Welcome to my first discussion post, in which I hope to debate graphic novel adaptations!
When we are first introduced to a chapter book, is the subsequent graphic novel adaptation done well or not? And in fact, for some readers the graphic novel may actually be the first and only introduction to the literary work, so how the work is portrayed is extremely important.
To start off, I read graphic novel adaptations of classics that I have read in the past, so I could compare the two. While Fahrenheit 451 is the authorized adaptation, as it was published while Ray Bradbury was still alive, the other two obviously are just some of many adaptations that have been written and/or drawn over the years.
Fahrenheit 451– originally by Ray Bradbury, adapted by Tim Hamilton
The book includes an introduction by Ray Bradbury, which gave it an excellent gravitas as you then moved into the illustrated story. This adaption was solid, and knowing that it was approved by Bradbury helped me feel that it represented what the author was trying to convey in his initial novel.
Wuthering Heights– originally by Emily Brontë, adapted by Sean M. Wilson
I have to admit I have not read the original in all it’s entirety, for my hate for both Catherine and Heathcliff prevented me from reading every word. But I read most of it, enough to know the broad plot lines. This adaptation further cemented my thoughts on the story. I hated almost everyone in the story, except for the maid Nelly. Thus, this was a solid representation with Gothic illustrations that matched the mood of the story.

The Picture of Dorian Gray-originally by Oscar Wilde, adapted by Ian Edington & Ian Culbard
This was a rather short adaptation of the morality tale, so it ended up being more of an introduction than a complete retelling of the story. Some of Wilde’s biting wit made it into the story, but the black and white illustrations were rather simple and cartoonish. I hope that after reading this adaptation, readers will then move onto the original.
Kindred– originally by Octavia E. Butler, adapted by Damian Duffy & John Jennings
I had not read the novel before I read the graphic novel, but it was adapted so well, that I WANT to read the chapter book. Now that’s a sign of an excellent adaptation, that instead of replacing the original, I want to further delve into the story. While not done until after Butler’s death, this version was done with her estate’s permission.
Silent Partner & The Web, originally by Jonathan Kellerman, adapted by Michael Gaydos & Andie Parks
I have been reading author Jonathan Kellerman’s books for years. He has a long running thriller series centered on psychologist Alex Delaware and his cop best buddy Milo Sturgis and the crimes they solve. As the series had been going on 30+ years, I assume the author wants to reach out to a new audience, thus two of his previous novels have been adapted into graphic novels with a third in the works. However, these versions are HORRIBLE, as the two adapted were were among his early, most convoluted books. This was obviously done with Kellerman’s approval, but has not received the best feedback in other’s reviews.
So what are your thoughts on graphic novel adaptations? Should classics be adapted, once their creator is dead? What about more modern books, done with the author’s permission and collaboration? Discuss!
-Nancy
July 26, 2017 at 7:17 pm
I actually really enjoy graphic novel adaptations, but I’m very picky about which stories should be adapted. This because sometimes stories work well in a one format, but often loose it’s meaning or original spark when it’s adapted. It gets a bit trickier with classics being adapted, once their creator of the story passes. I think it should only be done if the person gets permission from the author’s estate and does justice to the original story. Great post!
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 26, 2017 at 8:35 pm
Yes-two of the adaptations that were approved, Fahrenheit 451 & Kindred, were better than the other classics. If the creator is dead, who is to say that the adaptation fits how the author originally envisioned it?
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 26, 2017 at 8:47 pm
Good point! It’s hard to do, but in the case of graphic story stories I just think they should tell the original and add it’s uniqueness by adding vibrant, or stunning visuals. I read a couple adaptations where they completely veered away from the story and I couldn’t get into it. Unless is a graphic novel adaptation spoof, then I feel like you have a little more creative license with the original story (ex. Hark! A Vagrant)?
LikeLike
July 26, 2017 at 9:34 pm
Hmmm….this is tough. I was excited at the prospect of an intentional discussion post but I’m not really sure where I stand. My gut reaction is “no.” I think there’s great power in both mediums and to mix them, by nature, means you’re losing something. For example, I’ve seen lots of graphic novel adaptations of ‘Frankenstein.’ I haven’t seen one whose images come close to capturing the mood Mary Shelley created with her prose. Nor are they ever able to capture the full scope of dialogue either. So I think to take a classic novel and adapt it into a graphic novel, by the very act of adaptation, takes away the very foundation of the work – the prose.
