Wednesday 5 November 2014

Rather disappointing

I found, by accident last night, that the BBC had aired a new radio adaptation of John Wyndham's The Chrysalids last month on one of their digital channels, and that it was still available on iPlayer. Given that the book is one of my all-time favourites, and that I first came across it as a radio serialisation in the summer holidays when I was 11, I couldn't resist giving it a listen. There had been another version on the radio a few years back, which I heard a few snippets of two or three years after it had been broadcast, and which I absolutely hated, not least because the voice cast sounded like they were strolling down to the posh bistro in some leafy Surrey commuter town rather than struggling to survive in post-apocalyptic Labrador. That issue, at least, was addressed to a degree by using UK regional, predominantly northern English accents for most of the characters, but I still didn't enjoy the adaptation as much as I hoped I would. I knew the story would be abridged, because the 'series' consisted of two hour-long episodes, but the way it was cut to fit the time slot left a lot to be desired - the ending, in particular, was ridiculously rushed, and left out a very important - to me, anyway - aspect of the plot (here comes a spoiler), namely Michael returning to 'fetch Rachel away', rather than just jumping on the Zealand flying machine and leaving her to her fate, something which underlined the 'think-togethers' loyalty to each other in the original. There were also some minor irritants, most notably Rosalind's father having his name changed from Angus to Matthew for no discernible reason, given that he's only ever referred to, rather than being a foreground character, even in the book, never mind the adaptation. I suppose that when you've lived with and loved the book for forty-odd years, any new version would have to be extraordinarily good to pass muster, but I still think it could have been so much better without undue effort. And I also think, particularly in this CGI age, when the mutations inherent to the story could be relatively easily portrayed, that it would make a fantastic film.
More disappointment this afternoon, too - I went looking for 'the boy on the bus', but ended up running ten minutes or so early, and missed him. There were some other cuties to admire a bit later on, but I still ended up feeling a bit down in the mouth. Another day, maybe.

Love & best wishes to all
Sammy B

2 comments:

  1. I enjoy audio books when I drive long distances by myself. I ALWAYS get the unabridged versions, and so far I haven't been disappointed. I can imagine radio shows would be awful when the voices don't match and names are changed! ARGH!

    I remember Woking's public art, based on H.G. Wells' War of the Worlds. I also remember studying Orson Welles' radio adaptation in 1938. It was definitely a poor substitute (though a partner and I remade it in 1980 as a senior radio production class project!).

    Peace <3
    Jay

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello Jay
      As I said in the post, when you know a book so intimately, any adaptation is likely to be a disappointment. The biggest downer in this particular case is that I doubt it would encourage anyone to go to the original book.

      Love & best wishes
      Sammy B

      Delete