For my final project, I have chosen to examine the popular Hunger Games book by Suzanne Collins and the accompanying film of the same name directed by Gary Ross.  The book, an adventure novel, takes place in a desolate and post-apocalyptic America, now called Panem, divided into thirteen districts (one of which was destroyed) and ruled by the Capital and its ruthless president, Coriolanus Snow. The plot of the book follows the protagonist, Katniss Everdeen, as she struggles to survive in the annual death match orchestrated by the Capital as a punishment to the districts for previous revolts. Gary Ross stays true to the overarching plot, but also makes a number of alterations to the story line in the film interpretation.

The largest change that I noticed was in the level of violence. In the book, Collins describes very violent and harsh behaviors perpetrated by the children selected, or reaped, for the annual Hunger Games hosted by the Capital. The film, on the other hand, implies violence, but actually shows very little. One instance where this was especially noticeable was during the time spent in the cave by Katniss and Peeta. While retrieving the medicine needed to save Peeta, Katniss sustains a massive cut to her forehead culminating in her losing consciousness. In the book, this event is very tense, leaving the reader wondering whether or not Katniss could survive such an injury. In the film, however, this injury is presented as a laughable scratch, one barely warranting a band-aid. Another instance is in how Peeta’s leg injuries were handled. In the book, Peeta loses his leg after sustaining multiply injuries and eventually requiring a tourniquet, something not even hinted at in the film. These choices were undoubtedly made to preserve a rating that would allow young adults, the target age group for the book, to see the film.

Another difference is the physical appearance of the Hunger Games contestants in the film. Jennifer Lawrence, while she does a fantastic job in her portrayal of Katniss, does not fit the physical description of someone who is starving, or as in the end of the book, near death. In fact, she looks like a picture of ideal health, quite robust in her appearance. The same can be said for almost all of the other children cast in the role of tributes. Obviously the filmmakers were not going to starve an actor or actress in order to match Collins’ descriptions, so Ross chose to omit the reason for the Hunger Games being named what they are (that is, a game in which contestants frequently starve to death) likely to avoid this issue in the film. By doing this, Ross focused more on the action of the games and the emotions of the characters than some of the backstory provided in Collins’ book.  

One of Ross’s biggest successes was in his use of music. By making smart musical choices, Ross was able to elicit many of the emotions of the book, while maintaining a fast pace for the film. An event that took Collins several pages to explain could take literally seconds to take place on film. Much of the book focuses on Katniss’s inner struggles and internal dialogues, so short of including a narrator, these thoughts would be hard to translate to film. Ross cleverly turned some of these thoughts into actual dialogue for Katniss while other times he established the emotions felt by Katniss through wise musical choices.  In addition to providing the emotional connections, the music also added to the setting of the film. Much of the music harkens to folk music found in the Appalachians, the region of the country where the book and film are set. I felt like this musical choice helped to deepen Ross’s interpretation of the book while not taking extra time away from the action.

Another success of the film was the quality of the acting. Ross made very smart choices in his casting. Although many of the actors and actresses were in their teens or early twenties, they were able to provide top quality performances. Jennifer Lawrence, who has been honored by the Academy Awards, did an especially good job as Katniss, instilling a lot of the emotion felt by readers of the book. Another superb job was done by Amandla Stenberg, the young girl chosen to play Katniss’s ally, Rue. Stenberg was able to portray the heartbreaking role with class and talent. Rue’s defining moment in the story is in her death. Many times in films, especially with children, death scenes can seem very hokey and overacted, but Stenberg did a fabulous job, likely due to direction given by Ross.

As I mentioned earlier, Ross was successful in harnessing the emotion found in the original text. While many directors, given the story he was presented with, would have run wild with the amount of violence. Rather than glorifying the violence in the way most modern Hollywood movies do, Ross chose to go a different route. By downplaying this violence, Ross was able to spend more time focused on the story line and he also removed the distraction of violence. In fact, by minimizing the exposure to violent images, Ross was paying tribute to Collins’ message warning of the dangers of violence as a means of entertainment.

Overall, Ross made smart choices in his interpretation of Collins’ book. Instead of making a literal interpretation to the story in tune with the model set forth by the makers of the Harry Potter films, Ross made his own interpretation of the story. He wisely infused the main elements of the book that readers fell in love with and stuck true to the emotion of the book, while making the changes he saw fit, thus creating a successful and enjoyable film independent from the book. He obviously recognized the importance of the original text, but also realized that he was creating a film, not a book. In this type of transition, storylines must be streamlined, backstories shortened (or eliminated if not pertinent), and parts well cast, all while keeping a level of respect for the readers and the original story.  As a book lover, I was happy with the choices he made, and as a film goer, I was also pleased; a rare occurrence! As an independent artist, Ross was able to stick true to the main plotline and the emotions embedded in the text, but in the end he created a film that could be read independent of the book, establishing it as a piece of art on its own rather than another “accessory” or piece of merchandising in a franchise.

Prior to taking this course, I probably would not have enjoyed this movie as much as I did. When I read a book, I fall in love with every detail and The Hunger Games was no different.  When I love a book so much, I always struggle to enjoy the film version because I want to see a version of what I created in my own imagination, complete with all the details and anecdotes from the original text. Maybe it is just that the film version of The Hunger Games was just very well done, or maybe it is that my thinking on film interpretations has changed, but I was actually very happy with the film.

In Laura’s journal for week 2, the idea of a film’s fidelity to the original text was examined. When translating a book into film, it is obvious that cuts need to be made for the sake of time, but we were left to ponder how the filmmaker decided which cuts to make, and what affect those cuts had.  In The Hunger Games, Ross had a good balance between elements from the original text and changes made in order to make a successful film. One interesting choice that he made was in his handling of the mutts at the end of the games. In the book, the mutts are mutated animals engineered by the Capital and are not limited to the dog-like creatures from the film. In fact, the jabber-jay is a result of the Capital’s engineering and is also considered a mutt. The mutts that chase Peeta and Katniss at the end of the games are made even more frightening in Collins’ description because they had been made to resemble the fallen tributes. In the film however, they are not much more than big dogs. Ordinarily, changes like these would have turned me off from the film, but I now understand why they were done and can enjoy the film for what it is.

One interesting departure from the original text is the shift in perspective. In the book, we are presented with only Katniss’s view of the events surrounding her. We are presented with her feelings, her confusion, her opinions. In the film, however, Ross shows a variety of perspectives showing different sides of what is happening in Panem. The most interesting is the increased focus on President Snow. In the book, we form a hatred for the character based on Katniss’s opinions of him. Without the ability to be inside Katniss’s head in the film, Ross had to find a way for viewers to form this opinion without this luxury. By creating scenes with Snow independent of what Katniss would have known in the book, Ross was able to achieve the same goal set forth by Collins but in a method more fit for film. In making this choice, I think Ross established the film as a separate entity from the original text while not only honoring the book, but possibly adding to it with the addition of these different viewpoints.

Perhaps the most formative unit for me in this course was the examination of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz and the more popular film version, The Wizard of Oz. Like many people, I grew up watching The Wizard of Oz, and also like many people, I had not read the book beforehand. Upon reading the book, I came to realize that both the film and the book had their merits as films and books, and idea that I feel like I am now able to apply to new books and films that I read.

In the case of The Hunger Games, the book has been very popular and was published very close to the release of the film, making this situation different from that of The Wizard of Oz where there was a 39 year gap.  While the Oz film overshadowed the book version, I would say that the book and film for The Hunger Games are probably close in terms of popularity. In the long term, however, it is hard to say whether one will overshadow the other. The film is very well made, so like The Wizard of Oz, I could see the film becoming more popular. On the other hand though, the book is extremely well written, so I can also see how that would continue to be popular as well. 

Prior to taking this course, I will admit that I was rather shallow in my viewing of films, especially films based on books. I have really enjoyed being able to think more deeply about the underlying messages found in film and now find myself making these connections in the things I see on TV and in film.

The Hunger Games is a very political book and film. The story focuses on the problems that arise when governments become too powerful and take power away from the people. The power of the Capital is shown throughout the book, but the games themselves are the biggest display of this power. As mentioned outright in the book and film, the games are a way to remind the people of the power of the Capital and that any attempts at revolting would be useless. Katniss, sometimes unknowingly, challenges this power, thus inspiring others in the districts to have the strength to rise up.  This is seen in her handling of Rue’s death when she decorates the body with flowers, showing the viewers in the districts that this was not just another body, but an actual human, a little girl, that has been killed.  The most controversial challenge to power, however, is when Katniss brings out the deadlock berries. In the book, Katniss is portrayed as naïve and also a survivalist, doing whatever is necessary to survive. In the case of the berries, I believe that Katniss saw this as the only way for her and Peeta to survive the games, not as a way to stick it to the Capital, although this is how it was interpreted by many in the districts, and especially by Snow. 

