My Poetry Assignment

Hi class, thanks for your input last night. I think that it made my presentation more interesting with everyones great comments.

(ISU) Independent Study Unit

The CALENDAR is here.


There are two files you need to start step one of the ISU.

(1) ISU Overview

(2) Guided Reading Response

Stone Angel Essays

I just wanted to reiterate what I said in class. I am looking for everyone to bring a full draft of their Stone Angel essay for Tuesday. The reason that it is in your best interest to do so is that we will spend some time trying to make them better.

The way I figure it is that, hypothetically speaking, no matter what grade your first attempt at the essay is worth--55%, 75% or 95%, getting help from your peers and myself is bound to make it better. Some people won't avail themselves of this opportunity, but they never do quite as well as those who get it done early and redraft their papers.

I don't like to speak in terms of "rough copy" and "good copy." I discovered some time ago that some students (if asked to turn in a "rough copy") will actually take the copy of their essay that they wrote and then "rough it up." I prefer to think of the writing process as a never ending circle. Every time you get feedback on a draft of your paper, you casn write an improved draft. Therefore, every time you redraft your essay, it will be stronger. Some university papers I wrote I must have taken through 6 to 10 drafts.

Finding The Right ISU Novel

It will work best if you give me some options. You might want to look for something that has been awarded a Governor General's Award, The Giller Prize, A Pulitzer Prize or a Mann-Booker prize. You can just google the different awards and find out who the winners have been since the contests began. Any of the winners would be a safe bet.

Even novels that were short-listed would work. The 2009 Giller was just awarded Tuesday. The finalists are also listed along with a description of the winning novel, The Bishop's Man.

If you select wisely, this will become your favourite course novel.

Library Night- A Reminder

I know most of you know, but it occured to me that anyone who was absent on Tuesday may show up at Collegiate. Tonight we are at Central library selecting and reading our ISU novels.

I will be in the main foyer taking attendance by 6:30pm.

See you there!

Movie Review of The Stone Angel

In my opinion, The Stone Angel the novel and The Stone Angel the movie, have the same plot but are two different stories. I enjoyed both the novel and the movie, but as I would two different tales. Such differences as how the Hagar were portrayed, additional scenes, scenes being deleted or changes and the modernization of the film all played a part in creating a different story, which still followed the main event of the plot of The Stone Angel in text format.
The changes that the director made to the characters changed the story dramatically. Especially the changes made to Hagar. Hagar in the novel, in blunt words, is a prude. In the movie however, she is shown taking charge in the situation with Telford Simmons and allows other people to possibly see her and Bram pre/post-sexual activity. These scenes make Hagar out to be a hormone crazed individual prior to being with Bram, which is not the case at all. In the novel Hagar was surprised and somewhat unaware of what was suppose to happen on her wedding night. The director I predict was trying to make Hagar more modern, and easier to relate to a teenage audience. The director would do this mainly because the majority of profit from movies is made from teenagers.
The modernization of the story was a change the director thought was necessary in order to make the story interesting to the general public. For example, the change of Murray’s character from an unhappy husband hiding to a lover of a rebellious daughter, made that particular scene a lot more applicable to the audience. The change also allowed Hagar to get the reflection about John she needed, but did not require as much explanation. Also the fact that in the scene Hagar and the Murray substitute character were smoking marijuana made the hallucinations quite more realistic than if it had come from alcohol.
There was one additional scene not written in the novel that the director put in the movie that I did not like. In the movie it showed Marvin drunk, and speaking about sex to Doris. This changes how Marvin is look at completely. Marvin would be described as reliable, responsible, always trying to avoid conflict, honourable and respectable. The scene contradicts your entire view of Marvin’s good boy reputation.
As I previously stated, I enjoyed both the film and book. The movie was a good representation of the novel’s story, but not of the novel’s version of Hagar. The changes the director made definitely help the story to manifest itself in a smaller time frame, but unfortunately you lose part of the tale the novel is telling.

Movie vs. Novel

All the movies, that intend an abbreviation and a brief explanation of the written manner, have a short peek for the viewers for its clarification purposes. The movies that catch the eyes are less valuable to the seekers who prefer the depth in information compared to the novels that explain it in details. "The Stone Angel" film features the main contents of the novel. The people who do not inspect the visual manner, prefer to indulge themselves in the book contents. In contrast, the ones who are considered as visual learners, skip the reading and put their interests on the screen. Even though, the visual manner can reassure and clarify the viewers' imaginations, it does not increase or improve the viewers' literature skills. It is viewed not read, which makes it a scene of daily life that people pass by for a moment, understand the actions, conclude the theme, and forget what happened. But if it's read, it is maintained between the fingers and experienced as if being one of the characters and have an influence on personal life that would never fade away. When a person reads the novel by himself, either loudly or silently, he/she is able to understand it perfectly. But if someone else is reading it for that person, like the characters of the movie are reading for the viewers, the person will miss some of the important points that are valid to shape his conclusion.

"The Stone Angel" film is not necessarily similar to the novel. It misses some contributors and characters found in the novel. Hagar's brother Dan, as an example, was not present or even mentioned in the movie. Even though, he is not such a big contributor to Hagar's life, he plays an important role in shaping Hagar's hard personality. In the novel, Hagar underestimated him and failed him. This specific action clarify what type of a girl Hagar was. The main point here is that the spectators will have an idea that Hagar does not have a brother called Dan in the novel, which makes it a deceiving form of short expression. The producer wanted to make the movie a general expert of the novel, but actually it has some skipings and unparalleled contents compared to the novel's. The life with Dan, and the real vacation place, Shadow Point, for Hagar and Bram are some examples.

