I've always been extremely interested in great works of art that are inspired and birthed from other pieces. This idea of "parallel" or "inspired fiction" has allowed authors to reinterpret classics in order to further understand them. One of my favorites in this genre is Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, a satire of Hamlet which follows the exploits of two extremely minor characters in the Shakespeare play, and we've already seen the film version of another good example, The Hours. I also appreciate how this genre has evolved, becoming the widely popular "fanfiction" genre. Although many would consider "fanfiction" a separate, less professional category, but I believe that it allows for young aspiring writers to both experiment with characters they are used to and bear tribute to the books and worlds they love. I even dabbled into the genre myself for my open genre assignment last year, exploring how Black Swan Green protagonist Jason Taylor and Catcher in the Rye protagonist Holden Caulfield would interact if they ever met.
Although I hold this genre in very high regard, I run into a small snag when it comes to Wide Sargasso Sea: I've never read Jane Eyre, the novel which inspired it. This brings forth a difficult question to answer: is the previous reading unnecessary to my enjoyment of the book or am I missing a large part of the characterization? Although I do feel I have enjoyed this book on its own merits I can't help but feel at a disadvantage when we discuss the character of Rochester and whether he can be considered sympathetic. I find it difficult to even discuss my opinion on the character because I don't have the whole picture. It's the same feeling I would have if I tried to discuss a book I never finished among a group who has.
Although there's no changing the disadvantage I feel in discussions of character, I feel my enjoyment of the book itself isn't hampered. The reason for this is that the book takes place entirely before the events of Jane Eyre, meaning that any character development that takes place within that book is technically a moot point. Even still, I must admit that reading this piece of "inspired fiction" without first reading the source material has felt somehow wrong, as though I'm watching a show out of order, or seeing a prequel before viewing the original. I'm mainly interested to hear what others of you who are in the same boat as me think. Is it a problem to read inspired fiction without knowledge of the original, or should the book be designed to function well with both perspectives in mind?
1 comment:
I have always insisted, in what must be the ten or so times I've taught this novel now, that it absolutely does NOT depend on a prior reading of Bronte's novel. In part this is because so little of the story actually dovetails with the plot of the original (only part 3, and only indirectly--although the outline of "Bertha's" story and the early relationship with Rochester is referred to from a distance), there really is a sense of an independent fictional world (whereas _The Hours_ without _Mrs. Dalloway_ would certainly be deficient).
But now you get to read _Jane Eyre_ with _WSS_ in mind--and see how you read Bertha's story differently as a result!
Post a Comment