One of my favorite realizations was the gender role reversal of the book and film. Typically, the female character is in distress, waiting to be rescued by the male hero. In this case, however, the roles have been reversed to some extent. Typically, the female in a story is more emotional while the male is the more logical one. In this case, Peeta is the obvious romantic of the two, while Katniss is more focused on the logistics of survival. Also, Katniss, on many occasions, comes to Peeta’s rescue, repeatedly saving his life. It would have been easy for Collins to make Peeta useless, dependent on Katniss for everything, but she chose not to do this. Instead, she made the two very complimentary to one another in terms of their strengths and weaknesses. This was very refreshing as normally authors and film makers feel the need to have relationships that are dominated by one gender or the other. I did not feel this was the case with The Hunger Games. 

As a third grade teacher, this is not a book that I would be teaching to my students, however, I can see the value of teaching this to middle school or high school students. If I were to teach this, there are many directions in which I could go, but the most intriguing to me are some of the themes and the historical connections.

As a history teacher, I think this would make a great connection when teaching about Ancient Rome. The most glaringly obvious connection is to that of the gladiators. Like the Hunger Games, the Romans also employed blood sport as a form of entertainment. Gladiators would fight to the death as the audience watched and cheered on their favorites, exactly like in the Hunger Games. After digging a little deeper, there are more connections to be made, mostly in the use of names. Panem, the name of the country, comes from the term “Panem et Circenses” which means “Bread and Circuses” in Latin. (Everett, S.)  This is the means by which the Romans controlled their people; bread and entertainment kept the citizens happy, thus causing fewer problems for the government. (Capitolium.org, 1999) While the games did not make the people in Panem happy, other than those in the Capital, it did keep them from rising up for at least 74 years. Using this comparison as a jumping off point, it would be interesting to challenge students to make connections to other names in the book and research how those connections are relevant to the stories being told by Collins and Ross.

A less obvious, but just as interesting, connection could be to that of the Nazi regime. For students studying World War II, an examination into the similarity between Nazi Germany and the practices of Panem would likely elicit some interesting and enlightening perspectives.  While the Romans hoped to keep their citizens complacent and distracted, the Nazis operated with fear tactics more similar to what was in place in Panem.  In The Hunger Games, the citizens in the districts were being punished for revolting by taking place in the annual death matches. Similarly, Jews were being punished by Hitler for his belief that they were the cause of society’s problems. Not only are these messages described in the book, but the visuals created by Ross also harken to the Nazi era. In looking at the architecture of the Capital and the Justice Building, a nod to Nazi design was apparent. For students, it would be interesting to see what other connections they could make, specifically to the Holocaust and the treatment of Jews by the Nazis.  

Since the story is set in America, it is hard to ignore the comparisons to the early formation of our own country. In the book, the country was divided into thirteen districts, similar to how our country was originally organized into thirteen colonies. Like the colonies, the districts provided goods for the Capital, or in our case, the British. Like the Capital, the British ruled in a totalitarian manner, allowing for few freedoms for the colonists, leading to a revolution orchestrated by everyday citizens. Allowing students to explore these comparisons would likely lead to a deeper appreciation of the book and a better understanding of the motivation felt by the colonists.

In examining the idea of power in the Hunger Games, one first thinks of the obvious holder of power, that is the government and the president.  Looking deeper, however, we come to find that even someone as seemingly unimportant as a teenager from a lowly district has just as much power as an entire government.  This study into the power structure of The Hunger Games could provide an opportunity for students to discuss the roles of citizens in different types of governments, a valuable lesson in any political science class. Students could further debate why they think the structure of government in Panem was successful for as long as it was, and whether they think a system like that could work in today’s world.

Class is a very important element in this story, with glaring differences between those in the Capital and those in the districts. Economically, socially, and physically, the people of the Capital could not be any different from the citizens of the districts. While the people in the Capital are concerned with entertainment, their appearance, and food, the people of districts are simply trying to survive. While described well in the book, these differences are even more apparent in the film where the outlandish appearance of the Capital dwellers is brought to life. Challenging students to draw comparisons between the lower, middle, and upper classes in America with the class structure of Panem would provide for an interesting look at what happens when people are placed in a class without a means of moving up. In America, we can move between classes based on merit and our ability to work (ideally at least). In Panem, however, you are essentially stuck within the class you were born in, unless, of course, you can survive the Hunger Games.

Suzanne Collins’ book is full of symbolism and provides a great platform for teaching this idea to students. Flowers, for example, are used in a number of ways throughout the book and film, from Katniss’s love of dandelions (a symbol of hope and a reminder of her self-sufficiency) to Prim’s name (Primrose), to the way Katniss uses flowers to decorate Rue’s body, flowers play a very symbolic role in the book and film.  Bread is also another important symbol used throughout the book. As mentioned earlier, the name Panem actually means bread. Peeta (Pita) is a type of bread. Peeta’s father is a baker, and Peeta saves Katniss’s family from near starvation by giving her bread. After Rue’s death, District 11 sends her bread from their district. Over and over, bread and used as a symbol of life. Having students examine these symbols, as well as other such as the mockingjay, the three finger salute, and food, would provide a focus for deeper exploration of the text and film while strengthening their understanding of symbolism.

Just as filmmakers are independent artists, so too are teachers. Like a film maker, we are often presented with an overwhelming amount of information. It is our job then, as teachers, to pare that information down and present it to our students in a way that will provide a depth of understanding while remaining within the constraints of the overarching theme or topic, much in the way a film maker translates a novel into an hour and a half film. This need for decision making and editing is true in literature and film, but could also be extrapolated to anything for which teachers may be responsible.

Like filmmakers, we are responsible for helping to shape a story for our students. A filmmaker, however, is more limited in their translation of the text. Without making a major departure from the text, filmmakers are typically limited to making omissions and minor additions, rather than the more interpretive take that teachers can employ.  Making too big of a change will upset the fan base of the book, while an interpretation that is too literal, such as Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone, can cause a film to be watered down and pale compared to the original text.  As teachers, we are free to explore the themes, backstories, and social implications of a text without the limitations found by a filmmaker. Just as Laura posed the question in week two, “How did they decide which cuts to make and what effect does that have?” As teachers, we should ponder this question as well as, determining what to focus on when instructing our students. What is important to the point I am trying to make with my students? By leaving out other points, am I going to be doing a disservice to the text/film or my students?

While it is vital for teachers to help students in reading a film or book, there is also a reason for caution. When guiding children through a text, it can be very easy to instill our own feelings and opinions into the text, but this should be avoided. Students should be encouraged to come to their own conclusions about a film or book, so taking care to choose the correct questions to ask and ideas to develop is key to allowing for self-discovery and true internalization of the ideas being presented. For example, in our study of The Little Mermaid, we were encouraged to come to our own conclusions before reading the critique of another reader. Had we been presented with the Trites’ article beforehand, it is likely that many of us, myself included, would have more critical in our descriptions of the story and film.

The best way to teach a text and film would be to choose a goal and base all of the other choices around this initial goal. For example, when teaching The Hunger Games, I may want my students to understand how totalitarian rule is dangerous to a society. From there, I can choose to examine elements of the text that support the understanding of that goal. We can draw comparisons to the Roman Empire, the British rule over colonial America, as well as Hitler’s reign over Nazi Germany.  I could also focus on the social impact, drawing on the living conditions of the people of District 12 or the feelings of fear and unfairness felt by Katniss. This could be contrasted with the lives of the privileged living in the Capital, with food being so plentiful that they purposely make themselves throw up in order to eat more and where physical appearance trumps everything else in life. All of these examples, while varied, tie back to my original goal.

Going a step further than just literature and film, I feel that teachers are independent artists in their interpretations of almost anything that they are teaching. Just as we all interpret a text differently from one person to another, so too do we interpret other ideas differently. In math, for example, I may use the cross multiplication format, the traditional method for multiplying, as well as manipulatives, to help students understand the process of multiplying, realizing that all children learn differently and one method may work better for one student, while a different method works better for the person next to them. Being able to interpret the same idea in a variety of ways is vital to helping students understand.  In returning to The Hunger Games, Suzanne Collins was able to elicit emotional reactions in her readers through her carefully chosen words. Gary Ross achieved this emotional response through casting and musical selections. As a teacher, I might help students to make this emotional connection by encouraging them to make connections to their own lives.

