The Global Journal of Literary Studies I Volume II, Issue I I February 2016 ISSN : 2395 4817 The Global Journal of Literary Studies I February 2016 I Vol. II, Issue I I ISSN : 2395 4817 Contextual and Intertextual Refractions in Tom Stoppard’s screenplay for Shakespeare in Love Dr Anita Manuel Professor KCG College of Technology Chennai, INDIA. Dr Rosalia Bonjour Professor Saveetha Engineering College Chennai, INDIA. Ms Rajitha K Assistant Professor VIT University Chennai, INDIA. Abstract There have been many and varied adaptations of Shakespeare’s plays for the screen, enhancing as critics have pointed out, the cultural value of the cinema thereby changing the contemporary estimation of film as a low- culture medium. In 1999 Shakespeare in Love, scripted by one of the leading British Playwrights Tom Stoppard, was released to great critical and popular acclaim going on to win an impressive tally of awards (7), including the Golden Globe Award and the Academy Award for Best Original Screen play. One of the chief pleasures of watching the movie comes from our recognition of playwrights and familiar lines from plays subtly interwoven into the script. And for those in the know, the parallels with Stoppard’s own life. The contextual and intertextual refractions in the movie are without doubt the reason for its great success. The paper looks at the various screenplays by Stoppard, and shows how the film Shakespeare in Love provided an entry into what was perceived as the high culture represented by Shakespeare. The paper analyses how the movie presents to the viewer glimpses of the Elizabethan era, Renaissance Drama, Shakespeare’s plays, Shakespeare the individual and the playwright whose plays have enthralled generations of theatre goers. Shakespeare in Love also plainly presents a world of continuum in which Shakespeare’s early life in London corresponds with Stoppard’s own life. The film’s great appeal lies in the portrayal of a genius as a young man struggling to overcome his writer’s block, and in that story bringing alive the Elizabethan times, its flourishing theatre with its theatre owners, playwrights, actors and moneylenders, nobility and peasantry, as well as some of the major criticism of Shakespeare’s plays. Keywords : Popular culture, Intertextuality, Tom Stoppard, Shakespeare in Love The Global Journal of Literary Studies I Volume II, Issue I I February 2016 ISSN : 2395 4817 There have been many and varied adaptations of Shakespeare’s plays for the screen. Deborah Cartmel stated that Shakespearean plays were adapted to enhance the cultural value of the cinema thereby changing the contemporary estimation of film as a low-culture medium. She went on to say that a successful adaptation of Shakespeare must convey an awareness that the reproduction is both dependent on and inferior to the original (30, 31) Whether this observation is accurate or not, it is a common point of discussion in an adaptation of a novel whether the film was faithful or did justice to the text. It is also true that people who have loved a book often flock to the theatre to see its film version while many who have not read the book often apparently turn to the book because book sales inevitably rise after the release of a successful film version. In fact sometimes unknown books become part of public consciousness through the film. Case in points are the television adaptation of Tama, a Sahitya Academy winner of Balraj Sahney. A recent example may be Slum Dog Millionaire which went on to sweep the Academy Awards, though the novel Vikas Swaroop’s Q& A was comparatively unknown. Stoppard claims that screenwriting is easier than writing for radio or stage. Yet, he admits a certain inability “to see a film in my mind, to experience the way it moves and its dynamics … the best parts of my film scripts are scenes which might be in a play – that is linked together.” (Hardin) But Stoppard also knows that you lose control over the work and be disappointed with the final result. What you write you almost never see on the screen since screen writing by definition invites interference by others, “the writer serves the director, and you kind of give it over to him” but in the theatre “the director is there to serve the writer. It’s more or less the opposite of the movies where there is a directorial vision and the writer comes in to serve that vision”(Stevenson, p 127). He attends rehearsals of all his plays but not those of the movies because the vision is that of the director not the screen writer. John Boorman, television producer and director with BBC was the first one to suggest that Stoppard prepare scripts for television. He offered the first basic lesson of screenwriting to Stoppard “A script must be subject