‘O omnivorous powers, hail!’

M. Woźniak
{"title":"‘O omnivorous powers, hail!’","authors":"M. Woźniak","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780198867531.003.0014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Dialogue in historical films is often the weakest component of the presumed ‘authenticity’ of the vision of the past to which they aspire. Its artificiality is especially evident in productions about ancient worlds, because the historical characters typically speak in a language which has nothing to do with the reality presented on the screen, yet somehow needs to convey the idea of diachronic distance and diversity. This chapter will examine the stylistic strategies used by the screenwriters of Quo Vadis in order to create a dialogue functional to the film’s ideological message, but at the same time sufficiently credible and ‘authentic’. Special attention will be paid to the way the scripts deal with forms of address and with military or honorific titles, as these are usually the most important and evident signals of ‘historicity’ in film dialogues. From this point of view, the verbal strategies of Mervyn LeRoy’s Quo Vadis (1951) are rather complex and multilayered, and they will be the focal point of the analysis. Produced in the aftermath of the Second World War, the film relied heavily on the strategy of presentism, clearly audible in large chunks of the dialogue. On the other hand, as part of a ‘trustworthy’ reconstruction of classical antiquity, its cinematographic speech had to be at least superficially compatible with the image of imperial Rome. Finally, Quo Vadis also drew generously on its literary source and adapted for the screen some of the novel’s elegant, literary dialogues. The chapter will also examine the relation between the cinematographic and literary dialogue in two later adaptations to screen: Franco Rossi’s 1985 TV miniseries and Jerzy Kawalerowicz’s Polish heritage production (2001).","PeriodicalId":154048,"journal":{"name":"The Novel of Neronian Rome and its Multimedial Transformations","volume":"62 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Novel of Neronian Rome and its Multimedial Transformations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780198867531.003.0014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Dialogue in historical films is often the weakest component of the presumed ‘authenticity’ of the vision of the past to which they aspire. Its artificiality is especially evident in productions about ancient worlds, because the historical characters typically speak in a language which has nothing to do with the reality presented on the screen, yet somehow needs to convey the idea of diachronic distance and diversity. This chapter will examine the stylistic strategies used by the screenwriters of Quo Vadis in order to create a dialogue functional to the film’s ideological message, but at the same time sufficiently credible and ‘authentic’. Special attention will be paid to the way the scripts deal with forms of address and with military or honorific titles, as these are usually the most important and evident signals of ‘historicity’ in film dialogues. From this point of view, the verbal strategies of Mervyn LeRoy’s Quo Vadis (1951) are rather complex and multilayered, and they will be the focal point of the analysis. Produced in the aftermath of the Second World War, the film relied heavily on the strategy of presentism, clearly audible in large chunks of the dialogue. On the other hand, as part of a ‘trustworthy’ reconstruction of classical antiquity, its cinematographic speech had to be at least superficially compatible with the image of imperial Rome. Finally, Quo Vadis also drew generously on its literary source and adapted for the screen some of the novel’s elegant, literary dialogues. The chapter will also examine the relation between the cinematographic and literary dialogue in two later adaptations to screen: Franco Rossi’s 1985 TV miniseries and Jerzy Kawalerowicz’s Polish heritage production (2001).
“啊,杂食的力量,万岁!””
历史电影中的对话往往是他们所渴望的过去愿景的假定“真实性”中最薄弱的组成部分。它的人为性在关于古代世界的作品中尤其明显,因为历史人物通常用一种与屏幕上呈现的现实毫无关系的语言说话,但不知何故需要传达历时距离和多样性的想法。本章将研究《Quo Vadis》编剧使用的风格策略,以创造一种对电影意识形态信息有用的对话,但同时又足够可信和“真实”。我们将特别注意剧本处理称呼形式和军事或荣誉头衔的方式,因为这些通常是电影对话中最重要和最明显的“历史性”信号。从这个角度来看,Mervyn LeRoy的《Quo Vadis》(1951)的语言策略是相当复杂和多层次的,它们将是分析的重点。这部电影制作于第二次世界大战后,在很大程度上依赖于当下主义的策略,在大部分对话中都能清晰地听到。另一方面,作为“值得信赖的”古典古代重建的一部分,它的电影语言必须至少在表面上与罗马帝国的形象相一致。最后,《Quo Vadis》还充分利用了原著的文学来源,将小说中一些优雅的文学对话改编成了电影。本章还将探讨电影和文学对话之间的关系,在后来的两部改编电影中:弗兰科·罗西1985年的电视迷你剧和耶日·卡瓦莱罗维茨的波兰遗产作品(2001年)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信