. 1-31). Texas: University of Texas Press.
Buckland, W. (1998). Film Studies. London: Hodder & Stoughton.
Cartelli, T. (2003). Shakespeare and the Street: Pacino’s Looking for Richard, Bedford’s Street King, and the common understanding. In R. Burt and L. E. Boose (Eds.), Shakespeare, the Movie, II: Popularizing the Plays on Film, TV, Video, and DVD (pp. 186-200). New York and London: Routledge.
Collington, T. & Collington P. (2014). “The Time When ... The Place Where”: Chronotopes and Chronologies in “Love’s Labour’s Lost”. Studies in Philology, 111(4), 786-820. https://doi.org/10.1353/sip.2014.0027 ☍
Combs, R. & Durgnat, R. (2001). Shakespeare: A Chaos Theory. Film Comment, 37(4), 56-59.
Dessen, A. C. (2004). Rescripting Shakespeare: The Text, the Director, and Modern Productions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Eley, G. (2001). Finding the People’s War: Film, British Collective Memory, and World War II. The American Historical Review, 106(3), 818-838. https://doi.org/10.2307/2692326 ☍
Fedderson, K. and Richardson J. M. (2009). Shakespeare's Multiple Metamorphoses: Authenticity Agonistes. College Literature, 36(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1353/lit.0.0040 ☍
Flanagan, M. (2009). Bakhtin and the Movies: New Ways of Understanding Hollywood Film. London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230252042 ☍
French, E. (2006). Selling Shakespeare to Hollywood: The Marketing of Filmed Shakespeare Adaptations from 1989 into the New Millennium. Hertfordshire: University of Hertfordshire Press.
Hatchuel, S. (2004). Shakespeare, from Stage to Screen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511483615 ☍
Henderson, D. E. (2007). From popular entertainment to literature. In R. Shaughnessy (Ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare and Popular Culture (pp. 6-26). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CCOL9780521844291.002 ☍
Hindle, M. (2007). Studying Shakespeare on Film. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hitchcock, P. (1998). The Grotesque of the Body Electric. In M. M. Bell & M. Gardiner (Eds.), Bakhtin and the Human Sciences (pp. 78-95). California: SAGE Publications.
Holquist, M. (2002). Dialogism: Bakhtin and his World. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203425855 ☍
Hoy, M. (1992). Bakhtin and Popular Culture. New Literary History, 23(3), 765-782. https://doi.org/10.2307/469229 ☍
Hudelet, A. (2012). Austen and Sterne: Beyond Heritage. In D. Cartmell (Ed.), A Companion to Literature, Film, and Adaptation (pp. 256-272). New Jersey: Wiley Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118312032.ch14 ☍
Jackson, R. (2014). Shakespeare and the English-speaking Cinema. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Johnson, J. S. (2004). The Propaganda Imperative: Challenging Mass Media Representations in McKellen’s Richard III. College Literature, 31(4), 44-59. https://doi.org/10.1353/lit.2004.0059 ☍
Kohn, R. E. (2005). Parody, Heteroglossia, and Chronotope in Don DeLillo’s Great Jones Street. Style, 39(2), 206-215.
Lanier, D. (2007). Shakespeare TM: Myth and Biographical Fiction. In R. Shaughnessy (Ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare and Popular Culture (pp. 93-114). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CCOL9780521844291.006 ☍
Lodge, D. (1990). After Bakhtin: Essays on Fiction and Criticism. New York: Routledge.
Marowitz, C. (2004). Cinematizing Shakespeare. Shakespeare Bulletin, 22(2), 67-78.
Marshall, K. (2009). The Creative Process and the Power of Art in “Shakespeare Behind Bars”, or So This Is What “Looking for Richard’ Meant to Do?” Literature/Film Quarterly, 37(2), 140-150.
Mitchell, D. T. & Snyder S. L. (2000). Narrative Prosthesis: Disability and the Dependencies of Discourse. Michigan: University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.11523 ☍
Morgan, D. (1996). Andrew Suknaski’s “Wood Mountain Time” and the Chronotope of Multiculturalism. Mosaic: An Interdisciplinary Critical Journal, 29(3), 35-51.
Sandywell, B. (1998). The Shock of the Old: Mikhail Bakhtin’s Contributions to the Theory of Time and Alterity. In M. M. Bell & M. Gardiner (Eds.), Bakhtin and the Human Sciences (pp. 196-214). California: SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446278949.n13 ☍
Sinyard, N. (2000). Shakespeare Meets The Godfather: The Postmodern Populism of Al Pacino's Looking for Richard. In M. T. Burnett & R. Wray (Eds.), Shakespeare, Film, Fin de Siècle (pp. 58-73). New York and London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Steinby, L. (2013). Bakhtin’s Concept of the Chronotope: The Viewpoint of an Acting Subject. In L. Steinby & T. Klapuri (Eds.), Bakhtin and his Others: (Inter)subjectivity, Chronotope, Dialogism (pp. 105-127). London and New York: Anthem Press. https://doi.org/10.7135/9780857283108.009 ☍
Stone, J. (2008). Polyphony and the Atomic Age: Bakhtin’s Assimilation of an Einsteinian Universe. PMLA, 123(2), 405-421. https://doi.org/10.1632/pmla.2008.123.2.405 ☍
Van der Liet, H. (1999). “Haven't You Heard . . .”: Speech and Chronotope in Peer Hultberg’s Novel “Byen og Verden”. Scandinavian Studies, 71(2), 207-220.
van Elk, M. (2007). “Determined to Prove a Villain”: Criticism, Pedagogy, and “Richard III”. College Literature, 34(4), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1353/lit.2007.0050 ☍
Walker, E. (2006). Getting Back to Shakespeare: Whose Film is it Anyway? In D. E. Henderson (Ed.), A Concise Companion to Shakespeare on Screen (pp. 8-31). New Jersey: Blackwell Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470757659.ch1 ☍
1. Reviewer's name: Magdalena Grabias, PhD, Maria Curie-Sklodowska University, Poland
Publons Reviewer Profile
The manuscript constitutes an original study of the subject. The author bases his research on Mikhail Bakhtin’s notions of heteroglossia and chronotope and applies them to two contemporary cinematic adaptations of William Shakespeare’s Richard III. The study provides an interesting read for an academic and non-academic reader alike. The author states the aim of the research and scrupulously provides arguments in its favour by means of referring to a broad number of theoretical works. The article allows the reader to form an idea of the discussed field, as well as to follow the author’s clear arguments in the course of the reading, leading up to the conclusion. The manuscript is a sound addition to the fields of literature studies and film studies.
Review Verified on Publons https://publons.com/publon/16395438/ ☍
2. Reviewer's name: Irene Ranzato, PhD, Sapienza University of Roma, Italy
Publons Reviewer Profile
Although the article is based on a ‘classic’ theoretical framework such as Bakhtin’s discourse on dialogism, the line of reasoning followed by the author is original and insightful. The paper is well-structured and its purpose well-defined. Adaptation studies and philosophical sources have been well-selected. The methodological approach is very sound. Being at the intersection of disciplines, it can naturally interest even a readership not strictly concerned with the topic at hand.
Review Verified on Publons https://publons.com/publon/16395438/ ☍
Handling Editor: Stan Bogdanov
Verified Editor Record on Publons: https://publons.com/publon/16395438/ ☍