http://www.apple.com/trailers/disney/aliceinwonderland/trailer_large.html
make sure you click TRAILER not TEASER TRAILER
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Saturday, December 12, 2009
Alice the Hunter
The Walrus and the Carpenter haven't popped up again in the different adaptations we've seen, so instead I'll look at consumption more generally in Švankmajer's version.
What I find interesting in Švankmajer's adaptation is that eating is treated with a certain level of disgust and horror right on the surface. Upon opening the first desk, Alice pricks her finger and it bleeds. Her reaction to the blood is typical for a child: she licks it off her finger. But only moments earlier, she had watched as the White Rabbit removed his pocket watch from his stomach and licked off the sawdust that coated it, an act he repeats several times throughout the film. Later we see him eating sawdust as if it were a meal, and he seems to be enjoying it. The sawdust, of course, is his lifeblood, that which fills him and keeps him whole. After Alice scares him off she tries some of the sawdust herself, but spits it out in disgust. This Alice is not meant to consume the blood of others, only her own.
On Alice’s way down the rabbit hole (or elevator shaft), she pulls down a jar of something. Unlike in the original text, the jar is full, but what it contains looks so thoroughly disgusting that Alice, after dipping her finger into it, decides against eating it. This is the same finger she had just licked her blood from, but this new substance is clearly worse than blood.
The next foodstuffs she encounters she must eat, in order to change her size, but she certainly doesn’t seem to enjoy it. After drinking the inky potion and shrinking, she hurls the bottle into a corner of the room. Once she has had a bite of the dry-looking biscuit, she does the same. What is Švankmajer saying about food and about Alice? As she follows the White Rabbit, she seems to be on a hunt for blood, though she knows she can’t eat his. He certainly regards her as a predator, scampering off whenever she makes her presence know. Like a predator, she rarely shows an emotion other than irritation, and persists in the chase.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Monday, November 30, 2009
Eating in Wonderland
Consumption and edibility play a large thematic role in both Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass, and also figure largely in adaptations of the text. From the very beginning, the story is structured as a journey of ingestion. On the way down the rabbit hole Alice grabs a jar labeled "ORANGE MARMALADE," but finds it empty, "to her great disappointment" (10). Moments later she finds herself wondering whether cats eat bats, then the inverse. She soon stumbles upon objects which demand to be eaten ("DRINK ME," "EAT ME"), and soon discovers eating to be a transformative act.
Eating becomes a primary conduit of agency for Alice, whose tumultuous changes in size are actually conscious decisions to partake in physically altering substances (with the exception of her rapid growth in the courtroom, which seems to happen spontaneously). Yet the agency of ingestion comes without moral purpose, and has a tautological kind of justification: one eats to stay alive, and then one continues to eat. By populating his fantasy worlds with creatures that ruthlessly devour one another while spouting poetry, and food that speaks, Dodgson seems to recognize that eating is essentially amoral—if not immoral–because it requires the taking of another life. Eating, and thus living, is only justifiable using a moral calculus that values human lives above the lives of others. While the "real world" (both Dodgson's and our own) assumes such a moral framework, his imagined ones do not. The result is a place which on the surface appears to mimic human society, but more closely resembles the amoral confusion of the "natural world."
"The Walrus and the Carpenter" serves as an interesting nexus of the themes of consumption and society, and appears in both the original text ("Through the Looking Glass") and the 1951 Disney adaptation, slightly modified. What makes this poem stand out is not just the titular character's unmerciful devouring of the oysters, but that the oysters are in fact young children, and are illustrated (or animated) as such. The Disney adaptation stays fairly close to the original; it mostly modifies the poem to shorten it and remove language that might be unfamiliar to its audience. Interestingly, it changes the silent "eldest Oyster" of the original to an elderly mother oyster who cautions her children not to go, making their subsequent abduction and death even more disturbing. Yet at the decisive moment, it does not allow the Carpenter, the only human character, to partake in the feast. Instead the Walrus greedily eats them all, only to be chased out of the scene by the enraged carpenter, in what seems to be a conflict thought up by the Disney writers to distract from the unsettling event that has just occurred. After all, it's not often that the cute animal characters of Disney films are eaten alive–it would seem unbearably gruesome if the scene ended with the two devourers satisfied, talking to the oysters who are no longer there, as it does in the original. Only the Walrus cries, though his tears must be disingenuous (earlier the carpenter cried at the sight of sand on the beach).
