Aiding and Abetting Survival: Americanizing Robinson Crusoe through Adaptation

Abstract

Daniel Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe (1719) has been insistently adapted to both the big screen and TV throughout the 20th century and well into the 21st, the earliest version dating back to 1902 and the most recent to 2016. Although a full list of all versions would be elusive and also redundant, almost 50 adaptations are readily available for viewing and/or for analysis. Moving away from the ‘fidelity’ criticism in the earlier vein of adaptation studies and proceeding from the argument that all adaptations are essentially rewritings, alternative ways in which the source text may be reconstructed in an ultimately intertextual framework, this paper scrutinizes American screen adaptations of Robinson Crusoe, namely Robinson Crusoe on Mars (Dir. Byron Haskin, 1964), Lt. Robinson Crusoe, U.S.N. (Dir. Byron Paul, 1966), and Cast Away (Dir. Robert Zemeckis, 2000). Far from shedding new light on an almost-exhausted source text, these rewritings reflect more about their own discourses, relating to the historical and social contexts of their own making. In so doing, they ‘Americanize’ Robinson Crusoe. As such, three centuries after its publication, Robinson Crusoe is still being repeatedly reinvented and reconstructed in film, and this analysis investigates the dialogical relations among these adaptations while, at the same time, emphasizing how every new adapted version of a work of literature aids and abets the survival of its source text

Keywords

• Adaptation
• Robinson Crusoe
• Intertextuality
• Rewriting
• Survival

References

1. Albrecht-Crane, C. and Cutchins, D. R. (2010). Introduction: New beginnings for adaptation studies. In C. Albrecht-Crane and D. R. Cutchins (Eds.), Adaptation studies: New approaches (pp. 11-22). Madison, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson UP. google scholar
2. Alfaro, M. J. M. (1996). Intertextuality: Origins and development of the concept. Atlantis, 18 (1/2), 268-285. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/41054827. google scholar
3. Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogical imagination. (C. Emerson and M. Holquist, Trans.). Austin: U of Texas P. google scholar
4. Cahir, L. C. (2006). Literature into film: Theory and practical applications. Jefferson, NC: McFarland. google scholar
5. Carroll, R. (2009). Introduction: Textual infidelities. In R. Carroll (Ed.), Adaptation in contemporary culture (pp.1-7). London: Continuum. google scholar
6. Cartmell, D. and Whelehan, I. (2007). Introduction - Literature on screen: A synoptic view. In D. Cartmell and I. Whelehan (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to literature on screen (pp. 1-12). Cambridge: Cambridge UP. google scholar
7. Cawelti, J. (1965). Apostles of the self-made man: Changing concepts of success in America. Chicago: U of Chicago P. Defoe, D. (2001). The life and adventures of Robinson Crusoe. London: Penguin. (Original work published 1719) Geraghty, C. (2008). Now a major motion picture: Film adaptations of literature and drama. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield. google scholar
8. Haskin, B. (Director) (1964). Robinson Crusoe on Mars. Schenck-Zabel. google scholar

9. Hutcheon, L. (2013). A theory of adaptation. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge. google scholar
10. Kraft, E. (2007). The revaluation of literary character: The case of Crusoe. South Atlantic Review, 72 (4), 37-58. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/27784739. google scholar
11. Leitch, T. (2012). Adaptation and intertextuality, or what isn’t an adaptation, and what does it matter. In D. Cartmell (Ed.), A companion to literature, film and adaptation (pp. 87-104). West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell. google scholar
12. McFarlane, B. (1996). Novel to film: An introduction to the theory of adaptation. Oxford: Clarendon. google scholar
13. Naremore, J. (2000). Introduction: Film and the reign of adaptation. In J. Naremore (Ed.), Film adaptation (pp. 1-18). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers UP. google scholar
14. Paul, B. (Director) (1996). Lt. Robin Crusoe, U.S.N. Walt Disney. google scholar
15. Paul, H. (2014). The myths that made America: An introduction to American studies. Bielefeld: Clausen & Bosse, Leck. google scholar
16. Rich, A. (1972). When we dead awaken: Writing as re-vision. College English. 34 (1), 18-30. National Council of Teachers of English. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/375215. google scholar
17. Schober, R. (2013). Adaptation as connection - transmediality reconsidered. In J. Bruhn, A. Gjelsvik, and E. F. Hanssen (Eds.), Adaptation studies: New challenges, new directions (pp. 89-112). London: Bloomsbury. google scholar
18. Stam, R. (2005a). Introduction: The theory and practice of adaptation. In R. Stam and A. Raengo (Eds.), Literature and film: A guide to the theory and practice of film adaptation (pp. 1-52). Malden, MA: Blackwell. google scholar
19. Stam, R. (2005b). Literature through film: Realism, magic, and the art of adaptation. Malden, MA: Blackwell. google scholar
20. Turk, T. (2011). Intertextuality and the collaborative construction of narrative: J. M. Coetzee’s Foe. Narrative, 19 (3), 295-310. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/ 41289306. google scholar Zemeckis, R. (Director) (2000). Cast away. 20th Century Fox. google scholar