DP Habrnalova

PALACKÝ UNIVERSITY OLOMOUC
FACULTY OF ARTS
Department of English and American Studies
Bc. Adéla Habrnalová
Literary Works by Hanif Kureishi
and Their Film Adaptations
Master Thesis
Supervisor: Mgr. Pavlína Flajšarová, Ph.D.
Olomouc 2016
Místopřísežně prohlašuji, že jsem diplomovou práci na téma ―Literary Works by
Hanif Kureishi and Their Film Adaptations‖ vypracovala samostatně pod odborným
dohledem vedoucí diplomové práce a uvedla jsem všechny použité podklady a
literaturu.
V Olomouci dne 5. 5. 2016 Podpis ………………………

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, I would like to thank my supervisor, Mgr. Pavlína Flajšarová, Ph.D. for
her guidance, patience, and valuable advice throughout writing this master thesis.
I would also like to express gratitude to my family and friends for their support and
encouragement during my studies.
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 7
1. HANIF KUREISHI’S BIOGRAPHY ............................................................... 9
2. CONCISE HISTORY OF ADAPTATION STUDIES ................................. 14
2.1. Search for Interdisciplinary Dialog ............................................................. 14
3. LINDA HUTCHEON’S THEORY OF ADAPTATION .............................. 20
3.1. The Appeal of Adaptation ........................................................................... 20
3.1.1. Modes of Engagement.......................................................................... 23
3.2. WHAT? (Forms) ......................................................................................... 24
3.3. WHO? WHY? (Adapters) ........................................................................... 26
3.4. HOW? (Audiences) ..................................................................................... 28
3.4.1. Knowing and Unknowing Audiences .................................................. 28
3.4.2. Modes of Engagement Revisited ......................................................... 29
3.4.3. Kinds and Degrees of Immersion ......................................................... 30
3.5. WHERE? WHEN? (Contexts) .................................................................... 30
4. MY BEAUTIFUL LAUNDRETTE ................................................................ 32
4.1. Writing a Screenplay and Writing a Novel ................................................. 32
4.2. The Background and the Origin of the Screenplay and Film ...................... 32
4.3. Plot Overview .............................................................................................. 34
4.4. The Reception of the Film ........................................................................... 34
4.5. Comparison of Selected Aspects and Scenes .............................................. 37
5. THE BUDDHA OF SUBURBIA ..................................................................... 40
5.1. Plot Overview .............................................................................................. 40
5.2. The Background and the Origin of the Novel ............................................. 40
5.3. The Reception of the Novel......................................................................... 40
5.4. The Background and the Origin of the Film Adaptation ............................. 41
5.5. The Reception of the Film Adaptation ........................................................ 42
6. INTIMACY ....................................................................................................... 46
6.1. The Background and the Origin of the Written Works ............................... 46
6.2. The Reception of the Novella ...................................................................... 47
6.3. The Background and the Origin of the Film Adaptation ............................. 50
6.4. The Reception of the Film Adaptation ........................................................ 51
6.5. Comparison of the Plots .............................................................................. 53
CONCLUSION......................................................................................................... 58
RESUMÉ................................................................................................................... 62
BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................... 66
ANOTACE ................................................................................................................ 70
ANNOTATION ........................................................................................................ 71
INTRODUCTION
The aim of this thesis is to compare selected literary works written by Hanif Kureishi
to their film adaptations. The theoretical frame used throughout the thesis is based on
Linda Hutcheon‘s theory of adaptation. This methodological frame was thoroughly
chosen after research of current trends in adaptation studies. Hutcheon attempts to
prove that the adaptations have the same value as the adapted texts. In addition,
Hutcheon claims that evaluating adaptations on the premise of fidelity is obsolete
and futile. Hutcheon defines three different modes in which texts engage their
audience—telling, showing, and interacting. In this thesis, the telling mode of literary
works and the showing mode of their film adaptations will be examined and
compared.
The first chapter is devoted to brief biography of Hanif Kureishi. It is essential to

be acquainted with Kureishi‘s life since his works are assumed to be based on
autobiographic events. Kureishi‘s works were selected for this thesis for being
considered highly controversial. The comparison of selected reviews of both the
adapted text and the adaptation will be executed in the last three chapters.
The second chapter contains a concise history of adaptation studies and history of
search for interdisciplinary dialog. In the past, the fidelity of adaptation to its adapted
text was considered to be crucial. Although this approach is rather being relinquished
by contemporary researchers in adaptation studies, it still reverberates. This thesis is
supported by Linda Hutcheon‘s theory of adaptation which is demonstrated in the
third chapter. It deals with the appeal of adaptation, different modes of engagement,
forms of adaptations, adapters, audience, and context among other matters.
The fourth chapter is dedicated to the analysis of My Beautiful Laundrette. It does

not include an adaptation to be more precise. The screenplay written by Hanif
Kureishi and film directed by Stephen Frears will be compared. Furthermore, the
reception of the film will be demonstrated by presenting excerpts from selected
reviews.
The fifth chapter deals with the analysis of the novel The Buddha of Suburbia
written by Kureishi and its adaptation in the form of television miniseries. It was
7
made for BBC by Kureishi and the director Roger Michell. In addition, excerpts from
selected reviews of both the novel and the miniseries will be explored.
The sixth chapter is devoted to the last analysis which deals with novella
Intimacy and a short story ―Nightlight‖ and film Intimacy loosely based on these
literary works. And similarly as in the two previous chapters, excerpts from selected
reviews will be analysed.
8
1. HANIF KUREISHI’S BIOGRAPHY
The birthplace of Hanif Kureishi is Bromley, a South London suburb. He was born in
1954. ―While he experienced a typical English childhood, Kureishi‘s cultural
background was uncommon. Although English, he did not grow up within the
Church of England tradition; although Pakistani, he did not grow up within the
Muslim tradition.‖1 His subject of study at University of London was Philosophy.
Before he became a writer he had to do various jobs such as usher or jack-off-all-
trades.2 ―His early plays were produced by London‘s Theatre Upstairs, the Royal
Court Theatre, and the Royal Shakespeare Company, and he enjoyed international
success with the 1985 screenplay My Beautiful Laundrette, for which he was
nominated for an Academy Award. In 1990, his novel, The Buddha of Suburbia, won
the Whitbread Book of the Year Award for first novels.‖3 His fiction works have
been published on regular basis in recognised periodicals such as the New Yorker,
Granta, the London Review of Books and the Atlantic Monthly.4
In 1993, Kureishi‘s twin boys named Sachin and Carlo were born. Their mother
is Kureishi‘s former editor at Faber & Faber Tracey Scoffield. They were married
but now are divorced. His new relationship with Monique Proudlove started in 1995.
Their son named Kier was born in 1998.5 Kureishi‗s mother Audrey is of English
origin while his father Rafiushan Kureishi is of Indian/Pakistani origin.6 ―His father
Rafiushan was from a relatively affluent Muslim family from Madras and came to
Britain in 1947 to read law (most of the family moved to Pakistan after Partition).‖7
Kureishi, . . . , represents what the opening paragraph of The Buddha

famously describes as a ‗new breed‘ of Englishman in a number of
different senses. He can be categorised initially as one of the first
generation of children of ‗New Commonwealth‘ origins to be born in
1
Kenneth C. Kaleta, Hanif Kureishi: Postcolonial Storyteller (Austin: University of Texas Press,
1998), 18.
2
Bradley Buchanan, Hanif Kureishi (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007), 31; Kaleta, Hanif
Kureishi: Postcolonial Storyteller, 20.
3
Bradley Buchanan, Hanif Kureishi (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007), 31
4
Buchanan, Hanif Kureishi, 31.
5
6
7
Bart Moore-Gilbert, Hanif Kureishi: Contemporary World Writers (Manchester: Manchester
University
Press, 2001), 13.
9
Britain, but this description is complicated by Kureishi‘s Anglo-
Pakistani/Indian parentage, which makes him a minority within
minority.8
When growing up, Kureishi experienced many abusive and bullying situations to
such an extent that he admits, ―‗I couldn‘t tolerate being myself‘.‖9 ―In work as
diverse as ‗The Rainbow sign‘, The Buddha, The Black Album and ‗We‘re not Jews‘,
Kureishi provides harrowing accounts of the torment and self-hatred to which racism
can lead young people from such minorities.‖10
In an interview in 1997, Kureishi discussed how his complex personal

background impinges upon his work:
I came from two worlds … There was my Pakistani family, my uncles,
aunts and so on. Then there was my English family, who were lower
middle or working class. My grand-father had pigeons and grey-hounds
and all that. And having an Indian father … So, finding my way through
all that … I wrote all those books to make sense of it.11
Kureishi‘s complex relationship with his father is another focus of his

autobiographical works. Kureishi left home when he was young and it very afflicted
his father. ‗Oedipal tropes‘ can be also seen in his later fiction although used in a
more complex way. One reason for this could be the fact that Kureishi became father
himself and the paternity issue started to appear in his works. The protagonists of his
later works were no longer young men but paternal figures. When Hanif‘s father died
he had mixed feelings about it. On one hand he felt relieved, on the other hand he felt
guilty. In his memoir My Ear at His Heart Kureishi tries to attribute his father‘s
puritanism to the fact that he is an immigrant.12
… he did consider … white girls to be slutty, though he‘d married a

white girl himself … Father disliked Muslim conservatism, but didn‘t
like my sister looking ‗tarty‘. If the immigrant always lives in a world he
8
Moore-Gilbert, Hanif Kureishi: Contemporary World Writers, 13.
9
10
Moore-Gilbert, Hanif Kureishi: Contemporary World Writers, 13-14.
11
12
Buchanan, Hanif Kureishi, 32-36.
10
cannot quite grasp, he might seek to petrify it by controlling his children
and … their sexuality. (My Ear 115)13
―Given the many obvious connections that appear between Kureishi‘s work and
the broad movements of his life, it is difficult to avoid the hypothesis that Kureishi‘s
work is primarily autobiographical rather than social, or confessional rather than
political.‖14 The next factor contributing to such hypothesis is the fact that Kureishi
often names characters after members of his family or other people he is or was close
to. The people involved frequently denounced Hanif‘s treating of biographical
material.15
In a letter to The Guardian in 1998 Kureishi‘s sister claimed that

Kureishi gave ‗a false impression of our family life‘; she insisted that her
grandfather ‗was not a ―cloth cap working class person‖ ‘, but owned
three shops, and that her parents were well-off enough to send her to
ballet school. Kureishi‘s mother corroborated Yasmin‘s account in an
interview in The Observer shortly afterwards: ‗I suppose it‘s trendy
nowadays for an author to pretend they had a working-class background,
but Hanif had everything he wanted as a child.‘16
Kureishi‘s reactions to such denouncements were miscellaneous. Sometimes he

adopts a defensive attitude: ―Kureishi has elsewhere insisted that his work is not
faithful in detail to his experience: ‗Like Laundrette, Sammy and Rosie is quite a
personal story, autobiographical, not in its facts, but emotionally‘.‖17 Another
example of his reaction was admission that he did not manage to keep the
appropriate distance from his life experience when writing: ―‗I know that in certain
passages I‘ve been spiteful‘‖18 ―At the reading of Intimacy, moreover, Kureishi
argued that, while writers cannot help but draw on their own experience, they adapt,
edit or add to it in conformity with the demands of the story and other elements of
aesthetic form.‖19
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
11
Kureishi started to be interested in cinema in 1970s and was very keen on
American film culture. It is not very common for writers to work in film and
television industry. Kureishi admires popular music which he was using in his works
and films to express and emphasize the emotional effect.20 ―. . . Pop is valued by
Kureishi because it articulates both the political protest and the ‗sexual revolution‘
associated with the 1960s which, in theory at least, pointed the way towards more
tolerant and flexible conceptions of sexuality and gender roles as well as of class
identities.‖21 Kureishi considers pop to be as important as already established ―high‖
cultural forms. According to Kureishi pop is ―the richest cultural form of post-war
Britain‖.22
Kureishi believes that gender, sexuality and ethnicity are on the same level of
importance as conceptions of race, class and nation when speaking about categories
of (self-) identification. Kureishi‘s works are valued by younger British especially
because he takes its sub-cultures seriously and also because experiencing difficulty in
young age is one of primary themes in his works. In addition, Kureishi has
extraordinary sense of humour.23
―One of the key questions posed in his work is: ‗So what does it mean to be
British?‘ Most of his writing up to 1995, at least, constitutes an evolving set of
analyses of – and attempted answers to – this problematic.‖24 In ―The Rainbow Sign‖
Kureishi describes his return to England from Pakistan where he was for the first
time. He is surprised how British he feels, however after an attack on an Asian
family in the East End he reacts: ―‗who wants to be British anyway?‘‖ 25 Then he
refuses any patriotic feeling and demands ―new way of being British:‖26
In the meantime it must be made clear that black don‘t require ‗tolerance‘
in this particular condescending way. It isn‘t this particular paternal
tyranny that is wanted, since it is major adjustments to British society
that have to be made. I stress that it is the British who have to make these
20
21
22
23
24
Moore-Gilbert, Hanif Kureishi: Contemporary World Writers, 10, 4.
25
Susie Thomas, Hanif Kureishi: A Reader’s Guide to Essential Criticism (New York: Palgrave
Macmillan, 2005), 3.
26
Susie Thomas, Hanif Kureishi: A Reader’s Guide to Essential Criticism, 3.
12
adjustments. It is the British, the white British, who have to learn that
being British isn‘t what it was. Now it is a more complex thing, involving
new elements. So there must be a fresh way of seeing Britain and the
choices it faces: and a new way of being British after all this time.27
27
Thomas, Hanif Kureishi: A Reader’s Guide to Essential Criticism, 3.
13
2. CONCISE HISTORY OF ADAPTATION STUDIES
Film adaptations are inseparable albeit inconsistent part of cinematography history.28

In the nineties, a new wave of interest in film adaptation began predominantly in
Anglo-American field of research. This new wave of interest has led to reappraising
of the older starting points. Today‘s gradually established academic discipline aims
to find new themes exempt from subjective appraisals.
In the second chapter of her influential book A Theory of Adaptation (2006),

