Publication: Del teatro al cine: hacia una teoría de la adaptación. (Tres versiones de Macbeth)
Loading...
Files
Official URL
Full text at PDC
Publication Date
2016-11-11
Authors
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Citations
Exportar
Abstract
¿De qué se componen los sistemas semióticos propios de cada lenguaje, el dramático y el cinematográfico? ¿Cuáles son los complejos procesos de transformación por los que un texto dramático se convierte en una función teatral o bien en una obra fílmica? ¿Qué diferencia esencialmente la recepción de ambas obras? Y, finalmente, ¿existe la posibilidad de una teoría que estudie sistemáticamente el fenómeno de la adaptación? Estas son las preguntas que voy a tratar de responder en este trabajo, que llevarán a elaborar un esbozo de teoría de la adaptación del modo dramático al cinematográfico. Como cimientos previos a la elaboración de esta investigación, planteo un acercamiento a las teorías dramáticas y cinematográficas. Las fuentes que utilizo son, en primer lugar, los estudios sobre ambos sistemas semióticos. Para el estudio del drama utilizo el método de análisis dramatológico perfectamente sistematizado de José Luis García Barrientos en Cómo se comenta una obra de teatro (2001) y en Análisis de la dramaturgia. Nueve obras y un método (2007), complementándolo con las teorías de José Luis Alonso de Santos, Antonin Artaud, Ian Bernard, Keir Elam, John Gielgud, Roger Manvell, Vsévolod Emílievich Meyerhold, Konstantin Stanislavki y Anne Ubersfeld entre otros. Para el estudio de la teoría cinematográfica me apoyo en los estudios, principalmente, de Rudolph Arnheim, Henri Agel, Andrew Dudley, Daniel Arijon, Jacques Aumont y Michel Marie, Béla Balázs, André Bazin, David Bordwell y Kristin Thompson, Fernando Canet y Josep Prósper, Francesco Casetti, Sergei Eisenstein, Joaquín de Entrambasaguas, Jean Epstein, Susan Hayward, Siegfried Kracauer, Yuri Lotman, Marcel Martin, Christian Metz, Jean Mitry, Vsevolod Pudovkin, Vicente Sánchez Biosca y Robert Stam entre otros, quienes, en conjunto ofrecen un compendio muy amplio y dan una idea bastante completa y sistematizada del arte y lenguaje cinematográfico...
Which are the elements that compound the semiotic systems of theater and cinema? Which is the complex transformation process that allows a dramatic play to become a cinematographic movie? And, finally, is there any possibility of a theory that examines systematically the phenomenon of adaptation? To give an answer to these questions, I contemplated José Luis García Barrientos semiotics’ drama study, complementing it with the theories of José Luis Alonso de Santos, Antonin Artaud, John Gielgud, Vsévolod Emílievich Meyerhold, Konstantin Stanislavski and Anne Uberbeld among others. Regarding film theory, I considered mainly the studies of Rudolph Arnheim, Henri Agel, Jacques Aumont y Michel Marie, Béla Balázs, André Bazin, David Bordwell and Kristin Thompson, Francesco Casetti, Sergei Eisenstein, Joaquín de Entrambasaguas, Jean Epstein, Siegfried Kracauer, Yuri Lotman, Marcel Martin, Christian Metz, Jean Mitry, Vsevolod Pudovkin, and Robert Stam, among others. In addition to this compilation, I have attempted to integrate all schools in order to compare both languages, and, therefore, to explain the process of adaptation. Moreover, I have tried to classify different kinds of adaptations, depending of the remaining constituents. In order to achieve an approximation to a theory of adaptation, I have chosen William Shakespeare’s Macbeth, and three of their best screen adaptations: those of Orson Welles, Roman Polanski and Akira Kurosawa, whose découpages I offer in the Annex. Below, I have tried to summarize some guides for the adaptation and, finally, I insist on the different ways of reception relying on both, theory and a survey about this subject which I made in June 2010 (completely included in Annex)...
Which are the elements that compound the semiotic systems of theater and cinema? Which is the complex transformation process that allows a dramatic play to become a cinematographic movie? And, finally, is there any possibility of a theory that examines systematically the phenomenon of adaptation? To give an answer to these questions, I contemplated José Luis García Barrientos semiotics’ drama study, complementing it with the theories of José Luis Alonso de Santos, Antonin Artaud, John Gielgud, Vsévolod Emílievich Meyerhold, Konstantin Stanislavski and Anne Uberbeld among others. Regarding film theory, I considered mainly the studies of Rudolph Arnheim, Henri Agel, Jacques Aumont y Michel Marie, Béla Balázs, André Bazin, David Bordwell and Kristin Thompson, Francesco Casetti, Sergei Eisenstein, Joaquín de Entrambasaguas, Jean Epstein, Siegfried Kracauer, Yuri Lotman, Marcel Martin, Christian Metz, Jean Mitry, Vsevolod Pudovkin, and Robert Stam, among others. In addition to this compilation, I have attempted to integrate all schools in order to compare both languages, and, therefore, to explain the process of adaptation. Moreover, I have tried to classify different kinds of adaptations, depending of the remaining constituents. In order to achieve an approximation to a theory of adaptation, I have chosen William Shakespeare’s Macbeth, and three of their best screen adaptations: those of Orson Welles, Roman Polanski and Akira Kurosawa, whose découpages I offer in the Annex. Below, I have tried to summarize some guides for the adaptation and, finally, I insist on the different ways of reception relying on both, theory and a survey about this subject which I made in June 2010 (completely included in Annex)...
Description
Tesis inédita de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Filología, Departamento de Filología Inglesa II (Literatura de los Paises de Lengua Inglesa), leída el 05/10/2015