Read the following passage and answer question.
The matter of adaptation of literary or theatrical works to the Cinema has been taken for granted by most early filmmakers including – not the least among them – Sergei Eisenstein. The Lessons With Eisenstein, as recorded by one of his students, Vladimir Nizhny, are, in fact, lessons in film adaptation … Reading Lessons with Eisenstein gives the impression that filmmaking is adaptation. We’re not some of our most memorable film experiences derived from novels, plays, Broadway shows? So, what is the problem? The author is dead – or nearly so. Texts are open – or can be opened Plagiarism is an empty concept.
Adaptation has been an issue in both classic and post-classic – that is, pre-mid- 1960s and post-mid-1960s – film theory. But whereas classical theory dealt with the transfer of a work from one set of codes to another set, recent film theory of adaptation offers but variations on the theme of authorship. For, to paraphrase Robin Wood, if you have a masterpiece, sooner or later the presence of the master will be felt. This is why film adaptation remains an important issue today in as much as auteurism endures.
One could, of course, allude here to the observation of McLuhan that any new medium absorbs the products of earlier media. That is what film did with regard to literary and theatrical works. And we can see the same phenomenon occurring today with television. This new comer, indeed, absorbs everything; journalism, education, religion, entertainment, sports, arts, business – all. But McLuhan has not done much more, in this respect, than to help us to take note of a rather obvious phenomenon. This phenomenon creates problems for the filmmaker. The latter shows that a screening of his or her film on the TV network has important implications regarding the very perception of the film – let alone necessary market implications. While making film, a filmmaker may have to keep in mind that his or her film may eventually be shown on TV and this may mean disaster to the complex sound track, to image composition where the values of colour and masses may be neutralized, and, above all, to framing. It is not a purists matter of the work being unaltered, faithfully reproduced It is a matter of life or death: there are film segments that just won’t go on the small screen.
Similarly, the adaptation of a literary or theatrical work to film can be a matter of life or death for the work concerned As Andrey Tarkovsky has noticed:
Some works have a wholeness, and are endowed with a precise and original literary image, characters are drawn in unfathomable depths, the composition has an extraordinary capacity for enchantment, and the book is indivisible; through the pages comes the astonishing, unique personality of the author; books like that are master pieces, and only someone who is actually indifferent both to fine prose and to the Cinema can conceive the urge to screen them. It is all the more important to emphasize this point now, when the time has come for literature to be separated, once and for all, from cinema.
Q1. What did the Lessons with Eisenstein talk about?
(A) Lessons of adaptation of literary works to cinema
(B) Eisenstein’s life
(C) About cinema making
(D) About what Eisenstein taught his students
Correct Ans: (A)
Explanation:
Eisenstein’s lessons focused on the adaptation of literary works into cinema. He believed that films should not just tell stories but also interpret them visually. His student, Vladimir Nizhny, recorded these lessons, emphasizing how filmmakers must transform written texts into cinematic language. Many early filmmakers, including Eisenstein, considered adaptation a natural part of filmmaking. They saw it as an essential process rather than a challenge. Moreover, adaptation allowed films to bring literature and theater to a larger audience. Thus, the lessons highlighted how cinema could reshape stories into a new artistic form while retaining their essence.
Q2. What is the difference between the classical theory and recent film theory on adaptation?
(A) The difference in authorship of the adapted film.
(B) The variations on film themes.
(C) The classical one talks about the original while the recent one talks about the new theme.
(D) Classical theories talk about changes of codes, whereas the recent theories talk of variations of authorship of themes.
Correct Ans: (D)
Explanation:
Classical theory focused on changing one set of codes into another. It analyzed how stories moved from literature or theater into film. However, recent film theory shifted its focus to authorship. It explored how the filmmaker’s creative presence influenced adaptations. Robin Wood suggested that a true masterpiece always reveals the influence of its creator. Thus, classical theory examined structural changes, while modern theory emphasized the filmmaker’s role. This change in perspective makes adaptation a debate about artistic control rather than just transformation.
Q3. What is the opinion of McLuhan on adaptation?
(A) A new work of art is created through adaptation.
(B) The new medium takes in the past works of art and absorbs.
(C) All art works are absorbed by television.
(D) All works of art are destroyed by emerging media.
Correct Ans: (B)
Explanation:
McLuhan believed new media absorb earlier forms. Film took content from literature and theater, just as television now absorbs film. He pointed out that television integrates various aspects of society, including journalism, education, and entertainment. However, he did not see this as a revolutionary idea. Instead, he viewed it as an inevitable process. His observation helped highlight how media evolution affects storytelling. This absorption changes how audiences experience content, making adaptation a continuous transformation rather than a simple reproduction.
Q4. Identify the areas of negative influence that television may have on an adapted film?
(A) The director’s business
(B) The story, character and dialogue
(C) The sound track, colour and framing
(D) The screening of a film in TV
Correct Ans: (C)
Explanation:
Television can negatively affect a film’s sound, color, and framing. A film’s soundtrack may lose its depth when played on television. The composition of images may also suffer because TV screens often alter color balance. Moreover, framing, which is crucial in cinema, may not translate well to the small screen. Directors must anticipate these challenges while making films. Otherwise, important visual and auditory elements may lose their intended impact. This shift forces filmmakers to reconsider how their work will be perceived on different platforms.
Q5. What is the suggestion of Tarkovsky to solve the problem of ‘life and death for a film’?
(A) Showing a film in television to be made compulsory.
(B) Adaptation from literature is a must for films.
(C) Separate the author from the film.
(D) Separate literature from Cinema completely.
Correct Ans: (D)
Explanation:
Tarkovsky strongly believed literature and cinema should remain separate. He argued that some literary works are too complete to be adapted. Their depth, structure, and author’s unique voice cannot be transferred effectively to film. He warned that adapting such masterpieces could diminish their artistic value. Instead, he suggested that filmmakers create original works suited for cinema. This approach would preserve the integrity of both literature and film. Thus, he emphasized the need for independent storytelling rather than forced adaptation.
