encoding and decoding meaning: the reader-viewer response...

Chapter V

ENCODING AND DECODING MEANING:

THE READER-VIEWER RESPONSE

ENCODING AND DECODING MEANING: THE READER-VIEWER RESPONSE

The difference in reader and a viewer response to a novel and film

respectively is an important area of discussion in the process of

transformation from verbal to the visual mode of representation. To

understand this difference in response, one will have to explore the

production and consumption characteristics of a novel and a film.

A novel takes a reader several hours to read, as it may be many

hundred pages long whereas a film lasts for an hour or two. The

reader of the novel is in control of the process of reading; he can

pause at will, check back over incidents and facts and reflect upon

action but he is solitary in his engagement. The viewer of the film is

involved in a collective experience, in which the events or actions

relentlessly move on without the possibility of pause or recap.

However, a television adaptation of a novel in a serial form provides

an experience close to the reading of a novel. Television serials and

video recordings provide a flexibility of consumption, the ability to

pause and recap.

The transmission of the experience from producer to consumer is

also significantly different in both cases. Martin Esslin in his book,

The Field of Drama.1 points out that when we read there is a linear

progression, ordered and controlled by the reader. In dramatic

forms, including film and television, the words follow this structure,

Encoding and Decoding Meaning

but the other slgns come at the Vlewer simultaneously, and the

director can hardly control the order or the intensity· of

interpretation.

Charles Pierce and this successor Roman Jakobson identified three

kinds of signs. As a sign system the word on the page is different

from the screen and hence a discussion of signs is central to

understanding the difference in perception and response of a reader

and a viewer. When any communication system refers to an object,

person, concept and so on (the 'signified), it employs the signs at its

disposal ('the signifier'). An icon is a sign, which represents an

object mainly by its similarity to it; the relationship is not an

arbitrary one; a photograph of a man will resemble the man himself.

Whereas an index is a sign, which points to another object, in other

words it suggests an existential bond between itself and its object,

for e.g.: the 'the last resting place' may refer to a cemetery. The

third sign, the symbol, can only be understood by convention. It

does not resemble its object, nor possess any bond; there is no

immediate relationship other than agreed one among users of the

sign; for e.g., English speakers agree that the letters c-a-t are the

symbol for a domestic feline pet and such agreement has the force

of linguistic law2 . In film and television the iconic and the

indexical signs predominate while in prose the, symbolic sign is

used exclusively.

24R


Film theorists like Andre Bazin and Christian Metz have debated

these distinctions at length. Bazin emphasises on Cinema's ability

to reveal, to create a perfect aesthetic illusion of reality whereas

Metz insists that the aesthetic of cinema must refer back to an

agreed code to achieve its full meaning. The film or the television

image implies a close relationship between signifier and the

signified, compared to the arbitrary relationship of verbal language.

The image, therefore, is specifically representational: not 'a room'

but a specific room; not a bird, but a swallow- i.e. the ability to

achieve precision, exactness the hence an 'illusion of reality'. 2

Martin Esslin identified the following non-iconic signs developed

exclusively by film and television that constitutes in a lay man's

term the grammar of the screen:

1. Sign Shots: - long shots, close ups etc.

a. Panning shots

b~ .- Travelling shots

c. Slow motion and accelerated motion.

2. Signs derived from the linking of shots

a. Dissolve

b. Cross Fade

c. Split Screen

d. Sharp Cut.

3. Signs derived from editing:

a. Montage

b. Rhythmic flow of images.

249


There could be yet another category of signs which has emerged as

a major influence on film making and i.e. the arena of 'special

effects' employed extensively in science fictions, action thrillers,

space odysseys and animations. The 'Computer Graphics' and the

Digital Technology has added to the special effects thereby

producing a new brand of reality, i.e. a virtual reality. The web

space on the computer Internet sites is an example of such a virtual

reality and is called the virtual space. In virtual reality the viewer

becomes an active participant m the action and he almost

exp-eriences a 'lived reality' and his involvement is palpable and

tangible. These non-iconic signs or effects simulate a reality, which

is both illusory, and a lived experience. The inherent contradiction

of this category makes the cinematic medium even more

challenging.

The soundtrack forms yet another level pf non-iconic signs. The

dialogues, music, sound effects all together form a level of meaning

which adds to the visuals. The soundtrack and its juxtaposition

with silence make it possible for the director to enrich the

experience of a literary work when he transforms it into a film. The

sound plays a very powerful role in evocation of varied emotions,

ranging from suspense, horror, sorrow, happiness etc. The sound of

an approaching train in Ray's Pather Panchali (1955) and the sound

of whiplash highlighting the protagonist Neera's anguish and pain

in Ritwik Ghatak's Meghe Dhaka Tara (1960) till date remains a

250


historic landmark in the use of sound in the film. The non

synchronous nature of the soundtrack, which can be superimposed

over any visual, constitutes its own brand of meaning. Thus the

soundtrack in conjunction with the visual-track is an important

category of non-iconic signs which lends itself to similar sub

categorisation.

Foremost among the non-iconic signs in a cinematic medium is the

editing. Editing achieves continuity and a sequence in a narrative

structure, so that the reader could effortlessly read the film. Editing

bridges over gaps in space and disjunction in time. Techniques that

have been developed to achieve this are:

Match on action.

Consistency of screen direction.

The 300 rule (a change of shot must be at a different angle

from the previous shot by at least 300 ).

The 1800 rule- an imaginary line on the floor in front of the

camera, which is not crossed by the actors during shooting,

as otherwise the points of view- would be confusing.

The basic assumption of these techniques is that the screen

signifies a tridimensional space. These techniques produce a notion

of space, along with various kinds of shots like long shots and

close-ups. The interaction of the protagonists is portrayed by an

exchange of looks between them. Editing is then done according to

the principle of eyeline match. This particular method of editing was

251


a characteristic of the classic narrative. Noel Burch called it the

(Institutional Mode of Representation' which is not only a manner of

representation but also a way of making the spectator see. Gaston

Roberge 3 says that, the spectator is made to see through

identification and his insertion into the fiction is the source of

narrative pleasure. He goes on to elucidate the strategy i.e.

employed to achieve this. Nick Browne4 calls it the shot-reverse

shot editing. Suppose A and B are in conversation and it is through

shot-reverse- shot technique the faces of A and B are shown in

alternation. In shot 1, A is seen from above B's shoulder. The

spectator thus looks at A and thinking it as his look experiences a

certain pleasure. In the next shot B is seen from above A's shoulder.

Thus what the spectator thought was his look is revealed to be in

actuality B's look and so on so forth. Through this technique the

spectator is constantly dispossessed of his look. However, very soon

the spectator identifies with one of the protagonists and his look

becomes the spectator's look.

This according to Gaston Roberge has two effects.5 Firstly the film

creates an illusion of ontological reality and is completely authentic

in itself. This is known as suturing, stitching i.e. closing the film

unto itself. Secondly, by the succession of identification the

spectator is inserted into the text. The spectator not only

participates but is written into the text, and the text is as if written

and directed from his point of view. The spectator in the text is like

252


a king or queen beholding with pleasure the resolution of an

enigma, the solution of a problem and perhaps even resolving the

problem. Restricting the discussion to screen adaptations of the

literary texts and the difference in perception and response of a

reader and a spectator/viewer we shall have to steer the discussion

to certain specific problems of transfer. These would necessarily

include points of view, time, imagery, psychological realism and

selective perception. Joseph Boggs in his book The Art of Watching

films7 talks about five modes of points of view (the perspective from

whiCh a story is told) in a novel, which are noe available to the

camera.