As teachers, we are more similar to a filmmaker than a writer, especially in terms of time constraints. Like filmmakers, teachers have a limited amount of time to teach a world of material. This is where the art of interpretation comes in. As a teacher, I need to decide which concepts need more time and which others can be touched on more briefly, or possibly even be combined with another topic. For example, I may see a need for extra work on ending punctuation and less on capitalization, even though the curriculum may dictate the same amount of time for each. As a teacher, it is my job to identify the needs of my students, set goals for their instruction, and make decisions about how to achieve that goal in the most efficient and effective way possible.

As interpreters of film and literature, it is vital that we are able to distinguish one medium from another, placing the value of each within the context of its own presentation. A film should not be judged in the same way that a book is judged, and vice versa. While fidelity to the original text is vital, it is also important that filmmakers act as independent artists, with an end goal of creating a great, quality film, rather than a film that hits all the points in a book, but misses the emotion and intangibles that can only be elicited through smart cuts and additions. We also need to be cautious about getting caught up in the hype surrounding popular books and films so that we can make accurate determinations of quality. Conversely, we should not dismiss a text or film just because it is overly popular – it is popular for a reason, so it should be given a fair chance to stand on its own. As teachers, these points should be made with our students as well. We should push them to question why filmmakers made the choices they did and how those choices improved or diminished the quality of the film. In doing so, we are not just teaching students how to read a film or book, but how to think critically and deeply.

Capitolium.org (1999). Capitolium.org - Imperial Fora Official Website - Rome, Italy. Retrieved from http://www.capitolium.org/eng/imperatori/circenses.htm.

Everett, S. (n.d.). A Conversation: Questions & Answers.  Retrieved  from http://www.scholastic.com/thehungergames/media/suzanne_collins_q_and_a.pdf

A phenomenon is:

According to the definitions provided for the word ‘phenomenon’, I am quite certain that this is the proper word to describe Harry Potter and the fervor created by the wizarding franchise. J.K. Rowling did more than create a story when she penned the Harry Potter books, she created a world so rich and engaging and characters so relatable, that it was inevitable that more would come out of her work that a children’s story. Instead, Harry Potter’s world has become our world, and our’s his. 

Many, many books are published every day, but how does one become as successful as Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone with children and adults alike? This occurrence does not happen often, especially when the subject is a children’s story.  When I was first exposed to the first book in 1998, I remember watching news reports about how the book was going to change everything in regards to reading and literature for children, showing lines of people at books stores waiting to get their copies. Low and behold, this prediction was correct! There was something about Harry Potter that was able to connect with people and bring reading into vogue, a tall order considering the tech obsessed world into which it was released. Bookstores were selling out, the releases of each new book became huge events, and anyone who did not read the books was out of the loop. Prior to the release of the books, many people, children and adults alike, would not have considered themselves to be ‘readers’, but after being brought into the magical world of Harry Potter, many people like myself, found themselves being  brought back to the written word.

One of the reasons for the success of Harry Potter, in my opinion, is the way that it is written. Many children’s books before Harry Potter were very “sanitized”, written to appeal to the innocence of childhood. Harry Potter, on the other hand, has a bit of an edge, allowing for students to experience a tension and thrill not found in many children’s literature books. There is true emotion, not knowing whether Harry and his comrades will be successful in their quests and perilous journeys. Additionally, the Harry Potter books are very smart. Rowling included miniscule, seemingly unimportant details that proved to be vital later in the story, such as the reference to Hagrid’s desire for a dragon early in Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. This detail turned out to be extremely important later since it was this detail that led to uncovering the secret of how to get past Fluffy, the three headed dog guarding the Sorcerer’s Stone.  This attention to detail respects the intelligence of children and challenges them to think more deeply about stories than many others that had been available at the time.

Another reason for the success of the book is the relatability of the characters. Everyone who reads the books has a character to which they can relate. Are you a goody two shoes? You can put yourself in Hermione’s shoes. Your family struggles to get by? Ron it is! Harry, though, is the most relatable of all the characters. He relates to the stereotypical “nerd”, wearing his broken glasses and baggy clothes. He embodies the dream of many who wish to have a secret life that they are waiting to discover. What child doesn’t envision him or herself as a long lost member of royalty? Harry can relate with kids from rough home situations in his living arrangement with the Dursleys. The most relatable element for me, as a reader, is the connection with orphaned children. Although not an orphan myself, I lost my father in 1998 and was left with a Dursley-like caretaker. This was the same year that I read the story, providing a level of empathy felt for the character and a connection that was important for me as a grieving teen. In reading the books, I was able to escape in much the same way Harry escaped his life with the Dursleys.  

Even the story itself, although a fantasy, is very relatable and realistic.  Harry’s muggle life in particular is very realistic. Children know that life is not fair or perfect, so they can empathize with the injustices felt by Harry. Rowling’s description of this world of muggles is relatable to the readers, but it is the realism found in her descriptions of Hogwarts that makes the story truly come alive for readers.  In her descriptions, Rowling does not shy away from the outlandish or unbelievable ideas. Rather, she embraces them and describes them in such clarity that the ideas presented become plausible. Readers feel like they are at Hogwarts, making a real in their own imaginations.

The biggest influence on the Harry Potter phenomenon is film. Without the films, it is likely that Pottermania would have been limited only to readers of the books. With the addition of the films, more people were exposed to Harry Potter, creating a larger pool of people to spend money of the related merchandise. Outside of just the films as stories, the actors and music have also become huge parts of our culture. Emma Watson, for one, became known for her portrayal as Hermione in the films. Her influence, however, is not limited to just the Harry Potter universe. Rather, she famously attended Brown University, has become a fashion icon, and role model for many girls, showing that you can be fashionable, classy, AND smart. In a culture that glamourizes the clueless female archetype, seen in popular shows such as Jersey Shore and all of the Kardashian projects, Emma Watson broke the mold and showed girls that there is more to a woman than just looks.

The popularity of the books is due, at least in part, to the technologically advanced time in which we live. People were able to discuss the book, movie, and culture of the Harry Potter world like never before. With the advent of digital communication, fans are able to create their own websites showcasing their love for the franchise, buy and sell almost anything they could want related to Harry Potter, learn the ins and outs of the casts’ lives, and even be a part of the Harry Potter world through the online website, Pottermore. This connectivity provided by technology gave a sense of ownership to the fans, leading to a devout and enthusiastic following. 

On a grander scale, beyond just Harry Potter, there has been a shift in attitudes toward “geeks” by the general populace since the release of the books. Perhaps it is incidental, since the internet and technology were gaining in popularity at the same time as the books, but over the past decade or so the “geek” or “nerd” label has lost some of its stigma. Instead of the isolation felt by nerds of previous generations, modern day nerds are able to network and communicate with others like themselves, possibly helping to build confidence and self-esteem that was problematic in the pre-internet era.  Harry Potter himself is the epitome of the stereotypical nerd, complete with taped, broken glasses, and scrawny build. This popularization of nerd culture is evidenced by shows like The Big Bang Theory and the resurgence of franchises such as Star Trek. 

The Harry Potter phenomenon began, obviously, with the books. The books, however, can sometimes be overshadowed by the sheer volume of merchandising surrounding the franchise. From movies to clothing, home accessories to food, official postage stamps (I saw them today at the post office) to toys and games; it is easy to see how the heart of the franchise, the books, can get lots in the shuffle. I believe, however, that it is the books that keep the franchise grounded and attribute to the continued success of Harry Potter, even though the series is now over. New readers are discovering the books and falling in love with Rowling’s tale of magic, mystery, and adventure, fueling the continuing marketability of the franchise. 

This success of Harry Potter has led to a boom in young adult literature, specifically fantasy texts, including popular series such as The Hunger Games trilogy, Twilight, the Maze Runner books, the Percy Jackson books, and the Divergent series.  It also brought forth a resurgence in classic texts, such as the Chronicles of Narnia and The Lord of the Rings.  Rowling was able to prove not only that young readers were capable of enjoying smart literature, but that they craved it. This new interest in reading is not confined to just young readers; many adults have been drawn into many young adult books because the high quality stories and smart writing. The franchise has also proved that films based on young adult books can be extremely lucrative and successful. Without the successful crossover from book to film achieved by Harry Potter, I am doubtful that movies like Twilight, The Hunger Games, or Percy Jackson would have been made, let alone been as successful as they were. 

As a teacher, the culture of reading is evident in today’s classrooms. Growing up, I cannot ever remember discussing books with my friends. Even in school we did not really discuss books that we had read. As an elementary student in the early 1990’s, this was not that long ago. Now, however, it is not uncommon for me to hear students discussing certain books they are reading or have just finished.  I provide time in class for students to discuss books, but what fascinates me is the fact that I catch students talking about books outside of class. The fact that students are voluntarily discussing books without being prompted is a noticeable sign of the shift in reading attitudes in children. 