Linda Hutcheon deals with biases which still affect debates regarding literature and
film. One of the clichés she resolutely denies is repetitive attribution of closeness of
the viewpoint or interiority of the immersed subject exclusively to literary narration.
In addition, Hutcheon deals with time, irony, metaphor, and symbol in relation to
narratives updated by verbal and performance media. Hutcheon concludes her text
with considering authors of these truisms to be defenders of literature.
Thomas Leitch engages in frequently discussed issue of fidelity to the original

work. Leitch explains endeavours of fidelity as an exception which must be
understood in the context of given transcription. Efforts to be faithful to the plots of
canonical or famous books are according to Leitch often associated with commercial
intentions of the creators, because just such works can then arouse great interest of
the audience. Leitch is also interested in creators‘ motivation for making adaptations
of such books, production history, promotion and marketing of film versions.
Australian literary researcher Simone Murray sees major field of adaptation

studies in context analysis. According to Leitch, one of the starting points of way
forward (as a follow-up to Hutcheon formulations) is to consider adaptation as an
autonomous act and not to focus only on source texts.
2.1. Search for Interdisciplinary Dialog
Film adaptations were for a long time considered mere copies of more important and
more valuable literary works.29 The adaptation thinking itself is relatively young.
28
Petr Bubeníček, ―Filmová adaptace – Editorial,‖ Iluminace: Časopis pro teorii, historii a estetiku
filmu, no. 1 (2010): 5-6.
29
Petr Bubeníček, ―Filmová adaptace – Hledání interdisciplinárního dialogu,‖ Iluminace: Časopis pro
teorii, historii a estetiku filmu, no. 1 (2010): 5-6.
14
Principal theoretic and methodological concepts began to form in connection with
establishing film studies at American and British universities in the sixties and
seventies. Close reading was still prevailing at many faculties of arts being reinforced
by awareness of uniqueness of a novel or a poem and the uniqueness of the literary
act.
The greatest interest was in canonical works. It often led to privileging of the
printed texts which lead readers to develop their imagination in the contrary to the
motion picture. It was assumed that novel is not possible to transform into film and
that most of literary genres are incompatible with film representation of the fiction
world.30 Despite many adaptations having been made, most of film researchers did
not engage in the phenomenon and thus contributed to such condition. The situation
started to change slowly in the eighties and the nineties. At the end of the twentieth
century, adaptation become part of research discourse of humanities. The analysis of
adaptation represented fashionable interdisciplinary turn which manifested itself
among others by university seminars such as ―Shakespeare and Film,‖ Dickens in the
Film‖ etc.31
One of the first theoreticians of film adaptation was George Bluestone. In his
work Novels into Film (1957), Bluestone notified of the differences between the two
media. These differences were supposed to cause the inability of film adaptation to
resemble its literary source. Bluestone saw the distinction especially in the linguistic
nature of literature and the visual nature of film-presentation. Every film-maker
becomes a new author. Literary source provides them merely with springboard for
their own production.32 Bluestone commenced a period of searching for differences
between literature and film.
Another argument for critical appraisal of adaptations is emphasizing the

differences between reception and perception as two distinct ways of world
comprehension. There is still vigorous effort to measure reception against perception.
30
Katarína Mišíková, Mysl a příběh ve filmové fikci. O kognitivistických přístupech k teorii filmové
narace, (Praha: Nakladatelství Akademie múzických umění 2009) 154, in Petr Bubeníček, ―Filmová
adaptace – Hledání interdisciplinárního dialogu,‖ Iluminace: Časopis pro teorii, historii a estetiku
filmu, no. 1 (2010): 7.
31
Bubeníček, ―Filmová adaptace – Hledání interdisciplinárního dialogu,‖ 8.
32
George Bluestone, Novels into Film (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press 2003), s 61-62, in
Petr Bubeníček, ―Filmová adaptace – Hledání interdisciplinárního dialogu,‖ Iluminace: Časopis pro
teorii, historii a estetiku filmu, no. 1 (2010): 9.
15
Reading a book is considered to be intellectual process whereas watching a film is
associated with entertainment, relax, and suppressing one‘s own imagination. In film,
everything is presented in its completeness thus members of the audience do not have
to use their fantasy. Receptive aesthetician Wolfgang Iser termed film as medium
without gaps. The reception of prose is according to Iser richer and more personal in
perception. Film, on the contrary, indicates merely the physical perception and every
vision of the world the viewer remembers is brutally dissolved.33
Seymour Chatman aptly opposed to this opinion which appears among literary
researchers. In his influential book Coming to Terms (1990) Chatman puts himself a
question: if film is visually explicit, does that necessarily mean that there are no gaps
which could be filled? Film can be assumed to be without gaps only when perceived
at the lower sensory level. Gaps appear in films at generally narrative and stylistic
level. Chatman‘s further argument emphasizes conceptual imagination which can be
significantly stimulated during watching the film.34
Both literature and film were proclaimed equal in a broader cultural text. Their
relationship is not based on logics of hierarchy or competition. It is based on being
legitimate part of the whole culture. This neutral position enables to study basis of
intermediary relations exempted from prejudice.35
It is necessary to define the phenomenon. Linda Hutcheon defines adaptation as

both a product and process. It opens broader space for debates regarding adaptations
including not only usual formalistic analysis but also questions related to new
reading of literary work, with context of transcription origin, relation between
readers and audience experience, etc. Hutcheon‘s theory of adaptation will be dealt
with in the following chapter.36
The fidelity approach, despite being often used even currently, is slowly but
surely in remission. In the first half of twentieth century, great deal of adaptations
33
Wolfgang Iser, The Reading Process: The Implied Reader. Patterns of Communication in Prose
Fiction from Bunyan to Beckett (Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press 1974),
283, in Petr Bubeníček, ―Filmová adaptace – Hledání interdisciplinárního dialogu,‖ Iluminace:
Časopis pro teorii, historii a estetiku filmu, no. 1 (2010): 9.
34
Seymour Chatman, Coming to Terms, The Rhetoric of Narrative in Fiction and Film (Ithaca:
Cornell University Press 1990), 162, in Petr Bubeníček, ―Filmová adaptace – Hledání
interdisciplinárního dialogu,‖ Iluminace: Časopis pro teorii, historii a estetiku filmu, no. 1 (2010): 9-
10.
35
36
16
was unsuccessful. It made theoreticians jump to conclusions that the film does not
reach the quality of the novel because it is unable to capture fictional literary world.
Kamilla Elliott claimed that adaptation can be successful only under the condition of
being faithful to the original work.37
Approaches focused on fidelity are rejected nowadays. Departure from fidelity

comes out from poststructuralist turn. Nearly every author dealing with film
adaptation theory warns about the fact that fidelity concepts limit the discipline
development. Paradox might arise in form of audience‘s efforts to think about the
relation of the adaptation to the adapted text and consider the degree of adaptation
resemblance to the original work. In addition, there is also a discrepancy between
theory, common reception practice and conventional thinking. Umberto Eco asserted
that open art work provide us with unlimited number of meanings. Stanley Fish, on
the contrary, claimed that objective characterisation is only an illusion. In that case, it
is possible to be faithful to the original text merely at the very basic level of narrative
events. These facts however do no mean that it is necessary to resign from
consideration of changes in adaptations. Various questions can be dealt with such as:
How film-makers interpreted literary text? Was the meaning of the original text
changed in the process of adaptation? Was motivation of the authors artistic,
economic, political, etc.? What is the relation of this adaptation to previous film of
the same author? What does it say about current state of British TV production?38
For current adaptation thinking it is typical to interpret literary and film narrative.
Formalistic approach is methodological starting point of a number of works.
According to Chatman, basic questions regarding film adaptations are always
somehow related to adjusting and changes of the story. Therefore it is convenient to
search for new topics such as narrator, focalization, and characters. The issue of time
is also interesting for film researchers therefore it would be appropriate to
concentrate on basic modes of time structure: order, duration, and frequency. 39
Brian McFarlane‗s contribution to the field also needs to be mentioned. In his

Novel to Film from half of the nineties, McFarlane continued in Barthes‘ structural
narrative analysis. McFarlane distinguished between elements that can be easily
37
Bubeníček, ―Filmová adaptace – Hledání interdisciplinárního dialogu,‖ 12-13.
38
39
17
transferred on screen and elements that require adaptation. Easily transferable
element is for example the plot whereas elements such as the atmosphere of the
fictional world or characterisation of protagonists are not. McFarlane distinguishes
between narrative and narration. The attribute which is shared by novel and film is
the ―narrative‖ whilst they differ in the way of ―narration.‖40
Theoreticians try to demonstrate new ways for the discipline. At the beginning of
twenty-first century, there was no comprehensive theory of adaptation. Thomas
Leitch described this situation as ―theoretical vacuum.‖ Great impulse for change
was a project of Robert Stam and Alessandra Raengo. British researchers Deborah
Cartmell and Imelda Whelehan founded a journal Adaptation: The Journal of
Literature on Screen Studies. They set themselves a target to find a dialog between
literary and film science and demonstrate their reciprocal enrichment through
translation of one art into the other and mutual blending of literary and film aspects.
This approach is crucial for adaptation studies and it should bring freedom from the
one-sided influence of literary discourses. Another interesting area for research might
be in dealing with reception question in more detail. Not much has been written yet
about reader who approaches a literary work after watching its film adaptation. The
way in this direction was indicated by Polish film researcher Alicja Helman. Helman
is particularly interested in a more complex relation of viewer acquainted with the
literary source to adaptation. Helman distinguishes between watching a film based on
an original screenplay and perception of adaptation. In the first case, the viewer
reconstructs the film structure in semantic audio-visual motion. In the second case,
the viewer is equipped with certain knowledge of already introduced fictional world.
This knowledge appears in viewer‘s memory and the viewer is thus able to compare
literary and film works being aware of analogies and distinctions. The result is the
creation of the new virtual work. The viewer creates a unity which is neither only the
book nor merely the film being watched at the very moment.41
Different direction of the discipline is being sought by Peter Lev in his study
―The Future of Adaptation Studies.‖ The aspect which has not been yet enough
40
41
Thomas Leitch, Twelve Fallacies in Contemporary Adaptation Theory, 150, in Petr Bubeníček,
―Filmová adaptace – Hledání interdisciplinárního dialogu,‖ Iluminace: Časopis pro teorii, historii a
estetiku filmu, no. 1 (2010): 18; Bubeníček, ―Filmová adaptace – Hledání interdisciplinárního
dialogu,‖ 18-19.
18
discussed in adaptation studies according to Lev is the screenplay. Screenplay
testifies about the process of adaptation and it can also become an art form in itself.
He regards two facts which might hinder study of screenplays. Firstly, screenplays
are not easily accessed. Secondly, the research can be particularly tough considering
various drafts of screenplay, literary source and finished film.42
The future of adaptation studies resides in search for new questions and
application of topical initiatives of literary and film theory and methodology. Instead
of usual textual comparisons, there are several possible directions in which the
developing discipline might move. First of all, the research might focus on reasons
why such transcription was created and what are its consequences for distinct literary
readings. Possible questions might regard issues of gender, politics, etc. Second of
all, television adaptation is another interesting direction in research as it differs from
feature film in various aspects. How the film makers use the benefit of series format
which is much more close to the multi-page novel than is the feature film?43
The following chapter will be dealing with Linda Hutcheon‘s theory of

adaptations research which belongs among the modern and significant directions in
the discipline. Hutcheon‘s theory will be used throughout the entire thesis.
42
James M. Welsh and Peter Lev, eds., The Literature/film Reader: Issues of Adaptation (Lanham,
Md.: Scarecrow Press, 2007), 335-338; Bubeníček, ―Filmová adaptace – Hledání interdisciplinárního
dialogu,‖ 19.
43
19
3. LINDA HUTCHEON’S THEORY OF ADAPTATION
This thesis will use Linda Hutcheon‘s theory of adaptation for comparing literary
works to their film adaptations. ―Linda Hutcheon holds the rank of University
Professor Emeritus of English and Comparative Literature at the University of
Toronto.‖ Hutcheon specializes in ―postmodernist culture and in critical theory.‖44
According to Hutcheon, there are three modes of engagement with audience—

telling mode, showing mode, and interactive mode. Every mode of engagement
differs in the degree of audience‘s immersion. In this thesis, merely telling and
showing mode will be examined, since the process of adaptation of all three works is
from the telling to the showing mode of engagement. Hutcheon‘s theory is also based
on the assumption that fidelity factor is obsolete and it is essential to focus on
different matters in adaptation studies. Hutcheon positions adapted text and
adaptation on the same level of importance as both are considered autonomous
works.
The aim of the thesis is to consider various scenes and aspects in adapted texts as
well as adaptations in terms of the telling mode and showing mode of engagement.
3.1. The Appeal of Adaptation
George Kubler claims that ―human desires in every present instance are torn between
the replica and the invention, between the desire to return to the known pattern, and
the desire to escape it by a new variation."45 This human desire partly explains the
appeal of adaptations as they fulfil both these desires. Hutcheon explains ―the
popularity of adaptations‖ by ―two different ways of thinking: either stories are
considered forms of representation and thus vary with period and culture, or they are
what theorists like Marie-Laure Ryan identify as timeless cognitive models by which
we make sense of our world and of human action in it.‖46
44
―Linda Hutcheon,‖ http://individual.utoronto.ca/lindahutcheon/.
45
George Kubler, The Shape of Time: Remarks on the History of Things (New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1962), 72, in Linda Hutcheon, A Theory of Adaptation (New York: Routledge,
2006), 173.
46
Marie-Laure Ryan , Narrative as Virtual Reality: Immersion and Interactivity in Literature and
Electronic Media (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2001), 242-243, in Linda Hutcheon, A
Theory of Adaptation (New York: Routledge, 2006), 175.
20
What they are not is necessarily inferior or second-rate—or they would not have
survived. Temporal precedence does not mean anything more than temporal
priority.‖
Hutcheon questions the view of the ―original― or the ―source― text as superior to
adaptation. Hutcheon also argues that there are a number of purposes why
adaptations emerge besides the idea of ―fidelity‖. The idea of superiority or priority
of the original text is also challenged if we perceive the adaptation prior to the
original. Hutcheon studies adaptations as adaptations. This comprises of works
which are autonomous, consciously expanding and revisiting the text they originate
from. Hutcheon‘s theoretical perspective is both ―formal and ‗experiential.‘‖ ―In
other words, the different media and genres that stories are transcoded to and from in
the adapting process are not just formal entities; . . . , they also represent various
ways of engaging audiences.‖47 These ways of involving audience include three
modes of engagement. The first one is the telling mode the most characteristic for
novels and short stories. The second case is all performance media which engage
with their audience by showing the stories. The third mode is interactive one
represented by videogames. In this thesis, the telling and the showing modes will be
examined.48 ―These three different modes of engagement provide the structure of
analysis for this attempt to theorize what might be called the what, who, why, how,
when, and where of adaptation.‖49
Adaptations are considered to be ‗palimpsestuous‘ works. (Palimpsest means ―a very

old document on which the original writing has been erased and replaced with new
writing‖ or ―something that has changed over time and shows evidence of that
change‖50) As Hutcheon suggests, ―adaptation is a form of repetition without
replication, change is inevitable, even without any conscious updating or alteration of
setting.‖51 The adapted text is always present even when the audience is directly
focusing only on adaptation provided that the audience has previous knowledge of
the prior text.52 ―Adaptation as adaptation is unavoidably a kind of intertextuality . . .
47
Hutcheon, A Theory of Adaptation (New York: Routledge, 2006), XIV.
48
Hutcheon, A Theory of Adaptation, XIII-XIV.
49
Hutcheon, A Theory of Adaptation, XIV.
50
―Palimpsest,‖ Merriam Webster, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/palimpsest.
51
Hutcheon, A Theory of Adaptation, XVI.
52
Hutcheon, A Theory of Adaptation, 6.
21
the engagement with these other works in adaptations are extended ones, not passing
allusions. Part of both pleasure and the frustration of experiencing an adaptation is
the familiarity bred through repetition and memory.‖53
There are many possible reasons why adaptations are so appealing for adapters:
―financial appeal to adaptation,‖ ―to avoid financial risks, as well as troubles with
censors.‖ Adapting a successful novel anticipates a successful adaptation. Some
adaptors might enjoy the fact that adaptation is repetition of some previous work and
they can surprise the audience expectations. It is also the case of audience, which is
supposed to be broader with plays than with novels and even more with movie or
television.54 In addition, Hutcheon mentions ―the urge to consume and erase the
memory of the adapted text or to call it into question is as likely as the desire to pay
tribute by copying.‖55
Hutcheon deals with adaptation as both ―the process‖ and ―the product‖ and
introduces ―three distinct but interrelated perspectives‖ which demarcate
adaptations:56
1. Formal entity or product:
An adaptation is an announced and extensive transposition of a particular

work or works. This ‗transcoding‘ can involve a shift of medium (a poem
to a film) or genre (an epic to a novel), or a change of frame and
therefore context: telling the same story from a different point of view,
for instance, can create a manifestly different interpretation.
Transposition can also mean a shift in ontology from the real to the
fictional, from a historical account or biography to a fictionalized
narrative or drama.
2. Process of creation:
The act of adaptation always involves both (re-)interpretation and then