(Full disclosure, I am kind of a snob about this. Years ago, after seeing Joe Walsh’s ‘Atonement’ at my local theatre, I was talking with these two girls who were in my screening. We were flirting and discussing the movie. When I asked about their thoughts on the book-to-film transition, the one said, “Uh, I never read the book” and the other said, “I started, got twenty pages in, got bored and put it away.” Suffice to say no numbers were exchanged.)
However, on the other hand, I LOVE comic books! I know firsthand the potential power the can carry in their stories. I spend a lot of time reflecting on and writing about that myself! So maybe I’m just being snobbish to presume that a solid graphic novel adaptation can’t work. After all, I watch and enjoy films based off of books all the time and that’s also a very different medium than a novel.
Okay, so long/rambly way to sort my thoughts aside, I think I’d say they can be an interesting way to experience the story and there’s nothing inherently wrong with the idea BUT (just as I’d say with a book-to-film adaptation) I think you should always experience the novel first.
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 26, 2017 at 9:53 pm
Thank you for your lengthy reply (I can always count on you!), and I tend to agree with your thoughts. When the author is writing the novel, they are setting a mood, and we as readers start to envision it all in our minds, But we know it is all subjective, but when you see a graphic novel you know that the pictures are an integral part of understanding the narrative. Now we have someone else’s vision standing in for what the author intended. If it is an official adaptation, fine, that is what the author wants conveyed to the reader.
However…aren’t movie adaptations doing the same thing? And people surely flock to the movies to see re-tellings of classic stories! Ultimately, both books should be experienced, if possible.
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 27, 2017 at 12:44 pm
I think you’re exactly right about the movie adaptations! I go back and forth on how much I like movies as well, wondering about the merits of pulling the subjectivity out of imagining the setting. However, I still almost always end up seeing them.
Part of the thrill (and I’d bet this would be true of graphic novel adaptations as well) is seeing how the director’s (or in the case of graphic novels, the author and illustrator’s) vision matches up with my own. Sticking with ‘Atonement’ as my example, the dinner/search scene and Cecelia in her green dress were exactly how I envisioned it in my mind. It was so trippy! The ending however, very different. In some rare cases (back to ‘Atonement,’ the scene at Dunkirk for example) can be more powerful with images than just in your mind.
I like what you said about experiencing both. Maybe that’s where the fun lies, exploring the different versions and seeing what you like and don’t with each. In so doing, it helps us experience our truth of the original novel. When we watch or read an adaptation, what rings true shows us part of what we felt about the original novel and what doesn’t feel right also speaks to our personal experience of the original work.
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 27, 2017 at 3:49 pm
I like the term “our truth”, although that can certainly change as our life experiences change over the years. I recently reread a book I had loved in my 20’s, and now I look at it with completely different eyes. So when ever we read a book (chapter or graphic) or see a movie, we are making assumptions based off our own personal experiences. A new author or director can only bring in their vision, not everyone else’s.
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 26, 2017 at 10:14 pm
First, congratulations on your first discussion post! It is such a blogger milestone… I just wrote my second discussion recently so yeah, big deal!! ❤
I love the idea!! If it especially gets non-readers to pick up a classic story I say it can only be for the better. I like the idea of it being done with permission as normally the estate cares about quality. But the original author isn't really necessary as long as the new author is gun-ho about the original work. I've seen such great adaptions of classics into a reimagining of a classic and they can be really fun and fresh! I know its not exactly what you're talking about but I think there is room for a whole lot more graphic novels.
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 27, 2017 at 7:39 am
Looking back at my previous comments, it might seem I am against adaptations, but I’m not. You are right, some adaptations give a fresh view on the story-look at how much Romeo & Juliet has been reimagined! It’s just hard to know which adaptation still is true to the source material. I picked up a graphic novel in which poems & short stories from Edgar Allen Poe were depicted, and it was trash!
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 27, 2017 at 3:22 pm
Yeah there is always that risk… I wonder too if sometimes the pushing company spin stories that way as a marketing ploy and the author just gets behind them?
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 27, 2017 at 3:54 pm
Your comment rings true for the Kellerman books I mentioned at the end of the post. The two books chosen to be adapted, when there were so many other ones to choose from, couldn’t have been the author’s idea!
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 27, 2017 at 4:02 pm
Yeah even with chapter books sometimes I feel a marketing blurb goes too far on what it promises, great discussion I really enjoyed it!