1. First person;

2. Omniscient author;

3. Limited Third Person (where the narrator IS privileged and

omniscient but only on one character);

4. Dramatic point-of-view (in which the reader is not conscious

of the narrator, since he does not comment but merely

describes the scene);

5. Stream of consciousness - interior monologue. The first

person narrative in a novel, which often involves close

relationship with the reader, cannot be depicted by the

camera. One of the greatest challenges of a screen adaptation

is to not only present the actions and the events of the novel

but also capture the attitudes and subjective tones of the

author.

253


The camera with its unique technique of changing a point of view

within a scene, the editing which causes frequent and extreme

shifts in perspective, depths of field, focus, zooms, angle specifying

characters and objects, montage creating mood and emotion, goes

on to produce a metalanguage in which the characters are

encrypted in a film. The point-of-view in a way passes to the

spectator or the viewer, who with the aid of the cinematic tropes

"becomes a kind of fictional god: one who, if not omniscient, can

nevertheless move about with seemingly magical powers.s

Robert Scholes calls this Narrativity. Narrativity is a process by

which .. , "a perceiver actively constructs a story from the fictional

data provided by any narrative medium"9 Robert Scholes says that

a well-made film will require interpretation while a well made novel

may only need understanding. The images presented to us are

narrational blueprints for a fiction that must be constructed by the

viewer's Narrativity. Narration, which is common to all modes of

representation, is different from Narrativity, as it is the process of

enactment or recounting, depiction or description.

Film theorists have in fact stressed the passivity of a viewer in the

viewing process. Theorists like Stanley Cavell and Edgar Morin have

described the viewing process as an inherently voyeuristic and

pornographic, the viewer himself as impotent and passive. These

theorists have obviously ignored the visceral and physiological

response of the viewer to the emotions of violence, horror, romance

254


etc evoked in the film. On the contrary the literary theorists like

Louise Rosenblatt, Wolfgang Iser and Stanley Fish conceived

literature as a lived experience in which the reader, actualizing the

text participates in the work of art. While Stanley Fish refers to

literature as Kinetic Iser stresses the "inevitable omissions" or

"gaps" in a text which the reader must necessarily fill. Both Iser and

Fish use cinematic terminology to explain the Narrativity of the

reader and it is interesting to note that a stress on the reader

response arises in this age of films. Applying a reader-response

theory to viewing a film, we can naturally assume that if a reader is

resymbolising a text or through 'anticipation and retrospection'

animating a text then the viewer does the same while watching a

film. However the process becomes even more complex when

watching a screen adaptation. The viewer tries to coincide the film

experience with his prior reading experience of the source text. The

film experience of such a viewer will never be the same as his

individualistic encounter with the source text.

Joy Gould Boyum says in his book Double Exposure, that we often

tend to be disappointed by the film up there on the screen because

each of us who has read the novel will owe an allegiance to our own

imaginative recreation. 10 . Boyum says that the act of watching an

adaptation is like watching a narrative framed in double vision

wherein we are forever juxtaposing our film with the film on the

screen. We try and force the two narratives to achieve a fusion and

255


failing to do that we accept the tension and the distance. This

double vision leads to identifying omissions, additions and

interpolations in the screen adaptation. It intrudes in the viewing

process by dissuading the viewer from identifying with the

characters on the screen. The association that an actor has because

of the roles he has played in other films also prevents the viewer

from total identification with the character. In the film under

discussion, The Remains of the Day Anthony Hopkins forever brings

to mind the psychopath he played in the film The Silence of the

Lamb. Similarly Christopher Reeves more than being the rich

American in the film under discussion brings to mind his

immensely popular screen image of 'Superman'. Inspite of the

intrusions created by the 'double vision' in the act of viewing a

screen adaptation, there is always an ideal viewer. An ideal viewer

would be someone whose imaginative reconstruction or

visualisation of a particular novel will approximate the screen --..:.~~

adaptation. In comparing a book with an adaptation we are

comparing the reader's interpretation with the director's

interpretation. Hence the act of reading a text and the act of viewing

the screen adaptation of the text can never be the same and at best

used as a critical tool of analysis.

When the spectator or the viewer identifies with the subject within

the film he becomes the enunciated subject i.e. gets inserted into

the text of the film. The spectator, who is thus enclosed within the

256


text, completely identifies with the speaking subject. All the actions

of the subject seem believable in the given context. Nick Browne

proposed this theory of Spectatorshipll. Some films however instead

of enclosing the spectator in the text of the film invite him to work

on the text. Instead of being offered identification the spectator

enjoys the freedom of co-producing a text and hence uses his

sUbjectivity to build a world of his imagination. On the other hand

the enunciated spectator does not have the freedom to build but

understands the contradictions of the discourse and offers

criticism. What we are talking about is the spectator's relations to a

closed and an open text and consequent decoding of meaning. What

follows from this is that the structure of the film dominates the

spectator's viewpoint or process of deciding meaning.

The structuration of film brings us to the interesting concept of

.. decoupage (cutting out) in the film. Decoupage12 is the shot division

or invisible editing, and is also known as the shooting script. It

involves fragmenting a particular action in the film and then adding

a point of view of to each fragment so that when the fragments are

re-joined they result in, a particular unfolding of that action.

Decoupage means at the same time a particular way of shot division

before filming or the underlying structure of the finished film. The

technique of decoupage can easily control the spectator's response

to a film.

257


Colin McCabe and Laura Mulvey have proposed two theories of

Spectatorship. McCabe has argued that there may be several points

of view in a film, which are arranged in a hierarchy and only one is

dominant. That dominant discourse determines response not only

to the film but also to the other points of view in the film as well.

Instead of a discourse between the film text and the spectator there

is already a compiled history, which the viewer has to accept. The

dominant discourse is contained in the visual of the film and hence

organises the response to the film. Editing is a key area through

which it is achieved. The set, the choice of location, decor, lighting

and the entire technical baggage is used to organise a certain

response and encode a certain meaning.

Laura Mulvey had identified this dominant discourse as the

dominant look i.e. the look of the male spectator. According to

Mulvey, the fem~le spectator takes on another identity in order to

participate and obtain pleasure. This is borrowed from Lacan's ,

notion of misrecognition. Lacan had suggested, that when a

human being looks into the mirror he acquires an illusion of

wholeness, which is essentially misrecognition. In Lacanian terms,

in the mirror phase of a child, when the reflected image comes from

the mother's image, like a character on the screen, alienation

occurs, because the child has to accept the image projected on to it

by the desire of another. This mirror phase can be compared to the

act of Spectatorship, where viewers have to comply with what is on

258


the screen. The spectator thus experiences completeness, which is

temporary. The film unfolds fantasy that sustains desire in a viewer

by staging it. Laura Mulvey has psychoanalysed this spectatorial

pleasure in her article, "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema"13.

There are three looks in the cinema: the look camera, the look of

the protagonists within the film and the look of the spectator. In a

classic narrative the look of the camera is repressed as it supposes

an agency outside the narrative fiction. The other two looks often

coincide i.e. the spectator identifies with the protagonist. Laura

Mulvey calls this 'the unconscious of patriarchal society structuring

the film form by constituting the cinematic gaze of the spectator'.

The spectator irrespective of the gender looks at the woman as an

object of the male's desire. Mulvey says that a male spectator looks

at a woman in the film as an object of desire and fear both; fear ,

because the male is conditioned to see the woman as a symbol of a

lack and therefore, as a threat of castration. Mulvey concludes that

as a result of that fear, the pleasure of looking is only stronger. In

Freudian terms however one can say that in the cinematic gaze of

the spectator, both the voyeuristic and narcissistic pleasures

coincide. Central to Lacan's vocabulary 'ego' or identity of an

individual formed by looking at the mirror also constitutes the

spectator's ego. The spectator in the text indulges his voyeuristic

tendency, and directs his or her narcissistic gaze at the protagonist.