(re-)creation; this has been called both appropriation and salvaging,
depending on your perspective.
53
54
Hutcheon, A Theory of Adaptation, 5-6.
55
56
22
3. Process of reception:
Adaptation is a form of intertextuality: we experience adaptations (as

adaptations) as palimpsests through our memory of other works that
resonate through repetition with variation.57
The word ―adaptation‖ has undergone many attempts to be replaced by some new
and more convenient word which would express its complexity. It is not an easy task
to define this concept by one word. One reason is definitely the fact that it includes
the idea of adaptation as ―the product‖ and also the idea of adaptation as ―the
process.‖58
The ―novelty‖ is what the adapter adds to the adapted text to create the
adaptation. ―Perhaps one way to think about unsuccessful adaptations is not in terms
of infidelity to a prior text, but in terms of a lack of the creativity and skill to make
the text one‘s own and thus autonomous.‖59 The problem might appear when
adapting classics because in that case ―the audiences are more demanding of
fidelity.‖60
3.1.1. Modes of Engagement
Hutcheon brought a new approach to adaptations which are often of intermedial

nature. She distinguishes between three modes of engagement with the audience:
telling, showing, and interacting. Each of these modes of engagement allows
different degree of immersion. This thesis focuses on telling and showing modes of
engagement. ―The telling mode immerses us through imagination in a fictional
world; the showing mode (plays and films) immerses us through the perception of
the aural and the visual.‖61 The discussed adapted texts in this thesis are novel,
novella, short story, and screenplay using the telling mode of engagement. The
examined adaptations in the thesis are two movies and one TV series using the
showing mode of engagement. Each mode of engagement has different advantages
and disadvantages. In telling mode, limits of our imagination are highly individual
and the experience is controlled only by the words of the text. When reading a book
57
58
59
60
61
23
―we can re-read or skip ahead‖ which differs from the showing mode experience.
When we are shown a story in film or stage adaptations, the act is unstoppable unless
we watch a DVD. That might result in the feeling that reading a book is much more
under our control than watching a movie in a cinema. The advantage of performance
mode is the fact that words are not the only element carrying a meaning. Gestures
and visual representations are significant as well. Sounds and music are also integral
part in representing character‘s emotions and even in eliciting responses in the
audience. Visual and verbal elements can be amplified, moderated, or even opposed
by sound and music. The writer can take us into the minds of characters, however in
a film we do not get this chance and we have to focus on actors‘ facial expressions
and gestures or listen to the music and sounds to guess what they think or how they
feel.62
Focusing on these three ways of engaging with stories – telling, showing, and
interacting – ―can allow for certain precisions and distinctions that a focus on
medium alone cannot. It also allows for linkages across media that a concentration
on medium-specificity can efface, and thus moves us away from just the formal
definitions of adaptation to consider the process.‖63
3.2. WHAT? (Forms)
This thesis focuses on ―the most commonly considered adaptations . . . those that
move from the telling to the showing mode, usually from print to performance.‖64
Transferring a novel to the screen requires cutting and reducing in size. It may
seem as a negative aspect at first however the adaptation can become more powerful
thanks to condensation of the plots. Film adaptations can also add many elements
which can vary from the less significant such as ―bodies, voices, sound, music,
props, costumes, architecture, and so on‖ to the more significant elements such as
―new characters, increasing suspense‖ or the adapter can absolutely change the mood
of the ending for example ―substitute a happy ending to mute tragedy or horror.‖65
62
63
64
65
24
―In this negative discourse of loss, performance media are said to be incapable of
linguistic or narrative subtlety or of representing the psychological or the spiritual.‖66
Many theoreticians claim that using first-person narration is the privilege of the
telling media. It is possible to realize first-person narration also in film in the form of
―voice-over‖ or ―soliloquy‖, nonetheless it rather disrupts the action on the screen.
There are some films using camera from the perspective of the protagonist so the
audience see exactly what does the protagonist, however this technique is used very
rarely. Camera can be, on one hand, particularly useful tool in film. The telling mode
can simply tell us what the characters think about and how they feel, nevertheless in
film it is close-up which helps the audience to see facial expressions of the actors in
detail. Therefore the audience can analyse their emotions. On the other hand, the
scene which can be seen by the audience is limited by the camera direction.67
Regarding ―conveying exteriority,‖ the film might seem to be advantaged, yet ―in
a film all the items are concurrently present, of equal weight and thus significance—
at least until the camera lingers or lighting cues our eye.‖68 The telling medium can
decide what to focus on and then choose either dense or brief description of
particular items.69 Similar principle applies when taking into account the importance
of the action. The reader of the book simply guesses the importance of the action
according to the length and nature of its description. In film, the spectator sees all
characters at once. ―But the kind of shot (long, medium, close-up; angles, reverses),
not to mention the duration of the shot, is in fact always dictated by the dramatic
importance of what is being filmed, not by any naturalistic timing or pacing od the
actual action.‖70
Sally Walker suggests that exposition is one of the elements whose transition is
not easy from novel to film. Novels often use exposition to convey character‘s
background information in order to curtail ―character‘s options or the plot events.‖71
66
67
Hutcheon, A Theory of Adaptation, 53-54; 42-43.
68
69
70
71
Sally J. Walker, Write Now Workshops Series, vol. 3, Intro to Screenwriting (San Francisco:
FictionWorks, 2012), 57,
http://web.a.ebscohost.com.proxy.mzk.cz/ehost/detail/detail/bmxlYmtfXzYzNzU0NV9fQU41?sid=3c
8b799f-9324-4e38-ab07- d65e7049b27a@sessionmgr4003&vid=0#AN=637545&db=nlebk. EBSCO
library archive.
25
For the purpose of exposition, films can relatively successfully use devices such as
―scrolling information at the opening, [voice over], the montage [series of shots]
glimpses, or depicting a very brief backstory scene.‖72
Both prose fiction and film are ―capable of flashbacks and flashforwards‖ however
―its very immediacy [in film] can make the shifts potentially more effective than in
prose fiction where the narrating voice stands between the characters immersed in
time and the reader.‖73 Film makers have at their disposal many other technical tools
and effects. For example, ―literature‘s ‗meanwhile‘, ‗elsewhere‘, and ‗later‘ find their
equivalent in the filmic dissolve, as one image fades in as another fades out and time
merges with space in a more immediate way than is possible with words.‖74 When
adapting prose fiction into film, it is necessary to make many cuts and select only the
most important plots and subplots so as to fit to the given scope of time. Films
usually benefit from this process because they are more compressed than novel and
thus more dramatic. It is convenient to use such images ―that will visually relate an
instantaneous concept every time it appears without wasting precious script page or
film time.‖75 Television series, in comparison to films, have more time at its disposal.
Therefore such a great amount of cuts is not indispensable. Creators of television
series have to face the fact that every episode must fit into precisely given scope of
time which might be quite challenging experience.76
3.3. WHO? WHY? (Adapters)

Who is the adapter is an easy question for the telling media that have only one
author, the writer. In the performance media, the process of interpretation and
creation is collaborative. It is a collective process realized by the team of many
artists. Could be just one of them considered to be the adapter? How about the
screenwriter who interprets and recreates the adapted text as the first artist? The
whole subsequent work on the adaptation is based on the script so considering the
screenwriter as the adapter seems logical. However, it also brings some pitfalls such
as ―possible complexity‖ in the task to decide the author of the script. There are cases
72
Walker, Write Now Workshops Series, vol. 3, Intro to Screenwriting, 57.
73
74
75
76
Hutcheon, A Theory of Adaptation, 47, 66.
26
in which the first script was reworked by another screenwriter and sometimes
changes are made by editors.77
―Music director/composer‖ who creates the sound and the music to enhance the
emotions or to elicit the audience‘s reactions could be another possibility. Their role
in the process of making the adaptation is essential nonetheless ―composers usually
work from the script, not from the adapted text, because they have to write music
specifically to fit the production‘s action, timing, and budget‖.78
Actors sometimes draw inspiration from the adapted text especially in the case of
playing well-known literary characters. Every actor certainly brings something
special to the adaptation however they rather adapt the screenplay which they always
have to follow.79
―The editor sees and creates the whole in a way no one else does. Yet none of
these artists—screenwriter, composer, designer, cinematographer, actor, editor, and
the list could go on—is usually considered the primary adapter of a film or television
production.‖80 As already mentioned above, performance media are collaborative.
―There are multiple makers and therefore arguably multiple adapters.‖81
Many artists participate in the complex process of film creation. It is not an easy
task to define the adapter, however it is obvious ―from both studio press release and
critical response that the director is ultimately held responsible for the overall vision
and therefore for the adaptation as adaptation.‖82 Nevertheless, the screenwriter
usually begins the process by writing the screenplay besides the process of
interpreting and paraphrasing the adapted text for a new medium. The primary task
and main responsibility of film adaptation is thus shared by the screenwriter and the
director. ―The other artists involved may be inspired by the adapted text, but their
responsibility is more to the screenplay and thus to the film as an autonomous work
of art.‖83
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
27
Walker confirms the importance ―of all the roles of people involved in bringing a
film to the screen‖84 and emphasizes crucial roles of the producer and the director in
the collaborative process,
the . . . screenplay is merely the blueprint. Each of these people, these

artists, will uniquely interpret their contribution. Some may read the
original novel for flavor. Others may see no point since the mediums are
so different. The producer‘s fiscal guidance and the director‘s leadership
are central to the feel of the film.85
3.4. HOW? (Audiences)
―Pleasure of accessibility drives not only adaptation‘s commercialization but also its
role in education. . . . Teachers and their students provide one of the largest
audiences for adaptations.‖86
Some adapters consider their target audience when creating the adaptation which
might cause changes in a story to become more appropriate for this audience. The
film has also definitely broader audience than a novel and this must be taken into
account as well.87
3.4.1. Knowing and Unknowing Audiences
The adaptation interpretation varies with different knowledge of the audiences.88 In

order to experience adaptation as an adaptation, it is essential to know the adapted
text. Otherwise the audience perceives the adaptation as any other work. ―. . .
adaptation usually signals its identity overtly: often for legal reasons, a work is
openly announced to be ―based on‖ or ―adapted from‖ a specific prior work or
works.‖89
Provided the audience is familiar with the adapted work they can have an
interesting experience while filling the gaps in the adaptation by what they remember
from the adapted work. However, for an adaptation to be an autonomous work it
84
85
86
87
88
89
28
must make sense either with previous knowledge of the adapted text or without this
knowledge. ―Nevertheless, it is probably easier for an adapter to forge a relationship
with an audience that is not overly burdened with affection or nostalgia for the
adapted text. Without foreknowledge . . . the director will have greater freedom—and
control.‖90 Knowing audience is no longer able to see the adapted text in the same
light after coming into contact with the adaptation. They are influenced by adapter‘s
interpretation and recreation of the prior work. ―In the move from print to
performance, in particular, characters and places become incarnate in a way that
conditions how we imagine them in a literary work when we return to reread it. Our
imaginations are permanently colonized by the visual and aural world of the films.‖91
Adapters have difficult task to satisfy both knowing and unknowing audiences.
There are also other aspects causing different experience of the audience such as ―the
various media‘s diverse modes of audience involvement and of their degrees and
kinds of immersion‖ which will be discussed in the following paragraphs.92
3.4.2. Modes of Engagement Revisited
Each mode of engagement differs in mental involvement of the audience and it is

important for adapters to consider this aspect when making an adaptation into
specific medium.93
Telling requires of its audience conceptual work; showing calls on its

perceptual decoding abilities. In the first, we imagine and visualize a
world from black marks on white pages as we read; in the second, our
imagination are preempted as we perceive and then give meaning to a
world of images, sounds, and words seen and heard on the stage or
screen.94
―Each of these different modes demands of its audience its own decoding
processes. In reading, we gather details of narrative, character, context, and the like
90
91
92
93
94
29
gradually and sequentially; in seeing a film or play or musical, we perceive multiple
objects, relations, and significant signs simultaneously. . . .‖95
3.4.3. Kinds and Degrees of Immersion
There are significant differences between modes of engaging with the audience and
even between media within the same mode of engagement, particularly ―in how we
become immersed in an adapted story—physically, intellectually, and
psychologically.‖96
―Knowing or unknowing, we experience adaptations across media differently

than we do adaptations within the same medium. . . . the context in which we
experience the adaptation—cultural, social, historical—is another important factor in
the meaning and significance we grant to this ubiquitous palimpsestic form.‖
3.5. WHERE? WHEN? (Contexts)
The fact that the context is another important aspect affecting reception of adapted
texts and adaptations was suggested by Malcolm Bradbury, in Hutcheon‘s words:
. . . , even without any temporal updating or any alterations to national or