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 26, 2017 at 11:13 pm
I really enjoy graphic novel adaptations. It gives you a glimpse of the actual novel as well as gives you a new angle into the work because of the artist. I know many people who do not have the patience to sit through a written book but might enjoy the graphic novel.
Kindred is one graphic novel that I really want to read from the list above.
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 27, 2017 at 7:45 am
Kindred is definitely a winner, and I recommend it! I could see the Dorian Gray book that I mentioned being picked up by a younger reader, but hopefully that will encourage them to read the longer novel when they are older and ready for the deeper themes. Since the adaptation might be the only way some readers are introduced to the story, it needs to be done well.
LikeLike
July 26, 2017 at 11:56 pm
Does The Stand count as a classic? The book is one of my favorites. The graphic novels were incredible. The drawings were fantastic. I think most of the memorable scenes from the book made it into the 25-30 graphic novels. My vision of what the characters looked like was very close to what the artists came up with. This is probably due to Stephen King’s writing style. Anyway, the novels gave me a new way (that seemed very familiar) to enjoy the story.
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 27, 2017 at 7:53 am
Stephen King has been around long enough, that some of his work would be considered classic! I looked up this series, and SK served as Creative and Executive Director of the project, so with his help, it met his original vision. The art is key, as the visual from the graphic novel tells much of the story. I love graphic novels, but have rejected stories when I don’t like the illustrations.
LikeLike
July 27, 2017 at 9:50 pm
Yes, the illustrations make or break it. I thought these gave the story another dimension that made it even better. King puts much effort into describing his characters and the illustrators translated his vision perfectly.
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 27, 2017 at 12:16 pm
As long as the story follows the authors original story line, graphic novel versions are very enjoyable. I have enjoyed the classics (Dracula, Frankenstein, Call of the Wild, etc.) and look forward to reading more. You get the same great story along with the visuals. Also, it introduces younger readers to the possibility of reading the original work. If it promotes more reading I am all for it. Great discussion!
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 27, 2017 at 3:37 pm
Graphic novels are known for bringing in reluctant readers, and I certainly hope that it would encourage them to read the original in the future. The first two books you mentioned have had so many adaptations of them (books & movies) that it is fascinating to see how many different ways the monsters look and act under someone else’s vision.
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 27, 2017 at 1:33 pm
I love the idea if it’s done in the spirit of the original, is respectful, and not a money grab. I was just discussing the 1970s/80s Read-Along books that came with a vinyl record or cassette. These were mostly movie-based or TV show mediums that not only got children reading but had them listening to dialogue and looking at stills/artist illustrations from the featured film/show. I’ve gone a little off topic here, but I think anything that encourages reading and further reading is a good thing. Great discussion!
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 27, 2017 at 3:43 pm
Encouraging reading is so important! At the library I work at, we still order a lot of book/CD pairings, for it can help youth to have the visual & auditory versions of the story together. Plus, what you mentioned that the adaptations be in the spirit of the original, is key. A true adaptation should be respectful, although parodies of the classics can be amusing in a completely different way.
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 27, 2017 at 6:51 pm
I think adaptations absolutely can work well, but you have to pick the source material carefully. The source has to be something that suits a strong visual aesthetic (which is why Gothic comics often work so well) and it has to be something with movement in it – graphic novels as a medium are really good at fast-paced action and expressing a lot of meaning in a single image. That works better for something with action and big ideas than it does for something that’s mostly conversation.
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 27, 2017 at 10:02 pm
You are right, source material is key. The Gothic feel of Wuthering Heights translated well in the adaptation I read, while the wordy Dorian Gray had very lackluster illustrations and action.
LikeLike
July 31, 2017 at 5:15 pm
Personally, I love the idea of classics being converted into graphic novels- and I love classics in their original form. One thing that I’ve heard of lately is Shakespeare in the original English in graphic novel form- it just sounds very much up my street! I do think it would be good if there could be a collaboration between authors, but it also makes sense for them to use books that are out of copyright, because the artist doesn’t need permission. Great topic for discussion!
LikeLiked by 1 person
August 1, 2017 at 1:50 pm
Thank you! I have enjoyed many of the adaptations when they remain true to their original form too. I am looking forward to Gareth Hinds’ graphic novel vision of Edgar Allan Poe’s stories & poems. I’m hoping its a better adaptation of his work than others have done.
LikeLike
August 1, 2017 at 5:03 pm
You’re welcome! Yes I agree! And that sounds fantastic, I will have to check it out!
LikeLiked by 1 person