The theory of adaptation and the study of literature

Uporaba medijskih priredb literature je precej razširjena pri različnih oblikah (po) uče(va)nja književnosti v osnovnih in srednjih šolah, hkrati pa slabo metodološko in teoretično podprta. Prispevek razmišlja, kako bi bilo s teorijo priredb omenjeno prakso mogoče izboljšati v smeri aktiviranja in sistematiziranja izkušenj učencev. S tega stališča se zdijo uporabna naslednja izhodišča. Prvič: avtorstvo. Teorija priredb prevprašuje status izvirnosti pri nekaterih kanonskih literarnih delih tako, da jih vzpostavlja kot predelave v nizu besedil. Zavrača apriorno hierarhijo med literaturo in drugimi (umetniškimi) mediji, posledično tudi princip zvestobe predelave izvirniku, za katerega domnevam, da je najpogostejši šolski pristop pri analizi priredb. To učencem odpira nove poglede na literaturo (npr. vprašanje kanona, vloga literature v družbi, ekonomski vidiki umetniške, sploh priredbene produkcije) pa tudi lastno ustvarjalnost. Drugič: primerjava med različnimi umetniškimi mediji je v skladu z navodili v učnem načrtu eden od osnovnih ciljev analize priredbenega procesa. Prispevek osvetli nekaj principov soočanja semiotičnih sistemov na podlagi primerjave med umetniškimi izvedbami skupne pripovedi (na primer po naratoloških kategorijah, kot so koncept pripovedovanje/ prikazovanje oziroma globinske strukture, zgodba, oseba, prostor, čas). Ker pa je opredeljevanje umetniških medijev kot čistih, izraznih zlasti v enem kodu (npr. film kot umetnost podobe), problematično, se ga zdi smiselno nadgrajevati s premiso, da je sleherni medij večkoden oziroma hibriden. Učencem, ki se v prostem času srečujejo predvsem z elektronskimi teksti, tak pristop omogoča refleksijo ter sistematizacijo spontano pridobljenih izkušenj. Tretjič, a nič manj pomembno: recepcija. Primerjanje lastnega odzivanja na čustvene, miselne in etične signale kot tudi na prazna mesta v umetniških delih v različnih medijih ponuja odlična izhodišča za kritični premislek o lastni vlogi receptorja.Media adaptations of literature are frequently used at various levels of teaching and study of literature yet without a systematic methodological approach. The paper examines how the theory of adaptation could improve this practice, particularly by incorporating students\u27 experience into systematic knowledge about literature. To this aim, the following directions seem useful. Firstly, the curriculum presents the comparison of various artistic media as one of the basic aims of the analysis of the adaptation process. The paper looks at certain principles of comparison of different semiotic systems based on the analysis of various presentations of the common narrative (e.g. following narratological categories such as showing/telling or deep structures such as plot, character, space, time). The models defining media as pure, expressive particularly in one code (e.g. "pure film" as based on image only) have been criticised, thus it seems useful to claim that "all media are mixed media, combining different codes" (Mitchell 1999, 94). Students may profit by such approach as it offers theoretical reflection on the electronic messages which they predominantly encounter in their free time. Secondly, authorshipthe theory of adaptation questions the originality of certain cannon texts by presenting them as stages in the adaptation process which consists of several texts. Moreover, it problematises the hierarchy between literature and other artistic media, and consequently the "fidelity of the adaptation to the source", which, I assume, is still the most frequent approach to adaptation at various levels of the study of literature. Students thus gain new insights into the concept of literature (particularly its social and economical aspects) as well as into their own creativity. Finally, reception: the comparison of different modes of students reactions the emotional, mental and ethical signals as well as to the "blanks" of the artworks in various media offers good grounds for the reflection of their own reception process