cultural setting, it can take very little time for context to change how a
story is received. Not only what is (re)accentuated but more importantly
how a story can be (re)interpreted can alter radically. An adaptation, like
the work it adapts, is always framed in a context—a time and place, a
society and a culture; it does not exist in a vacuum.97
There are always ―possible causes of change in the process of adapting made by
the demands of form, the individual adapter, the particular audience, and now the
contexts of reception and creation.‖98 The context also includes ―the materiality
involved in the adaptation‘s medium and mode of engagement—the kind of print in a
book, the size of the television screen.‖99 Hutcheon also mentions ―elements of
presentation and reception, such as the amount and kind of ‗hype‘ an adaptation gets:
95
96
97
98
99
30
its advertising, press coverage, and reviews. The celebrity status of the director or
stars is also an important element of its reception context.‖100
Whatever significant changes might have appeared during the time between
realization of adapted text and adaptation, it is not certain that the adapters will
consider such changes. However the adapters are aware of this fact and they usually
update the adaptation to fit to the time of reception in order ―to shorten the gap
between works created earlier and contemporary audiences. . .‖ 101 Nonetheless, ―. . .
the adapter works in one context, but the meaning he or she establishes within that
frame of reference can change over time.‖102 It might result in later incomprehension
of the audience if there is an immense gap between context of creation and context of
reception.103 In this case it could be convenient for the audience to consider the time
of creation to better comprehend the work. What might also influence the
interpretation of the audience is their possible knowledge of author‘s life or
intentions when creating the work of art.
The next chapter will deal with the first analysis out of three in this thesis. All
three analyses will be comparing literary works by Hanif Kureishi to their film
adaptations.
100
101
102
103
31
4. MY BEAUTIFUL LAUNDRETTE
The first work analysed in this thesis is My Beautiful Laundrette written by Hanif
Kureishi. It is an interesting case since the film cannot be called an adaptation of the
script. Screenplays are not considered to be literature. They are written in order to be
filmed. However, comparison of My Beautiful Laundrette in the form of script to the
film might be interesting as well. As already mentioned earlier, Peter Lev suggested
that it might be interesting to discuss screenplays as an art form in itself in his study
―The Future of Adaptation Studies.‖ The screenplay was written by Hanif Kureishi
and the film was based on this script and directed by Stephen Frears.
4.1. Writing a Screenplay and Writing a Novel
Sally Walker suggests that ―writing a novel takes one mindset and creating a
screenplay an entirely different one. Novelists must paint everything the reader is
going to imagine. The screenwriter will only paint what the collaborators need to
imagine. This is an important distinction. . . . The intimacy between writer-to-reader
is lost.―104 In the fiction prose, ―the voice and style of a writer‖ and ―beauty of the
word‖ are important. ―Screenplays are not literature. Screenplays are the crisp
blueprints that will guide the various craftsmen and artists who will translate the
written word into a visual medium.‖105
4.2. The Background and the Origin of the Screenplay and Film
Hanif Kureishi wrote the first draft of the script overnight. Kureishi was primarily a
playwright and My Beautiful Laundrette was his first film. Therefore the first draft
included elements of stage play. There were many dialogues which were reduced in
the next draft in favour of more action. Laundrette was intended to be shot for TV
Channel Four not for cinema. It was a low-budget film. Kureishi was glad for this,
because there was no commercial pressure on the team of film makers. Kureishi
claimed that a great thing about TV drama was presenting contemporary issues to
broader audience then, on the contrary, in the theatre. At first, Kureishi intended
Laundrette to be an epic. He wanted to begin with scenes in the fifties with Omar and
104
105
32
Johnny as little boys growing up. Kureishi wanted the audience to observe ―arrival of
an immigrant family in England and showing their progress to the present.‖106 All
this would be difficult to achieve in a single TV drama. Therefore it was set merely
into the present referring to the past. The intention of ―the film was to be an
amusement, despite its references to racism, unemployment and Thatcherism. Irony
is the modern mode, a way of commenting on bleakness and cruelty without falling
into dourness and didacticism,‖ according to Kureishi.107 There is a few interesting
facts from shooting mentioned by Kureishi. The best one could be the fact that the
laundrette which was built for the film was so authentic ―that people came in off the
street with their washing.‖108
The version of the script used for this analysis is the last draft before shooting.
Although Kureishi added and cut a few scenes during shooting it was not reworked
for publishing just for the case of such analyses comparing the script with the film.109
The script was first published in 1986; the edition used for this thesis was
published in 2000. ―My Beautiful Laundrette was first shown at the Edinburgh Film
Festival in autumn 1985. The film opened at the London Film Festival on 15
November and was subsequently released at London cinemas on 16 November
1985.‖110
The film was a success, however Kureishi could not know that in advance and he
had to be courageous enough to write about Asian people, despite being discouraged
by others. As Kureishi claimed in the interview for Yousaf in 2001,
I am . . . pleased that works like Buddha and My Beautiful Laundrette

helped to open the publisher‘s doors for other writers because you forget
that when I started writing people asked ‗Why are you writing about
Asians? Who is interested in minorities?‘ You can‘t believe it now but
when My Beautiful Laundrette came out it proved it was possible to
make a film about Asian people that other people wanted to see: people
went to see it and it was popular and made money. It is hard to get into
106
Hanif Kureishi, introduction to My Beautiful Laundrette, by Hanif Kureishi (London: Faber and
Faber, 2000), 4-5.
107
Kureishi, introduction, 5.
108
109
110
33
that position in the first place. I remember applying for a bursary and
being told, ‗You are going to be in writers‘ ghetto if you write about
Asian people. Don‘t do that.‘ It was really insulting and offensive. So it
is important to me, and I think to others who get through to publishers
now.111
At that time, it was difficult to write not only about Asians but also about gays.
Set in Thatcherite eighties, the topic was controversial and thus important to be
mentioned as Kureishi puts it,
let‘s say being gay in London today is not like being gay in Afghanistan
so it depends where you locate the characters. During the 1980s,
Thatcher, it seemed to a lot of us, was trying to introduce, in shorthand,
‗old-fashioned morals.‘ Therefore, transgressive desire seemed very
important to write about then. So you combine two gay blokes running a
laundrette, which is the entrepreneurship she wanted, and you make it
transgressive.112
4.3. Plot Overview
The film observes the development of the main protagonist Omar who is of Pakistani
and English origin. He makes use of the opportunity and rebuilds the laundrette
which was entrusted to him by his uncle Nasser. Omar‘s English friend from
childhood skinhead Johnny helps him to run the laundrette since he is fed up with
just hanging about. Johnny becomes Omar‘s employee and a lover. The film also
monitors the fates of the rest of Omar‘s family and some English squatters. It refers
to racism, Thatcherism and classism with humour.
4.4. The Reception of the Film
The initial responses to Laundrette were controversial. Kureishi was criticized by

some members of his family and by many Asians as for the way they have been
111
Nahem Yousaf, Hanif Kureishi's the Buddha of Suburbia: A Reader's Guide (New York: The
Continuum International Publishing Group Inc, 2002), 9.
112
Yousaf, Hanif Kureishi's the Buddha of Suburbia: A Reader's Guide, 21-22.
34
represented in the film. Kureishi defended himself and said that he is not going to
make PR to Asians by providing lies or favouring them in his works.113
Despite controversies, the film was successful and changed lives of the whole
team as the producer Tim Bevan noted, ―our lives changed, literally, that night when
the film was screened. It was the beginning of Dan‘s stardom, as it were. . . . It
established Stephen as a major filmmaking talent. Hanif‘s first movie was a
success.‖114 In addition, Kureishi was certainly pleased by Oscar nomination for the
best screenplay of 1985.115
There were all kinds of reviews. First of all, reviews which are praising the film
will be introduced. David Robinson was surprised by the fact that the film concerns
serious issues with such ease that watching it is an amusing experience:
The marvel of the film is that it deals with such tough issues – class, race,
sex, corruption, ignorance, prejudice, Britain here and now – yet remains
not only watchable but very comic; that it never compromises, yet
proposes no ready-made villains or victims, unless (fulfilling both
functions) it is the hopeless little knot of National Front punks who hang
around dismally waiting for something or someone to smash.
. . . The boys still have each other. Kureishi and Frears, without self-
consciousness or shame, leave us with one of the most delicate and
touching love scenes in contemporary cinema.116
―Several reviewers praised Kureishi for his sympathetic but complex portrait of
immigrant life.‖117 Another subject of praise in many reviews was the portrayal of
gay relationship between Omar and Johnny. Warnecke‘s (Omar) and Day-Lewis‘s
(Johnny) performances were also often appreciated, for instance, by Dan Mancini:
Omar's gay relationship with Johnny could have been rote symbolism for
the young Pakistani's affection for his adopted home contrasted by his
willingness to exploit it. But Warnecke and Day-Lewis bring a warmth
113
114
Tim Bevan, personal interview, 8 July 1994, in Kenneth C. Kaleta, Hanif Kureishi: Postcolonial
Storyteller (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1998), 41.
115
Kaleta, Hanif Kureishi: Postcolonial Storyteller, 41.
116
David Robinson, ―Only Sentiment,‖ Sight and Sound, 55 (Winter 1985-6), 67, in Susie Thomas,
Hanif Kureishi: A Reader’s Guide to Essential Criticism (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005), 28.
117
35
and honesty that infuses the political aspects of the screenplay with real
humanity. The relationship feels true.118
There were also criticizing reviews, especially those of Asian reviewers.

Mahmood Jamal argued that Kureishi made cheap stereotypes for English audience‘s
amusement.
What is surprising about the film is that it expresses all the prejudices
that this society has felt about Asians and Jews – that they are money
grabbing, scheming, sex-crazed people. It‘s not surprising therefore, that
it was popular with European audiences. It says everything they thought
about us but were afraid to say.119
The final excerpt will aptly conclude the reviews as it is the defence of
Laundrette by Salman Rushdie who stated:
I would defend My Beautiful Laundrette against all colours, even though

it will upset some Asians. In fact there are some fat cat Asian
businessmen that I would not mind upsetting. Even though, more
seriously, some white viewers will find in it material which will satisfy
their wish to dislike Asians … The reason for my defence is that there is
nothing in it that is imaginatively false, and because it seems to me that
the real gift which we can offer our communities is not the creation of a
set of stereotyped positive images to counteract the stereotyped negative
ones, but simply the gift of treating black and Asian characters in a way
that white writers seem very rarely able to do, that is to say as fully
realized human beings, as complex creatures, good, bad, bad, good. To
do anything less is to be kept captive by the racist prejudices of the
majority, and that complexity is what Kureishi‘s script strives for.120
118
Dan Mancini, ―My Beautiful Laundrette,‖ DVD Verdict, September 5, 2003,
http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/mybeautifullaundrette.php.
119
Mahmood Jamal, ―Dirty Linen,‖ Artrage (Autumn 1987). Reprinted in Kobena Mercer, ed., Black
Film, British Cinema (London: Institute of Contemporary Arts, 1988), 21-2., in Susie Thomas, Hanif
Kureishi: A Reader’s Guide to Essential Criticism (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005), 31.
120
Salman Rushdie, ―Minority Literatures in a Multi-cultural Society,‖ in Kirsten Holst Petersen and
Anna Rutherford, eds., Displaced Persons, (Sydney: Dangaroo, 1987), 40-1, in Susie Thomas, Hanif
Kureishi: A Reader’s Guide to Essential Criticism (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005), 34.
36
4.5. Comparison of Selected Aspects and Scenes
At the beginning of the film, there are sound effects used together with initial credits
in a particularly apt way. The film title and names of its creators are alternately
displayed on the screen. Every change of the name is accompanied by the sound of a
spinning washing machine and also graphic spinning of the name. There are also
sounds associated with bubbles. While the last name disappears, the sound of the
water can be heard running off the plughole. These sounds are used again with the
final credits at the end of the film together with music. The sounds benefit the film in
the form of engaging more senses simultaneously. This is an obvious advantage of
the showing mode (in this case the film) in contrary to the telling mode (in this case
the script). Similar advantage of the telling mode happens with music which has the
ability to culminate the scenes which are suspenseful and dramatic. There are no
descriptions or instructions of the sound and music in the script, therefore it is a
value added of the film.
In film, Omar‘s father (Papa in the script) talks to Nasser on the phone. At the
beginning it is not certain who the person he talks to is. In the script it is obviously
Nasser. In the film, the other side on the phone is not heard. However, it is written in
the screenplay under sign VO i. e. voice over. During the conversation it is revealed
in both film and script that Nasser is Omar‘s uncle.121
"In this damn country which we hate and love, you can get anything you want.
It's all spread out and available. That's why I believe in England. Only you have to
know how to squeeze the tits of the system,"122 says Nasser to Omar in both the film
and script. This is an important reference to not only Nasser‘s business attitude but
all Pakistanis who take the opportunity and do business instead of being on the dole.
When Papa warns Omar not to get too involved with his uncle, the scene differs
in the script compared to the film. The underlined reply in the following transcription
was omitted in the film, but seems to be quite significant with its reference to racism.
PAPA: Don‘t get too involved with that crook. You‘ve got to study. We
are under siege by the white man. For us education is power.
121
Kureishi, My Beautiful Laundrette, 12.
122
37
(OMAR shakes his head at his father.)
Don‘t let me down.123
In Nasser‘s house is a party. When Omar comes to the room of his uncle, there
are several Pakistani friends, one Englishman, and American. In the screenplay there
are names of every character, in the film however there is no need to know all the
names since all the characters can be seen. They are talking and at the end of the
scene, a significant part of conversation concerning Thatcherite eighties is omitted in
the film,
ENGLISHMAN: Maybe Omar‘s father didn‘t make chances for himself.

Look at you, Salim, five times richer and more powerful than me.
SALIM: Five times? Ten, at least.
ENGLISHMAN: In my country! The only prejudice in England is

against the useless.
SALIM: It‘s rather tilted in favour of the useless I would think. The only
positive discrimination they have here.
(The PAKISTANIS in the room laugh at this. The ENGLISHMAN looks

annoyed. DICK O‘DONNELL smiles sympathetically at the
ENGLISHMAN.)124
On the other hand, in the film, there are some added lines. Englishman offering a
drink to Omar and Salim expressing his belief in Omar:
ENGLISHMAN: Can I make you a drink?
OMAR shakes his head at ENGLISHMAN.
NASSER: Make him a man, first!
SALIM: Give him a drink, Zaki. I like him. He‘s our future.
(SALIM waves at OMAR and OMAR smiles at him and nods.)125
One significant scene outside the laundrette was enriched and little bit different in
the film. And it was one of the controversial scenes arousing discussions. While in
123
Kureishi, My Beautiful Laundrette, 18-19.
124
125
My Beautiful Laundrette, directed by Stephen Frears, (1985), DVD.
38
the script, Johnny and Omar are painting the outside of the laundrette, English
gangsters are watching them. After Johnny finishes the job in the script, he just nods
goodbye to Omar and walks away. In film however, the scene is one of the crucial
ones in the entire film. Merely Johnny is painting outside and then Omar walks out
of laundrette and gives him money. Afterwards, Omar hugs him and Johnny licks
Omar‘s neck, smiles amusedly and walks away. The gangsters see them hugging but
cannot see that Johnny licks Omar‘s neck as this is taken by camera from the
opposite side. This is one of the moments praised by some critics as causally treating
homosexuality and condemned by others.126
Omar‘s development was immense. At the beginning, he hardly speaks and

seems shy. At the end he is self-confident businessman. In the script, there is also
interesting change in attitude of barman Tariq to Omar. Tariq despises Omar at the
beginning. At the end, on the contrary, Tariq‘s attitude to Omar is rather servile.
Tariq‘s character was omitted in the film. Omar‘s strongest statement in both the
script and the film might be:
OMAR (to JOHNNY): I want big money. I‘m not gonna be beat down by
this country. When we were at school, you and your lot kicked me all
around the place. And what are you doing now? Washing my floor.
That‘s how I like it. Now get to work. Get to work I said. Or you‘re
fired!127
Overall, several lines from the script concerning race, class and Thatcher
economics were cut in the film. Yet, these issues were still present. The film is more
enriching experience than reading the script since the script is merely a blueprint for
film makers. Especially the dramatic scenes take a lot of time to read through, but in
the film everything happens very quickly and it is hence more suspenseful. It was
interesting experience, however, to compare the script to the film. I appreciate actor‘s
performances, especially those of Daniel Day-Lewis as Johnny, Gordon Warnecke as
Omar, Roshan Seth as Papa, and Derrick Branche as Salim.
126
Kureishi, My Beautiful Laundrette, 39; My Beautiful Laundrette, directed by Stephen Frears
(1985), DVD.
127
Kureishi, My Beautiful Laundrette, 51; My Beautiful Laundrette, directed by Stephen Frears
(1985), DVD.
39
5. THE BUDDHA OF SUBURBIA
5.1. Plot Overview
The plot is the same in both the book and the television series. It follows adventures
of Karim Amir, a teenager who has grown up in Bromley, suburbs of South London.
His father Haroon immigrated to England from India in his twenties to study there.
His mother Margaret is English. Therefore Karim feels to be somewhere in-between
these two heritages and he strives to find his identity throughout the novel. He
escapes to London from the suburbs and becomes an actor.
5.2. The Background and the Origin of the Novel
Kureishi‘s first novel was published in 1990 and won him the Whitbread Award for
Best First Novel. The novel The Buddha of Suburbia raised many discussions about
to what extent it is autobiographic novel. Kureishi answered,
there‘s one difference, one main difference between me and that guy in
The Buddha, which is that when I was young, from the age of fourteen, I
fully knew that I wanted to be a writer. And so I had a great sense of
purpose and direction in my life all through those years. I was very
strong-willed: get out of the suburbs—be a writer—be educated—make
something of yourself. The boy in The Buddha is much more of a drifter.
He has that side of me which is opportunistic and up for anything, but he
doesn‘t have, and never can have—I didn‘t give him—the fucking
discipline that I have, the sense of purpose that I have. That‘s the main
difference.128
5.3. The Reception of the Novel
Some reviewers were full of praise for Kureishi, however many reviews criticized
Kureishi for bad representation of Asians in Britain, violence, promiscuous main
character, etc. Many reviewers noted that they found the first half of the book much
128
40
more appealing and entertaining than the second half. The setting of ―In the Suburbs‖
was according to critics better crafted than the ―In the City.‖129
Another element which was frequently acclaimed by reviewers was the evocative
period detail. Fineberg declared, ―mood and time is adeptly evoked without
sentimentality.‖ Robin Epstein corroborates Kureishi‘s ―wry appreciation . . . of
fashion, literature, music, politics and spirituality.‖130
Hermione Lee stated that the novel is ―one of the sharpest satires on race relations
in this country.‖ Similarly, Michiko Kakutani claimed in the New York Times that it
is at once ―a traditional comedy of manners‖ and ―a scathing satire on race relations
in Britain.‖131 Robin Epstein from Courier Journal observed that the novel ―rightly
undermines the impression some might have mistakenly picked up about British
Muslims from the calls for the head of Salman Rushdie. . . . They are far from being
a fundamentalist monolith of book burners.‖132
5.4. The Background and the Origin of the Film Adaptation