The more I learn and think about Harry Potter as a cultural phenomenon, the more I realize how truly commercial our society is. It is neither the publishers nor the merchandisers that cause such a phenomenon. It is the consumers that drive the fanaticism; it is a simple matter of supply and demand. As consumers purchase goods, the demand increases, causing the franchises to produce more goods to keep up with consumer demands. John Pennington also argues that, “Phenomena such as the Harry Potter books are driven by commodity consumption.” Without consumers buying into the phenomenon, it would not exist. 

In Joel Taxel’s article about children’s literature, the idea of “Fast Capitalism” is addressed in regards to the industry of publishing. Rather than allowing time for the writing process, fast capitalism pushes for a more regimented system of getting books from the minds of authors to the hands of their readers. As Taxel put it, children’s literature has become a “circuit of production, circulation, and consumption”. The artistry is lost, instead turning literature into a commodity to be bought and sold, rather than art to be enjoyed and savored. When this happens, the value of the text shifts from intrinsic to external. The story does not matter anymore. What matters is the amount of money to be made from sales of the book, possible films, and merchandising. This also hurts new authors since publishers are less likely to take risks on an unknown writer. Publishers would rather put their resources towards authors with successful track records.

 
 While there are many positives that have come from Pottermania, such as the renewed interest in reading for enjoyment, there are also negatives. One such problem is the overwhelming effort by publishers and film makers to create the next phenomenon. Creating such a phenomenon is extremely lucrative, so it is understandable that others would like to find similar success and cash in. This can be seen in successful franchises such as Twilight and The Hunger Games. Like Harry Potter, fans have the technology at their fingertips to fuel their obsessions and access to any merchandise they can imagine.  While this is good for a capitalist economy like ours, it begins to turn the focus from the literature to the accessories, a dangerous route that can lead to subpart stories. Why spend your time on the story when the screenplay and merchandise will earn far more money? 

While some authors may lose motivation to create quality literature due to the merchandising aspects, many others feel the pressure of publishers to create stories with a quick turnaround time. This lack of time presents a challenge as this can lead to shoddier work. Authors are artists and work in very different ways and at different rates, so to expect that all authors can perform under such constraints is unfair. By limiting production to authors with quick turnaround times, many more laborious authors may be shut out from the industry.

Another concern is that beautifully written stories can lose their value as quality literature in the wake of the commercialization brought on by such a cultural phenomenon. As stated in the article by Philip Nel, “separate the books from the marketing.” In doing so, we can recognize a text for its merits, rather than all of the exterior distractions.  This devaluation of the text can be troublesome for authors, including J.K. Rowling, who was very protective of her characters and her work. She was adamant that her characters were not to be pitchmen, for example, insisting that none of her characters would be seen drinking a Coca-Cola as a means of product placement.

While it would appear that there are a lot of negative aspects to a cultural phenomenon like Harry Potter, such as the devaluation of quality literature, increased pressure on authors, and more difficultly for new authors trying to get published, not to mention the increased commercialization driven by consumers, there are also several positives that perhaps negate or possibly even outweigh the negatives. The first positive being the fact that phenomena like this provide shared cultural experiences, giving people common ground with others. In a world so divided, any means of bringing people together cannot be overlooked. In terms of the Harry Potter phenomenon in particular, it was shown that film adaptations of children’s books can be well made and wildly successful, in this case leading to the success of many other adaptations.  Finally, the most important and hopefully lasting effect of this cultural phenomenon is the impact on reading in our culture. Not only has Harry Potter convinced more children to think reading is cool, but it has also gotten their parents hooked on reading. In transforming our culture into one that not only can read, but enjoys reading, the Harry Potter phenomenon has provided our society with gift that not even the greatest of planners could concoct. A phenomenon is by definition is an extraordinary occurrence. It is something that just happens. No one planned for Harry Potter to change the world, but he did. Despite the commercialization and media frenzy, Harry Potter gave us, as a society, one of the greatest gifts possible, that is an internal and deeply felt love of reading. 

In Philip Nel’s article from The Lion and the Unicorn, the merchandizing and general commercialization of Harry Potter are examined. Nel argues that as readers and consumers, we need to make an effort towards to “separate the books from the marketing.” By looking at the book and merchandizing in one, it is possible that there are literary merits of the book that are being overlooked due to the distraction of everything else in the world of Harry Potter.

I thought it was interesting to note that J.K. Rowling, the author of the series, was not as impressed with the marketing and commercialization, as determined by June Cummins.  As an author, it can be assumed the Rowling would like her work recognized for its literary merits, something that is overshadowed by the immense about of “stuff” that can make the books appear to be nothing more than another piece of merchandise to make money for the franchise.  Additionally, much of the money gained from Rowling’s Harry Potter empire is donated into charitable causes, backing up her viewpoint on wealth depicted throughout the books. Nel points out Rowling’s depictions of the use of wealth, through the villianization of the Dursleys and the Malfoy and through Harry’s portrayal as a thrifty philanthropist, Rowling makes the point that wealth is not necessary a bad thing as long as it is used for good and not as a way to hurt others.

One point that he made really struck a chord with me. Early in the article, Nel quotes John Pennington as saying, “Phenomena such as the Harry Potter books are driven by commodity consumption” and “the pleasure and meaning of a book will often be prescripted or dictated by convention.” Books are not simply seen as just books anymore, but as jumping off points for larger media and marketing campaigns (or in some cases, the books follow the media and marketing efforts). As a young adult reading these books for the first time, I vividly remember thinking about how the stories would make such great movies and envisioning myself as Hermione, long before the movies were in the works. Obviously I was not alone in this thinking since the books did indeed get adapted into films.

I think the most compelling argument for the quality of the books is the origin of Harry Potter’s popularity. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone originally became popular because kids read the stories and told other kids how great the book was. Word spread, and more and more kids were reading the book. It was not the mass marketing campaigns or merchandising; it was kids falling in love with a story and sharing that with one another.  As a child myself at the time, that is why I started reading the books. I did not chose to read the books because the media was telling me I should, rather it was because I heard it was a good book and gave it a try. If a book can inspire kids not only to read but to inspire other kids to read, then that is a very telling quality. As Nel put it, “hype alone is not a sufficient explanation for Harry’s appeal.”   

In this article, Joel Taxel presents a history of how the publishing of children’s literature has changed over time. From its origins in small publishing houses to the now prevalent multimedia conglomerates, the changes that have taken place in the industry are substantial. These changes are so substantial, in fact, that Taxel points out that the likelihood of a piece being published has more to do with marketability, having a proven author, and mass appeal than the actual quality of the written work, all leading to more profits for the publishers. Additionally, Taxel asserts that children’s literature has also become part of a political economy, including the push for multicultural literature. All this, coupled with the “Fast Capitalism” framework, have turned the world of children’s literature upside down.

As pointed about by Taxel, the publishing industry exists for the purpose of creating revenue. With that mindset, publishers choose books that pose the least amount of risk and offer the biggest return on investment. Risk is determined by factors such as notoriety of the author and the mass appeal of the story. A niche story by an unknown author would have a hard time finding the backing of a large publisher.

As the educational landscape has changed, so too has the publication of children’s literature. The first boom in publishing happened during the 1950’s with the passage of the National Defense Education Act. This act provided funding for math and science books for school libraries, prompting publishers to give more attention to children’s books. Education changed even further in the 1960’s with the passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Not only were more funds allocated to school libraries, but the audience being targeted began to be altered. As a reflection of the social changes occurring at that time, more and more multicultural texts were being published and purchased. Eventually, however, the funds dried up, causing publishers to find new avenues for selling their wares and shifting their audience from librarian to “consumer child”.

“Fast Capitalism” is a new term for me, but a very familiar idea. Rather than being works of art, children’s literature has become a commodity that has a “circuit of production, circulation, and consumption”.  We live in a fast paced world where consumers are used to immediate gratification, something that is difficult to achieve in a time consuming process like writing.  In becoming commodities, the intrinsic value of literature is lot; instead it is defined solely in terms of monetary value. In devaluing this literature, publishers are opening the door for shoddy writing for the sake of quicker turnaround and higher profits.  This focus on the bottom line also limits the risk taking of publishers. Unless there is a standout story with mass appeal, such as Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone or The Hunger Games, publishers are unlikely to take risks on unknown authors, instead favoring authors or series with proven success.

In the end, Taxel encourages teachers, and those in the position of putting books in the hands of children, to choose wisely and to not be afraid to step outside of the mass marketed texts.  In doing so, the young readers can be exposed to higher quality, multicultural texts that do not have the mass appeal of many of the texts being pedaled by the large publishers.  One of the strongest calls to action and a perfect summation of Taxel’s view is this:

Choosing the best books for our readers should be our ultimate goal, not find the book that will sell the most copies. It takes more work than opening the monthly Scholastic flyer, but in the end, the lasting effects on our students make the extra effort worth it.