to alteration, development, evolution to various stages – to some extent the writing process is indivisible from the making of the film. Casting alters it, location often demand or suggests developments, rehearsal reveals problems, and shooting itself exerts constant pressures on the script…. A script is never really finished. During editing new lines are needed to replace ones that have suffered excision…” (quoted Ira B. Nadel, 90). A statement borne out much later by his experiences while writing the screenplay for Nabokov’s “Despair”. Stoppard admired Nabokov and wanted the dialogue, to be treated with lightness and speed. But his script was extensively reworked in ways which infuriated him. Stoppard objected to a betrayal of the spirit of the work rather than to changes of his words (Hardin, p. 163). The result was a critical and box office disaster. The Global Journal of Literary Studies I Volume II, Issue I I February 2016 ISSN : 2395 4817 Despite the interferences, rewrites, cuts and frustrations Stoppard remains positive, and Stoppard’s success on stage led to more offers to script movies. In 1975, he worked on his first feature length film, an adaptation of “The Romantic Englishwoman” by Thomas Wiseman. It was directed by Joseph Losey who called him in because he was not happy with the script. He said he contributed very little but in reviews Stoppard was praised for adding most of the humour (Nadel, 92). In 1985, he conscripted Brazil which went on to become a huge success and was nominated though it did not win the Oscar. The satire and wit of the film was highly appreciated and most of the credit given to Stoppard though he himself said modestly that he had only put in a few jokes (ibid, 94, 95). The film adaptation of Graham Greene’s bestseller “The Human Factor” in 1978, “Empire of the Sun” in 1987, based on J. M. Ballard’s novel and directed by Steven Spielberg, followed. And then in 1999 came Shakespeare in Love which was released to great critical and popular acclaim going on to win an impressive tally of awards (7), including the Golden Globe Award and the Academy Award for Best Original Screen play. One of the chief pleasures of watching the movie comes from our recognition of playwrights and familiar lines from plays subtly interwoven into the script. And for those in the know, the parallels with Stoppard’s own life. Shakespeare in Love plainly presents a world of continuum in which Shakespeare’s early life in London corresponds with Stoppard’s. It is a portrait of every struggling artist. “One room scratching a living” (Ambushes for the Audience) is an image from Stoppard’s life that parallel’s the film’s introduction of Will. Even the changing titles of Shakespeare’s plays and the borrowing of ideas from others reflected in the film are parallels from Stoppard’s own lifting of ideas from Shakespeare’s plays itself (ibid, 166). Viola, the name of the lead character in the movie, is the name of the heroine in Twelfth Night. Felicity Kendal who played Viola in BBC Twelfth Night, met the married Stoppard a year later as an actor in his play On the Razzle where she was in male attire ( Delaney, 33). In his screenplay, Stoppard shows the married Shakespeare falling in love with a young woman Viola who when they first meet is dressed as a man to audition for Sakespeare’s new play. Kendal went on to become Stoppard’s muse and long term romantic interest for eight years, just as Viola was Shakespeare’s muse in the movie. WILL (despite himself) Orsino…good name VIOLA But fearful of her virtue, she comes to him dressed as a boy The Global Journal of Literary Studies I Volume II, Issue I I February 2016 ISSN : 2395 4817 WILL (Catching it) and thus unable to declare her love It will be a love story … for she will be my heroine for all time INT. WILL'S ROOM. DAY. WILL looks up from the table. WILL (VO CONTINUED) and her name will be Viola… Most striking of course is the success story of Shakespeare and Stoppard. A comparatively unknown Stoppard came on to the British stage in a similar blaze. His first full length play performed in The Edinburgh Fringe Festival after repeated rejections caught the interest of Kenneth Tynan of National Theatre. He asked for the script and the rest is history. Since then Stoppard has been the reigning Superstar of British theatre just as Shakespeare was in his own times. And it cannot be ignored that this play by Stoppard which catapulted him to fame was about two minor characters in Hamlet, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. One of Stoppard’s letters in 1963 states “Kenneth keeps on about the play and I keep on lying that I am progressing” (Levenson, 166 -167), the same excuse Shakespeare makes in the film to his creditors.