Eating becomes a primary conduit of agency for Alice, whose tumultuous changes in size are actually conscious decisions to partake in physically altering substances (with the exception of her rapid growth in the courtroom, which seems to happen spontaneously). Yet the agency of ingestion comes without moral purpose, and has a tautological kind of justification: one eats to stay alive, and then one continues to eat. By populating his fantasy worlds with creatures that ruthlessly devour one another while spouting poetry, and food that speaks, Dodgson seems to recognize that eating is essentially amoral—if not immoral–because it requires the taking of another life. Eating, and thus living, is only justifiable using a moral calculus that values human lives above the lives of others. While the "real world" (both Dodgson's and our own) assumes such a moral framework, his imagined ones do not. The result is a place which on the surface appears to mimic human society, but more closely resembles the amoral confusion of the "natural world."
"The Walrus and the Carpenter" serves as an interesting nexus of the themes of consumption and society, and appears in both the original text ("Through the Looking Glass") and the 1951 Disney adaptation, slightly modified. What makes this poem stand out is not just the titular character's unmerciful devouring of the oysters, but that the oysters are in fact young children, and are illustrated (or animated) as such. The Disney adaptation stays fairly close to the original; it mostly modifies the poem to shorten it and remove language that might be unfamiliar to its audience. Interestingly, it changes the silent "eldest Oyster" of the original to an elderly mother oyster who cautions her children not to go, making their subsequent abduction and death even more disturbing. Yet at the decisive moment, it does not allow the Carpenter, the only human character, to partake in the feast. Instead the Walrus greedily eats them all, only to be chased out of the scene by the enraged carpenter, in what seems to be a conflict thought up by the Disney writers to distract from the unsettling event that has just occurred. After all, it's not often that the cute animal characters of Disney films are eaten alive–it would seem unbearably gruesome if the scene ended with the two devourers satisfied, talking to the oysters who are no longer there, as it does in the original. Only the Walrus cries, though his tears must be disingenuous (earlier the carpenter cried at the sight of sand on the beach).
Alice in Wonderland comparison: Carroll vs. Svankmajer
The story of Alice in Wonderland is almost always associated with childhood, and can usually be interpreted as a child-like narrative. What I mean by this is that the situations and types of conflict which occur in Alice’s experiences in Wonderland seem to mimic the way in which children emotionally and logically experience situations they may not fully comprehend in the adult world. This element of child-like logic is an integral part of the Alice in Wonderland narrative, and is present in almost every version of the story. However, what differs between versions of the Alice story is in what way this child-like logic is portrayed. A child's view of the world can be magical and fanciful, while at the same time being violent and confusing. It all depends on the way it is presented and the perspective of the situation. One important characteristics of the Alice story is that the narrative lends itself not only to the wonderment and imagination-rich element to childhood (which is usually the focus in most versions of Alice) but also the darker more confusing elements of childhood. Perhaps the most interesting polarity in the Alice narrative itself is how the same experiences in Wonderland can be metaphor for both positive and negative experiences in childhood based on the way the events themselves are portrayed. As compared to the Lewis Carroll's original stories Alice’s Adventure in Wonderland(1865) and Through the Looking Glass(1872), which presents a very playful yet traditional view of childhood, Jan Svankmajer’s Alice (1988) represents the opposite and darker side of childhood. Although the events in Svankmajer’s Alice are based in Carroll’s text, his reinterpretation of events changes the mood of the story entirely, creating a disturbing yet relatable version of Alice. It is interesting to consider the importance of emphasis and perspective in the portrayal of the Alice narrative, and how the same events can take on drastically different moods when told from different perspectives
In Alice’s Adventure in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass, Alice is characterized as a precocious child who, despite being very curious, generally goes out of her way to obey rules, be polite, and try and maintain order. Alice is characterized as being on the cusp of young adult-reasoning, having one foot in the door of both childhood and adolescence. Because of this she has the ability to be logical, but also because of her age she is still naive. This dichotomy is important in understanding the way she interacts with the things and situations in Wonderland, which seems to mimic how a child would understand and feel in situations with adults that they don’t fully understand. To a child the actions, reasoning and explanations they receive from adults can be just as confusing as any of the experiences Alice has in Wonderland. Despite being puzzled by many of the things she experiences, Carroll’s Alice is very accepting of the bizarre world around her and tries to obeys its strange rules. Alice’s attitude towards Wonderland seems rooted in a very traditional idea of how a child should act in adult situations ( i.e, obey with out asking questions) mixed with a more realistic idea of how a child would actually act ( be inquisitive, perhaps naggingly so). This places Carroll’s Alice as a kind of prototype child who is at the same time a realistic representation of childhood and relatable in that way, but also slightly idealized. For Carroll, the things Alice experience in Wonderland do not scare her, but rather display the positive sides of childhood imagination. Although it might seem the things Alice encounters through her adventures would be scary for a child, by leaving Alice calm and accepting of the world around her Carroll makes Wonderland a exciting exploration of the child's imagination. It is this fact which makes Carroll’s story popular for children and mainstream culture because it taps into the social ideas of idyllic childhood and fairy-tale. However, with slight change in perspective what once seemed charming and fun could also seem sinister and scary.
