Christopher's story in The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime doesn't follow the traditional story outline. There is no clear climax and the conflicts in the story often don't involve Christopher at all. Christopher's autism affects the way he views the world. The story is told from his point of view, so the narrative is often not relatable. It doesn't have a happy ending or a relatable description of his feelings, but yet, it is still compelling. The novel is not traditional, and consequently, the play doesn't tend to follow the 'usual model' either. Though the playwright, Simon Stephens, took creative license with the sequencing and presentation of the story, both authors stayed true to Christopher's first person, albeit fictitious, narrative.
A novel usually provides detailed descriptions of people, places, and things. Even in the novel, despite his different view of things, Christopher describes his experiences-“And then the policeman went away and I had my tomato soup and Mr. Shears stacked up some boxes in the spare room so he could put a blowup mattress on the floor for me to sleep on, and I went to sleep."- but he tells them in a series of run-on sentences. "The policeman went away," and then directly following that, " I had my tomato soup." He doesn't pause or try to smooth his transitions. His brain keeps going, one thing after another. The playwright did something similar. He hops from one scene to the next. For example, in part two, Roger gives Christopher some books he picked up at the library. Christopher says, "They're for children. They're not very good. I'm not going to read them." Roger then says, "Well, it's nice to know that my contribution is appreciated," but directly after that, Judy begins talking to Christopher about a chart she's made. There is a small gap in the script, but no stage direction. According to the novel, these two scenes happen in different rooms, but in the play there is no reason for moving given in the dialogue or stage directions. Both the play and the novel jump around, but despite Christopher’s ever roaming mind, in the novel, he puts words to the changes in location and characters who are interacting.
The script (of the play) is stripped of details. There are minimal stage directions, so explanations for movement are few and far between. Changes in lighting and a character’s stage position are used in place of clear scene endings and transitions. These effects help the audience to understand the story. Because so much of Christopher’s story is taking place in his head, Stephens had the difficult task of showing what can’t be shown. For example, when Christopher was reading the letters from his mother, he wasn’t reading them out loud. In the play, Judy has to put a voice to her letters so that the story can progress. When Christopher is in the police station, and then again when he’s in the train station, other voices besides his are heard by the audience. Lists of the things he has, or sees, run through his head. The play voices these lists. The voices let us to further experience what happens in Christopher's mind, like we are able to do in the novel.
The play was shorter than the novel. There were minimal descriptions, so dialogue made up most of its length. It took less time to read, but, without prior knowledge of Christopher's story and an avid imagination, the scene transitions, or lack thereof, could be confusing. The novel is more descriptive and helps a reader build the story. The script is the barebones of the story. When it is performed, effects help to clarify what's happening, but when reading the script, we can't see those. I found the novel more enjoyable. Mark Haddon was able to show multiple levels of Christopher's personality. The jumble of his brain was easier to explain and understand on paper than with our imaginations.
Christopher's story is hard to relate to. It is not often that a novel is told from the point of view of an autistic person. The way his mind works is complicated. To explain it with words and pictures is difficult, let alone with just lighting and actions. Stephens didn't really cut anything out. It's just that without Christopher's explanations of his reasonings, there was very little dialogue-which Stephens had to infer for the script- and few descriptions of the places where he was experiencing the story. The playwright had to create dialogue from Christopher's internal monologue. This difficult task was achieved through creative scene sequencing and presentation. But despite their differences, both the play and the novel presented Christopher's story in roughly the same way he would have told it. 
No comments:
Post a Comment