INFORMATION TO USERS This reproduction was made from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this document, the quality of the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help clarify markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1.The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark, it is an indication of either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, duplicate copy, or copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed. For blurred pages, a good image of the page can be found in the adjacent frame. If copyrighted materials were deleted, a target note will appear listing the pages in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photographed, a definite method of “sectioning” the material has been followed. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For illustrations that cannot be satisfactorily reproduced by xerographic means, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and inserted into your xerographic copy. These prints are available upon request from the Dissertations Customer Services Department. 5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases the best available copy has been filmed. University M odfilm s Internationa! 300 N. Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Mi 48106 8410403 M itrevski, George Goce DESCRIPTION OF ADAPTATIONS OF RELIGIOUS AND FOLKLORE TEXTS: WITH EXAMPLES FROM YUGOSLAV THEATER AND DRAMA The Ohio State University Ph.D. 1984 University Microfilms International300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 Copyright 1984 by Mitrevski, George Goce All Rights Reserved DESCRIPTION OF ADAPTATIONS OF RELIGIOUS AND FOLKLORE TEXTS: WITH EXAMPLES FROM YUGOSLAV THEATER AND DRAMA DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University By George Goce Mitrevski, B.A., M.A. ***** The Ohio State University 1984 Reading Committee: Approved By Dr. Mateja Matejic Dr. Frank Silbajoris Dr. Jerzy Krzyzanowski v Adviser Department of Slavic and East European Languages and Literatures s? Copyright by George Goce Mitrevsk 1984 For Susie ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This dissertation could not have been written without the extensive help I received from people both here and in Yugoslavia. I would like to thank the IREX Board for providing me with a fellowship to conduct research in Yugoslavia. The assistance given to me by the researchers at Sterijino pozorje in Novi Sad has been most appreciated. I am also very greatful to my mentor in Yugoslavia, Jovan Hristic, who guided me through ten months of work during my stay there. I express my genuine gratitude to the faculty of the Slavic Department at Ohio State University for the inspiration they have given me through my years of graduate study, and most of all to my advisor Dr. Mateja Matejic for the assistance he has provided me in the writing of this work. There is no doubt in my mind that this work could not have seen the light of day had it not been for the patience, assistance and understanding of my wife Susan. VITA April 1, 1951......... Born - Prespa, Macedonia, Yugoslavia 12/75.. Stony Brook 9/76 - 6/77.. ......... N.D.E.A. Title VI Fellowship, The Ohio 9/79 - 6/80 State University, Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures 6/77 - 12/78 . 6/80 - 9/80 University, Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures 6/79 .. 1/79 - 6/79 . 9/80 - 9/81 University, Department of Slavic 9/82 - 6/83 Languages and Literatures 9/81 - 6/82.. in Yugoslavia 1 9 8 3 . University FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Russian Literature Studies in Russian Literature. Professors Jerzy Krzyzanovski and Hongor Oulanof Studies in Literary Theory. Professor Frank Silbajoris Studies in^ Yugoslav Literature. Professor Mateja Matejic TABLE OF CONTENTS page INTRODUCTION.................................................... 1 CHAPTER I. THEORY.............................................. 5 1. Intraliterary............................................ 8 2. Intersemiotic........................................... 11 3. Intracultural........................................... 13 CHAPTER II. THE BIBLICAL CULTURAL PROTOTEXT................ 17 1. Cultural attitudes toward biblical prototexts in dramatic adaptations................................... 19 2. The biblical dramatic text of the Middle Ages.........21 3. Drama in the Byzantine Church......................... 46 4. Secularization of biblical drama......................56 5. Biblical plays in the vernacular in Yugoslavia....... 63 6. Opposition to biblical drama.......................... 72 CHAPTER III. THE MYTHOLOGICAL AND FOLKLORE PROTOTEXT...... 79 1. From ritual to tragedy................................. 85 2. The myth as prototext.................................. 88 3. Modern adaptations..................................... 90 CHAPTER IV. THE TEXTUAL MODE OF ADAPTATION IN DRAMA...... 95 1. The nature of dramatic discourse...................... 97 2. Plot structure.......................................... 99 3. Alteration by selection and elimination............. 101 4. Selection and elimination in the adaptation of folklore material..................................... 115 5. Adaptations from multi-plot folklore texts...........122 6. Alteration by modernization.......................... 144 6.1 Linguistic modernization......................... 147 6.2 Plot modernization................................ 155 6.3 Cultural modernization........................... 176 6.4 Transcultural adaptation 18 2 v CHAPTER V. THE PERFORMANCE MODE OF ADAPTATION............. 189 1. From dramatic text to performance text............. 189 2. Perception of an adaptation in the performance text.................................................... 204 3. Poliphony of performance text........................ 207 CONCLUDING COMMENTS.......................................... 214 BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................................. 218 Vi INTRODUCTION So many factors are involved in the development of meaning in theatrical adaptations, that it becomes almost impossible to retrace the process of perception and interpretation of a performance. The theatrical performance is a conglomeration of radically different modes of communication (the dramatic text, scenery, movement, lighting, etc.), each governed by its own rules of selection and combination. This capacity of the performance to embody varied communicative systems of heterogeneous codes does not result in a merged "sum" of communicative levels, but rather in a complex unified semantic text. The "information poliphony" and "density of signs" (Barthes 1972, 262) in adaptations of texts is increased at least twofold over productions of non-adaptations. In the viewing of such performances the spectator is expected to be equipped with information about the text which is adapted, and to have the necessary theatrical experience for piecing together that information with everything that has been added by the individuals involved in the production (author, director, actor, etc.). One aspect of the original text which we tend to avoid in discussions of adaptations is the fact that the text had its own 'life1 and individuality before it was adapted , which implies that the new text cannot exist without being in the shadow of its original. For a spectator who is familiar with the original, the adaptation loses all individuality. Adaptations of culturally generated texts, such as folktales, songs, religious texts, or any other texts that belong to a cultural history and tradition of a people, have been seen in both the verbal and non-verbal arts for many centuries. They are unique in that their interpretation is based mostly on cultural attitudes toward them. This is one of the reasons why the function of religious texts in adaptations is limited by their culturally restricted function outside of the text. In the history of biblical adaptations it hase been the case that even their very creation can be in question when the culture feels a particularly strong bond toward the original text. When this bond is at a minimum, or even non-existent, the adaptation may even assume the parodic (destructive) attitude toward the biblical, or cultural text. Analysis of this type of works, then, would have to take into concideration the relationship between the two texts. It is my intention in this work to provide a theore­ tical and historical survey of biblical and mythological adaptations which would include a discussion of the genesis of such texts and a comparison with more modern dramatic works originating in the territory of Yugoslavia. I have included in my study prototexts which are part of a local cultural history and tradition (folktales and epic songs), in which case the highest degree of familiarity with the prototext