Adaptation and the Idea of the Death of the Author: The Case of Samuel Beckett

Chapter
First Online:
Part of the Second Language Learning and Teaching book series (SLLT)

Abstract

The article discusses the usefulness of Ronald Barthes’ concept of the death of the author in reference to the output of Samuel Beckett. On the one hand, the playwright refused to provide any interpretation or explanation of his oeuvre and thus left the finding of its meaning to individual receivers. On the other, however, he rigorously insisted on a strict following of his stage directions, or, to put it differently, on respecting his original vision of the given drama. At present, the faithfulness to the spirit of his output is guarded by the Beckett Estate, represented by his nephew who has to cope with a difficult, if possible at all, task of protecting the authorial rights of his great uncle. The problems connected with the legal status of Beckett’s writings are further complicated by the fact that, in most of the cases, there exist a number of his manuscripts, often introducing changes even in the same language and there are also differences between the French and English versions. As far as the productions of his dramas are concerned the situation is also similar—for instance, apart from the published version of Beckett’s Production Notebook of Happy Days, registering his work on the Royal Court production in 1979, there are three annotated copies prepared by Beckett himself and records made by Martha Fehsenfeld and Alfred Hübner concerning still other productions on which Beckett worked.

Keywords

Literary Text Annotate Copy Primary Text Stage Direction Secondary Text 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Abramowska, J. 1976. Literatura – dramat – teatr. Wprowadzenie do nauki o teatrze. t. 1 – Dramat – teatr. Ed. J. Degler. Wrocław: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego:245-251.Google Scholar
  2. Ackerley, C. J. & S. E. Gontarski, eds. 2006. The Faber Companion to Samuel Beckett. A Reader’s Guide to His Works, Life and Thought. London: Faber & Faber.Google Scholar
  3. Andrew, D. 2000. Adaptation. In Film Adaptation, ed. James Naremore, 28-37. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bair, D. 1978. Samuel Beckett. A Biography. New York and London: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
  5. Bradby, D. 2001. Beckett. Waiting for Godot. Plays in Production. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Burke, S. 2008. The Death and Return of the Author. Criticism and Subjectivity in Barthes, Foucault and Derrida. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Clurman, H. 1972. On Directing. New York: The Macmillan Company.Google Scholar
  8. Culler, J. 1981. Presupposition and Intertextuality. The Pursuit of Signs. Semiotics, Literature, Deconstruction. London and Henley: Routledge and Kegan Paul:100–118.Google Scholar
  9. Culler, J. 1975. Structuralist Poetics. Structuralism and Study of Literature. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  10. Elam, K. 1980. The Semiotics of Theatre and Drama. London and New York: Methuen.Google Scholar
  11. Głowiński, M. 1986. O intertekstualności. Pamiętnik Literacki no. 4:75–100.Google Scholar
  12. Górski, K. 1976. Literatura i teatr. Wprowadzenie do nauki o teatrze. t. 1 – Dramat – teatr. Ed. Janusz Wrocław: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego:233–244.Google Scholar
  13. Harmon, M., ed. 1998. No Author Better Served. The Correspondence of Samuel Beckett and Alan Schneider. Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Hassan, I. 1991. Pluralism in Modern Perspective. The Postmodern Reader. Ed. Ch. Jencks. London: Academy Editions:196–199.Google Scholar
  15. Heuvel, M. V. 1991.Performing Drama/Dramatizing Performance. Alternative Theater and the Dramatic Text. Ann Arbour: The University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  16. Hornby, R. 1995. Script into Performance: a Structuralist Approach. New York, London: Applause.Google Scholar
  17. Hu, S. 1989. Tom Stoppard’s Stagecraft. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  18. Hutcheon, L. 2006. Theory of Adaptation. New York, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Hutnikiewicz, A. 1976. Czy dramat jest dziełem literackim? Wprowadzenie do nauki o teatrze. t. 1 – Dramat – teatr. Ed. J. Degler. Wrocław: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego:77–84.Google Scholar