Firstly, Kureishi was not willing to write the screenplay adaptation of the novel. At
last, he made an agreement with BBC for television serial. The script was written by
Kureishi and the director Roger Michell. The process was difficult for Kureishi not
only because his father had died a few months before they started to work on the
screenplay.133 Kureishi remarked,
in my novel I could really fill the characters out much more. I had
unlimited time and space. With the TV Buddha, I knew I had to be
concerned with plot. The book had sold one hundred and fifty thousand
copies in paperback. Five million people would be my TV audience. It
was completely different. So it had to be pretty direct. I just wrote—I
wrote it with the director—but I just wrote what was in the book. At first
they had tried to be clever with it in various ways, but it didn‘t work. I
just did it straight. It‘s the same as the book. It was very fucking difficult.
129
130
Yousaf, Hanif Kureishi's the Buddha of Suburbia: A Reader's Guide, 64.
131
132
133
Kaleta, Hanif Kureishi: Postcolonial Storyteller, 105-106.
41
I never wanted to do it. In principle I was all for somebody else adapting
my book to film too, . . . but only if they did it right.134
5.5. The Reception of the Film Adaptation
Kureishi himself admitted that Roger Michell did a great job adapting Buddha for
television.135
After the final episode of Buddha was screened, Tessa Boase reported in
the Daily Telegraph the following response from a London-based Asian
town councilor: That series has done untold damage to the British
perception of Asians living in this country. The older generation has been
shown to be narrow minded and old fashioned, and the younger
generation outrageously rebellious and offensively promiscuous. There is
no middle ground. What is worse, people are applying these caricatures
to Asians in the Nineties. Thing are not so extreme.136
Greg Quill from Toronto Star expressed his enthusiasm about the television
series, ―rarely in television have we had the chance to absorb a piece of original
entertainment as complex, as wry and satirical, as beautifully executed, as good-
natured as . . . The Buddha of Suburbia. Don‘t miss a minute. The Buddha of
Suburbia is a rare TV event.‖137
According to a TV review, like many teenagers the character is vain,

arrogant and self-centered. In the novel these shortcomings are redeemed
by the humour, honesty, and unerring sense of irony with which Karim
homes in on the more ludicrous elements of the ‗70s culture. The
detachment that made Karim such an unusually objective narrator in the
novel makes for a rather unengaging character on the screen. Television
can‘t put us into his mind and whereas Karim is at the heart of the novel,
in the TV version he‘s in danger of being swamped by the many
134
Kaleta, Hanif Kureishi: Postcolonial Storyteller, 114-115.
135
136
137
42
outlandish people around him. We‘re not looking at them through his
eyes, we‘re looking at him and them from the outside.138
Reviews varied a lot, however, the criticism in media made good promotion to
the TV adaptation, resulting in broader audience and increased ratings. Hanif
Kureishi became better-known and it brought new perspective on his work.139
First of all, the novel is in the telling mode of engagement in which the readers are
informed about characters thoughts and feelings. This advantage besides the writer‘s
language and style is lost in the showing mode. Therefore viewers have to guess what
is in character‘s minds either from facial expressions or gestures. Close-up is used
quite often in The Buddha series for that purpose, but it cannot substitute for Karim‘s
contemplating which is sometimes important for the story, or just amusing. When
Karim‘s father Haroon tells Karim that he is appearing again, both are very excited
and in both the novel and the series the dialogue is almost identical. Nevertheless, in
the book the reader is made aware of Karim‘s meditating on the subject,
he was right – I was looking forward to this second appearance of his. I

did enjoy the activity, but there was something important I had to know. I
wanted to see if Dad was a charlatan or if there was anything true in what
he was doing. After all, he‘d impressed and then done the difficult thing
– knocked Charlie out. His magic has worked on them and I‘d given him
the ‗God‘ moniker, but with reservations. He wasn‘t yet fully entitled to
the name. What I wanted to see was whether, as he started to blossom,
Dad really did have anything to offer other people, or if he would turn
out to be merely another suburban eccentric.140
The subjective first person narration in the novel was difficult to transform to the
series according to Michell. Nonetheless, Michell thinks they succeeded without
applying the voice over device. They had ―to accommodate the point of view of the
138
139
140
Hanif Kureishi, The Buddha of Suburbia (London: Faber and Faber, 2009), 22.
43
camera, which records what Karim sees.‖ Critics split in opinions if the novel‘s point
of view was preserved or lost.141
The music is another important aspect. Kureishi makes many references to the
seventies music. Nonetheless, it is not easy for the viewer, who did not live in the
seventies, to imagine the songs in the telling mode. On the contrary, music can
support the atmosphere in all showing media. Therefore it is a huge advantage of the
of television series to have soundtrack by David Bowie. Bowie‘s contribution was
much praised by critics. The initial scene is full of energy which is achieved by
Roshan Seth‘s performance and Bowie‘s song ―Fill Your Heart.‖ The viewer is
thrown right into the action of the film. There is no information about character‘s
past. And that leads to the next element of comparison—exposition.
Exposition is characteristic of telling media. Showing media can use devices such
as ―scrolling information at the opening, [voice over], the montage [series of shots]
glimpses, or depicting a very brief backstory scene.‖142 None of these devices is used
in the series. During the novel, there are many expositions of the characters‘ past. At
the beginning of the second chapter, for example, the reader is familiarised with
Karim‘s father Haroon growing up in Bombay and subsequent studies in England
where he stayed and met Karim‘s mother, an English woman.143 The first scene of
both the book and the film begins with Haroon coming home from work in a lively
mood. However, the exposition of the main protagonist Karim precedes this scene in
the book.
My name is Karim Amir, and I am an Englishman born and bred, almost.

I am often considered to be a funny kind of Englishman, a new breed as
it were, having emerged from two old histories. But I don‘t care –
Englishman I am (though not proud of it), from the South London
suburbs and going somewhere. Perhaps it is the odd mixture of
continents and blood, of here and there, of belonging and not, that makes
me restless and easily bored. Or perhaps it was being brought up in the
suburbs that did it. Anyway, why search the inner room when it‘s enough
to say that I was looking for trouble, any kind of movement, action and
141
142
143
Kureishi, The Buddha of Suburbia, 23-25.
44
sexual interest I could find, because things were so gloomy, so slow and
heavy, in our family, I don‘t know why. Quite frankly, it was all getting
me down and I was ready for anything.
Then one day everything changed. In the morning things were one way
and by bedtime another. I was seventeen.144
In the telling mode, the readers use their imagination for a mental picture of
characters. In the showing mode, the viewers do not apply their imagination as they
are immediately confronted with every character impersonated by particular actor. It
might result in disappointment of knowing audience that is no longer able to see the
adapted text in the same way as before watching the adaptation. Therefore it is easier
for the adapters to satisfy unknowing audience. However, adapters must satisfy the
expectations of both knowing and unknowing audience. Precisely chosen cast might
be good precondition of success. Cast in The Buddha of Suburbia was praised by
many critics and actor‘s performances were significant for the success of the TV
series.145
144
Kureishi, The Buddha of Suburbia, 3.
145
Kaleta, Hanif Kureishi: Postcolonial Storyteller, 108, 110.
45
6. INTIMACY
The novella Intimacy (1998) and the film of the same name (2001) do not have much
in common as the film is merely loosely based on the novella and the short story
―Nightlight‖ from the collection Love in a Blue Time (1997) both written by the
British writer Hanif Kureishi. Both, the book and the film raised controversial
debates and reviews. The reason might be the fact that each work was created by a
controversial artist. The novella Intimacy and the short story ―Nightlight‖ was
written by Kureishi who is controversial for his poignant and honest style of writing
about themes such as race, social politics, sex, drugs, gender, sexuality, etc. In
addition, Kureishi‘s works very often raise questions and consequent discussions
about to what extent they are autobiographic. Patrice Cheréau (1944-2013) was a
French writer and director ―regarded by some as the enfant terrible of French theatre,
with productions that were highly charged, highly sexual and highly
controversial.‖146
6.1. The Background and the Origin of the Written Works
The novella Intimacy was written by Kureishi and was published by Faber and Faber
in 1998. It falls into his middle works which do not focus on teenagers or young
adults as Kureishi‘s previous works. The middle works such as Love in a Blue Time
(1997), Intimacy, and Midnight All Day (1999) often deal with inner worlds of its
main characters. The issue of race is in the majority of stories either overshadowed or
totally avoided. The issue here is rather midlife crisis of the main characters. Susie
Thomas aptly described the atmosphere in the books as ―an overall impression of
stasis and claustrophobia, it is because many characters seem trapped by domesticity,
torn between the desire to go and the responsibility to stay.‖147
―Kureishi himself, however, sees his midlife work differently: not as a chronicle of
domestic misery but as a challenge to emotional orthodoxies.‖148 The influence and
inspiration also came from American authors such as Salinger, Plath, Roth, and
146
―Patrice Chéreau,‖ Telegraph, October 8, 2013,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/10365020/Patrice-Chereau.html.
147
148
46
Bellow in the form of the confessional monologue.149 ―In an interview from June
2001, Kureishi explains more experimental and more economical use of language of
his middle works, Intimacy in particular:
It is quite difficult, particularly when you are an established writer, to

decide how far you can go in terms of your relationship with the
audience. I liked Intimacy being a rough book in that sense; the cruelty,
the fragmentation, the lack of smoothing out or over. People have said
the book is so cruel and horrible, the people in it are so nasty and I say
‗well, that‘s what it‘s like.‘ I wanted the book to be an experience. If I
wrote a book now about a relationship that split up ten years ago, it
would probably be overworked and too thought-out. I wanted to capture
the roughness. The style you use has to reflect what is going on in the
mind at the time of writing.150
6.2. The Reception of the Novella

The principal cause of inconsistent acceptance of the novella Intimacy might be in
the main character, Jay, who the reader cannot really sympathize with. At least most
of the reviewers did not. It is then quite complicated for some reviewers, who
evidently contempt Jay, to overcome Jay‘s personality and praise the novella.
Many reviewers criticize Kureishi for Intimacy being ―lazy‖ and ―sluggish‖.
Laura Cumming from Guardian stated, for instance, that it lacks ―the energetic
cockiness Kureishi had in his youth.‖151 Many reviewers also praise his early works
for concerning race issues. Such approaches, however, have failed to consider that it
is not possible for the writer to use the same themes and style over and over again.
People grow up and change during the entire life. And this can be supported by
Kureishi himself who commented on that matter in an interview given Robert
McCrum from Guardian, "I'd been this kid with long hair, hanging around in
London, taking drugs and having sex with girls. Suddenly, I was getting up at seven
149
150
Continuum International Publishing Group Inc, 2002), 22-23.
151
Laura Cumming, ―Charity ends at home: Intimate? Pathological more like. Laura Cumming on
Hanif Kureishi‘s toxic creation,‖ Guardian, May 9, 1998,
http://www.theguardian.com/books/1998/may/09/fiction.hanifkureishi.
47
in the morning and taking my kids to the park. My life switched. I'd become an adult.
These kids were looking to me as a father and I was responsible. I could no longer
write books from the point of view of a 17-year-old.‖152 And the change in one‘s life
is incessant as Kureishi admits, "that's what's great about being a writer. . . . Every 10
years you become somebody else."153 Therefore it is important to consider writer‘s
professional development and personal experience when comparing their new works
to the former ones.
Cumming literally eats Kureishi alive in her review:
Kureishi insists that this is a work of fiction, and he should know. But at
its core, Intimacy reads like pure pathology, the rage and boredom and
cruelty of a man who has fallen out of love. When Jay says that 'there are
some fucks for which a person would have their partner and children
drown in a freezing sea', the line is surely not an illustration, but the
unmediated voice of resentful destruction itself. To pretend that this is
part of some larger bid for existential freedom as Kureishi does,
underpinning Jay's specious philosophising with references to Sartre, is
to tell lies beyond the frame of the novel.154
Such review as the one by Cumming was not an exception. After Intimacy’s
publication, it was a difficult time for Kureishi. It seemed that nobody is able to see
the work as an art separately from Kureishi‘s life issues especially leaving his two
sons and a partner.155 Kureishi expressed his disappointment about reviews of
Intimacy in an interview given Nahem Yousaf in 2001:
I think some reviewers were caught up in the furore around Intimacy and
haven‘t yet looked fairly and squarely at the book. Nor have they yet
taken into consideration the fact that I was playing a literary game. I
consciously wrote Intimacy in the form of a confession and was also
152
Robert McCrum, ―Hanif Kureishi Interview: ‗Every 10 years you become someone else‘,‖
Guardian, January 19, 2014, http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/jan/19/hanif-kureishi-
interview-last-word.
153
McCrum, ―Hanif Kureishi Interview: ‗Every 10 years you become someone else‘,‖ Guardian,
January 19, 2014, http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/jan/19/hanif-kureishi-interview-last-word.
154
Cumming, ―Charity ends at home: Intimate? Pathological more like. Laura Cumming on Hanif
Kureishi‘s toxic creation,‖ Guardian, May 9, 1998,
155
Thomas, Hanif Kureishi: A Reader’s Guide to Essential Criticism, 137; Buchanan, Hanif Kureishi,
31; Moore-Gilbert, Hanif Kureishi: Contemporary World Writers, 15.
For more details regarding Kureishi‘s life see chapter Hanif Kureishi‘s Biography.
48
aware that it might be read as ‗Hanif Kureishi telling the truth about a
relationship break-up.‘ That too is a literary construct: it is artificial. All
of one‘s work is autobiographical to the extent that it reflects one‘s
interests. But the book hasn‘t yet been read as a move in a literary game
which is quite disappointing. It operates as a construct—written in the
first person, constructed as a confession—and this is the basis on which it
should begin to be evaluated. I wanted a book people could play with in
that way. It is a text, not me. I am not the text.156
―I did a reading in Leeds recently and there were a few men who were talking
about being separated from their wives and children and of the relationships they
try—and sometimes fail—to build with them both. It did give me a sense that people
might look for that stuff in my work,‖157 says Kureishi in the interview given Yousaf.
It can be assumed then that there are definitely some readers who sympathize with
Jay. A professional praise came from Julie Myerson‘s review in Mail on Sunday, ―it
is by far the most astute and painful dissection of male sexual restlessness that I've
read― and from Suzanne Moore who ―applauded the novel‖ in the Guardian ―as an
example of ‗male honesty‘.‖158
There is one statement in the book, asserted by Jay, which caused the strongest
objections of many reviewers, for example David Sexton in Evening Standard and
Laura Cumming in Guardian. And that is, ―there are some fucks for which a person
would have their partner and children drown in a freezing sea.‖159 Such an immense
attention given to this statement is definitely justifiable. This is the point where the
reader might lose the last bit of sympathy with Jay or not. It is really up to every
individual person of the diverse readership. Some readers might appreciate the
―roughness‖ of the book which was the aim of Kureishi. He wanted to depict the
transgression of desire.160
156
157
158
Suzanne Moore, ―Why I Applaud the Books of Men Who Tell It Like It Is,‖ Inedependent, May
15, 1998), 21, quoted in Susie Thomas, Hanif Kureishi: A Reader’s Guide to Essential Criticism (New
York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005), 141.; David Sexton, Evening Standard, May 14, 1998, quoted in
Susie Thomas, Hanif Kureishi: A Reader’s Guide to Essential Criticism (New York: Palgrave
Macmillan, 2005), 141.
159
Thomas, Hanif Kureishi: A Reader’s Guide to Essential Criticism, 141-142; Hanif Kureishi,
Intimacy (London: Faber and Faber, 1998), 120; Laura Cumming, ―Charity ends at home: Intimate?
Pathological more like. Laura Cumming on Hanif Kureishi‘s toxic creation,‖ Guardian.
160
49
6.3. The Background and the Origin of the Film Adaptation
Film Intimacy won the Golden Bear for Best Film and the Silver Bear for Best
Actress (Kerry Fox) at the Berlin International Film Festival in 2001.161
The film Intimacy is loosely based on the novella Intimacy and the short story
―Nightlight‖ by Hanif Kureishi. The French director Patrice Chéreau firstly wanted
to adapt merely the novella. It was not possible however as it is generally particularly
difficult to depict the thoughts and internal monologues from the book in
performance media. The idea how to continue came early as Chéreau said in the
interview for Indiewire, ―and then I discovered a very short story called "Nightlight."
But after five pages, this story stops, so we had to invent what comes next. So this
was all created, working with Hanif in London and working with my scriptwriter in
Paris, who is a woman. This is a huge advantage, because it changed the point of
view.‖162 This point of view was changed thanks to French scriptwriter Anne-Louise
Trividic. The film is 120 minutes long drama with cold and gloomy atmosphere as
Kureishi aptly depicts it, ―the film is an adult film. I always thought it should have a
35 certificate! It is quite a dark film, not a film for eighteen-year-olds eating popcorn.
Films at the moment seem to be so formulaic. When you see a film like this, it feels
dark, strange, and very unusual.‖163 There are not many characters which is another
uncommon aspect. It is an intimate film. First challenge of the director was to create
a story of only two or three people. And he admits that it was necessary to capitalize
on his own experience, ―for example, all the mistakes of the male character, I think
I've personally done them, already, all of them. I know what it means to follow
somebody or to deny you're in love with somebody.‖164 And the male character, Jay,
who is often blamed among other things for his self-destructive behaviour was
performed by an extraordinary British actor Mark Rylance. Nevertheless, at the
beginning, Rylance was offered just a supporting role. After having seen the
Rylance‘s outstanding performance of ―the Queen of the Nile‖ in ―Antony and
161
―IMDb,‖ International Movie Database,
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0256103/awards?ref_=tt_awd.
162
Anthony Kaufman, ―INTERVIEW: Night Lights; Patrice Chereau Probes ‗Intimacy‘,‖ Indiewire,
October 16, 2001,
http://www.indiewire.com/article/interview_night_lights_patrice_chereau_probes_intimacy.
163
Continuum International Publishing Group Inc, 2002), 20.
164
Kaufman, ―INTERVIEW: Night Lights; Patrice Chereau Probes ‗Intimacy‘,‖ Indiewire.
50
Cleopatra at the Globe‖, Chereau came to Rylance and said that he would prefer him
to play the leading part of Jay.165
6.4. The Reception of the Film Adaptation
There is a large number of diametrically opposed opinions on various matters. Either

