https://shakespeare.edel.univ-poitiers.fr:443/shakespeare/index.php?id=115 Index des publications de auteurs Sébastien Lefait fr 0 https://shakespeare.edel.univ-poitiers.fr:443/shakespeare/index.php?id=2534 Cet article propose une nouvelle manière d’aborder l’adaptation shakespearienne. Celle-ci est ici considérée comme une pratique esthétique dont le but est de tirer de nouvelles conclusions à partir de l’utilisation des machines épistémiques que sont les pièces de Shakespeare. Cette nouvelle manière de voir l’adaptation est le résultat d’une étude de cas, le Cymbeline de Michael Almereyda, lu comme point nodal entre la pièce, le film, mais encore un troisième terme crucial pour comprendre la stratégie d’adaptation mise en place : le concept d’image-cristal tel que théorisé par Gilles Deleuze. Au terme d’une analyse qui gagnerait à être complétée par l’étude de cas similaires, l’article affirme que l’adaptation shakespearienne remplit une fonction didactique. Grâce à des films tels que Cymbeline, l’adaptation rappelle au grand public que l’évolution des productions audiovisuelles a des conséquences sur la réception, tout en enseignant aux lecteurs de Deleuze que le moment est venu de mettre à jour leur vision du concept fondamental de l’image-cristal. Là où Deleuze nous incitait à voir le temps dans l’image-cristal, des adaptations comme celle d’Almereyda placent le passage du temps à l’origine d’une nécessaire mise au point sur cette même image-cristal. This article offers a new perspective on Shakespearean adaptation, treating it as an aesthetic practice designed to draw new conclusions from the epistemic machines that Shakespeare’s plays constitute. This new take on adaptation results from the study of a specific case, Michael Almereyda’s Cymbeline, which is seen as the juncture between the play, the film, but also Gilles Deleuze’s philosophical concept of the crystal-image, a third term that is essential to make sense of the director’s adaptation strategy. As the result of an analysis that would benefit from being complemented by the study of similar cases, the article claims that Shakespearean adaptation serves a didactic purpose. In such cases as Cymbeline, adaptation teaches viewers in general that the evolution of visual productions has consequences on reception, and drives readers of Deleuze, in particular, to update their vision of the image-crystal. Where Deleuze taught us to see time in the image-crystal, such adaptations as Almereyda’s show the concept to be in need of an update because of the passing of time. mar., 24 nov. 2020 12:02:31 +0100 sam., 28 févr. 2026 12:41:17 +0100 https://shakespeare.edel.univ-poitiers.fr:443/shakespeare/index.php?id=2534 https://shakespeare.edel.univ-poitiers.fr:443/shakespeare/index.php?id=399 It is very tempting for film adapters of Hamlet to unequivocally treat the spectre as supernatural, and to exploit its spectacular potential by creating a film ghost, for instance with the help of Computer Generated Imagery. Such handling of the spectral, however, seems to overlook Shakespeare’s use of the supernatural as a way of testing the limitations of theatrical representation through an exploration of the elsewhere spaces that generate ghosts. In Hamlet, indeed, the interference of the supernatural world with the real world, which is usually presented as a form of transgression, is simply described as a trespassing of the borders of theatrical space. Consequently, turning Shakespeare’s spirit into the kind of ghost encountered in fantastic movies amounts to misunderstanding some aspects of the play, in which the ghost’s link to reality is emphasized, because the spectral is then described as undoubtedly supernatural, emerging as it does from nothingness rather than from an ambiguous elsewhere place. The aim of the present paper is to examine Shakespeare’s characterisation of the elsewhere spaces from which the spectre emerges, then to study some sequences from films which manage to preserve the ambiguity of the play’s glimpse into spectral spaces, by locating them in places that are not necessarily outside film narrative spaces, but contiguous to them. mer., 28 juil. 2010 15:34:12 +0200 jeu., 16 sept. 2010 10:46:08 +0200 https://shakespeare.edel.univ-poitiers.fr:443/shakespeare/index.php?id=399 https://shakespeare.edel.univ-poitiers.fr:443/shakespeare/index.php?id=114 “Nothing will come of nothing”. Lear’s atomistic postulate, followed as it is by the King’s peremptory “Speak again”, reads like a commentary on Shakespeare’s text itself, which both repeats and rephrases existing material. Indeed, King Lear results from the weaving into one text of bits and pieces which may part again to be reunited later under a different shape. As such, the play does not come of nothing, and consequently should never return to nothingness. Film adaptations of King Lear are faithful to the text on two grounds, since they both include Lear’s famous line and illustrate it, thus repeating the play and reworking it. In this respect, Ran is so radically different that some refuse to rank it among Shakespearian adaptations, not only because the famous phrase is not spoken in the film, but also because Kurosawa constantly emphasizes his presence as the maker of the film, thus drawing a clear line between what comes from Shakespeare and what is born out of the darkness of the screen, to which it returns at the end of the showing. This paper aims at studying Kurosawa’s Ran as a metaphysical reflection on the filmic creative process, which adapts a similar reflection found in Shakespeare’s play, and at proving that Ran should be considered as a successful adaptation of King Lear. Indeed, even if the film keeps almost nothing from the original text, it nevertheless manages to transcribe its existential depth by adapting it to another culture, to another time, and to another artistic medium. jeu., 28 janv. 2010 15:17:52 +0100 ven., 13 déc. 2024 23:30:00 +0100 https://shakespeare.edel.univ-poitiers.fr:443/shakespeare/index.php?id=114