[Hardy-l] Re: Hardy-l Digest, Vol 37, Issue 15

[ANN WHITLOCK]

--- On Sun, 19/10/08, hardy-l-request at coyote.csusm.edu <hardy-l-request at coyote.csusm.edu> wrote:

From: hardy-l-request at coyote.csusm.edu <hardy-l-request at coyote.csusm.edu>
Subject: Hardy-l Digest, Vol 37, Issue 15
To: hardy-l at coyote.csusm.edu
Date: Sunday, 19 October, 2008, 7:00 PM



----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 22:53:50 +0000 (GMT)
From: carolyn mcgrath <carolynmcgrathuk at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: [Hardy-l] the surreal question
To: hardy-l at coyote.csusm.edu
Message-ID: <903410.1641.qm at web27406.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

Thanks for the reply, Pauline. I have the series recorded so shall watch it all
again over half-term and look out for all the points people have raised. A
friend of mine was watching the series and reading the book for the first time
alongside so I shall be interested to hear what she has to say.
 
I agree the series wasn't perfection by any means, but it was good to have
Hardy on mainstream TV. I was disappointed too by various bits, and found
certain actions a bit hammy. There was a moment you would have seen when Tess
was walking from the stone, past Angel, to the police when it felt like
'Exit, slowly and majestically, stage left'. It felt very stage-directed
at points and I think it needed something more 'filmy' - maybe something
grander in the filming - at that point, for example, to take a wider, aerial
shot of the police and the plains and a small figure amongst the stones. 

I think some of the 'surreality' of the book - don't know if that
is the right word in the right place, but I'll go with it - is when the
narrating voice takes on the timbre of a particular character, when it is their
perspective of the world that comes to the fore and the images take on the hue
of their sensibility or emotion at a particular time. I wanted the scene at the
wedding night at the D'Urbeville mansion to be more gothic than it was and
surreally grotesque at moments. Personally, I love the scene when Angel
sleep-walking carries Tess - I would have liked it kept in. Is it too much? I
think maybe it somehow complicate matters so was left out, to make things less
ambiguous again as I think it raises the question of Tess' passivity, which
is challenging. 

My criticism then would be it was too realistic or naturalistic - I hope I am
using these terms correctly - and would have benefited from a less conventional
filming approach. I need to read more film criticism to know how to use the
language properly so apologies to those who already know! Oh dear, not more
apologies - enough!

best wishes
Carolyn McGrath

Interesting thoughts. One of the main differences between watching the TV film and reading the text is that reading is a slow process of returning and shaping – it is almost impossible to recall first thoughts. It is not surprising that the first response to a filmed novel is disappointment if the interpretation does not re-awaken memory and association. Like you, I have decided to sit down and watch it again. I, too was disappointed at the cutting of the sleep walking episode. It would have been good to film because of the absence of dialogue and the emotional intensity of Tess’s unspoken thoughts. I have just read chapter 37 again and there is so much potential for a voice-over visual narrative, such as you suggest.I was trying to recall a visual moment  of emotional intensity in the film and think it would be in the last episode (a tiny detail) when John Durbeyfield’s gnarled fingers slowly reached out to Tess, as her hand slowly reached out to
 him – not immediately showing their faces – Quite some time over a minute detail.Perhaps there was metaphor in movement then?All the best,Ann Whitlock
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://coyote.csusm.edu/pipermail/hardy-l/attachments/20081020/d3a301ab/attachment.html