the film scenes seem artificial or authentic to critics and reviewers. Timothy Spall,
playing the part of Claire‘s husband, is castigated by some critics and praised by
others. It is difficult to find a review which does not spend the most of the time
dealing with sexual scenes. For some critics, the raw sexual scenes were portrayed
authentically as Anthony Quin from The Independent puts it, ―Patrice Chéreau is
good on flesh. He understands its hues, its texture, its hideous vulnerability.―166 Yet,
Quin is not only commending Chéreau, ―in mainstream drama, however, the
documentary element is disruptive, hauling the viewer outside the boundaries of
fiction. A tacit contract between audience and actor has been breached.‖167
Nonetheless the aim of Chéreau was not to make artificial romantic scenes but to
depict the sexuality and desire from real life as he openly said to Rylance, ―I don't
want you to be concerned with masking parts of your body or your genitals. I want to
capture something that's as real as possible."168 And Chéreau‘s aim of depicting real
bodies was fulfilled having been confirmed by Quin who compares Rylance‘s naked
body to ―one of Schiele's agonised studies of the human figure.‖169
Patrice Chéreau was disappointed by the reviews that commented only on sexual
scenes as being shocking. According to Chéreau, many spectators simply were not
able or did not want to see the hidden communication between the lovers.170 Chéreau
complained about the nature of journalism today and noted that it is a big problem
for the film, ―people in the audience have told me, ‗I didn't want to see the film after
reading the reviews, and then finally I went to watch it, and it's not the film I was
165
Jessica Winter, ―Mark Rylance‘s Body Language,‖ Village Voice, October 23, 2001,
http://www.villagevoice.com/film/mark-rylances-body-language-6396702.
166
Anthony Quinn, ―The Big Picture: Intimacy (18),‖ Independent, July 26, 2001,
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/reviews/the-big-picture-intimacy-18-
9270659.html.
167
Quinn, ―The Big Picture: Intimacy (18),‖ Independent.
168
Winter, ―Mark Rylance‘s Body Language,‖ Village Voice.
169
170
Chris Neumer, ―Patrice Chereau Interview,‖ Stumped Magazine,
http://www.stumpedmagazine.com/interviews/patrice-chereau/.
51
expecting. It's not just about sex.‘‖171 There is much more to it as for the aim of the
project Chéreau remarked, ―so we decided, ‗What can you learn about someone
when making love to them?‘ That was really interesting to direct. The sex became a
language -- a dialogue and they are talking. And they're saying a lot. Sometimes,
people say, ‗They don't talk.‘ But nobody talks that much when they're making
love.‖172 And Quin from The Independent was aware of lovers‘ communication yet
the rest of the film was not that persuasive for him as he observed:
The irony of it all is that the sex scenes between Rylance and Fox have a
fleshy realism and an urgency which the rest of the movie conspicuously
lacks. Chéreau, . . . , wants to show sex as an expression of the
characters' drives – how the act can be a conversation, or a furious row,
or a farewell. It's what happens outside of their intense couplings that
makes Intimacy feel clogged and, at its worst, completely artificial.173
Rylance confirmed the artificial aspect of the dialogues by saying, ―a few friends
in England who have seen the film have said, you know, the dialogue didn't feel
completely natural. And when I saw the film I thought that maybe I should have been
more strong about making changes. But Patrice has very forceful ideas about how he
wants things to be.‖174
Chéreau‘s ambition to depict everything in naturalistic way was described and

praised by Michael Thomson from BBC, ―so as to render their sweaty encounters as
untitillating as possible, Chéreau never uses attractive lens filters, slick camera
moves, or exciting editing, and so the ill-at-ease relationship of this inarticulate
couple comes through all the more powerfully.‖175 Despite this acclaim, Thomson
finds a lacking element as well, ―the only real mistake the director makes is to ram
home his themes and ideas through the self-conscious remarks of Jay's colleague and
171
172
173
174
Winter, ―Mark Rylance‘s Body Language,‖ Village Voice, October 23, 2001,
http://www.villagevoice.com/film/mark-rylances-body-language-6396702.
175
Michael Thomson, ―Intimacy,‖ BBC, July 18, 2001,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/films/2001/07/18/intimacy_2001_review.shtml.
52
the overheated prattle of Claire's chatty husband. He should have trusted in the
couple's significant silences, and the sex.‖176
Many reviewers mentioned significant role of the lead actors and their
remarkable performance. Michael Thomson, for instance, praised their performances
in his review as ―two full, textured performances from Mark Rylance and Kerry
Fox, who are such good actors that they convey pain or loss with the smallest twitch
of a mouth or the briefest glance.‖177
6.5. Comparison of the Plots
The film Intimacy is evidence that in a modern way the fidelity factor slowly but
surely withdraws when making an adaptation. The film is named after the novella
although it also drew inspiration from the short story ―Nightlight‖. The plots differ a
lot because the film was merely loosely based on its literary sources.178
The novella Intimacy is narrated in the first person. The main protagonist is a middle
aged scriptwriter from London who has won some prizes and awards and he was
even nominated for Oscar. The name of the narrator is revealed as late as on page
twenty—four. Most of the content consists of Jay‘s inner thoughts or flashbacks with
memories regarding his parents, partner Susan and their two sons three and five years
old, Jay‘s mistress Nina, friends Victor and Asif. The novella begins with Jay‘s
statement, ―It is the saddest night, for I am leaving and not coming back.‖179 The
story takes place during this night and next day Jay really leaves the house. The
entire novella takes place during one night in Jay‘s head. He contemplates the
leaving from all possible angles and tries to vindicate this action.180
The length of the short story ―Nightlight‖ is just about eight pages. There are no
names revealed. It is third person narration. The main protagonist is a middle aged
man who left wife and kids five years ago. Now he experiences sexual encounter
every Wednesday with a woman he does not know anything about. They do no talk.
He begins to be addicted to her and when she does not show up one Wednesday he
176
Thomson, ―Intimacy,‖ BBC.
177
Thomson, ―Intimacy,‖ BBC.
178
For more detailed information see chapter The Background and the Origin of the Film Adaptation.
179
Kureishi, Intimacy (London: Faber and Faber, 1998), 3.
180
Kureishi, Intimacy.
53
feels desperate. She comes again however and he realizes that he wants to know her
and talk to her. The story ends before any talk occurs.181
The film could be assumed to be a ‗sequel‘ of these two literary sources to those
who read it.
Definition of a ‗sequel‘ from Merriam-Webster dictionary:

a: subsequent development
b: the next installment (as of a speech or story); especially: a literary,
cinematic, or televised work continuing the course of a story begun in a
preceding one.182
The main protagonist of the film Intimacy is middle aged former musician Jay
who works as a head barman in London. He left his wife and two sons a year ago. Its
beginning is definitely inspired by the short story ―Nightlight.‖ Jay experiences
sexual encounter every Wednesday. In the film, it is not evident neither how they
met nor how their relationship began. They do not talk much as in the short story.
With passing time however Jay yearns for more and he follows her. This destroys
their mysterious relationship because the enchantment of fancy is crushed by
reality.183
Using Hutcheon methodology, the novella and the short story belong to the ―telling
mode of engagement with the audience‖. Therefore it is quite simple to express
characters‘ thoughts. Since inner monologue is not easy to depict in film, Jay
discusses his thoughts and problems with his colleague from work Ian. The film
belongs to ―showing mode of engagement.‖ It is not possible to see into actors‘
heads. Thus the audience must focus on actors‘ facial expressions and gestures. If
camera uses close-up (shooting just faces) it is a hint for the spectators to focus
mainly on the facial expressions. If the whole figures are visible the focus moves to
gestures and the body. Film Intimacy very often relies on close-up.
Jay in film works in a bar which is a busy place and it is definitely more
interesting for the audience than being a scriptwriter as in the novella.
181
Kureishi, ―Nightlight,‖ in Love in a Blue Time (London: Faber and Faber, 1997), 138-145.
182
―Sequel,‖ Merriam Webster Dictionary, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sequel.
183
Intimacy, directed by Patrice Chéreau (2001), DVD.
54
Flashbacks are used both in the novella and film. In the film, they are created
through a few special devices. First one is moderating the sound of the current scene
while turning on the sound of the following scene a few seconds earlier before
changing the shot. Secondly, echoes of the voices can be heard. Thirdly, younger
look of the characters—Jay has longer hair and looks younger. In the novella, there is
no smooth transition to flashbacks of memories. It is divided just by blank line or an
asterisk and taking turns quite often. Sometimes it feels really fragmented which was
Kureishi‘s intention to depict the ―roughness‖ of the book.184
Jay contemplates his parents in the book. However we do not learn anything
about them in the film. It might be useful to consider Jay‘s parents relationship as
one of possible reasons why he struggles to have happy relationships with women.
He claimed that his parents ―. . . were loyal and faithful to one another. Disloyal and
unfaithful to themselves.‖185 He saw that his parents were frustrated and he assumes
that marriage is a struggle.
Jay in the novella expresses himself about realization that he is unhappy, ―I

suppose I want to be loyal to something else now. Or someone else. Yes; myself.
When did it start going wrong with Susan? When I opened my eyes; when I decided
I wanted to see.‖186 In film Jay admits to Claire‘s husband Andy that he did not
realize how unhappy he was in marriage until he left. It seems that Jay is trying to
convince Andy that his marriage is unhappy as well to get Claire just for himself.
Claire in film seems have similar dilemma to Jay‘s in the book: Leave or not to
leave. She is not happy with her husband and she seems to be in love with Jay,
however she stays with her son and husband eventually.
In the book, there is information that Jay has Asian ancestry. He was bullied in
childhood and lived in constant fear which might have caused his split personality
and problems with relationships. The film does not deal with race issues at all.
In the short story ―Nightlight‖ there is this scene when the woman does not come
and the man becomes desperate as it goes in the story, ―he stands at the window . . .
for three hours, feeling in the first hour like Casanova, in the second like a child
184
For more detailed information on this matter see chapter The Background and the Origin of the
Written Works.
185
Kureishi, Intimacy, 58.
186
55
awaiting its mother, and during the third like an old man.‖187 This scene is almost
identical in the film. Jay hastily cleans the room because it is about two o‘clock (the
time she regularly comes) and then there is shot of him looking impatiently from the
window awaiting Claire. The second shot is darker thus it indicates that some time
has passed and Jay‘s look begins to be sad and disappointed because she did not
come. In the third shot he sits in the chair with resignation looking bored when just
playing with some plastic foil with bubbles. Then he looks at the watch in the kitchen
while waiting in the hall and it is eleven past three. In the next shot he anxiously lays
on the floor in his bedroom. Then he gets out of the house when it is already dark
outside and hurries straight to the pub where Claire performs in a basement theatre.
Jay obviously needs and wants more since this moment. Jay‘s situation is alike with
the situation of the main protagonist of the ―Nightlight‖ who ―can only gauge her
mood by the manner of her love-making.‖188 Conversation never happens in the story
because he fears of losing the fancy which probably provide them with more
satisfaction than reality. However for Jay in film this situation is unbearable.
There is interesting contrast between Jay in the film and Jay in the novella. Jay in
the novella expresses himself, ―. . . , I am not sure that I can touch someone as I used
to–frivolously. After a certain age, sex can never be casual. I couldn‘t ask for so
little. To lay your hand on another‘s body, or to put your mouth against another‘s –
what a commitment that is! To choose someone is to uncover a whole life. And it is
to invite them to uncover you.‖189 In the film however, Claire comes just for so little
and does not ask anything else. Surprisingly, Jay is the one who does not want it to
be casual and wants to uncover the whole life of his lover. Thus the film ends quite
sadly for Jay since Claire decides to stay with her husband and son. In contrary, the
end of the novella is full of hope and love. This different mood of endings between
adaptation and adapted text is possible as a successful adaptation should be an
autonomous work on its own without any previous knowledge of the adapted text.190
Therefore film Intimacy certainly is an autonomous work on its own.
187
Kureishi, ―Nightlight,‖ in Love in a Blue Time (London: Faber and Faber, 1997), 140.
188
Kureishi, ―Nightlight,‖ in Love in a Blue Time (London: Faber and Faber, 1997), 144.
189
190
Hutcheon, A Theory of Adaptation, 2006, 36-37; 121.
56
Another important aspect of showing mode is music which can be heard in
contrast to telling mode in which the audience must use their imagination. Music
often helps to specify the emotions and mood of the scene.
Mise-en-scène in showing mode can be assumed to be an equivalent to