In Svankmajer’s Alice we are introduced to a situation which is familiar to us because it is based on Carroll’s narrative, but through Svankmajer’s reinterpretation the actions take on an entirely different mood. One of the reasons Svankmajer’s version is so effective is because it presents the narrative of Alice in Wonderland in a very traditional way, but uses this familiarity as a foundation to play with many of the other ideas which can be associated with themes from the original works. The use of stop motion animation, freely using both inanimate and live objects to represent the same characters, over-pronounced sound effects, and frankenstien-esque monsters, Svankmajer presents us the Alice in Wonderland we know but in an entirely new and horrifying way. There is something shockingly candid about Alice, not in its action which is obviously fantastical, but the way in which the character of Alice reacts to the situations she finds herself in, which on the whole creates a darker less-perfect Alice than we are traditionally confronted with. Like Carroll’s version, Svankmajer uses fantastical situations which vaguely resemble real life situations to portray child-like reasoning and emotionality. And although his version appeals to the more chaotic parts of childhood, Alice’s reactions are recontexualized through the darker frame of Svankmajer’s image of Wonderland. One example which sticks out in my mind in Svankmajer’s version is the Mad Hatter and the March Hare’s tea party. One of the most famous instances from the original Alice stories, Svankmajer takes the action of that scene and transforms it into a frantic, circular and nightmare-esque sequence. In Svankmajer’s version the absurdity of the situation is not emphasized by what the March Hare and Mad Hatter are literally saying to Alice ( like in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland), but rather by emphasizing the absurdity of the actions and how scary the chaos of Wonderland could really be. Although Alice is equally as calm and accepting in Alice, it is partially because she too has a dark twisted side. Carroll’s Alice is the epitome of a sweet little girl who has manners and self control, where Svankmajer’s Alice is a little more gritty, unruly and apt to handle the chaos of his Wonderland. This difference is important in this interpretation of Alice because, being a character which is well loved and emulated even today in our society, to knock Alice off of her pedestal so to speak is a powerful statement on the nature of childhood itself.
I found Svankmajer’s Alice to be repellant at times, but overall a very appealing version of the narrative because it highlights the horrific aspects of Wonderland which are often glossed over. Although I enjoyed Alice’s Adventure in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass, after seeing Svankmajer’s version I became fascinated with the darker side of the story and how Wonderland seems to exist in a transient place between nightmare and fantasy . Perhaps the reason this narrative is such an important classic is because of how relatable it is, because of its flirtation with both chaos and beauty, and the important role perspective plays on deciding which sphere Wonderland really exists in.
The 1972 movie-musical version of Alice, Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland seems to combine both ideas on childhood which were presented in the Svankmajer and the original novel. Because the story sticks so closely to the original story, while at the same time using intense visuals and costumes, both the dream like ideal childhood and nightmare quality of the story are seen. Alice in this version is perhaps the most closely related to Alice from the novel, and is the most likable version of Alice for me personally. However, because the pace of the novel is so slow, and many of the costumed animals are so creepy, it does take on the sense of a nightmare. I enjoyed this film version because it did seem to be a hybrid of many of the childhood themes I had picked up on from other versions of Alice, while at the same time maintaining its originality. Because it was able to combine both the idyllic childhood with the nightmarish elements, this version of Alice was a great way to round out our look at the narrative because it was simultaneously faithful to the original stories intentions, while at the same time adding its own unique visual spin on the story.