259


Both Laura Mulvey and Colin McCabe's film theory emphasised the

viewer's control over the film being watched. These theories

attempted to demonstrate how the spectator is fIxed in place by the

film text, by its system of reinforcing and developing values. These

theories were influenced by Ferdinand -de Saussure's theory of

language, which proposed, that the structures of language

including film language, do our thinking for us and limit our

thinking. The spectator is thus fItted into the text and the forms of

identifIcation which the spectator receives from the film are the only

ones that he can use to arrive at meaning. Gramsci's concept of

hegemony or dominance of social structures and Althusser's

ideological state apparatus form the basis of theories of

Spectatorship.

It would be appropriate at this juncture to understand who controls

the media and its meanings and in· what fashion. There are

essentially two models of media control, the pluralist model and the

critical model. The pluralist model proposes that media (Including

films) in society are made up of many interacting groups,

institutions, interests, many sites of power, government, audiences

with varying interest etc. These have differing and at times

competing interests, powers, social stakes and interpretive frames.

Many different social forces can have an influence on who has

access, what meanings get constructed, how they are constructed.

These social forces could be the traditions, laws and ideology of a

260


state. The Pluralist model however did not recognise ideology as the

only determining force and believed in democratic system which

gave freedom to its audience to speak and influence opinions. The

Pluralist position however took into cognizance the role of ideology

through the work of Bakhtin and Foucault who worked from within

the critical tradition.

The Russian theorist Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin, advanced the

proposition that language is inherently ideological in that it informs

and expresses the particular way in which the speaker sees and

feels about the world and her position in it. He argued that any

language is made up of many sociolects, or ideological positions,

attached to class, region, age, profession, and so forth, so that

individuals are situated differently within the larger social unit; and

in that any social meanings involve a complex interplay and

cOtppetition among these socialists, or ideolects.

The French theorist Michel Foucault saw power as operating in

society through many centers, and in many ways. He pointed out

that power is not inherently negative-it is what is necessary for

anything to happen. Foucault did focus attention on the restrictive

forces of institutions and on the central role of ideology, but he also

imagined a world much less predictable and much less controllable

by socially dominant forces, than the critical position imagined.

261


"

Added to these recent positions in support of a pluralist perspective

has been the post-structuralism sense that 'subject' is a socially

constructed position within the system.

The individuals may variously occupy different subject positions (I

am variously a father, a husband, a professor, some what of a post-

structuralist, a dog owner, and so on, and my sense of myself, and

my realm of meanings changes, this theory holds, as 1 move

through these various subject positions). The media may structure

subject positions for me; alternately, 1 may bring the decoding

potentials of different subject positions to different mediated

messages, hence make different meanings.

The Critical position on the other hand commonly believes, that the

ruling class influences the understanding of the populace:

(1) Through socialising process, including the schools the church

and so forth.

(2) Through the economy 1.e. self-interest of the business and

cultural institutions.

(3) Through the control of the power elite.

The media for instance, according to the critical model, serves the

interest of the dominant ideology. The audience has only those

interpretations available, which have been taught to them. The

ideological control operates through the construction of a cultural

imagination produced by the structured media professional.

262


The Critical model under the pressure of theorists like Foucault and

Bakhtin and the Cultural Studies (meanings can be decided by

audience situated differently historically and socially) has moved

towards a 'loose control' model. This model sees control as being

more distributed than centralised and effected through ideology

than through direct economic and political force.

What follows from this discussion is that: -

1. Meaning is encoded through a framework of knowledge, and that

these have a social dimension and a material dimension. (I.e.

they are embedded in the economic and political processes of the

society).

2. That meaning is what is made by the receiver who decodes the

message in the context of his or her own framework of

knowledge. The history, the time and different social and

geographic placement, will have an impact on the similarities of

encoded and decoded meaning.

3. The various codes of all kinds through which meanIng IS

contracted (connotations, genres) can vary from one reception

site to another and can differ from sender to receiver i.e. from

encoder to decoder.

A film text or any other text encodes an intended or preferred

meaning, but the reader may not decode the message within the

'preferred' interpretive frame. The spectator or the viewer may

interpret within the dominant mode, decoding, as the encoder

263


would have it. The VIewer may alternatively adopt a negotiated

position wherein he may accept some aspects of the dominant

meaning, but rejects and alters other aspects to suit his own

desired goals. Finally the viewer may read the film text from an

oppositional point of view; interpreting meaning subversively,

. h d' cd' 14 against t e ommate or prelerre meanmgs.

Let us now examine a mUltiple text scenario m the context of

cinematic adaptations of literary texts. We begin on an assumption

that a literary text can be no more reffered to as the 'original text',

hence the text which is used for say cinematic adaptation (it is

applicable for all such adaptations) is at best a 'source text' from

where the narrative is borrowed for a visual representation. The film

adapted from such a text has a language of its own and hence can

be called a 'text' too which is however different in nature because of

the mode of its representation. This text is however is preceded by a

'text in transition' which I shall call the screenplay. The screenplay

according to me is the intermediary stage where the 'verbal' is in the

process of transformation to the 'visual'.

Now let us consider a hypothetical but a hugely prevalent situation

where a reader of a particular literary text also watches the film

adaptation of that text' he is our reader-viewer. In the process of

viewing, the reader fills in the inevitable gaps in the film text with

his Narrativity. The 'reader -viewer' has now a text which is an

amalgamation of the literary text and his reading of it plus the

264


screenplay writer and the director's rendition of it and also the

gaps, dissension's and conflicts in trying to match the 'verbal' and

the 'visual'. This 'reader -viewer' text is thus very different from the

'source text' and the 'film text'. (See Graph 1-2).

Continuing the same hypothesis we may imagine another situation

where the reader of a particular literary text may not have seen the

film based on it and similarly there is a viewer who has not read the

'source text' of the film. We therefore have a situation where the

there is a 'reader's text' and there is a 'viewer's text'and there is a

huge gap between the two. However, we will also have to remember

that there could be several such individual reader's text and

similarly several individual viewer's text and consequently several

different readings of the 'source text' and the 'film text' based on it.

This 'viewer' may eventually read the source text of the film and try

and compare the film and the 'source text' with the film as a

reference point. The reverse is equally true where the reader of that

text may view the film based on it and compare it with the source

text as the reference point. The logical argument that follows is that

a 'reader-viewer' text is experientially different from a 'viewer -

reader' text (See Graph 3,4,5).

On the basis of above observations we can safely assume that we

are presently in a mUltiple text scenario where the visual mode of

representation along with its verbal counterpart has extended the

domain of literature. The cinematic adaptations of literary texts and

265


the published screenplays of such film adaptations have thus

brought the verbal-visual debate centrestage and have also made

the word and the image an inseparable concept in the study of

literature.

Multiple Text Scenario in a Cinematic Adaptation of a Literary Text

I. Source Text 1

! Screenplay

! Film Text (Adaptation) 2

1 2

II. Source Text Film Text

x Reader- Viewer's Text

266

III.

Gap

IV


1 2

Source Text Film Text

Gap

Reader's Text Reader-Viewer Text Viewer's Text

3 X 4

I II~~I GAP

5

GAP

6

Arising out of Reader's

Interpretation

Arising out of director's

interpretation.

1 2

Film Text Source Text

Viewer-Reader's Text

y

267


V. Reader-Viewer Text Viewer-Reader Text

Gap Text Z

Encoding and Decoding Meaning: The Remains of the Day - The

Film

In order to understand the gaps that inevitably occur during the

transference of a novel to a film, we shall undertake a small

exercise of comparing and contrasting the novel and the film. The

novel and film under consideration here are: -

1. The Remains of the day.Kazuo Ishiguro (London: Faber and

Faber, 1989), 245 pages.

