Integrity Issues

I love Hayao Miyazaki's animated film, Howl's Moving Castle. It's one of his lesser appreciated films, not having won the acclaim and awards of Mononoke and Spirited Away, but it still remains one of my favorites. Inspired by Dianna Wynne Jones' book of the same title, Howl's Moving Castle is the story of a young girl who is cursed by the Witch of the Waste to take on the facade of an old woman. Adjusting rather readily to her new life, she takes up residence with the famed (and feared) Wizard Howl, a man who roves the countryside in a mysterious moving castle and is supposed to eat the hearts of young maidens (among other terrible things). At about that point, Miyazaki's film branches off rather substantially from Jones' original tale. For Miyazaki, the book is more of a springboard than any sort of script. He uses the very basics of the characters and plot to tell his own story, in which everyone and everything is fresh and new.

But is that alright? Or did Miyazaki violate some sort of unwritten code in doing this? Only recently have I considered the integrity of artistic work, specially in books and film, in this specific way. In Miyazaki's film, fundamental aspects of the plot and characters are altered in ways unintended by Jones in her original book.

A few years ago, Neil Gaiman's book, Coraline, faced similar issues when it was made into a movie, but because of Gaiman's intimate work in the production of the film, such changes seem more appropriate. (The alternations to Coraline were significantly less dramatic than Howl in any case.) Although the addition of a completely new character may seem a drastic change, Wybie's presence in the film was much needed to relieve Coraline of the internal dialogues that fill the book. Another character was necessary to avoid a movie filled with the thoughts of the main character. Even still, Wybie's presence had a significant impact on the scenes and motivations of various characters. And Coraline herself was quite a different character in the movie as in the book. But when the original author of the story signed off on such things himself--and too admitted the importance and necessity of certain changes--there seems to be less issue at hand. Even still, was the integrity of the original Coraline and her story compromised for the film, even if it was a success?

It's a tricky situation. As a writer myself, I cringe at the idea of my characters being interpreted in ways not intended by myself. I'm well aware that it's not unusual to see characters and stories from various movies and books twisted and contorted in ways they were never intended by fans, but it seems quite different when someone is laying claim over such things in an official way.

Do I enjoy Miyazaki's Howl's Moving Castle? Oh, immensely. I love his story and his versions of the characters. But having read the book, there is always something somewhat troubling to me when I approach the film now. Among other things, I feel in some ways that Howl was cheated, that important aspects of his character have been ignored. But Miyazaki's Howl is not Jones' Howl.

Sometimes I wonder how Jones feels about that.

But perhaps I'm just over-thinking things.


Love and peace,
Aemilius