description in the telling mode. Mise-en-scène is a French word expressing
―the process of setting a stage, with regard to placement of actors,
scenery, properties, surroundings, and environment.‖191
191
―Mise-en-scène,‖ Dictionary, http://www.dictionary.com/browse/mise-en-scene.
57
CONCLUSION
The aim of this thesis was to compare selected literary works written by British
writer Hanif Kureishi to their film adaptations. Specifically his two early works My
Beautiful Laundrette (1985), and The Buddha of Suburbia (1990) and one of his
middle work Intimacy (1998). Hanif Kureishi was born in Bromley, South London to
his Pakistani father and English mother. Since Kureishi has experienced tough
childhood full of racist attacks, he deals with issue of race and class in his early
works. In his middle works, Kureishi explores midlife crisis. Kureishi was criticized
for using autobiographic material by members of his family. His piquant style of
writing earned him a label of controversial writer. Kureishi is either praised or
condemned by literary critics and the audience. The comparison of selected reviews
of both the adapted texts and the adaptations were executed in the last three chapters.
The second chapter described a concise history of adaptation studies and history
of search for interdisciplinary dialog. In the past, the fidelity of adaptation to its
adapted text was considered to be crucial. Although this approach is rather being
relinquished by contemporary researchers in adaptation studies, it still reverberates.
The theoretical frame used throughout the thesis was based on Linda Hutcheon‘s
theory of adaptation which belongs among current trends in adaptation studies.
Hutcheon attempts to prove that the adaptations have the same value as the adapted
texts. In addition, Hutcheon claims that evaluating adaptations on the premise of
fidelity is obsolete and futile. Hutcheon defines three different modes in which texts
engage their audience—telling, showing, and interacting. In this thesis, the telling
mode of literary works and the showing mode of their film adaptations were
examined and compared. These two modes of engagement differ in the degree of
audience‘s immersion. The telling mode immerses its audience through mental
processes of imagination. The showing mode, on the other hand immerses its
audience through the perception of the aural and the visual. Both modes of
engagement have some advantages and disadvantages when being compared to one
another. The advantage of the telling mode, for example, is that the experience is
significantly individual concerning audience‘s imagination which is limited only by
the words on the page. In the showing mode, on the contrary, there is no great space
58
for audience‘s imagination since the visual and the aural perception are instantly
employed. The disadvantage of the showing mode might be the difficulty to convey
character‘s thoughts and feelings. In the book, the audience is simply told about it,
however the film applies devices such as voice over, soliloquy, kind of shot—close-
up tells the audience that facial expressions are important. The medium or the long
shot tell the audience to focus rather on gestures and posture of the characters.
Another element is sound and music which are essential part of showing mode. It can
either enhance the emotions or to be contrary to it in the case of irony. The process of
adaptation usually involves change in the medium and mode of engagement. In this
thesis literary works were adapted to film versions. Therefore, it was necessary to
make cuts in the adapted texts to fit in the size of particular film adaptation. Film‘s
length is limited. It can become either burden or benefit in the form of more
condensed plot.
The fourth chapter was dedicated to the analysis of My Beautiful Laundrette. The
screenplay written by Hanif Kureishi and film directed by Stephen Frears were
compared. First of all, differences between writing a novel and writing a screenplay
were introduced. In the script, the beauty of words is not important since it serves
only as a blueprint for film makers. It was discovered that the film benefitted from
sounds and music. The suspense was increased in dramatic moments and the sound
of bubbles and spinning washing machine enriched the initial and final credits.
Moreover, several lines from the script concerning race, class and Thatcher
economics were cut in the film. Yet, these issues were still present. Furthermore, the
controversial reception of the film was demonstrated by presenting excerpts from
selected reviews. The film was usually praised by critics for dealing with issues such
as race, class, sex, corruption, ignorance, and prejudice with ease. However some
British Asians were offended by their negative representation.
The fifth chapter dealt with the analysis of the novel The Buddha of Suburbia
written by Kureishi and its adaptation in the form of television miniseries for BBC.
The script was made by Kureishi and the director Roger Michell. On one hand, the
showing mode of the miniseries lacked the first person narration and the subjective
point of view of the main protagonist which was crucial part of the novel for its
humour. The music was, on the other hand, an advantage of the showing mode for
59
evocation of the seventies. The novel‘s telling mode is characteristic by exposition,
either at the beginning or throughout the entire work giving information of the family
past. In the miniseries, there is no exposition of the past. Actors‘ performances in the
miniseries were brilliant and thus appreciated in the showing mode. In the telling
mode of the novel, the reader has to use their imagination for the characters.
Kureishi, however, is able to describe them in detail. In addition, selected reviews of
both the novel and the miniseries were explored. The subject of criticism was again
Kureishi‘s way of representation of British Asians. Others criticized Kureishi for a
large number of violence and obscenity. Many critics mentioned that the first half of
the novel concerning life in the suburbs was better crafted than the second half
related to life in the city. Miniseries was criticized for the same issues as the novel
and sometimes for lacking the first person narration. However the soundtrack by
David Bowie, the depicting of the seventies and the cast were much appreciated.
The sixth chapter was devoted to the last analysis which dealt with novella
Intimacy and a short story ―Nightlight‖ and film Intimacy loosely based on these
literary works. The film was directed by French director Patrice Chéreau who was
considered to be controversial artist. It resulted in controversies with both the novella
and the film. It was discovered that the telling mode of the literary works certainly
exceled in interior monologue of the main protagonist. The film frequently used
close-up. In both the novella and the film, flashbacks were used. However the film
and its showing mode properties have ability to make the transition from the present
to the past smoother. Nonetheless Kureishi‘s aim was to experiment with language
on the page. Kureishi did not try to make it smooth, he wanted to make it rough and
he ‗succeeded.‘ Similarly as in the two previous chapters, selected reviews were
analysed. Kureishi was frequently criticised for using his own experience. Intimacy
was assumed to be based on his divorce with Tracey Scoffield. For some critics it
was insensitive, for others it was full of male honesty and it was considered to have
elements of male testimonial. Chéreau‘s film Intimacy also raised many questions
and controversial discussions. The explicit sexual scenes were the cause of split
audience. For some, the communication without speaking was skilfully portrayed by
the main protagonists. Other reviews criticized the rest of the film and the dialogues
for being artificial.
60
In conclusion, considering value of adaptations merely according to the degree of
fidelity is obsolete. In current trends of adaptation studies, other elements of
adaptations are being studied. This thesis dealt with differences between the telling
and the showing mode of engagement based on Linda Hutcheon‘s theory of
adaptation. Both modes proved to have some advantages and disadvantages, however
they can enrich one another. As for Kureishi‘s work, he was always interested in
controversial issues, therefore reception of his subsequent work might be
controversial as well.
61
RESUMÉ
Tato diplomová práce se zabývá literárními pracemi britského spisovatele Hanifa

Kureishiho a jejich filmovými adaptacemi. Konkrétně se jedná o My Beautiful
Laundrette (1985), The Buddha of Suburbia (1990), a Intimacy (1998). Hanif
Kureishi se narodil v Bromley, což je část předměstí jižního Londýna. Jeho otec
pochází z Pákistánu a matka z Británie. Proto v dětství trpěl, jelikož mu byly
adresovány rasistické poznámky a zažil i fyzickou šikanu. Jeho krize identity je
rozebrána právě v díle The Buddha of Suburbia. Dále se v jeho brzkých pracích
věnoval otázce rasismu, třídy, ekonomice Margaret Thatcherové, sexuální identitě a
násilí. V jeho knize Intimacy se zabývá otázkou, zda jako otec odejít od rodiny, když
není šťastný. Tahle otázka byla také pravděpodobně inspirována skutečnými
událostmi v jeho životě, jelikož se jako otec dvou synů rozvedl se svou někdejší
ženou Tracey Scoffieldovou. Kureishi je považován za kontroverzního autora a proto
je tak zajímavé se jím zabývat. Byl často kritizován za necitlivé použití
autobiografického materiálu ať už ze strany rodiny nebo literárních a filmových
kritiků. Recenze jednotlivých děl a jejich adaptací byly také porovnány v posledních
třech kapitolách.
Teoretický rámec pro jednotlivé rozbory děl je založen na teorii adaptace Lindy
Hutcheonové, která považuje adaptaci jako stejně hodnotné dílo jako její předlohu
bez ohledu na míru věrnosti. Hledisko věrnosti je zastaralé, i když je občas na
věrnost adaptace brán zřetel i v dnešní době. Od strukturalistického obratu se však od
tohoto konceptu upouští, jelikož omezuje vývoj disciplíny. Lze se například zabývat
otázkami jako: Jak filmaři interpretovali literární předlohu? Byl význam předlohy
změněn v procesu adaptace? Byla motivace autorů umělecká, politická, ekonomická
apod.?
Na začátku dvacátého prvního století ještě neexistovala ucelená teorie adaptace.

Thomas Leitch tuto situaci označil jako „teoretické vakuum.― Velkým impulsem pro
změnu se stal projekt Roberta Stama a Alessandry Raengové. Také britské teoretičky
Deborah Cartmellová a Imelda Whelehanová přispěly ke změně založením periodika
zabývajícího se filmovými adaptacemi literárních předloh. Jejich cílem bylo najít
společný dialog mezi literaturou a filmem a demonstrovat jejich vzájemné obohacení
62
skrze překlad jednoho umění do druhého. Mnoho toho ještě nebylo řečeno o
opačném procesu recepce, tj. když čtenář přistupuje k literárnímu dílu až po
zhlédnutí filmové adaptace daného díla. Tato oblast je jedna z možností pro budoucí
zkoumání adaptace. Peter Lev v jeho studii o budoucnosti adaptačních studií zase
naznačil jinou mezeru ve výzkumu. Podle Leva je scénář zajímavý pro diskusi. Nese
totiž svědectví o procesu adaptace a může se stát uměleckým dílem sám o sobě. Lev
zmiňuje dva fakty, které by mohli daný výzkum ztížit. Prvním z nich je nelehká
dostupnost scénářů a druhým ještě zásadnějším je případná náročná práce
s analyzováním více verzí scénářů, předlohy a adaptace dohromady.
Jak již bylo řečeno, tato diplomové práce používá teoretický aparát Lindy
Hutcheonové, která definovala tři různé způsoby zapojení se publika do procesu
recepce uměleckého díla. Prvním z nich je ‚vyprávěcí‗ způsob (telling mode)
charakteristický pro literární díla. Druhým z nich je ‚předváděcí‗ způsob (showing
mode) charakteristický vizuálním a aurálním vnímáním divadelní hry, filmu apod.
Třetí způsob je interaktivní (interacting mode), který zahrnuje i fyzickou reakci
recipienta, avšak tímto způsobem se tato práce nezabývá. Dále se práce věnuje
otázkám, co se dá adaptovat, kdo je adaptér, recepční zkušenosti publika
obeznámeného s předlohou adaptace a naopak recepci publika bez předchozí
zkušenosti přistupujícího k adaptaci jako autonomní umělecké práci jako každé jiné.
V rozboru díla My Beautiful Laundrette se jedná o porovnání původního scénáře

napsaného Kureishim a stejnojmenného filmu režírovaným Stephenem Frearsem.
Rozdíl mezi psaním scénáře a románu je například ten, že scénárista nemusí dbát na
stylistiku, jelikož scénář slouží pouze jako detailní plán pro natáčení. Je jistě
zajímavé seznámit se se scénářem, ale film My Beautiful Laundrette přináší benefit
v podobě zvuku a hudby, což jsou typické znaky ‚předváděcího‗ způsobu. Napínavé
scény byly díky hudbě ještě intenzivnější, než ve scénáři. Zajímavý efekt pak
způsobily zvuky bublin a zvuk ždímající pračky při úvodních a závěrečných
titulcích. Bylo zjištěno, že repliky obsahující rasistické poznámky byly ve filmu
lehce zredukovány. Film byl pozitivně hodnocen pro lehkost, s jakou zobrazuje
složité otázky jako rasa, třída, sexuální identita, ekonomika Margaret Thatcherové
apod. Na druhou stranu mnoho britských Asiatů bylo dotčeno jejich negativní
reprezentací.
63
Další dílo komparativní analýzy byl Kureishiho román The Buddha of Suburbia a
jeho filmová adaptace ve formě čtyřdílné minisérie pro BBC. Scénář pro minisérii
napsal Kureishi a režisér Roger Michell. Nevýhodou minisérií se stala ztráta
subjektivního vyprávění z pohledu hlavní postavy Karima, které bylo v románu
přínosné a humorné. Hudební doprovod filmové verze však předčila pouhý popis
hudby sedmdesátých let v knize. Autorem vychvalovaného soundtracku byl umělec
David Bowie. Dalším důležitým aspektem je expozice, čili nastínění minulosti
postav. V románu je to běžná záležitost. Stejně tak je tomu u románu The Buddha of
Suburbia. Ve filmové verzi se však divák expozice nedočká. Přijde tak o cenné
informace o kontextu, ze kterého problémy mohou vyplývat. Recenze jak románu,
tak minisérie byly rozporuplné. Opět byla problémem již dříve zmíněná reprezentace
britských Asiatů. I když sexuální scény byly ve filmu redukovány, obě díla si
vysloužila kritiku za přílišnou obscénnost. Recenze týkající se románu například
vychvalovaly první část knihy popisující zkušenost z předměstí v porovnání s druhou
částí popisující zkušenost z Londýna a New Yorku. Filmová verze byla zase
chválena díky brilantním hereckým výkonům, např. Roshana Setha, Naveena
Andrewse apod. a také díky soundtracku a kostýmů či prostředí vhodně evokujících
sedmdesátá léta.
Poslední rozbor se týká díla Intimacy. Film Intimacy byl inspirován novelou
Intimacy a krátkou povídkou ―Nightlight‖ Hanifa Kureishiho. Film se zasloužil o
vlnu kritiky pro explicitní sexuální scény. Francouzský režisér, Patrice Chéreau, však
usiloval o naturalistické zobrazení např. pomocí záběru zblízka. Jeho cílem bylo
zachytit komunikaci bez mluvení, což se mu podle některých kritiků povedlo.
Kureishiho novela byla tvořena hlavně vnitřním monologem muže ve středním věku,
Jaye, který trpí krizí středního věku, není šťastný s partnerkou, a proto opustí ji i jeho
dva syny. Kureishi byl kritizován za necitlivé použití autobiografického materiálu.
Krátce před napsáním novely Intimacy totiž sám zažil rozvod a rozpad dlouholetého
vztahu. Porovnávaným aspektem mezi díly byl například flashback, čili pohled do
minulosti. Kniha byla kritizována pro její neplynulé přecházení z přítomnosti do
minulosti. Kureishi ale přiznal, že to byl jeho záměr. Experimentoval s jazykem, a
líbilo se mu, jak text vypadá. Filmové přechody z přítomnosti do minulosti byly
naopak zvládnuty velmi decentně díky filmovým nástrojům. Přímo ve vzpomínkách
pak byly zpomalené záběry, a ozvěny hlasů vedle mladšího vzhledu Jaye.
64
Na závěr je nutno podotknout a tím připomenout již zmíněný fakt, že hodnotit
význam adaptací jen z hlediska věrnosti k adaptovanému textu je zastaralé. Tento
koncept také omezuje další vývoj disciplíny. Proto se v současných adaptačních
studiích sledují jiné výzkumné otázky.
V této diplomové práci byly porovnány literární díla Hanifa Kureishiho s jejich
filmovými adaptacemi na pozadí teorie adaptace Lindy Hutcheonové. Ukázalo se, že
jak ‚vyprávěcí‗ tak ‚předváděcí‗ styl má různé výhody a nevýhody, ale jejich
vzájemnou kooperací se mohou obohatit.
Co se týče děl Hanifa Kureishiho, je možné, že se čtenáři dočkají dalších