2. The Remains of the day., Merchant-Ivory production Screenplay:

Ruth Prawer Jhabvala , Running time: 135 minutes, Columbia

Pictures, 1993.

These gaps will indicate not only the actual content that has

been transferred to the film, but will also highlight the places where

the focus of the narrative shifts. This exercise will also compare and

contrast the narrative style in the two texts and how they contribute

to the constitution of meaning in different modes of representation.

A sample segmentation and shot analysis of few scenes will also

indicate how meaning is constituted in a cinematic medium

through the cinematic devices.

268


FILM

Scene 1

Auction Scene.

Scene 2

Stevens servmg breakfast to

Mr. Lewis.

Scene 3

1. Stevens begins his journey

2. Fox hunt.

Scene 4

Interviewing Miss Kenton.

Scene 5

Employing Stevens Senior.

Scene 6

Miss Kenton Brings Flowers

into Stevens' Parlour.

Scene 7

Lunch with the staff.

Scene 8

The Dust Pan Scene.

Scene 9

Stevens

nose.

Senior's dripping

GAPS - Additions & Deletions

Not there in the novel.

Can be located in the novel, not as in

the novel.

1. CRll be located in the novel, not as i

the novel.

2. Not there in the novel.



Can be located in the novel.

Not there in the novel as it is.

Reconstituted with details in the novel.

As in the novel.


269


Scene 10

The Chinaman Episode.

Scene 11

Summer House Episode.

Scene 12

Stevens and Lord Darlington.

Scene 13

Relieving Stevens Sr. of his

job.

Scene 14

Looking from the Window.

Scene 15

Stevens Sr. given new duty chart.

Scene 16

Stevens addresses the staff.

Scene 17

Arrival of Mr. Lewis.

Scene 18

Lord Darlington asks Stevens

to help Reginald Cardinal with

facts of life.

Scene 19

Stevens accosts Reginald in

the garden.

As in the novel.

Details can be located m the novel,

dramatised for the film.


As in the novel.

As in the novel.

Not as in the novel. Details dramatised.





270


Scene 20

Arrival of Mr. Dupont.

Scene 21

The Conference.

Scene 22. Stevens Sr. falls ill.

Scene 23

The Conference Dinner

Preparation.

Scene 24

Stevens visits his father.

Scene 25

The Song Sequence at the

Conference.

Scene 27

Death of Stevens Senior.

Scene 28

Stevens resumes his journey.

Can be located in the novel but certain

details altered in the film.

Can be located in the novel, but details

added and deleted in the film, the date

of the conference in the film is 1936

and in the novel it is 1923.

As in the novel.


Can be located in the novel, but details

'altered in the film.


Can be located m the novel. Details

altered.

Sundry details In the novel

encapsulated and dramatised.

271


Scene 29

Arrival of Sir Geoffrey and his

butler.

Scene 30

Dinner with Sir Geoffrey.

Scene 31

Stevens entertains Mr. Benn

in his parlour.

Scene 32

Lord Darlington's Dilemma.

Scene 33

Lord Darlington asks Stevens

to dismiss the Jew maids.

Scene 34

Stevens informs Kenton of the

dismissal.

Scene 35

Appointing a new maid.

Scene 36

Stevens at an inn.

Scene 37 Stevens humiliated

by Lord Darlington's guests

Can be located in text, identity of the

butler changed to that of Mr. Benn.




As in the novel.

Can be located In the novel, details

added.

Can be located in the novel, details

altered in the film.


altered in the film.

As in the novel.

272


Scene 38

Stevens with Richard Carlisle

and Stevens' Confession.

Scene 39

Lord Darlington's confession.

Scene 40

Stevens and Miss Kenton In

the summerhouse

Scene 41

Lisa and Charlie.

Scene 42

Miss Kenton visits Stevens'

parlour.

Scene 43

Lisa Speaks to Miss Kenton.

Scene 44

Cocoa Session.

Scene 45

Miss Kenton meets Mr. Benn.

Scene 46

Lord Darlington sits waiting

in a dark room.

Can be located m the novel, details

altered.

Can be located m the novel, details

added.

Can be located In the novel, details

added.


As in the novel.




Can be located in the novel, as in the

novel.

273


Scene 47

Miss Kenton informs Stevens

about her marriage proposal.

Scene 48

Lord Darlington dines with

Reginald.

Scene 49

Arrival of Midnight Guests

Scene 50

The secret meeting at the

Darlington Hall.

Scene 51

Kenton informs Stevens about

her acceptance

marriage proposal

Scene 52

of the

Cardinal Speaks to Stevens

Scene 53

Stevens walks in on a tearful

Miss Kenton

Scene 54

Stevens and Miss Kenton

meet at the sea-side town

As in the novel.

As in the novel.

As in the novel.

Can be located In the text, details

added.

Can be located in the text details

added.

Can be located in the novel. Some

details deleted.


added, and altered.


274


Scene 55 Not as in the novel.

Stevens meets Miss Kenton

Scene 56

Stevens at the pIer at Not there in the novel.

Cleveland with Miss. Kenton

Scene 57

Stevens sees off Miss Kenton Can be located in the novel, details

at the bus stop altered.

Scehe 58

Last Scene Not there in the novel.

The source text (Faber and Faber, 1989), that has been visualised

in the film is tabulated below.

Prologue : July 1956

Darlington Hall

Day one-Evening, Salisbury

Day two-Morning, Salisbury

Day three-Morning, Taunton,

Somerset

Day three-Evening, Moscombe

near Tavistock, Devon

Day four-Afternoon, Little

Compton-Cornwall

Day six-Evening Weymouth

pp. 14, 15

275

pp.36-37

pp. 50-51, 52-53, 61-67, 78, 86-106

Missing in the film only a few sundry

details have been used from the episode.

pp. 146-157, 165, 169, 192, 196.

pp. 212, 213-217.

pp. 232-240.


What emanates from the above exercise is that during the process

of adaptation of a literary text to a film, while some of the material

from the literary text gets transferred as it, the rest of it is reworked

to suit the demands of the cinematic medium. In the novel and its

film version under discussion about 65 pages of a 245-page novel

gets transfeq-ed and the rest of the details from the novel get

reconstructed. I have divided the film into 58 scenes and a close

study of these scenes reveals a distinct pattern of reconstruction.

This pattern can be summed up as:

Scenes 8, 10, 13, 14, 22, 33,37, Transferred as it is from the source

42,47,48,49(11 scene~ text.

Scenes 1, 4, 5, 9, 16, 23, 25, 30, 1, Not present in the source text.

32, 41, 43, 45, 54, 55, 56, 58 (17

scenes)

Scenes 2, 3, 6, 7, 11, 12, 15, 17, Details from the source

18, 19,20,21,24,25,27,28,29, reconstructed with additions

34, 35, 36, 38, 39, 40, 44, 46, 50, deletions.

51,52,53, 57 (29 Scenes) ,

Hence what emerges is that all the change and thematic shifts in

the film is because of 17 entirely new scenes and 29 reconstructed

scenes. Only 11 scenes get transferred as it is, but the film

apparatus with its distinctive features transforms even these 11

scenes.

In the novel Stevens moves between many time frames In his

narration. The In the discernible pattern that emerges is:

Present 1956 <l-----1l> Recent Past <l1------1l> Past 1923

~/ A few hrs ago

~/ A few months ago

276

text

and


In the film there is a distinct linear progression in time and all the

flashbacks neatly travel to the past and come back to the present

without any major digressions. Stevens is very meticulous in

planning his trip, his route plan etc. the episodic division in the

novel is synonymous with his character. They appear as a journal

or a diary entry and is a detailed travelogue of six days. We shall try

to highlight how flashbacks or memories unfold both in the novel

and in the film.