As a middle school student, I read the first four books in the series, but lost interest while waiting for the new books to come out. I remember liking the books, but I never really had any interest in anything other than the books. I also had a bad experience with a fanatical member from my church, including a thirty minute lecture about them being “evil”. I don’t attribute that to stopping reading the books, but I can’t help think of that incident when I think of the series.  The complementary merchandise was not really something I was interested in at the time, and it was by no means at the level that it is today. Also, I had not seen this movie, or any of the others, before starting this week.

When beginning my search for Harry Potter, I did a quick Google search for “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone (since I figured to start with the text on which we are focusing) and noticed right away that the first result links to the IMDB (Internet Movie Database) listing for the film. Although I am not surprised, it seems to imply that the movie has overtaken the book in terms of popularity. I was not blown away by the movie, so to me, the movie seems to be just another bit of merchandising, but apparently I am in the minority in that respect.

I continued by broadening my search to include everything Harry Potter. One of the first items was a news article about the opening of Diagon Alley at Universal Studios in Orlando. This stuck out to me because I just saw a segment yesterday on the Today show that featured the Daigon Alley attraction, an attraction meant to complement the popular “Wizarding World of Harry Potter” attraction. Initially, I was surprised to see something like this being built since the books and films are all done, but I suppose this is another way to earn revenue and build the franchise, especially with the success of the other attraction.

Along the same lines, there is another real-world attraction that I found online that seems to be immensely popular. The Warner Brother’s studio in London offers studio tours of the Harry Potter set, special screenings, and Potter related events. I found this intriguing because most film sets are dismantled after filming, but this was obviously not the case for Harry Potter. Based on the website, it looks like it was carefully preserved and includes artifacts such as the Hogwarts castle model, a key piece in all of the films.

One fun thing I found was the Pottermore website. I downloaded the ebook from Pottermore (you cannot purchase it direct from the Nook store – unlike any other book I have purchased), but had not explored it until after I finished reading the book. This is one of the many interactive sites that gives fans the chance to put themselves in the story. I ended up signing up, and WOW! Is there a lot to do! I played around for a few minutes and was taken to Gringott’s and Daigon Alley to shop for supplies, and then answered some questions to be “sorted” into my house. I am not a big Potter fan, but I was drawn in, making it easy to see how a real fan could go crazy about something like this and be made to feel part of Harry Potter’s world.

Next, I shifted gears to look at merchandise produced for the franchise, and was not surprised to find a plethora of memorabilia. In addition to all of the mass produced, branded materials, I also found a vast amount of goods on Etsy.com. Etsy is one of my favorite online retailers and is popular with the geek community. The passion for the franchise comes through in all of the handmade goods, including jewelry, clothing, decals, home accessories, and more.

In perusing the sites, one thing that I noticed is the effort to get fans really involved in the world of Harry Potter, more than just reading or looking at pictures or videos. One way that I noticed over and over was the way that everything was branded not only by the Hogwarts insignia, but also by house, leading fans to choose a house, or have one chosen for them if they visited the Pottermore website. Most of the retail websites that I visited obviously included a large number of general Harry Potter merchandise, but most of the websites also had house specific goods as well.,

Another aspect that shows the devotion of fans is the number of fan sites! In the age of technology, it is easy for fans to share their interests online and many have done so. Many of the sites posted spoilers, trailers, and news about the franchise. I also found that quite a few also follow news stories about JK Rowling and the actors, including new projects that they are working on as well as any accolades that have been awarded. This really shows the staying power that this series has; the books and films are done and people are still maintaining interest in not only the books and their author, but also in the actors that portrayed the characters they loved for so many years.

In addition to looking at the merchandising and online fan-dom, I also thought I should look into the opposing viewpoint, one that I was made aware of long ago as a middle school reader. I expected to find at least a few people denouncing the books and films based on merits, but to my surprise almost ALL of the criticism was religiously based. I expected the religious argument of course, but did not expect the near nonexistence of criticism for any other reasons.

Overall, it appears that Harry Potter can be linked to almost any cultural aspect. To test this, I searched for a variety of random topics and attached “Harry Potter”. I started with some rather general searches including food, automobiles, and sports. Those were easy, so I tried to think of anything that would be impossible to connect to Harry Potter, but I was unable to stunt Google with surgery, asparagus, STDs, Phantom of the Opera, pandas, or even mitochondria. It appears that there is no escaping Pottermania. JK Rowling’s stories were a good start, but the franchising, movies, and merchandising efforts were successful in not only creating revenue, but also in inspiring fans to be a part of Harry’s world and also to help to grow this world into something I am sure Rowling could have never imagined.

I was first introduced into the world of Harry Potter as a middle school student at the time when the first book was originally published. I remember reading the first several books after hearing all the hype from my friends and TV, and I ended up really enjoying them. I eventually outgrew the books, however, during the long waits between the new publications and gave up on the series. Rereading the first book brought back some of the same emotions that I felt when I first read it so long ago, but I also saw it in a different light reading it now as an adult. I may even have to go through and catch back up on the series!

I stopped reading the Harry Potter series before the first movie came out, so this was my first time viewing the film. Overall, I feel that the filmmakers were pretty faithful to the heart of the story, even making nods to some of the smaller details that only people who read the books would really appreciate, like the Botts Every Flavor Bean and the spell Ron tries to turn his rat yellow.  This tells me that the filmmakers were aware of the huge following of the books and were trying to be respectful to the readers, perhaps to make up for some of the plot changes that had to occur in transitioning the book to film.

One of the most impressive features of the movie was the setting. The filmmakers made use of wide shots, models, and CGI to create an impressive world for the film, keeping very true, for the most part, to the original descriptions created by Rowling. In some cases, it made the story even clearer. For example, I had a hard time imaging what the entrance to the Platform 9 ¾ would look like. I imagined Harry, Ron, and the rest of the Weasley clan running onto the tracks but that just never seemed right in my mind. After seeing this scene in the film, the original description made more sense. While the impressive scenery was helpful, I also found it to be distracting at times. The Quidditch scenes, in particular, were hard to watch. The CGI, cutting edge at the time I’m sure, was almost dizzying and was very unrealistic. I found myself paying more attention to the quality of the effects than what was happening in the action.

In translating this elaborate story into film, there are a few plot elements that needed to be changed in order to create a movie of an appropriate length and also to avoid confusion for viewers who had not read the books. One of the major changes was the Norbert storyline. For one, the movie does not really seem to stress how dangerous it was to have a dragon, both for personal safety and in terms of legality. In the book, this was spelled out very clearly, creating another level of tension in the plot. Also, in the book, Harry, Ron, and Hermione take the Norbert matter into their own hands and see to Norbert’s removal. Since this is not a major plot element, it is easy to understand why it was streamlined – viewers were presented with what they needed to know, that is the suspicious nature of how Hagrid acquired the dragon egg.

Another important aspect of the original story that was removed was Hermione’s part in reaching the Sorcerer’s Stone. In the book, Rowling was very clear that each professor created a different challenge to prevent anyone from reaching the stone, two of these challenges removing Ron and Hermione from the endeavor. In the movie, however, there is no mention of the professors creating the challenges, an element that would have added some depth to the story line. In leaving out the mention of the professors designing the challenges, the omission of Snape’s potion challenge would have been unnoticeable to uniformed viewers.  I am assuming this was another effort to cut time, but I was a little disappointed that this was not included.

While most of the other major plot elements are included, and even many of the smaller details are embedded in the film, I did not get the same feeling that I did when reading the book.  It almost felt as though the filmmakers were almost TOO literal with the story, if that is possible, causing them to gloss over story and ignore the DEPTH to which the details were originally presented. Since the backstories were not presented in the depth, it led to a disconnect from the characters and the story itself. When reading the book, I was on the edge of my seat, trying to figure out what was going on, piecing together the clues. I felt Harry’s anxiety at various times in the book and shared in Ron’s anger at Draco Malfoy. These same feelings were not achieved, at least for me, in the film. I did not feel the investment into the film that I did with the book. Perhaps it was because I already knew what was going to happen, but I think it is more due to the rushed nature of the film and the shallow presentation of the story. 

I think another aspect to take into consideration is that this film was created for children. The later films became more serious and dark as the readers of the stories grew older and matured with the characters, but the original film was rated PG and was marketed for kids. Because of this, I feel like the adaptation of the book was spot on for the intended audiences. It provided the major plot elements, stuck true to the defining characteristics of Rowling’s characters, and also provided a level of action and adventure to appeal to young viewers. Delving more deeply into the backstories would have possibly been daunting for young audiences, so keeping the movie fast paced and visually interesting is probably a major factor in the success of this franchise.  As an adult reader, I am indifferent to the film. It was successful in many ways, but left me hoping for an emotional connection that just was not there.