kontroverzních témat v jeho próze, jelikož právě taková témata ho vždycky zajímala.
65
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bevan, Tim. Personal interview. Working Title Films: London, 8 July 1994. In
Kenneth C. Kaleta. Hanif Kureishi: Postcolonial Storyteller Austin: University of
Texas Press, 1998.
Bluestone, George. Novels into Film. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press
2003, 61-62. In Petr Bubeníček, ―Filmová adaptace – Hledání interdisciplinárního
dialogu.‖ Iluminace: Časopis pro teorii, historii a estetiku filmu. Praha: Národní
filmový archiv, no. 1 (22/2010), 9.
Bordwell, David, and Kristin Thompson. mění ilmu: vod o tudia ormy a
Stylu. 1. vyd. ed. V Praze: Nakladatelství Akademie múzických umění, 2011.
Bubeníček, Petr. ―Filmová adaptace – Editorial.‖ Iluminace: Časopis pro teorii,

historii a estetiku filmu. Praha: Národní filmový archiv, no. 1 (22/2010), 5-6.
Bubeníček, Petr. ―Filmová adaptace – Hledání interdisciplinárního dialogu.‖

Iluminace: Časopis pro teorii, historii a estetiku filmu. Praha: Národní filmový
archiv, no. 1 (22/2010), 7-21.
Buchanan, Bradley. Hanif Kureishi. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.
Chatman, Seymour Benjamin. eoretick Knihovna. vyd. 1. ed. Vol. 21, Příběh a
Diskurs: Narativní truktura v Literatuře a ilmu. Brno: Host, 2008.
Cumming, Laura. ―Charity ends at home: Intimate? Pathological more like. Laura
Cumming on Hanif Kureishi‘s toxic creation.‖ Guardian, May 9, 1998.
Hutcheon, Linda. A Theory of Adaptation. New York: Routledge, 2006.
Jamal, Mahmood. ―Dirty Linen,‖ Artrage (Autumn 1987). Reprinted in Kobena

Mercer, ed., Black Film, British Cinema. London: Institute of Contemporary Arts,
1988, 21-2. In Susie Thomas. Hanif Kureishi: A Reader’s Guide to Essential
Criticism. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.
Kaleta, Kenneth C. Hanif Kureishi: Postcolonial Storyteller. Austin: University of

Texas Press, 1998.
66
Kaufman, Anthony. ―INTERVIEW: Night Lights; Patrice Chereau Probes
‗Intimacy‘.‖ Indiewire, October 16, 2001.
http://www.indiewire.com/article/interview_night_lights_patrice_chereau_probes
_intimacy.
Kureishi, Hanif. The Buddha of Suburbia. London: Faber and Faber, 2009.
———. Intimacy. London: Faber and Faber, 1998.
———. ―Nightlight.‖ In Love in a Blue Time, 138-145. London: Faber and Faber,
1997.
———. My Beautiful Laundrette. London: Faber and Faber, 2000.
———. Introduction to My Beautiful Laundrette, by Hanif Kureishi, 3-6. London:

Faber and Faber, 2000.
McCrum, Robert. ―Hanif Kureishi Interview: ‗Every 10 years you become someone
else.‘‖ Guardian, January 19, 2014.
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/jan/19/hanif-kureishi-interview-last-
word.
―Mise-en-scène,‖ Dictionary, http://www.dictionary.com/browse/mise-en-scene.
Mišíková, Katarína. Mysl a příběh ve filmové fikci. O kognitivistických přístupech

k teorii filmové narace, (Praha: Nakladatelství Akademie múzických umění
2009), 154. In Petr Bubeníček, ―Filmová adaptace – Hledání interdisciplinárního
dialogu.‖ Iluminace: Časopis pro teorii, historii a estetiku filmu. Praha: Národní
filmový archiv, no. 1 (22/2010), 7.
Mitchell, Elvis. ―FILM FESTIVAL REVIEW; Raw Desire and Trysts, But No Sign
of a Tango.‖ New York Times, October 11, 2001.
http://www.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=9C07E2DC163FF932A25753C1A9
679C8B63.
Monaco, James. Albatros Plus. 1. vyd. ed. Vol. 35, Jak Číst ilm: vět ilm , Médií
a Multimédií: mění, echnologie, Ja yk, ějiny, eorie. Praha: Albatros, 2004.
Moore-Gilbert, Bart. Hanif Kureishi: Contemporary World Writers. Manchester:

Manchester University Press, 2001.
67
Moore, Suzanne. ―Why I Applaud the Books of Men Who Tell It Like It Is,‖
Independent, May 15, 1998, 21. In Susie Thomas. Hanif Kureishi: A Reader’s
Guide to Essential Criticism. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.; David
Sexton. Evening Standard, May 14, 1998. In Susie Thomas. Hanif Kureishi: A
Reader’s Guide to Essential Criticism. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.
Mravcová, Marie. Knihovna Iluminace. vyd. 1. ed. Vol. 14, Od Oidipa k

rancou ové Milence: větov Literatura e ilmu: Interpretace z Let 1982-
1998. Praha: Národní filmový archiv, 2001.
Neumer, Chris. ―Patrice Chereau Interview,‖ Stumped Magazine.

http://www.stumpedmagazine.com/interviews/patrice-chereau/.
―Patrice Chéreau.‖ Telegraph, October 8, 2013.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/10365020/Patrice-Chereau.html.
Quinn, Anthony. ―The Big Picture: Intimacy (18).‖ Independent, July 26, 2001.
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/reviews/the-big-picture-
intimacy-18-9270659.html
Robinson, David. ―Only Sentiment,‖ Sight and Sound, 55 (Winter 1985-6), 67. In
Susie Thomas. Hanif Kureishi: A Reader’s Guide to Essential Criticism. New
York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.
Rushdie, Salman. ―Minority Literatures in a Multi-cultural Society,‖ in Kirsten Holst

Petersen and Anna Rutherford, eds., Displaced Persons, (Sydney: Dangaroo,
1987), 40-1. In Susie Thomas. Hanif Kureishi: A Reader’s Guide to Essential
Criticism. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.
Ryan, Marie-Laure. Narrative as Virtual Reality: Immersion and Interactivity in

Literature and Electronic Media. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press,
2001, 242-243. In Linda Hutcheon, A Theory of Adaptation. New York:
Routledge, 2006.
Thomas, Susie. Hanif Kureishi: A Reader’s Guide to Essential Criticism. New York:
Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.
Thomson, Michael. ―Intimacy.‖ BBC, July 18, 2001.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/films/2001/07/18/intimacy_2001_review.shtml.
68
Yousaf, Nahem. Hanif Kureishi's the Buddha of Suburbia: A Reader's Guide. New
York: The Continuum International Publishing Group Inc, 2002.
Walker, Sally J. Write Now Workshops Series. Vol. 3, Intro to Screenwriting. San
Francisco: The Fiction Works, 2012.
http://web.a.ebscohost.com.proxy.mzk.cz/ehost/detail/detail/bmxlYmtfXzY
zNzU0NV9fQU41?sid=3c8b799f-9324-4e38-ab07-
d65e7049b27a@sessionmgr4003&vid=0#AN=637545&db=nlebk. EBSCO
library archive.
Welsh, James M., and Peter Lev, eds. The Literature/film Reader: Issues of
Adaptation. Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow Press, 2007.
Winter, Jessica. ―Mark Rylance‘s Body Language.‖ The Village Voice, October 23,
2001. http://www.villagevoice.com/film/mark-rylances-body-language-6396702.
ANALYZED FILMS
Intimacy, directed by Patrice Chéreau (2001), DVD, KOCH LORBER FILMS, 2004.
My Beautiful Laundrette, directed by Stephen Frears (1985), DVD, Channel 4, 2008.
The Buddha of Suburbia, directed by Roger Michell (1993), DVD, BBC Worldwide,
2007.
69
ANOTACE
Příjmení a jméno: Habrnalová Adéla
Katedra: Katedra anglistiky a amerikanistiky
Název práce: Literární díla Hanifa Kureishiho a jejich filmové adaptace
Vedoucí práce: Mgr. Pavlína Flajšarová, Ph.D.
Počet stran: 71
Počet znaků: 137 795
Klíčová slova: Hanif Kureishi, filmová adaptace, britská literatura, rasismus,

kontroverzní spisovatel, Moje krásná prádelna, Buddha z předměstí, Intimita
Předložená diplomová práce se zabývá literárními díly Hanifa Kureishiho a jejich

filmovými adaptacemi. Konkrétně se jedná o tato díla: Moje krásná prádelna,
Buddha z předměstí, Intimita. Cílem je díla porovnat na základě teorie adaptace
Lindy Hutcheonové, která považuje hledisko věrnosti za zastaralé v hodnocení
adaptací. Porovnány budou konkrétní média a adaptabilita vybraných prvků při
přenosu z jednoho média do druhého. Dále se práce věnuje porovnání recenzí jak
literárních předloh, tak jejich adaptací. Předpokládá se široká škála hodnocení,
jelikož jsou daná díla spojována s kontroverzními autory a umělci.
70
ANNOTATION
Name: Habrnalová Adéla
Department: Department of English and American Studies
Title of the Thesis: Literary Works by Hanif Kureishi and Their Film Adaptations
Thesis Supervisor: Mgr. Pavlína Flajšarová, Ph.D.
Number of Pages: 71
Number of Characters: 137 795
Key Words: Hanif Kureishi, Film adaptation, British literature, Racism,

Controversial writer, The Buddha of Suburbia, My Beautiful Laundrette, Intimacy
This diploma thesis deals with literary works written by Hanif Kureishi and their film
adaptations. Particularly, works such as: The Buddha of Suburbia, My Beautiful
Laundrette, and Intimacy. The aim is to compare these works to their film
adaptations on the background of Lindy Hutcheon‘s theory of adaptation. Hutcheon
considers fidelity factor to be obsolete in evaluating adaptations. The particular
media will be compared as well as the transferability of selected aspects in adaptation
process from one medium to another. Furthermore, this thesis is devoted to
comparison of reviews of both the literary works and their film adaptations. It is
assumed that reviews will vary a lot because these works are associated with
controversial authors and artists.
71

DP Habrnalova

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DP Habrnalova

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

DP Habrnalova

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PALACKÝ UNIVERSITY OLOMOUC

Department of English and American Studies

Bc. Adéla Habrnalová

Literary Works by Hanif Kureishi

and Their Film Adaptations

Supervisor: Mgr. Pavlína Flajšarová, Ph.D.

V Olomouci dne 5. 5. 2016 Podpis ………………………

1. HANIF KUREISHI’S BIOGRAPHY ............................................................... 9

2. CONCISE HISTORY OF ADAPTATION STUDIES ................................. 14

2.1. Search for Interdisciplinary Dialog ............................................................. 14

3. LINDA HUTCHEON’S THEORY OF ADAPTATION .............................. 20

3.1. The Appeal of Adaptation ........................................................................... 20

3.1.1. Modes of Engagement.......................................................................... 23

3.2. WHAT? (Forms) ......................................................................................... 24

3.3. WHO? WHY? (Adapters) ........................................................................... 26

3.4. HOW? (Audiences) ..................................................................................... 28

3.4.1. Knowing and Unknowing Audiences .................................................. 28

3.4.2. Modes of Engagement Revisited ......................................................... 29

3.4.3. Kinds and Degrees of Immersion ......................................................... 30

3.5. WHERE? WHEN? (Contexts) .................................................................... 30

4. MY BEAUTIFUL LAUNDRETTE ................................................................ 32

4.1. Writing a Screenplay and Writing a Novel ................................................. 32

4.3. Plot Overview .............................................................................................. 34

4.4. The Reception of the Film ........................................................................... 34

4.5. Comparison of Selected Aspects and Scenes .............................................. 37

5. THE BUDDHA OF SUBURBIA ..................................................................... 40

5.1. Plot Overview .............................................................................................. 40

5.2. The Background and the Origin of the Novel ............................................. 40

5.3. The Reception of the Novel......................................................................... 40

5.6. Comparison of Selected Aspects and Scenes .............................................. 43

6.2. The Reception of the Novella ...................................................................... 47

6.4. The Reception of the Film Adaptation ........................................................ 51

6.5. Comparison of the Plots .............................................................................. 53

6.6. Comparison of Selected Aspects and Scenes .............................................. 54

The first chapter is devoted to brief biography of Hanif Kureishi. It is essential to

The fourth chapter is dedicated to the analysis of My Beautiful Laundrette. It does

Kureishi, . . . , represents what the opening paragraph of The Buddha

In an interview in 1997, Kureishi discussed how his complex personal

Kureishi‘s complex relationship with his father is another focus of his

… he did consider … white girls to be slutty, though he‘d married a

In a letter to The Guardian in 1998 Kureishi‘s sister claimed that

Kureishi‘s reactions to such denouncements were miscellaneous. Sometimes he

Film adaptations are inseparable albeit inconsistent part of cinematography history.28

In the second chapter of her influential book A Theory of Adaptation (2006),

Thomas Leitch engages in frequently discussed issue of fidelity to the original

Australian literary researcher Simone Murray sees major field of adaptation

2.1. Search for Interdisciplinary Dialog

Another argument for critical appraisal of adaptations is emphasizing the

It is necessary to define the phenomenon. Linda Hutcheon defines adaptation as

Approaches focused on fidelity are rejected nowadays. Departure from fidelity

Brian McFarlane‗s contribution to the field also needs to be mentioned. In his

The following chapter will be dealing with Linda Hutcheon‘s theory of

According to Hutcheon, there are three modes of engagement with audience—

3.1. The Appeal of Adaptation

Adaptations are considered to be ‗palimpsestuous‘ works. (Palimpsest means ―a very

1. Formal entity or product:

An adaptation is an announced and extensive transposition of a particular

The act of adaptation always involves both (re-)interpretation and then

Adaptation is a form of intertextuality: we experience adaptations (as