|A fractal representation of adaptation; Deleuze would be proud!|
Like any undertaking, what guides my hand and mind in the creation of this adaptation is a philosophy of adaptation. Though it may not, at first, seem believable that there exist philosophies of adaptation, there is, in fact, varied and well trodden over ideas on what an adaptation should entail and criteria for how adaptations are grouped.
You, dear reader, will be thankful to know that this post is not the time or place where I go into great detail on those philosophies. If you wanted to familiarize yourself with adaptation and its different schools, then a google search or an Amazon search with a few key choice words should get you to where you need to go. No, I just wanted to outline my own philosophy of adaptation.
Or, it is not as much a "philosophy" as it is some basic underpinnings.
You see, I enjoy the works of two brilliant, yet diametrically opposed, philosophers-- that of Alain Badiou and Gilles Deleuze. Each philosopher built their own idea of semiotics and textual engagements during their academic careers. And though each one differed as well as converged on certain aspects, I adored reading about and engaging with their philosophies so much, that I decided to incorporate both thinker's concepts into my adaptation of medieval texts.
Now, to be honest, the philosophy which subtends my adaptation does not truly effect it in any conceivable manner; more, it is something which explains adaptation as I see it. It is an engagement with Badiou's conversion of poetry mixed with Deleuze's conception of the Event. The end result is to examine language's function when used within a gaming framework (which, of course, alters the function of language, especially since the language is being already used in an Event, that is in a game, that has been converted from poetry...). So, complicated, but this is exactly why I am engaging with it-- in order to better appreciate and come to terms with Badiou and Deleuze's theories; the means is my adaptation project, something which I think would greatly benefit from post-structuralist application.
So, yeah, in a way it seems like I am cheating-- I am not building my adaption from a pre-thought philosophy. Rather, I am adaptation philosophy through pre-thinking philosophy of adaption; in sum, I am thinking of art through other lenses and seeing where I can go with an original application. Though in a more solid world I would be the one brainstorming original philosophies, as an Undergraduate I am only expected to apply pre-rendered ideas onto existing formats. And this is fine. Philosophical titans such as Badiou or Deleuze, take a long time to study, and I see no harm in taking it slow and crafting a piece which does their thinking honor.