I found the Trites’ reflection to be quite intriguing and in line with most of the ideas I discussed in my initial reflection on the story and film. While Trites went more in depth in regards to the plot change, I spoke briefly about how the Disney version changed the plot to fit their brand. Trites went farther and addressed the difference in the little mermaid’s motivation in each interpretation, pointing out that in the Hans Christian Andersen story, the little mermaid is motivated by the desire to gain an immortal soul above and beyond her desire for love. This is very much the opposite of the Disney story where Ariel shallowly seeks a husband.  

Trites’ view on the films portrayal of marriage was especially interesting. She points out that the film “presents marriage as a goal to be achieved rather than as a process to be experienced.” This is an interesting idea and one that is common in many Disney films, and is perhaps a reflection of society’s view on marriage as well. Our culture is obsessed with big, expensive weddings, something that I experienced several years ago when planning my own wedding. Many people were almost disgusted that my husband and I decided to have a very small modest wedding, but for us, the day was more about being husband and wife than it was about impressing people or showing off in any way. For us, the wedding day was a beginning, where the film, and modern society, views the wedding day as the ending point. This view is evidenced by shows such as Say Yes to the Dress and Bridezillas where the commercialized wedding is glamourized. This could be one of the reasons why there are so many failed marriages in our country; when so much attention is focused on a wedding, the thought about what happens next is often forgotten.

While I do feel like Trites was right about a lot of things, such as the portrayal of women as being dependent upon men and the Christian overtones of the original story, I felt like some of her observations were overstretched just to make her points. One example of this is in the comparison between Ursula’s desires for power in the form of King Triton’s trident with penis envy. While it is impossible to know what the film makers were thinking, I have a hard time believing that a company like Disney would have intentionally included this metaphor.  Perhaps this metaphor was incidental based on society’s views on power in men and women, but I think to argue so fervently that Ursula had penis envy is a bit much.

I also feel like Trites’ reflection is somewhat of a contradiction of itself. She starts by taking a moral high ground, asserting the sexist nature of the film and original text, but later, she makes insensitive comments regarding female body image including her description of the conflict between Ariel and the transformed Ursula as, “a dark-haired anorexic and a fairer one.” Eating disorders are a very touchy subject and labeling someone, even an imaginary character, is a bit insensitive to readers who may have struggled with this, just as the issues of sexism raised by the film and story are sensitive to others.

While I do disagree with some of Trites’ feelings on the film and original text, her essay has helped me to see the story in a new light, and the film even more so. Even as a child, I had always been bothered by the fact that Ariel had to essentially give up everything about herself in order to be good enough for a man, but now having read Trites’ take, as well as the original story, I feel like there is a lot more about this film that should have bothered me. Growing up in an overexposed culture, I guess I did not think anything of the level of exposure, but after taking a step back and rewatching the movie, I’m not sure that I would want my own daughter watching this. Between the near-naked mer-people and the flouncy bossom of Ursula, there is far too much skin being shown for a children’s movie. That paired with the actual message of female oppression, as seen through Ariel’s dependence on men, the way she fixates on finding a mate over almost anything else, and the negative portrayal of less than ideal body types (overweight females and scrawny men), this is definitely not a movie that would be touted as teaching girls to be strong, powerful, and happy with their bodies. 

Trites’ take on the story by Hans Christian Andersen actually made me appreciate the original text even more. Stories with the level of depth of The Little Mermaid are not common in literature today, especially for one so short. While there are examples of sexism, I feel that the overall moral of the story is one that can be seen as empowering to women, especially when taking into consideration the time period in which it was written. From the beginning of the story, the little mermaid has her own ideas, her own identity, and her own desires. Unlike Ariel, she maintains these defining traits throughout the story as they guide her towards her goal of an immortal soul. Also unlike Ariel, she remains virtuous until the end, as evidenced by her acknowledgement of the prince’s choice in a wife and her unwillingness to kill the prince to get what she wanted. I image that if Ariel were told she could have had the prince if she took a life, she would have done it. After reading Trites’ essay, I also feel like the original story’s message about working hard and making sacrifices for what you want are important lessons that I did not initially glean from the story, but are lessons that are more than applicable to readers today.

I appreciated her take on the Christian allegory most of all. The repeated mention of the mermaid’s desire for an immortal soul is an easy to see connection to Christianity, but taking the metaphor even further are the sacrifices made by the little mermaid.  Trites mentions that the little mermaid gains her salvation “through the self-sacrifice of good works”. While she does indeed save herself (unknowingly), I feel like the little mermaid could also be considered a Christ figure. Rather than kill the prince so that she might live, she, like Christ, sacrificed her own life so that the man she loved might live. This mirrors the Christian belief that Christ sacrificed his life so that his believers, whom he loved, might live eternally in heaven.  Also like Christ, she was resurrected, in a way, when she joined the daughters of the air. 

Modern culture is extremely evident in the Disney reinterpretation of The Little Mermaid. From the stick thin female figures to the fixation on marriage as the ultimate goal for a girl, the film reflects many of the societal norms regarding female bodies, female power, and the place of females in a society.  By latching onto and perpetuating these views, Disney was able to connect with viewers, and this, combined with the commercial aspect of selling related memorabilia, led to the making a pop culture phenomenon. 

Disney’s reinterpretation, like The Wizard of Oz, placed very little stake in maintaining true to the original story, and in doing so created a “text” all its own. While it can be argued that The Wizard of Oz improved upon the original text, I think one would be hard pressed to say that Disney’s The Little Mermaid improved upon Andersen’s version in anyway.  In making the choices they did, Disney ended up taking a very powerful, selfless, and virtuous character and turning her into a selfish, shallow, and deceitful character.  Even so, Ariel’s character in the film could actually be considered a positive thing culturally, despite all the negatives. Ariel, unlike many of the Disney princesses before her, questioned authority, had her own ideas, and acted on those ideas. Since The Little Mermaid, strong female characters, in my opinion, are starting to be recognized as more important than ever and I think this is evident in some of Disney’s movies released after The Little Mermaid, including Pocahontas, Mulan, Brave, Tangled, and Frozen. It is almost as if The Little Mermaid was a turning point in Disney’s treatment of women. 

Another positive to the film is the idea of accepting people different from one’s self. While not mentioned by Trites, I feel that the filmmakers were making a sociopolitical statement about interracial/non-traditional relationships. The conflict between Ariel and her father could be considered an analogy of black/white relationships. The mermaid/human conflict is also reminiscent of the Romeo and Juliet, another story that labels people as unworthy based on exterior traits, in that case, the family to which they belong. By showing that someone as strong and powerful as King Triton can come around, perhaps filmmakers are encouraging viewers to be more accepting as well. 

While the argument can be made that the film and original text paint women in a negative light, it is also important to recognize the good in both of them as well.  I think what this week’s lesson has taught me, more than anything, is how easy it is to project your own views into your interpretation. Trites’ negative views were contrary to some of the positives that I gleaned from the film and text.  I went into my review with a more positive attitude overall, where Trites had a more critical view from the beginning.  I also found that there is a line that can be crossed when examining a film or text. There comes a point when analysis and reflection turn to overthinking, something I think was the case in parts of Trites’ arguments. While there is a lot going on with The Little Mermaid socially, politically, and culturally, I think that there are times to just accept a film or text for what it is, in this case, a story for children, made to appeal to the social norms of the time.

I grew up in the early 90’s and this was, by far, my favorite movie! Disney obviously took quite a few liberties with the original storyline, but I think that is common with many of the movies produced by Disney. The biggest change between the two interpretations is the plot. The original storyline is a tragedy, ending with the death of the little mermaid. The Disney version, however, concludes with a happy ending, an element common to almost all Disney movies. This was likely done to fit the Disney “brand”. Most, if not all, of the Disney princess movies have a very similar and simple plotline – there is a conflict, rising action, a climax, and then a happy ending, which is typically a wedding. The Little Mermaid is not different and was adapted to fit into this formula. 

There were also some changes made to accommodate changes in social acceptance. One of those changes would be age. In the Hans Christian Andersen version, the little mermaid is fifteen years old when she meets and falls in love with the prince. The Disney version changed the age to sixteen, which makes a marriage and assumed consummation of that marriage slightly more acceptable (at least legal). The violence in the story was also removed since a children’s movie that included severed tongues and fixated heavily on death would probably not fare well with young viewers.  These were minor changes, but ones that were made to appeal to modern consumers.