Reading the novel for several days and experiencing each step resulting in producing a "mature tree" idea that covers the whole contents, is rather than watching the movie and have a "short plant" picture that just covers what mainly happened in a short two hours period of time.

Roni.

ISU Authors

Please register your ISU author and novel with me by adding a comment here.

I will take everyone's choices and put them into a chart in order to avoid duplication.

Happy Picking! (The novel)

Response To Film Due Wednesday

Thanks again to Jessica, Rosalind and Mark for initiating an insightful (and inciteful) conversation about the film.

I suggested in class that I might assign Monday as a cut off date for the assignment, but given that most people still haven't posted yet I'm thinking Wednesday may be a little more practical. If you have not yet been added as an author, please email me at ewcwriter@live.ca. All you need to do is state your name (if it's not clear in your email address) and say "please add me to the blog." I can do it in about 25 seconds.

Cost-Benefit Analysis- "The Stone Angel"

I didn't hate the movie "The Stone Angel" by any means, but definitely found it less enjoyable than the book due to the following reasons:

First, I disliked the lack of detail in the movie, and felt that the movie version of "The Stone Angel" was more modernized than anything. For example, the language in the movie was more coarse, and most of the characters in the movie really weren't anything like the characters portrayed in the novel. I'll have to agree with Mark when saying that the "Murray character" in the movie was a horrible representation of Murray F.Lees from the novel. To be honest, I found the meeting between Hagar and Murray to be important in the novel, and didn't agree with the change in his character in the movie.

Secondly, Bram was made out to be irritating, rude and rather uncaring in the novel, whereas in the movie, I found him to be a decent husband/father and actually felt sorry for him when Hagar and John left him, especially because of the changes made during that scene in the movie, displaying Bram's emotional side, leaving him heartbroken and alone, rather than uncaring and sarcastic, as he was made out to be in the novel.

Finally, I thought Hagar's death was poorly recreated in the movie, and really didn't think it did much for her overall character, thus showing the lack of detail in the movie. It's not hard to understand that movies trigger a different type of audience, and in that aspect, I thought the movie was entertaining, however, I didn't think the movie did the novel much justice.

Jenn

Stone Angel Characters

Though I know it is easy to be critical and it is a hard task to make a movie from a book, I think "The Stone Angel" was a poor representation of the book, almost worst than "Eragon" and that's something.

One of the biggest problems I found with the movie was its characters; each and every one of the novel's characters was either missing or incorrectly portrayed.

Bram is a good example of this, if you could say that he was even in the movie. When I thought of Bram from the novel I saw a large, untidy, filthy mountain man, not some cowboy straight from a Western romance. In the movie, Hagar's marriage almost seems justified by Bram's appearance rather than being a rebellion against her farther thus taking away another example of Hagar's pride. The director probably did this to attract a larger audience, but I think he would have been better off adding to John's appearance rather than Bram's.

Another character with serious issues was Murray Lees, or rather the "Murray character" since Murray himself was not in the movie. In the novel, Murray was a character that could relate to Hagar. Also, despite the fact that Murray had vices (mainly drinking), he has a reason, his grief, and we the reader's can sympathise with him. The "Murray character" however was nothing than a sexually motivated, drug smoking ne'er-do-well punk with nothing relative to Hagar besides a scandalous, sexual relationship loosely similar to John and Arlene's. I don't know why the director made this change as Murray would have only cost him five more minutes or so.

If anyone has other ideas about characters left out or modified, feel free to comment.

Mark

Cost-Benefit Analysis (Media Assignment)

Just a reminder that I am looking for everyone to enter into a virtual conversation about the Stone Angel film. Jessica has provided a shining example of how to approach the topic. She's fairly critical but supports her remarks well with detailed references to both the film and the novel.

Is there anyone who would like to take a more favorable stance?

All I'm looking for would be a remark or two about some of the differences between the film and the novel, along with a consideration of what Skogland (the director) both loses and gains by making the changes.

It struck me while viewing last night that there may have been a scene or two that Laurence herself might have wholeheartedly applauded, like the scene where John lies down under the oncoming train. I think that's one of the best scenes I've seen in any number of films.

What do the rest of you think? Is it too much?

Opinion on the movie created from "The Stone Angel"

I disliked the movie created from the novel “The Stone Angel” for numerous reasons.

First, I thought the casting was poor. The actors did not represent the characters in the novel well. They appeared more modern and did not fit the descriptions given to them in the novel. Hagar was the main character in the novel and her main qualities were her “strength” and stubbornness, which were not portrayed well in the film.

Secondly, important details were missing. What I found important was John lying to Hagar about his elementary school friends, old Hagar spending her last night at Shadow Point with Murray in the old cannery, and during Hagar’s last days in the hospital forming a relationship with Mrs. Dobereiner. Those events played a significant role in the novel because they demonstrated how John and Hagar were changing over time. Perhaps including these scenes would have improved the movie.

Lastly, I found the novel was full of emotion, whereas the movie was focused on what would sell. I found the added curse words, drugs and alcohol scenes unnecessary. Although there were scenes with alcohol and minimal swearing in the novel, I found it overdone in the movie.

That being said, I understand that it is not an easy task to create a movie from a novel, let alone a Canadian fiction novel. If the director would have stayed true to the novel, I believe, they could have created something great even on a budget.

Jessica