Flashback in the film

In the film since there are two narrators the flashbacks are also for

two narrators, Miss Kenton and Stevens. The film begins with Miss

Kenton's letter in whith she remembers the army of under-butlers

at Darlington Hall, which gets immediately (the past) visualised on

the screen with a shot of under-butlers, waiting outside a door. In

Scene -3, it is Stevens' tum to be the narrator and his flashback

begins in the form of a reply to Miss Kenton's letter. This flashback

continues uninterrupted till Scene-27 of the film, which is almost

halfway into the film. This flashback ends with Stevens' father

dying.

In Scene- 28 the omniscient narrator takes over again with Stevens

arriving in a small town, quickly followed by Miss Kenton's

flashback which once again begins through a letter which Stevens

collects at a grocer's store during his journey. Hence from Scene- 28

onwards the third flashback begins and this time from Miss

277


• Kenton's point of VIew. This flashback continues till the end of

Scene-35 of the film. It is interesting to note that Miss Kenton's

flashback comprises of scenes which mostly foregrounds her

interaction and a growing intimacy with Stevens. However, there is

one scene where Lord Darlington is trying to resolve his dilemma

about the dismissal of the Jewish maids (Scene- 34) in no way can

become a part of Miss Kenton's memory. This is where the film

takes a license of subtly becoming omniscient. The narrator thus

not only acquires this characteristic but it is also acquired by the

viewer. The film perhaps has this poetic license of being omniscient

because it uses the all-seeing camera eye for capturing events and

characters. This all seeing eye takes over once again in Scene-36 to

show Stevens driving in to Taylor's inn. However the fourth

flashback begins in this scene from Stevens' point of view. The

fourth flashback continues till Scene -38 where once again the

present intrudes and Stevens gets a lift to his car and resumes his

onward journey. The fifth flashback begins in this scene and

continues till Scene- 53 where Stevens and Miss Kenton part ways,

with Miss Kenton deciding to marry Mr. Benn and Stevens refusing

to reciprocate her emotions towards him. From Scene-54 to Scene-

58 the omniscient narrator takes over. The viewer is not subjected

to anymore flashbacks.

The film screenplay thus uses five flashback episodes to translate

the novel. While Stevens is used for three narrations and Miss

278


Kenton is used for two. Every flashback is linked with the next

through an omniscient narrative. The novel however has a sole

narrator in Stevens and the narrative uses many time frames and

progresses in a back and forth manner.

The film narrative progresses in a following manner: -

Sequence Scene Flashback Narrator Cinematic Entry Points for Reminiscences

1. Scene-l - Omniscient Car moving towards Darlington

Hall

.' 2. .

Scene-l (i) Miss Kenton Letter to Stevens

3. Scene-2 - Omniscient Stevens with his new employer

at Darlington Hall.

4. Sc3-27 (ii) Stevens Letter to Miss Kenton

5. Scene 28 - Omniscient Stevens at Taylor's inn. ,

6. ' Scene 28-35 (iii) Miss Kenton Miss Kenton's second letter to

Stevens.

7. Scene-36 - Omniscient Stevens at Taylor's inn.

8. Scene 36-38 (iv) Stevens Stevens remembers

9. Scene-38 - Omniscient Stevens confesses to Richard

.. Carlisle .

10. Scene 38-54 (v) Stevens Stevens remembers

11. Scene 54-58 - Omniscient Stevens meets Miss Kenton and

returns to Darlington Hall.

279


In the film, the final destination for Stevens is Clevedon and

Stevens begins and ends his journey at Darlington Hall. There is no

mention of the time he takes to travel or the places he visits during

his journey. The novel on the other hand ends at Weymouth and

methodically plots his travel, the time taken for the travel and his

memories. Let us now see how the narration progresses in the novel

Prologue: July 1956, Darlington Hall

Entire Prologue is a flashback after the cha1>ter begins with 'It

seems increasingly likely that I really will undertake the

expedition .... '

~ Day One: Evening. Salisbury

The reflections begin about what or who is a 'Great Butler'

with the sentence 'tonight I find myself. .. ' at the beginning of the

chapter, and then the entire chapter is a flashback, as if Stevens is

writing his diary or a daily journal at the end of the day.

~ Day Two : Morning Salisbury

A brief description of the morning and then the comment

which results in a flashback: - "Now in these quiet moments as I

wait for the world about to awake and find myself going over in my

mind again passages from Miss Kenton's letter", - reminiscences of

March 1923.

280


~ Day Two: Afternoon, Mortimer's Pond: reflections on who is a

great butler and an incident from recent past and his present

exploration.

~ Day Three: Morning, Taunton; Somerset: reflecting about

immediate past and then the sight of silver polish company takes

him to the past.

~ Day Three: Evening - Moscombe, Tavistock Devon: Stevens

continues with his reflection of Lord Darlington's views on

Semitism and Miss. Kenton's stand on it. The episode of the

maid Lisa leaving the job, and then there is a break in the

flashback to relate what happened that early evening. It seems

as if Mr. Stevens was once again recounting it to his diary or to

an imaginary audience at the end of the evening. He suddenly

breaks it to narrate the immediate past and the evening. After

describing the events of the evening he reverts back to the past

and at the end of it retires for the night.

Stevens' comments on page 164 and 175 and 179 act as a

reminder to the reader that they are delving into Steven's past: -

"I have tended increasingly of late to indulge myself in such recollections" ... (p.165)

"But then, 1 suppose, when with the benefit of hindsight one begins to search one's past". (p.175)

"But 1 see I am becoming unduly introspective". (p.179)

He mentions reading Miss Kenton's letter and then again reverts to

the present. After his identity is mistaken for that of a Lord at the

281


dinner table of Mrs. Taylor Boarding House in the village, he meets

the village doctor, Richard Carlisle, it triggers fresh memories of a

similar incident in the past when Stevens was ridiculed for his lack

of opinion or ignorance.

~ Day Four - Afternoon - Little Compton, Cornwall:

Stevens waits for Miss. Kenton who is now Mrs. Benn and then

describes the immediate past of what happened to him at

Moscombe and then his memories again take him back to

Darlington Hall.

~ Day Six - Evening, Weymouth

Stevens recalls his meeting with Miss. Kenton 48 hrs after it took

place, which is significant. There is no further travel back to the

past and novel ends in the present. We do not have an entry titled ,

Day five, that is the day Stevens meets Miss Kenton. The reader

never meets her, the novel's gradual progression to the present is

halted. Miss Kenton can only remain in Stevens' past never in the

present she will remain as an entry in Stevens' diary. The film

however ends in the present and the reader-viewer's anticipation of

meeting Miss Kenton reaches a closure not provided in the novel.

Let us now tabulate the eight flashback entry points in the novel as

against five in the film and the narrator here is Stevens.

282

Sequence

Prologue - July 56

Day One - Evening

Day Two - Morning

Day Two - Afternoon

Day Three - Morning

Day Three - Evening

Day Four - Afternoon

Day Six - Evening


Flashback Place

1 Darlington Hall

2 Salisbury

3 Salisbury

4 Mortimer's Pond

5 Taunton,

6

Somerset

Moscombe

Tavistock

Times Frames Narrated.

Present

1956 - Recent Past - 1936 - 1956

1956 - 1932 - 1920's. 30's - 1956

1956 - 1923

Distant Past - Recent Past

1956 - Recent Past - 1936 - Recent

Past- 1956

7 Little Compton, 1936 - Recent Past - Past - 1956 -

Cornwall

8 Weymouth

1935

1956 - Recent Past (day six) -

Present.