In Alice’s Adventure in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass, Alice is characterized as a precocious child who, despite being very curious, generally goes out of her way to obey rules, be polite, and try and maintain order. Alice is characterized as being on the cusp of young adult-reasoning, having one foot in the door of both childhood and adolescence. Because of this she has the ability to be logical, but also because of her age she is still naive. This dichotomy is important in understanding the way she interacts with the things and situations in Wonderland, which seems to mimic how a child would understand and feel in situations with adults that they don’t fully understand. To a child the actions, reasoning and explanations they receive from adults can be just as confusing as any of the experiences Alice has in Wonderland. Despite being puzzled by many of the things she experiences, Carroll’s Alice is very accepting of the bizarre world around her and tries to obeys its strange rules. Alice’s attitude towards Wonderland seems rooted in a very traditional idea of how a child should act in adult situations ( i.e, obey with out asking questions) mixed with a more realistic idea of how a child would actually act ( be inquisitive, perhaps naggingly so). This places Carroll’s Alice as a kind of prototype child who is at the same time a realistic representation of childhood and relatable in that way, but also slightly idealized. For Carroll, the things Alice experience in Wonderland do not scare her, but rather display the positive sides of childhood imagination. Although it might seem the things Alice encounters through her adventures would be scary for a child, by leaving Alice calm and accepting of the world around her Carroll makes Wonderland a exciting exploration of the child's imagination. It is this fact which makes Carroll’s story popular for children and mainstream culture because it taps into the social ideas of idyllic childhood and fairy-tale. However, with slight change in perspective what once seemed charming and fun could also seem sinister and scary.
In Svankmajer’s Alice we are introduced to a situation which is familiar to us because it is based on Carroll’s narrative, but through Svankmajer’s reinterpretation the actions take on an entirely different mood. One of the reasons Svankmajer’s version is so effective is because it presents the narrative of Alice in Wonderland in a very traditional way, but uses this familiarity as a foundation to play with many of the other ideas which can be associated with themes from the original works. The use of stop motion animation, freely using both inanimate and live objects to represent the same characters, over-pronounced sound effects, and frankenstien-esque monsters, Svankmajer presents us the Alice in Wonderland we know but in an entirely new and horrifying way. There is something shockingly candid about Alice, not in its action which is obviously fantastical, but the way in which the character of Alice reacts to the situations she finds herself in, which on the whole creates a darker less-perfect Alice than we are traditionally confronted with. Like Carroll’s version, Svankmajer uses fantastical situations which vaguely resemble real life situations to portray child-like reasoning and emotionality. And although his version appeals to the more chaotic parts of childhood, Alice’s reactions are recontexualized through the darker frame of Svankmajer’s image of Wonderland. One example which sticks out in my mind in Svankmajer’s version is the Mad Hatter and the March Hare’s tea party. One of the most famous instances from the original Alice stories, Svankmajer takes the action of that scene and transforms it into a frantic, circular and nightmare-esque sequence. In Svankmajer’s version the absurdity of the situation is not emphasized by what the March Hare and Mad Hatter are literally saying to Alice ( like in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland), but rather by emphasizing the absurdity of the actions and how scary the chaos of Wonderland could really be. Although Alice is equally as calm and accepting in Alice, it is partially because she too has a dark twisted side. Carroll’s Alice is the epitome of a sweet little girl who has manners and self control, where Svankmajer’s Alice is a little more gritty, unruly and apt to handle the chaos of his Wonderland. This difference is important in this interpretation of Alice because, being a character which is well loved and emulated even today in our society, to knock Alice off of her pedestal so to speak is a powerful statement on the nature of childhood itself.
I found Svankmajer’s Alice to be repellant at times, but overall a very appealing version of the narrative because it highlights the horrific aspects of Wonderland which are often glossed over. Although I enjoyed Alice’s Adventure in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass, after seeing Svankmajer’s version I became fascinated with the darker side of the story and how Wonderland seems to exist in a transient place between nightmare and fantasy . Perhaps the reason this narrative is such an important classic is because of how relatable it is, because of its flirtation with both chaos and beauty, and the important role perspective plays on deciding which sphere Wonderland really exists in.
The 1972 movie-musical version of Alice, Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland seems to combine both ideas on childhood which were presented in the Svankmajer and the original novel. Because the story sticks so closely to the original story, while at the same time using intense visuals and costumes, both the dream like ideal childhood and nightmare quality of the story are seen. Alice in this version is perhaps the most closely related to Alice from the novel, and is the most likable version of Alice for me personally. However, because the pace of the novel is so slow, and many of the costumed animals are so creepy, it does take on the sense of a nightmare. I enjoyed this film version because it did seem to be a hybrid of many of the childhood themes I had picked up on from other versions of Alice, while at the same time maintaining its originality. Because it was able to combine both the idyllic childhood with the nightmarish elements, this version of Alice was a great way to round out our look at the narrative because it was simultaneously faithful to the original stories intentions, while at the same time adding its own unique visual spin on the story.