On a deeper level, there are social statements that can be drawn from both stories, some more obvious than others. One of the most glaring and obvious is the idea that a woman must be physically attractive in order to secure a mate, while a man must be strong and muscular to be desirable and powerful (look at King Triton for example). In the story, the sea witch tells the little mermaid, “Your beautiful form, your graceful walk, and your expressive eyes; surely with these you can enchain a man’s heart.” In the movie, Ursula states similarly, “You’ll have your looks, your pretty face, and don’t underestimate the importance of body language” when explaining to Ariel how she will get the prince to fall in love with her. This idea of body image is reiterated during the Poor Unfortunate Souls song when two mer-people are shown, one a scrawny man and the other a larger woman. Ursula labels them as “depressed” and “pathetic” before transforming them into a brawny, muscular man and a thin, gorgeous woman. This implies that physical appearance is the most important aspect in determining one’s happiness. 

One thing that I had not noticed until watching the movie again was that there is what could be interpreted as a statement on interracial or nontraditional relationships. This can be seen in the conversation that takes place when King Triton confronts Ariel about her being in love with a human.

Triton’s argument against Ariel’s involvement with a human sounds eerily familiar to the arguments used by those opposed to interracial or other nontraditional relationships. 

I also think that Ariel’s plight in the film could relate to the struggle of people suffering from gender identity issues. From the beginning of the film, Ariel relates more to humans than she seems to relate to mer-people, she fixates on human made objects (a departure from the original story) and longs to be “where the people are”. This is similar to how people with gender dysphoria relate to a gender other than what they were born as physically, often from a young age. While Ariel obviously does not have gender issues, she does long to be something she is not, which could be seen as a similar struggle. Like some people with gender dysphoria, Ariel made the decision to make physical changes to her body in order to be part of the social group with which she felt she belonged, making great sacrifices to do so. I am by no means an expert on the subject of gender dysphoria, but I think that whether it was intended or not, this could be a relevant connection.

Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory was one of my father’s favorite movies, so I have seen it countless times. I remember always being a little scared, or maybe more uneasy, about the movie, but after reading the book, the movie seems tame. In Dahl’s original, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, the line between humor and meanness is blurred, leading to a conflict as to the appropriateness of the text for younger readers. After taking a few days to think about the implications of the book, however, I have found that connections with religious teachings can be made within the text as well, serving as a means of enriching character education.

An interesting revelation that I came to after a few days of pondering the text is how the naughty children exemplify many of the traits that are seen as undesirable in Christianity. As a teacher at a Catholic school, this would be a relevant tie-in for my students. The seven deadly sins are seen throughout the children in Dahl’s book. August Gloop exemplifies gluttony, Veruca Salt is the definition of lust and envy in her intense desire to find a golden ticket, Violet Beauregarde shows pride in being the best gum chewer and wrath in her feud with “Miss Cornelia Prinzmetal”, while Mike Teavee is the epitome of sloth. The final sin, greed, is one shared by all four of Dahl’s naughty children. The fact that the children exemplifying these traits are villainized in the story, one could argue that this could be a valuable morality tale for children. 

When considering this book for use with children, I would be cautious. As an adult reading this story, it was easy for me to pick out the negative and violent remarks and read more deeply into some of the descriptions than a younger reader might. To help accommodate for this, I would likely choose to present this story as a read aloud if I were to use it with my third graders. This would allow for discussions about the language that Dahl chose. Aside from clarifying the text, it would also allow for students to explore the idea of questioning text, rather than just accepting it as it is written – just because Dahl chooses to use certain words to describe characters, does that make it alright for us to do the same? 

In terms of the “goodness” of this book, I would consider this to be a good book for most children. With proper support and guidance, children could learn the lesson of being humble and virtuous. The harsh language and violence presented, while possibly too intense for some readers, mirrors the harsh realities of the real world and presents them in a way that is understandable for most children. Children learn through mimicry and role playing, so being able to experience the hardships of life through the use of humor is a safe way for children to learn these lessons.

The first interpretation of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, the 1971 film entitled Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory is a classic loved by children for the past several generations. As a child, I watched the film over and over with my father, for whom this was a favorite. I remember being uneasy or even scared at parts of the film, but now having read the book I have come to realize that the film takes the harshness of the original text by Dahl and mellows it to a more socially acceptable and main stream level. The songs in this version of the film in particular are much less violent and mean spirited than the songs written by Dahl in the book.

The second film, the 2005 version of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, reverts back to the original title of the book and also to many of the original features of the book, such as many of the original song lyrics and major story elements, such as the use of squirrels rather than the geese who laid golden eggs from the 1971 version. In doing so, I feel that the 2005 film was much edgier and more closely represented the tone of the book. There are also elements from the 1971 film that were reinterpreted and included in the movie, such as the showiness of Willy Wonka’s initial introduction to the children. Even this, though, was edgier in the newest version. Rather than a tumbling Willy Wonka, we are met with a pyrotechnic show that ends with the disturbing image of melting doll faces.

In reproducing the film in 2005, the filmmakers succeeded in created a more updated take on the original story while infusing it with more elements from the original books. Mike Teavee, for example, is one instance where an update made the movie more relevant to today’s viewers. In the old version, Mike is obsessed with westerns; not exactly something kids most days can connect with. In the new version, Mike is more like the stereotypical gamer: violent, impulsive, and obsessive. Modern day children can more closely relate to this updated version of Mike Teavee than the 1971 version.

While the 2005 film was successful in updating the feel of the film for modern viewers and instilling more original elements from the book, I think that it missed the mark in terms of appropriateness for young children. In the newest version of the film, many of the songs sung by the Oompa-Loompas very closely resemble the original songs from the book. While fidelity to the original is often important to the success of a film, I felt that in this case, it made the Oompa-Loompas come across as mean rather than the fun loving imps they are supposed to be.

The 2005 film also missed the marks in terms of social sensitivity. While I realize that we live in a hyper-sensitive, politically correct world, there are several instances where I feel the filmmakers crossed the line between being edgy and being offensive. One such example is the use of ageism, specifically in the case of Grandma Georgina. While Alzheimer’s disease and dementia are real and common problems, including a character that displays traits of these afflictions for comedic purposes is insensitive. Ageism is also noticeable again when Willy Wonka visits the Bucket house and states to one of the grandparents, “You smell like old people and soap.” Again this is used for humor, but could be considered offensive. At the other end of the spectrum, there is an obvious commentary on youth through the descriptions and film portrayals of the young people in the story. The brashest would probably be in the portrayal of Mike Teavee in the 2005 film. He is portrayed as rude, mean, and self-absorbed. This is exemplified by his language, especially when he says that, “Even a retard could figure it out.”  

In addition to ageism, sexism is a possible concern in the book and films. The most glaring is in the peanut factory where only women are working. Why Dahl chose to include this specific detail is not clear to me, but this detail was shown in both versions of the film. The issue of gender is also apparent in both films when considering the Oompa-Loompas. Willy Wonka states that he relocated the entire population to his factory, but you never see female Oompa-Loompas save the one female who works as a secretary for Wonka in the 2005 film.  

Throughout the book and both films, the negative attitude towards overweight characters is made evident. In the book, the characters frequently refer to Augustus Gloop as “revolting”, “enormously fat”, “disgusting”, and a “pig”. Close shots in the film only serve to further the opinion that Augustus is an unsavory character.  In one description of Augustus, Dahl states,

This leads Grandma Georgina to refer to him as “repulsive”. The grandparents, and the whole Bucket family for that matter, are seen as pure, kind, and virtuous, so to have even them describe Augustus in this way shows Dahl’s feelings on those that are overweight. In addition to the portrayal of Augustus, there is another overweight character that suffers under Dahl’s descriptions. 

While this description was left out of the films, it does show that Dahl held obvious prejudices against heavy people.

Additionally, Dahl also portrays the wealthy as less idealistic and virtuous than those who are made to suffer in life. This is made evident by Veruca Salt more than any other character. In the book, she is simply described as rich and spoiled, but the films take this sparse description and portray her as the stereotypical rich girl, complete with equestrian outfits, fur coats, and a mother who likes cocktails. In the 2005 film, Charlie also points out the unfairness of Veruca getting the ticket even though she did not find it herself.  In fact, other than Charlie, all of the children come from well to-do families.

