Concept, Gaze, Execution: Women Artists Interpret Male Subjects and Authors (Seminar) (51st NeMLA Convention)
Organization: Northeast Modern Languages Association
Event: 51st NeMLA Convention
Abstract submissions invited - please submit and circulate widely!
Concept, Gaze, Execution: Women Artists Interpret Male Subjects and Authors (Seminar)
51st Annual NeMLA Convention: March 5-8, 2020 (Boston, MA)
deadline for submissions:
September 30, 2019
This session seeks to stage a conversation about the idea of adaptation, with a focus on how women writers and directors script performative interpretations of male subjects or texts by male authors. Papers can look at Shakespeare restaged by women playwrights and directors, modes of engagement, the continued debate about originality versus adaptation versus appropriation, the impact of contexts and audiences, or the hybridity of transcultural adaptations. When Snapchat demands images that appear and disappear, do our theories regarding adaptation need to be reshaped? Or can they ‘travel’ in time as Said theorized for space and place?
Full panel description below and at this link:
Please note: you do not need to be a NEMLA member to submit an abstract.
Abstract submission guidelines:
Questions about the panel: firstname.lastname@example.org; Java.email@example.com
Areas: Comparative Literature / Women's and Gender Studies
This session seeks to stage a conversation about the idea of adaptation, which Linda Hutcheon defines as “an announced and extensive transposition of a particular work or works”, as both a “product” and a “process”. The panel is especially interested in how women writers and directors script performative interpretations of male subjects or texts by male authors.
Thus, papers can look at Shakespeare as restaged by women playwrights and directors, for example, or women film-makers who direct features on male subjects. Papers can focus on the modes of engagement -- “showing”, “telling”, and “interacting” (following Hutcheon) -- or on the continued debate about originality versus adaptation versus appropriation. Others could analyze the impact of contexts and audiences on form and content or the hybridity that defines transcultural adaptations.
As Said theorized, “Texts have ways of existing, both theoretical and practical, that even in their most rarefied form are always enmeshed in circumstance, time, place and society – in short, they are in the world, and hence are worldly.” In today’s world saturated by social and mass media, what does it mean for a text to be ‘worldly’? Is a tweet ‘worldly’ and can it be adapted? Does the phenomenon of ‘re-tweeting’ constitute ‘sampling’? If so, it does not qualify as adaptation, per Hutcheon’s categorization. When Snapchat’s raison d’être is to make images appear and subsequently disappear, while Instagram allows the staging of one’s life via images, sans textual narration, do our theories regarding adaptation need to be reshaped? Or can they ‘travel’ in time as Said theorized they did in space and place? Finally, how does the gendered nature of adaptation present itself in ‘product and process’, whether we look at the gender of authors or those who create adaptations?