Role of the Cheshire Cat (re-visited)
Wonderland is a strange and nonsensical world filled inhabited by strange and nonsensical residents. Among the many famous denizens featured in Alice's Adventures in Wonderland certain individuals stand out more prominently than the rest. There is the terribly annoying Duchess, the tyrant Queen of Hearts, the eccentric Mad Hatter and many other characters. Each has their own unique personality and their own trials set for Alice. However, above all else the Cheshire Cat is probably the most memorable and interesting of all the creatures crossing paths with Alice. The cat plays a significant role in the fact that he appears three times with Alice and seems to actually follow her and stand by her side. Although he speaks in nonsense, he is the only one who gives Alice actual usable advice and is more dominantly on her side. This role is seen prominently in Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, Disney's Alice in Wonderland, and Inanimate Alice. In American McGee's Alice video game (which I won't be focussing on), the Cheshire Cat is literally your guide into the twisted world of Wonderland
Alice has a great deal of encounters as she charts her way through the unknown forests of Wonderland. Most of these meetings, however, end with her leaving in confusion to wander aimlessly without a destination. There is a pivotal turning point with Alice's encounter with the cat whereas she is given directions and it soon after this that our heroine finally reaches the brilliantly warm flower-beds she had been searching so long for. Also, The Cheshire Cat at this moment puts many of Alice's nonsensical experiences into perspective which no one has done thus far. During their conversation involving directions and which way to go, the cat gives her two choices and says, "'In that direction' the cat said, waving his paw round, 'lives a Hatter: and in that direction,' waving the other paw, 'lives a March Hare. Visit either you like: they're both mad.' 'But I don't want to go among mad people,' ALice remarked 'Oh you can't help that,' said the cat: 'we're all mad here. I'm mad, you're mad." Cheshire Cat is, for the first time really, making sense and giving Alice an answer. The fact of the matter is, this entire world is mad, crazy and that's simply the way it is.
Also, when he re-appears at the Queen's croquet game later Alice recognizes him as a friend, as a sort of companion. She says after seeing his face, "It's the Cheshire Cat, now I will have somebody to talk to." This means not only can we speculate on the cat's role in the story, but Alice says it herself.
In the interactive story Inanimate Alice, the Cheshire Cat is replaced by a similar idea. His entity lives in Alice's imaginary friend Brad. Alice reveals to us that she has no real friends and talks only to Ben, similar to relationship with Alice and Cheshire Cat. They are both a voice of reason in a crazy and unruly world (because our world here is just as nonsensical as Wonderland). Ben acts as a guide and a sort of common ground for Alice to make sense of everything changing around her. Often a voice inside her head, Ben gives Alice advice, points her in the right direction and never truly leaves her side.
The Cheshire Cat has had an incredible impact on pop culture and is the most recognizable symbol and character in the Alice in Wonderland world. This is possible only because of his role as the guide and companion. We can relate to him unlike any of the other citizens of Wonderland.
We can see the Cheshire Cat as Wonderland's skewed depiction of Alice's own kitty Dinah. She frequently mentions the little critter throughout her adventures and wishes she could crawl beside her at each and every turn. Like Dinah, who Alice describes as a mischievous animal, the Cheshire Cat often lands the girl in trouble. When the Cheshire Cat is taunting the Queen of Hearts, in reality that may have been Dinah knocking over Mrs. Liddell's vase with Alice. Of course Dinah would make a quick and quiet escape from the crime scene! She would paw off and disappear leaving only a mischievous smirk behind.
That seems to be the source of Cheshire Cat's illusion-esque vanishing acts and his "grin from ear to ear." Cheshire Cat is Alice's companion, her one and only friend. And in the real world the only friend we ever see her playing with is Dinah. The Cheshire Cat is no more than an elaborated version of Dinah, of a normal cat. The only difference is that metaphor becomes reality for our multi-striped friend.
Each quirky trait Cheshire Cat has, all his strangeness and riddling are exaggerated cat-like behaviors. In folklore especially cats are often associated with witchcraft and mystery. Their silent approaches and disappearances always have (and always will) left people wondering about their curious "powers." Cheshire Cat is a representation of cat myths of both oast and present.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)