NAME ______________________________________ MAT. NO.

______________

Biennale 1 MOCK 45 MINUTES

Reading
From book to screen
I have noticed that after I publish a book people inevitably ask: ‘Is there going to be a film?’
They ask this question in tones of great excitement, with a slight widening of the eyes. I am left
with the suspicion that most people think that a film is far more wondrous than a novel: that a
novel is, perhaps, just a hopeful step in the celluloid direction, and that if there is no film, then
the author has partially failed. It is as if ‘the film’ confers a mysterious super-legitimacy upon
the writer’s work.

Objectively speaking, a film’s relationship to a novel is as a charcoal sketch to an oil painting,

and no writer I know would actually agree that ‘the film’ is the ultimate aspiration. Certainly,
any literary novelist who deliberately tried to make something tailor-made to filmmakers
would fail to produce a good book, because the fact is that books are only filmic by accident.

It is, in any case, a long journey from page to screen, because the first stage involves ‘selling
the option’, whereby, in return for a modest sum, and for a limited time, the producer retains
the right to be the first to have a bash at making the film, should he get round to it. It is
theoretically possible to go for decades having the option renewed, with no film being made at
any time at all. This is money for jam, of course, but the sums are not big enough to be truly
conducive to contentment. My first novel had the option renewed several times, and then
finally it was dropped. This is, alas, a common fate, and many a novelist remembers those
little bursts of hope with a wry smile.

In the case of my second novel, however, the book eventually made it over the first hurdle,
which is the ‘exercising of the option’. This is the point where a more substantial fistful of cash
changes hands, but regrettably even this is not enough to meet the expectations of loved ones
and acquaintances, who strangely assume that you are imminently to be stinking rich for ever.
More importantly, here begins the battle that takes place in the author’s psyche thereafter. The
hard fact is, that it is no longer your own book. Although, unusually, I was asked if I would like
to do the script myself, no doubt both producer and director were mightily relieved when I
declined.

Novelists, you see, rarely make good scriptwriters, and in any case I couldn’t have taken the
job on without being a hypocrite – I had even told off my best friend for wasting her literary
energy by turning her novels into scripts when she should have been writing more novels. She
has had the experience of doing numerous drafts, and then finding that her scripts are still not
used. I wasn’t going to put up with that, because I have the natural arrogance of most literary
writers, which she unaccountably lacks.

As far as I am concerned, once I have written something, then that is the way it must be; it is
perfect and no one is going to make me change it. Scriptwriters have to be humble creatures
who will change things, and even knowingly make them worse, a thousand times and a
thousand times again, promptly, and upon demand. I would rather be boiled in oil.

It is, as I say, no longer your own book. The director has the right to make any changes that he
fancies, and so your carefully crafted (non-autobiographical) novel about family life in London
can end up being set in Los Angeles, involving a car chase, a roof-top shoot-out and an
abduction by aliens. This from a writer’s point of view, is the real horror of film.

When my book was eventually filmed, I did get to visit the set. However, I cannot count the
number of people I met there who a propos possible changes to the story, repeated to me in a
serious tone that, ‘Of course, film is a completely different medium.’ This mantra is solemnly
repeated so that filmmakers are self-absolved from any irritation that may be set up by
altering the characters or the story. I think that it is a clicheé that is really either untrue or too
vague to be meaningful. There could not be anything simpler than extracting the salient points
of the main narrative, and making a faithful film, which is what all readers and writers would
actually prefer.

My theory is that filmmakers are hell-bent on a bit of territorial marking, and each time one
can only hope that they have sufficient genius to do it with flair. There are, after all, a few films
that really are better than the book, and it would genuinely cause me no distress were people
to say this of the one based on my own efforts.

Answer questions 1-4 by choosing the best answer A, B, C or D. For questions 5/6
answer in your own words.

1. What do people do when the writer publishes a new book?

A. They make wrong assumptions about his aims.
B. They draw wrong conclusions from his comments.
C. They make unfair criticisms of his writing.
D. They gain a false impression of his attitude.

2. The writer compares writing with the visual arts to support his view that
A. related art forms benefit from indirect comparisons.
B. ideas are easily translated from one medium to another.
C. an artist has no idea how an idea may develop.
D. each art form should be judged on its own merits.

3. Which phrase best reveals how the writer regards the attitude of film producers in the
‘option’ system? (paragraph 3)
A. ‘have a bash’
B. ‘get round to it’
C. ‘money for jam’
D. ‘a common fate’

4. Which word best describes the attitude of the people on the film set towards the
author?
A. intolerant
B. defensive
C. indifferent
D. aggressive
5. According to the writer, what does a good scriptwriter mainly need to be/have?
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________

6. In the final analysis, the writer accepts that a film version of his literary work may be
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________

5. They need to adopt a flexible approach to the work.

6. a chance to improve upon the original.

Word Formation
Frankenstein’s Real Creator
Please write your answers in the spaces provided below.

In these days of (0)_________________________________ engineering, it is not unusual to hear

the name Frankenstein invoked by those who fear the consequences when humans
seek to create a being in their own (1) _________________________________.
Often overlooked, however, is the fact that the tale originated, not as a folk legend, still
less as a wildly original film script, but as a literary (2)________________________________.
Even today, to read the chilling story of an inventor and the uncontrollable monster he
created is at once both a thought-provoking and an (3)___________________________________
experience. What’s more, the (4)________________________________ popularity of the novel,
and it’s modern-day relevance are all the more remarkable when we remember it was
written almost 200 years ago, by an 18-year-old woman called Mary Shelley. Over the
decades, (5)__________________________ films have attempted to capture the full horror of
her story, but none have come close to equaling the power of Mary Shelley’s powerful
prose. Amongst (6)__________________________ and commentators, Frankenstein has long
been (7)___________________________ as a powerful piece of gothic fiction, representing as it
does an (8)____________________________ fusion of contemporary philosophy, literary skill
and (9)_______________________________ vision.
It is only recently, however, with increased media attention devoted to the
philosophical issues her novel raises, that there has been a more general
(10)___________________________________ of interest in Mary herself.

0. GENE _____________GENETIC___________
1. LIKE ___________________________________
2. MASTER________________________________
3. SETTLE_________________________________
4. ENDURE________________________________
5. NUMBER________________________________
6. ACADEMY_______________________________
7. KNOWLEDGE___________________________
8. ORDINARY______________________________
9. IMAGINE________________________________
 10. REVIVE__________________________________
1. LIKENESS
2. MASTERPIECE
3. UNSETTLING
4. ENDURING
5. NUMEROUS/INNUMERABLE
6. ACADEMICS
7. ACKNOWLEDGED
8. EXTRAORDINARY
9. IMAGINATIVE
10. REVIVAL