We shall now attempt a complete shot breakdown of three scenes

from the film, which have been randomly chosen. In these three

scenes we shall try to highlight how the film apparatus collectively

constructs and encodes meaning. All the scenes that have been

chosen for shot analysis are not present in the source text. The

visual text that gets constructed in these scenes not only

contributes to the rest of the screenplay but are also indicative the

director and the screenplay writer's signature. These scenes are

built with details culled out from the source text but they differ in

their treatment, placement and enactment. This exercise will

highlight the process of encoding meaning in the film medium,

which would necessarily dictate the process of decoding meaning

for the viewer.

283


Shot Breakdown

Shot Analysis of Scene-7 (Darlington Staff Luncheon)

S. No. Sequence of Short Camera Editing

I. Cooks + Stevens + All Staff Sideways Pan, Frontal Long Shot Cut

2. Charlie + Men Staff Sideways, Mid length shot Cut

3. Miss Kenton + Women Staff Sideways, Mid length shot Cut

4. Stevens + Staff Frontal medium close-up Cut

5. Charlie + Staff do Cut

6. Stevens Medium close~tlp Shot Cut

7. Charlie + Staff Frontal Mid length Shot Cut

8. Stevens Medium close-up shot Cut

9. Charlie + Men Staff Sideways, Medium close-up Shot Cut

10. Stevens + All Staff Long take, Frontal Mid length Cut

II. Stevens Sr. Long take, Medium close-up Cut ,

12. Charlie + Men Staff Sideways Mid length Shot, Long Cut

take

13. Stevens Sr. Mid close up Cut

14. Miss Kenton + Women Staff Sideways Medium close-up shot Cut

15. Stevens Sr. + Men Staff Frontal medium close-up shot Cut

16. Stevens Sr. Medium close-up Cut

17. Miss Kenton -do- Cut

18. Stevens -do- Cut


20. All Staff Frontal Mid length Shot Cut

2I. Miss Kenton + Women Staff Sideways Mid length Shot Cut

284


22. Stevens Medium Close Up Cut


24. Stevens Sr. -do- Cut




Total Duration 2 Min. 54 Sec.

Total Number of Shots 27

Mise-en Scene

The seating arrangement around the lunch table with Stevens

at the head of the table with Stevens Senior on his right and Miss.

Kenton on his left establishes the hierarchy that operates among

the staff in Darlington Hall. Stevens is shown carving the steak,

which is again, a position of priviledge framed by the camera. Miss

Kenton is shown seated with the other women members of the staff

on the right side of the table. Stevens Senior who is an under-butler

is shown seated with other men members of the staff on the right

side of the table.

The mise-en-scene locates the staff luncheon room, the camera

slowly pans from the kitchen, follows one of the staff members who

carries the food bowls food to the tables. The close proximity of the

staff luncheon room, which is the extension of the kitchen, further

situates the position of the staff in Darlington Hall. The luncheon

table with its cutlery and food bowls provides an instant contrast to

three other eating occasions in the film where serving and laying

out of the table is almost a ritual. The luncheon table conversation,

which revolves around the dignity of a butler once again, provides a

contrast to other such conversations taking place over lunches and

dinners. Lord Darlington's 'honour' and 'nobility' is a matter of

285


numerous such conversations as against Stevens' preoccupation

with 'dignity of a butler'. The framing of the microcosm in this scene

is an ironic comment on the events that are happening in

Darlington Hall at the macrocosmic level.

The call bell for the staff is in the luncheon room and when it rings

on the soundtrack the luncheon is interrupted and Stevens Senior

moves away midway through his lunch to attend the call. Miss

Kenton points out that the bell is for Stevens Senior, once again an

indication of the regimen that operates in Darlington Hall. The novel

does not however have such details but seem probable when seen

in the film.

The staff luncheon scene with 27 disparate shots, with a time

duration of 2 minutes, 54 seconds thus constitutes meaning at

various levels. The disparate shots are joined together in a

particular sequence, this sequence operates as a visual syntax. The

sequence of shots joined together with perfect eye line match, along

with dialogues on the soundtrack conveys the flow of conversation.

The nonsynchronous characteristic of soundtrack allows to frame

expressions .on the faces of character 'B' while character 'A' is

speaking. When Stevens Senior is shown speaking the reactions on

the faces of his listeners, who are not necessarily framed along with

him and constitute a separate shot, creates meaning for the viewer.

The mise-en-scene of all the 27 shots collectively present the

hierarchy that exists among the staff in Darlington hall, the pride

that Stevens and his father share for their profession and the

microcosmic world of butlers within the four-walls of a Lord's

house. The setting, the decor, the seating arrangement around the

lunch table, the costumes, the nature of their interaction

establishes the ambience a large household in the 1930's Britain.

The greatest challenge of the film medium is to capture and

present a great amount of detail in minimum possible time. For

286


example the above scene conveys all the details mentioned within a

span of three minutes approximately. The director while composing

a shot packs in as much information as possible in his framing of a

mise-en-scene and at the same time keeps in mind the entire film

where every shot contributes to a scene without appearing

Incongruous.

Shot Analysis of Scene-53 (Stevens Walks in on a tearful Miss

Kenton)

A complete shot analysis of this scene will provide an insight into

the film apparatus at work in the constitution of meaning. This

scene has a running time of 3 minutes and 48 seconds. The scene

comprises of 15 shots in which last two shots are longer than the

others. All the shots are midlength shots except the last one, where

the camera lingers throughout on Miss Kenton's tear stricken face

in a close-up.

Shot 1: Stevens is shown walking towards the camera through the

corridor, down a flight of steps. His walk is slow and almost

reminiscent of his father's labored walk in an earlier scene. The

placement of this shot immediately after his· audience with Reginald

Cardinal and with Miss Kenton before that also constitutes

meaning. The viewer attributes his tired shuffle across the corridor

to the lateness of the hour and fallout of his earlier interactions

with Cardinal and Miss Kenton, which seems to have sapped him of

his energy. This is in the realm of actor's performance. Let us

closely observe how the camera situates this action. Stevens is in

the left side of the camera frame, he bends down and inserts a key . in a door towards his left. This is a long take which ends with Miss

Kenton's voice on the soundtrack and immediately followed by a

shot of Miss Kenton standing in the doorway on the right side of the

camera frame.

287


Shot - 2: Miss Kenton's placement in the camera frame facilitates

an eyeline match with Stevens in the earlier shot. Eyeline match is

an important requisite of editing and joining of two shots, since that

takes into account the viewer's gaze and how a viewer see two

people speaking to each other in two different frames. Two cameras

are placed next to the two actors respectively to take these shots.

Say, Miss Kenton looks towards camera 1 and hence Stevens is

somewhere behind camera-l to suggest that look on Miss Kenton's

face and vice-versa. When Stevens responds, he looks towards

camera-2, and Miss Kenton has to be behind the camera-2 to

establish Steven's presence and that is how cinematic space IS

organised. This technique is known as the shot-reverse-shot

technique that establishes the point of view in the actors in

question and also takes the viewer's gaze into account. The viewer

by now knows that they are in conversation with each other. The

lighting in the shot shows Miss Kenton's profile in a shadow and

her face catches the light of the corridor.

Shot 3: Stevens straightens up and looks towards the camer~ and

consequently at Miss Kenton and the viewer at the same time. The

viewer gets inscribed in this exchange of looks, as it alternately

looks at Miss Kenton from Stevens and the camera's point-of-view

and then at Stevens from Miss Kenton and again the camera-2's

point of view.

Shot 4: A midlength shot of Miss Kenton in shadows, her lip

movement matches the dialogue on the sound track (lip-synch). She

apologises for her earlier behaviour.