Perhaps the largest indiscretion of the book and films is the treatment of race and people of color. We are first given a taste of this in the story of the Indian prince. In the 2005 film, as well as the book, the prince is portrayed as stupid.  On its own, this story could be seen as a funny anecdote, but when coupled with the treatments of the Oompa-Loompas, it is apparent that Dahl showed prejudices towards nonwhite characters.  The Oompa-Loompas who run Willy Wonka’s factory are described as fun-loving and mischievous creatures, but I cannot help but make comparisons to the plight of Africans brought to America as slaves. In the book, 

Wonka describes how he saved them from the hot, steamy, and dangerous jungles and brought them to safety, an argument used during the slave trade; the African slaves were thought to be better off as slaves than in their savage and wild homelands. Willy Wonka goes on to explain how he brought the Oompa-Loompas to his factory. In the book, he talks about smuggling them, but in the 2005 film, he goes as far to say that he “imported” them. Typically, when referring to people, you do not “import” them.The use of this word shows that Wonka views the Oompa-Loompas as objects rather than people, just as slaves were treated as property rather than people. Additionally, the Oompa-Loompas are dressed uniformly, making no distinction between individuals other than in their voices (in the films), another tactic used to depersonalize slaves. Wide shots are used in both films to show the uniformity of the Oompa-Loompas and further stress the idea that they are not individuals. Dahl described the assimilated Oompa-Loompas as, “wonderful workers. They all speak English now. They love dancing and music. They are always making up songs.” This is eerily similar to descriptions that could have been used to describe the slaves brought to the Americas, famous for their work songs and traditional dances. In addition, there are several references to the Oompa-Loompas being used as test subjects for Wonka’s wild test trials, such as the three course bubblegum and the fizzy lifting drinks. Historically, slaves have been used as test subjects, fitting with the comparison between the Oompa-Loompas and the African slaves. The most telling image from either film or the book, however, is the image in the 2005 film of the Oompa-Loompas rowing the boat down the chocolate river. In this scene, the Oompa-Loompas are emotionless and bring to mind pictures of slaves rowing the large ships used in the past.  The idea that these are “fun loving” creatures is refuted in the stony faces of the rowers.  This picture was downplayed in the 1971 version by having two Oompa-Loompas turning a paddle wheel, but the portrayal in the 2005 version only strengthens the case for racial inequality in this story.

Overall, when taken at face value, the book and films, while brash, could be considered suitable for young audiences. The book and 1971 film teach viewers that being well behaved and virtuous is of the utmost importance. The 2005 version, also makes this point, but adds on the idea of the importance of family, exemplified by Willy Wonka’s childhood flashbacks and the changes at the end of the film that include Wonka’s distain for family in general. When taking a deeper look, however, Dahl’s prejudices become evident and paint a story of sexism, ageism, and racism that perpetuates stereotypes and does little to provide readers with a positive message. Do the good messages outweigh the bad? Honestly, I am not sure, but that is what is great about stories like this. They get people talking and cause discussions about the important issues in our world. What was meant to be a simple children’s story has fully grown adults interpreting and reinterpreting the meaning over 50 years after it was first published. 

The idea behind this week’s lesson is that movies can come to be more popular than the books from which their inspiration was drawn. The Wizard of Oz is an example of this phenomenon, but it can also be seen in films such as the Harry Potter series and Forrest Gump. In the case of The Wizard of Oz, I feel that this can be attributed to just how well done the movie was. It also can be due to the fact that the filmmakers did not set out to create perfect representation of the book. They understood that film was a different medium than text and adapted the book into a successful film. Filmmaking was in its infancy at the time, so they created their own rules and did not bend to what was expected. They created an adaptation that held true to the main themes of the book, while taking viewers on an exciting journey all its own. Sometimes films fail because they try to make an exact representation of the text and discount the fact that film is a totally separate medium. Another book-to-film adaptation that experienced a similar shift in popularity was the movie Jaws. It was the first movie to use many of the open-water filming techniques, creating a similar level of awe that was created by The Wizard of Oz.

The Harry Potter series, on the other hand, has become a popular movie franchise for a much different reason. The book series has a very deep story with an incredible amount of detail, and is very popular in its own right, but the books are very long. The length of the books, for many people, is a major deterrent. By bringing these stories to film, movie goers are able to experience these amazing stories without having to commit to the time it takes to read such long books.  It is sad that this is the case, but it is a reality of the world today.

Another reason that some movies overshadow the original books is the matter of obscurity. Although it was a best seller, I had no idea that Forrest Gump was originally a book before working on this unit. Maybe I missed the (shrimp) boat, but I had no idea that the movie was actually a book adaptation. I do not think I am alone in the fact that I don’t realize that certain movies are actually based on books. From a quick Google search, I was able to determine that many movies that I love were actually inspired by books, including The Blindside, The Princess Bride, and The Shawshank Redemption.

Even though this shift in popularity happens, I do not think that it necessarily diminishes the quality or importance of the original text. Throughout this unit, I have come to fully embrace the idea that film and text are totally separate mediums and should be treated as such. Just as each popular film has its merits, so too does the original text from which it was derived. 

The add-ons, spin-offs, and merchandising, if nothing else, paint a picture of the commercial nature of our world. It is easy to get overwhelmed with a certain franchise when we are inundated with commercials, Happy Meal toys, soundtracks, and merchandise. Who wasn’t tired of the Twilight series? All of these things, however, help to generate a greater following for the franchise. People typically gravitate towards things that they think are popular with those around them. If I see more and more people walking around in Ender’s Game attire, I would likely take notice and at least see what all the hype is about. Whether we like to admit it or not, people stick to societal norms, so expanding beyond text and film makes cultural connections that help spread ideas beyond what may have been possible on their own.

The Wizard of Oz has been one of my favorite movies since my childhood, so I obviously hold it dear to my heart. I remember watching it around the holidays with my dad. I remember playing Dorothy in a fifth grade interpretation next to my now-husband who played the Cowardly Lion. I eagerly await the day when my daughter will be old enough to enjoy it with my husband and I. With that said, I do not necessarily have the same connection with the original book. I do like the original text now that I have read it, but more from the standpoint that it provides further background information about my favorite characters and puts them into more adventures, rather than from a nostalgic point of view.

I think this week’s lesson, more so than the previous lessons, solidified for me the idea that a movie does not have to been totally true to the original text to be successful. In fact, by straying from the original text a film can actually overtake a book in terms of popularity. The Wizard of Oz is obviously one example where this was the case. Its success, in my opinion, was due to the fact that the filmmakers viewed the medium of film totally independent of text. In doing so, they were able to translate the themes, feeling, and overall plot into a successful film without being tied to every detail of the book. Generally, I think this is what it takes to turn a well-loved children’s book into a film. Oftentimes children’s books are read repeatedly, especially if it is a favorite of the child. This means that the reader is extremely familiar with the story. By tapping into the emotions elicited by the book and sticking to the main themes and plot, filmmakers can please viewers without making literal interpretations of everything in a book. One example of a film that I believe did a great job making the text to film transition was The Hunger Games. Like The Wizard of Oz, it was sanitized in terms of violence to appeal to a young audience, but the feel of the film very much fit the feeling of the book and still had much of the same overarching plot, even though both were streamlined in order to fit the time constraints of a movie. The characters exhibited the same traits as in the book and the main storyline stayed the same. When well done, viewers are able to “forget” about the book and become engrossed in the film for what it is, rather than what it is not. If a movie does not catch me right away with the look and feel that reminds me of a beloved book, then I cannot help but spend the rest of the movie looking for more ways in which the film differs from the movie.

A movie like City of Ember, on the other hand, was not successful in its adaptation of the book by the same name. In the book, two kids have to discover the way out of an underground city set up to ensure the survival of humans on the Earth. The problem is, no one in the city realizes that they are underground, so no one knows that they should escape. The protagonists of the story decide that something needs to be done since the city is running out of food, water, and electricity to a dangerous level. In this movie, the filmmakers changed the plot by altering key details and strayed from the feel of the original text. In addition, they focused on minute details from the book, such as when the man returns from a failed escape attempt with stories of huge monsters. In the book, the man is made out to be mentally unstable and progressively tells more exaggerated tales. It is literally less than a page worth of material. In the movie, however, the filmmakers took this small detail and made it a major element of the film by adding in giant sized moles and beetles. These were undoubtedly added to create more drama and action, but were unnecessary and take away from the engrossing story told by Jeanne DuPrau. The filmmakers go as far as changing how the heroes eventually escape from the city, creating a huge shift away from the plot of the original book. If the filmmakers had taken inspiration from The Wizard of Oz perhaps they would have been able to create a more successful interpretation of such a great book.

I will admit that prior to this class I would have categorized myself along with the hardcore readers that are impossible to please at the theater. I fall in love with certain books and characters and want every little detail included in the film adaptations. I have always known that with time constraints this was not possible, but as they say, the heart wants what the heart wants. By examining a film that I have always loved and comparing it to the original text, I think I may finally be swayed to give filmmakers more of a break and try to look at films independent of the books that go with them.