Lamb to the Slaughter by Roald Dahl:
Text vs. Video Adaptation
An analytical essay comparing and contrasting the literary elements of Roald Dahl's short story "Lamb to the Slaughter" with its video adaptation.
The video and the short story versions of Lamb to the Slaughter by Roald Dahl, despite being the same story, are different enough that they are almost completely different[cite: 120]. Different enough that I think it makes the most sense to compare them by literary elements[cite: 121]. Not all of them, mind you, but the ones that make sense, the ones that seem to differ the most[cite: 122]. At least to me. These being: Narrative – the point of view that the story is told from, Voice – the tone with which the story comes across, and Character – the way the characters are portrayed[cite: 123].
Narrative Structure and Perspective
The first thing the I noticed (in fact it’s hard not to) is the choice to have the video version be in medias res – or starting in the middle and presenting the beginning via dialogue and flashbacks[cite: 124]. This actually confused me quite a bit, and I re-checked the video to make sure I was actually starting at the beginning[cite: 125]. Where the text begins you with the main character sitting and waiting for the husband to return home, the video begins at the point where she returns from the grocer on her alibi-establishing trip and finds the body[cite: 126]. Like so many stories don in this manner, some of the elements fall apart once you figure out that she’s the one who committed the murder – such as why she put on the performance in front of no one when she saw the body[cite: 127]. When reading the text, we know why – to get herself into the mindset to make the call[cite: 128]. But in the video, in hindsight, her reaction to the body seems solely for the purpose of selling the lie to the audience[cite: 129]. This is a hole that could have been plugged with a line like “OK.. I need to get myself in the mindset for the phone-call…”[cite: 130].
Perspective-wise, the text is entirely in Mary’s head, we only sense what she does[cite: 130]. We only know and feel what she does, where the video is following everyone around, letting us see what they do and say, while denying us their inner thoughts and emotions[cite: 131].
Voice and Tone
For the voice, it seems to be to have shifted between the two[cite: 132]. The text is a bit more suspenseful, we are introduced to her and know how she feels and thinks, then she commits the act in what we know is a detached state where she didn’t know what she was doing[cite: 133]. There’s almost a desperation, a gravity, a need to escape her mistake[cite: 134]. In the video it almost looks like an impulsive crime of passion that while she instantly regrets, the voice unfolds as a sort of playful cat-and-mouse vibe between the character and the police[cite: 135].
Character Portrayal
There’s one thing that the video is able to give us over the text, however. Character[cite: 136]. We see more of who everyone is[cite: 137]. Everyone gets more to say, we see body language, we hear tone[cite: 137]. We get more of the ‘show don’t tell’ as we get to watch the story unfold before our eyes[cite: 138]. In the video, as in real life, we don’t have the benefit of being in people’s heads[cite: 139]. We see the characters from the outside, as the camera shows us[cite: 140].
Conclusion
All in all, these were two interesting pieces[cite: 140]. I would love to see a different version that follows the text a little more closely, as I’m sure the choices made in the video were to help sensationalize it for a viewing audience[cite: 141].