Shot 5: The camera frames Stevens who responds to Miss Kenton's

speech. By now the faces and the voices of these two protagonists

are firmly established in the viewer's audio-visual cognitive realm so

when the camera moves midway through Steven's response to focus

288


on Miss Kenton's silent gaze, there is no confusion. The VIewer

immediately scans Miss Kenton's face for reactions. Miss Kenton's

face with Steven's voice on the soundtrack constitutes a narrative

and conveys meaning in addition to the dialogue on the soundtrack.

Shot 6: Miss Kenton's silent face is framed with Steven's voice or

the soundtrack. She begins to speak when Steven's voice ceases.

The camera continues to frame her through this transition.

Shot 7: Stevens looks towards the camera and asks Mss Kenton to

retire and once again the camera moves midway through his

speech, to focus on Miss Kenton's face.

Shot 8: While Stevens continues to speak, the camera captures

Miss Kenton's profile slowly sliding behind the door, gradually

moving away from light into a silhouette. Her movement as if in a

response to Stevens' request seems hurried and abrupt.

Shot 9: In the next shot Stevens shown climbing down into a cellar,

a medium close-up shot, perhaps taken with a hand held camera.

He turns slightly, to look back at the top of the stairs as if to convey

an unfinished task or something left unsaid during his conversation

with Miss Kenton. He turns his back to the camera to put on a light

in a small enclosure.

Shot 10: A close-up shot of a disembodied hand taking out a wine

bottle from a stock of similar such bottles. The bottle is frosted and

in the next shot Stevens is shown wiping the frost. A shelf tag with

1913 written on it is in the frame; hence the wine bottle is a

vintage. Notice the transition from the earlier shot, a light is put on

and a disembodied hand is shown pulling out the bottle. Stevens is

shown holding the bottle in the next shot which means it was his

hand in the earlier shot. The sequence in which shots are placed

conveys the sequence of events on the screen. The editing which

289


joins the two disparate shots which individually have no meaning,

can be carried out on the editing table. However, the way the shot

should be composed i.e. the angle, the setting, the performance,

and the movement of the camera is worked out to the last detail in

the shooting script. The same shot can be composed differently, i.e.

the placement of the camera, the angles and lights could be

changed and the end result would be dramatically different.

Sometimes the same shot is composed differently so that there is a

choice on the editing table, but sometimes it is also done as a

narrative strategy to bring in mUltiplicity of viewpoints. For e.g. the

same shot of Stevens climbing down the stairs with the camera in

front could be shQt with the camera following him from behind. In

the second instance the viewer's identity is changed from that of an

on looker to that of a participant. The viewer would then acquire

Stevens' viewpoint. The camera following the actor from behind is

popularly used in horror films where a sudden discovery or the

anticipation of a discovery evokes similar emotions in the actor and

the viewers.

Shot 11: Stevens IS shown looking at the bottle. Editing ensures

that the hand pulling out the bottle and Stevens looking at the

bottle is one fluid movement. This effect is however achieved with

two different shots, one shot is with the camera peeping over

Stevens' shoulder (Shot 10) and the next shot is with the camera

taking a frontal shot of Stevens. Stevens looks thoughtfully at the

bottle and looks up, his look conveys that he is preoccupied, not

really looking at the bottle. We see then how meaning gets

simultaneously constituted both in the domain of technical

sequencing and in the realm of performance.

Shot 12: Stevens switches off the lights and then turns his back to

the camera to climb up the stairs.

290


Shot 13: Again a disembodied shot of a bottle falling and breaking.

The camera tilts up to show Stevens exclaiming in annoyance and

looking dismally at he spilled wine. This shot is significant since it

captures in detail an occurrence which otherwise has no meaning

in the entire backdrop of the film. The wine bottle breaking

establishes the emotional turmoil that Stevens is going through,

which is otherwise not evident from his demeanour or the dialogue.

Shot 14: Stevens is shown coming out from the same door where

he had gone in. An interesting aside must be added here.

Hypothetically speaking Steven's walk down the stairs to a cellar

may have been filmed somewhere else, and the door that leads to

the cellar in the film is some place else. Editing in films can easily

collapse space and time. Two shots of a particular scene can be not

only distanced in place and can be also in time but made to appear

as a part of the same time and place through editing. The camera

moves backwards to frame Stevens' movement towards the camera.

Shot 15: This shot and the next are unusually long and packs in ,

more details about Stevens and Miss Kenton's relationship than any

other scene in the films. Stevens locks the door 'and he has a bottle

in hand which means he" must have gone back to get another bottle

which is not captured by the camera - a skip in time and action

easily filled in by the viewer. Stevens turns to look diagonally

towards the camera-2 and we immediately know from our earlier

experience that he is looking towards Miss Kenton's room. He starts

walking towards camera-2 and we suddenly hear sobbing on the

soundtrack which gradually gets audible and louder as if to convey

Stevens' close proximity to the source. Stevens is shown standing

outside a door, presumably the same door where Miss Kenton was

shown standing in an earlier shot. Stevens tries to listen, hesitates

and then opens the door and the shot ends.

291


Shot 16: We see the camera following a pair of footsteps, the shot is

in semidarkness. The footsteps stop near a hunched figure sobbing.

The huddled figure rises on the sound of the footsteps and looks

up. The camera remains focused on Miss Kenton's tear stricken

face. The viewer waits in anticipation for reconciliation between

Stevens and Miss Kenton. The camera frames a hand holding a

bottle and we know it to be that of Stevens. Stevens' voice comes

over on the soundtrack reminding Miss Kenton of a forgotten

errand. The camera never focuses on Stevens as he speaks but

continues to frame a close-up of Miss Kenton's face, which borders

on expectation, bewilderment and amazement. The bottle held hand

moves away from the frame and we hear the sound of retreating

footsteps on the soundtrack. Miss Kenton is shown doubling over

with grief burying her face in the stool crying with a renewed agony.

The camera by not focusing on Steven's face achieves the stiff

coldness of Stevens's character without having to depend on the

performance of the actor to convey his impassivity. The camera

frames Miss Kenton from top below; a frame popularly used to

convey inferior position of a person is used here to convey her

pitiable state. Moreover while tilting up her face to listen to Stevens

who is never shown, she is in direct communication_with the viewer

who is looking down at her through the camera~ This elicits the

viewer's sympathy organised through a point-of-view shot. The

designing and composition of a shot thus subliminally impacts the

viewer's emotion.

In the next shot the background score starts playing and indicates

the end of flashback. Stevens is shown once again driving his car as

a repetitive which facilitates joining of shots placed in different time

and space.

292


Shot Composition of Scene 58 (Last Scene)

Action On Camera Shot Composition

1. A chandelier is being lowered from The camera pans downwards to the

the ceiling on a pulley Mr. Lewis is left to frame both Mr. Lewis and the

seen behind the chandelier climbing chandelier's descent. A long shot

down the now famous Darlington hall which holds still to focus on Stevens

Staircase. and Mr. Lewis.

Mr. Lewis startles to see Stevens Camera slowly moves backwards to

emerge from the secret door on the the base of the stairs and then pans to

staircase. the right to frame both Stevens and

Mr. Lewis greets Stevens and asks his

comments on his new suit.

the lowered chandelier.

While Mr. Lewis moves out of the

frame to the right at the base of the

staircase Stevens follows him at a gap

and hence remains in the frame a little

while longer than Mr. Lewis.

Soundtrack: ambience sound of

footsteps, Chandelier being lowered

Background score plays throughout.

