Haveing one of those days where I’m not in pain but I am just all out of sorts. So what do I spend my Sunday doing?
Watching multiple versions of Treasure Island. Obviously.
First Treasure Planet, then Muppets, because again, most fun, obviously.
Although, side note: as someone who has seen more adaptations and read the book, Muppets might be one of the most faithful adaptions I’ve seen. Because Muppets- they value that good literature 📚👍
It is hitting me this time around that many of the adaptation changes in any media version have to do with culture, and what makes sense to the intended audience.
In the book:
Jim is like 12/13, maybe even younger.
Sure, his dad is dead, but it’s more of prerequisite to needing the income from going to sea than it is a a main character trait. It is not implied he needs a father figure. It is simply understood, in a British way, that men will influence him as a young man going off into the world to learn. There is a lot of comparing the different types of men he meets and deciding for himself what makes a man, but it is not about father figures, just observation and lessons along the way.
Jim never really trusts John. Even as he learns useful skills from him, he is cautious and wary, and as soon as they confirm John is a pirate, Jim’s attitude is very “I knew it!” And “Finally, here it is. Here we go.”
As soon as John is a pirate, he is evil. It is never implied he is anything better than the devil figure whispering charm in your ear. His one single redeeming quality is that he actually does like Jim. That doesn’t make him special. Jim is the youngest cabin boy and the ship mascot. Everyone likes Jim. The question remains- is this character willing to kill a child anyways? In the end John isn’t, and it’s a surprise. Him getting away at the end still has that feeling of the noted enemy getting away at the end of an episode of a super hero show- “Another day- Jim Hawkins!”
In any American adaptation:
We age Jim up. I will say, again, Muppets are more faithful here. Still, every adaptation makes it more ok for him to go to sea. Jim in Treasure Planet is a troubled teen who needs to prove himself. Jim in Muppets is an orphan with nothing to tie him to land. We as Americans don’t like the idea of a Mother sending her son to sea for months to earn income, so that’s not what happens.
A boy needs a father. In the US it is expected that a father teaches thier son all the things that make them a man. Boarding school is last resort rather than expected. So of COURSE Jim is taken in by John- he was missing a father in his life. It is a main character point of the story. The comparison of different men becomes more emotional than intellectual.
This shifts the tone of the story so much. Original book is very much “kid character off on an adventure.” He’s clever, thoughtful, and important to everyone. He gets himself into trouble, but he gets himself out of it, and saves the day multiple times- not just at the end to show growth. It’s personal fantasy for rambunctious little boys. But the family friendly versions written by Americans? The kid is a kid, and it’s about him learning to lean on the right adults and build self confidence. If he’s great right off the bat- where is the story? Well, the original story is a little boy proving to the adults he can do stuff, which is a completely different view of how growing up is supposed to work.
John is so much more sympathetic. You actively root for him to do the right thing and be a good man, despite his love of gold. In Treasure Planet he is mostly a scallywag, and he builds a real bond that makes you cry. In Muppets the ending feels like Jim has won over John’s worldview. You WANT him to be good.
Why? Because Americans have a much different relationship with pirates. Pirates won our wars and built our port towns. They were the first sparks of rebellion against the structure of the British society. They are freedom- in all its worst chaotic ways and best democratic equality ways.
Pirates are chaos- They are clever, disruptive, and write thier own rules. How your society relates to chaos will inform your view of pirates. Often in American story’s- Errol Flynn, Pirates of the Carribean, ect- they are the chaotic hero against the oppressive structure, akin to Robin Hood or Bug Bunny. We do love our conmen.
Meanwhile, British society is built on the idea that structure and bureaucracy keeps things running and people from falling to the wayside. Pirates cause battles and destroy innocent port towns. They disrupt trade routes and people go hungry.
Neither view is wrong, but focus on different aspects of a complex group of people of a very vast spectrum.
It is an interesting intellectual excercise to pull pirate depictions apart. 🧐 Perhaps someday I’ll have a whole thing on that.
I think what I get from this analysis of “Treasure Island” in general is that I want a TV show. Not because you get more info from the book, but because the book is very serial, with many smaller adventures, and you could get more of that feeling of the kid hero solving problems and proving themselves to everyone, while also possibly exploring some of the emotional aspects that we have come to expect out of John Silver and Jim’s relationship with him.
For a modern example- it’s why Percy Jackson works so much better as a show than a movie. Even if they had done the movie well, the show still would have been better, because the book is episodic like that.
A show could also actually portray the Doctor, Trelany, and the Captain the way they should be done. In the original book, they are a wonderful trio akin to Star Trek’s Bones, Spock and Kirk. Only imagine all of Kirk’s charm and daring with none of his brain in Trelany, the Doctor being later Spock with all his intelligence and warmth, and the Captain as a very practical, very firm, often grumpy Bones. Obviously the Doctor and the Captain spend far too much time reigning Trelany in 😂.
Like, I get why two out of three of these guys get squashed together into one character in adaptations- that’s a lot of characters for a movie. But a tv show could be really fun. And the fact that you have these three on one side, with John Silver on the other, as the angels and much louder more charming devil on Jim’s shoulders, fighting for his heart and mind, is amazing. Intrigueing. Dynamic.
The fact that evil can be one charming clever guy, while good is so difficult and complex it need three entirely different guys to portray it is one of the best parts of this story and it is NEVER explored in on screen adaptations.
Finally, it’s a minor note, but Ben coming out of nowhere would stop feeling disruptive. It’s just another episode with another aspect of this treasure hunt to focus on, not some random character out of nowhere. I did appreciate how the Muppets solved that. Picture in the Captain’s quarters and suddenly the appearance on “Ben” is cheered, lol.
Also- could I have a version, of any media, where it is blatant that the Pirates need this kid’s help because he can read? It is such a huge “learning to read is important” moment in literature, and I think I’ve seen it in like one version? Maybe? I think it’s in the Disney live action?
I really like the “Jim knows machines” from Treasure Planet, but it does steal that moment, and in the Muppets, who you think would run with this, it is more about his compass than his reading skills.
Reading lets you have adventures, both imaginative and literal, and I want that to be important in this story. It doesn’t need to be a big hokey moral lesson, but if it was just more obvious, kiddos would make that connection themselves. Sorry- Librarian bias here, but I want it back.
Anyways, I could do with a tv with different seasons just being different classical children’s literature. Most of them were serial, and would lend to that structure really well. We could explore more classical aspects of the story while keeping the bits we tacked on in later adaptations.
Could be fun 🤷🏻♀️
14 notes
·
View notes