  20. Ingarden, R. 1976. O funkcjach mowy w widowisku teatralnym. Wprowadzenie do nauki o teatrze, t. I, Dramat – teatr. Ed. J. Degler. Wrocław: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego,Google Scholar
  21. Ingarden, R. 1937. O poznawaniu dzieła literackiego. Lwów: Wydawnictwo Zakładu Narodowego Imienia Ossolińskich.Google Scholar
  22. Ingarden, R. 1988. O dziele literackim. Warszawa: PWN.Google Scholar
  23. Jenny, L. 1988. Strategia formy. Transl. K. and J. Faliccy. Pamiętnik Literacki no. 1:265–295.Google Scholar
  24. Kleiner, J. 1976. Istota utworu dramatycznego. Wprowadzenie do nauki o teatrze. t. 1 – Dramat – teatr. Ed. J. Degler. Wrocław: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego:47–51.Google Scholar
  25. Kristeva, J. 1980. Desire in Language. A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art. Ed. L. S. Roudiez. Transl. T. Gora, A. Jardine and L. S. Roudiez. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  26. Lachmann, R. 1991. Płaszczyzny pojęcia intertekstualności. Transl. M. Lukasiewicz. Pamiętnik Literacki vol. 82, no. 4:209–215.Google Scholar
  27. Libera, A. 2009. Godot i jego cień. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Znak.Google Scholar
  28. Luere, J., ed. 1994. Playwright Versus Director. Authorial Intentions and Performance Interpretations. Contributions in Drama and Theatre Studies no 54. Westport: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  29. Pavis, P. 1982. Languages of the Stage. Essays in the Semiology of the Theatre. Transl. S. Melrose et. al. New York: Performing Arts Journal Publications.Google Scholar
  30. Pavis, P. 1998. Słownik terminów teatralnych. Tłum. S. Świontek. Wrocław – Warszawa – Kraków: Zakład Narodowy imienia Ossolińskich.Google Scholar
  31. Pavis, P. 1992. The Theatre at the Crossroads of Culture. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Pfister, M. 1991. Koncepcje intertekstualności. Pamiętnik Literacki vol. 82, no. 4:183–208.Google Scholar
  33. Pfister, M. 1993. The Theory and Analysis of Drama. Transl. J. Halliday. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Pfister, M. 2000. The Theory and Analysis of Drama. Transl. J. Halliday. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Raszewski, Z. 1976. Partytura teatralna. Wprowadzenie do nauki o teatrze. t. 1 – Dramat – teatr. Ed. J. Degler. Wrocław: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego:105–138.Google Scholar
  36. Skwarczyńska, S. 1976a. Dramat – literatura czy teatr? Wprowadzenie do nauki o teatrze. t. 1 – Dramat – teatr. Ed. J. Degler. Wrocław: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego:223–232.Google Scholar
  37. Skwarczyńska, S. 1976b. Niektóre praktyczne konsekwencje teatralnej teorii dramatu. Wprowadzenie do nauki o teatrze. t. 1 – Dramat – teatr. Ed. J. Degler. Wrocław: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego:139–147.Google Scholar
  38. Skwarczyńska, S. 1976c. Zagadnienie dramatu. Wprowadzenie do nauki o teatrze. t. 1 – Dramat – teatr. Ed. J. Degler. Wrocław: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego:53–75.Google Scholar
  39. Sławińska, I. 1976. Główne problemy struktury dramatu. Wprowadzenie do nauki o teatrze. t. 1 – Dramat – teatr. Ed. J. Degler. Wrocław: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego:85–104.Google Scholar
  40. Staiger, J. 1989. The Death of the Reader. The Cinematic Text Methods and Approaches. Ed. R. B. Palmer. New York: AMS Press:353–367.Google Scholar
  41. Styan, J. L. 1969. The Elements of Drama. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Törnkvist, E. 1991. Transposing Drama. Studies in Representation. London: MacMillan Education Ltd.Google Scholar
  43. Ubersfeld, A. 1982. The Pleasure of Spectator. Modern Drama vol. 25, 1 March:127–139.Google Scholar
  44. Whitelaw, B. 1995. Who He? An Authobiography. London: Sceptre.Google Scholar
  45. Williams, R. 1968. Drama in Performance. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  46. Wiśniewski, T. 2006. Kształt literacki dramatu Samuela Becketta. Kraków: TAiWPN UNIVERSITAS.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of ŁódźŁódźPoland

Personalised recommendations