2. The portrait of the Elizabethan The camera composes a midlength

gentleman bought by Mr. Lewis in the shot with Mr. Lewis on the left side of

beginning of the mm is brought in. Mr. the frame, with his back turned

Lewis looks on as it is being hung. towards the camera looking up at the

293

portrait. The background score keeps

playing.


3. Mr. Lewis shown standin& at the

end of a room with draped furniture.

He turns to his right to speak to

Stevens who is shown opening a

window and day light streams in.

A long frontal shot. The camera does

not move and the performers move in

and out of the frame as in a stage

performance.

They walk towards the camera talking Th . d' 1 l't d l' ht t e room IS 1m y 1 an Ig _ S reams

and exit from the right side of the in as a window is opened.

frame. Two other men in the frame

shown working

A man with a bucket and duster

shown walking in from the left side of

the frame, with his back towards the

camera and walks away from the

camera.

Mr. Lewis commen ts on the hectic

activity and Stevens informs him that

he will get the house ready in time for

Mrs. Lewis' arrival

4. Stevens says that he is expecting a Mr. Lewis and Stevens walk in form

new housekeeper. He talks with his the right side of the frame with their

back towards the camera and pulls backs turned to the camera. While

out a note pad to confirm his Stevens is closer to the frame on the

information. left, Lewis proceeds to far right.

The mise-en-scene of the shot frames

A detail like this establishes Steven's a high ceiling, a huge room with large

methodical and professional attitude. French windows. A large painting over

the fireplace and a table tennis table

are the only furniture in the room.

The background score continues to

play.

5. Stevens looks into his note pad and A mid length frontal shot of Stevens.

informs Lewis about the new

housekeeper who is a matron from a

preparatory school in Sussex.

294


6. Lewis comments on how the matron A midlength frontal shot of Lewis,

will keep them from misbehaving. stands with his hand in his trouser

pocket, on the right side of the frame

again to facilitate eye-line match

between the two shots.

7. Stevens replies in the affirmative. A mid length shot of Stevens.

Stevens looks on wondering how to

react and then after a bewildered

pause as it as an after thought laughs

a little.

8. Mr. Lewis turns away and walks to The camera holds the frame whik

the far end of the table and picks up Lewis goes around the table to face the

the 'table tennis racquet and ball and camera frontally. The camera moves

mentions the 1938 conference to slightly forward to frame Lewis in a

Stevens. mid-length shot

9. A bust shot of Stevens who looks A frontal midlength shot. The dialogue

on and then says he does not of Lewis from an earlier shot carries

remember what Mr. Lewis had said over to this shot, to focus on Stevens'

during the 1938 conference as he was face.

busy serving.

10. A pigeon flies into the fireplace, A medium close-up shot of a pIgeon.

seen fluttering. The background score starts playing.

11. Stevens and Lewis walk in from The camera holds the long shot.

two sides of the room towards the

fireplace.

12. A disembodied hand tries to A medium close-up.

displace the pigeon.

13. Both men look up to see the A medium close - up.

pigeon's flight

14. Pigeon flies around to settle in the The camera takes a medium close up.

crevice of the ceiling.

295


15. Lewis claps with the ball and the The camera slowly pans to the right to

racquet and moves to the right of the frame Lewis' movement.

room, trying to dislodge the pigeo!l and Fl· ht f . th dt k Ig 0 pIgeon on e soun rae . then looks up to trace pigeon's flight.

16. The pigeon trying to escape

through the ventilator in the ceiling.

The camera pans up and then down

to show its flight.

17. Stevens looks up and moves The camera moves slightly to hold

forward slightly Stevens'movement.

18. Pigeon in flight turns left and then The camera tilted up moves

right. accordingly to keep it in frame.

19. Stevens turns his back to the The camera holds the frame with

cam~ra while the pigeon flies in from Stevens in focus, against the backdrop

the right into the frame followed by of an open French window while the

Lewis in hot pursuit. pigeon and Lewis move into the frame.

20. Lewis is shown standing outside The camera is on a crane outside the

the window and releasing the pigeon in house, looking down on Lewis as he

air, looks up and then goes inside and releases the pigeon in the air.

shuts the glass paned French window.

Stevens appears behind the window

looks outside and upward towards the

camera.

21.

Stevens moves into the frame, looks

from behind the window towards the

camera upwards and then moves out

of the frame.

A dissolve as the camera zooms out

and Darlington Hall recedes below in

the distance. The background score

starts playing.

These exerCises were undertaken to understand how the

visual mode of representation in film works especially when it is an

adaptation from a literary text, a novel in this case. This exercise

296


provides an insight into how equivalencies are achieved in two

systems of signification or enunciation. It also reveals how the

filmmaker reproduces cinematically certain novelistic effects and

adds his own interpretations. A close reading of the cinematic text

reveals how the use of devices such as voice-over, point-of-view

shots, the frame composition, the soundtrack, the tension between

the on-screen and off-screen space all together constitute a

narrative of its own which mayor may not be in conjunction with

story line of the film. What choices, the filmmaker embraces in

combining several codes of lighting, music, sets, decor, camera

angle etc. in a particular scene are endless. Hence an adaptation in

film medium is inescapably inscribed with the filmmaker's

interpretation at every given moment of the visual representation.

The auteur's predilection also influences the process of

filmmaking. Merchant- Ivory for instance has a penchant for

making films' with cross-cultural references. All their films, which

are mostly adaptations, are based on classics, and aim towards a

cultivated 'art cinema' they are mostly period pieces, which usually

have a discourse on "Englishness". This predilection for making a

particular kind of film transforms all their films with a certain tone

and flavour that is easily identifiable like a popular brand.

The VIewer with 'his or her own intertextuality (literary,

cinematic and ideological) constructs his own sense of the

narrative. He knows what to look out for instance in a Merchant-

297


Ivory production. The producer and the director cater to this

existing discourse with every film they make and gradually

establish it almost as a genre of cinematic adaptations of literary

text and acquire an aura of infallibility difficult to oppose by other

such adaptations.


Notes:

1

2

3

Martin Esslin, The Field of Drama (London: Methuen, 1987), p.36.

Passim, for a detailed analysis see, Peter Wollen, Signs and Meaning in the Cinema (London: Secker and Warburg, 1972).

Robert Giddings, Keith Selby and Chris Winsley, Screening the Novel: The Theory and Practice of Literary Dramatisation. (London: Macmillan, 1990), p.6.

4 Gaston Roberge, The Subject of Cinema (Calcutta: Seagull Books, 1990), pp.65-66.

5

6

Nick Browne, "The Spectator in the text: The Rhetoric of . Stagecoach" , in Film Quarterly. 29.2,1975-76.

Gp. Cit. Roberge, p.66.

7 Joseph Boggs, The Art of Watching Films (Mountain VIew, California: Mayfield Publishers, 1985).

8

9

Bruce Morrissette, Novel and Film (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985), p.93.

Robert Scholes, "Narration and Narrativity in Film", in Quarterly Review of Film Studies.' 1.111 (August 1976), p.291.

10 Joy Gould Boyum, Double Exposure; Fiction into Films (Calcutta: Seagulls Books, 1985), p.50.

11. Gp. Cit. Nick Browne.

12 Noel Burch, Theory of Film Practice (London: Secker and Warburg, 1973) pp.3-4. Burch explains that decoupage which does not have an English equivalent. Though the meaning can be derived from the 'shooting script' actually it is very distinct from it. It refers more to the underlying structure of the finished film.

13 Laura Mulvey, "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema", in Screen, 16.3, (autumn, 1975).

14 John Lye, "Who Controls Media and their Meanings", in COMM 2F50 Communications Theory, http:/ / www. brocku. cal commstudiesl coursesl2F50.

299

encoding and decoding meaning: the reader-viewer response...

Documents