From bustles to Beverley Hills:

adapting Austens Emma for the

21st century
How adaptation and appropriation can give classics a
new lease of life
with me, that Clueless doesnt just rewrite
I love a good film. Who doesnt? And when I
was asked to write a piece about the 1990s
classic, Clueless, I couldnt think of anything
better!
For those who havent seen it, Clueless is a
seminal film for many girls my age. It was
released when I was twelve so the
glamourous, American high school flick
seemed a stark contrast to my dowdy, uber
Yorkshire, comprehensive school life. The
posters emblazoned the three main
characters on mobile phones, in glamourous
clothing, with pink sparkly letters: what is
there not to love?! They were everything we
wanted to be and more. It was only much later
in life that I became aware that the story was
based on Jane Austens classic tale of a
spoilt, bored, rich girl, Emma. So Im going
to look at the two, their similarities and
differences, their styles and audiences and,
by the time Ive finished, I think youll agree

Emma, it improves on it.

appropriation
prpre()n/
Although not a true adaptation of the original,
Clueless is a successful appropriation
including many of the major themes and
perspectives that Jane Austen pursued. As in
the original, Clueless is exclusively in the first
person with direct speech throughout where
conversations and events are witnessed by
the viewer/reader. The themes running
through each version are the same too: the
need to fit in and be popular, social position,
wealth and even the characters themselves.

Michael Alexander coined the term

palimpsestuous meaning
works, haunted at all times by
their adapted texts.
Even with all of these common themes
intertwining them together, there are many

differences
too.
Some
articles about
Austen, point
to the fact
that the
target
audience for Emma was women and she
tailored her plotlines specifically to this
demographic (Eberle, H). In 1815, when
Austen wrote Emma, its widely believed that
it was written to be read by ladies of a similar
position, social standing and education to
Austen herself.
Clueless however, is clearly aimed at a
younger generation of audience: the
characters in Emma and Clueless both mirror
their intended audience. The humour,
language, the overall flamingo pink colour
scheme all feed on modern stereotypes of
teenaged girls.
A century or two later, we might get to see her
living it up similarly. The effect is the same
though, the introduction of the main character
is performed BY the main character. In
Emma, the protagonist herself is an
omniscient narrator whereas in Clueless,
Cher speaks directly to the audience in a
voiceover as well as enacting her actions.

Aside from Cher and Emma having similar

backgrounds for their eras, there are other
strings that tie the two media together. Aside
from the Cher and Emma being similarly
situated in society (allowing for the fact that
society has changed over time) the strings
that bind the two protagonists and their stories
continue across the years and differing media.
Many characters from Emma are mirrored in
Clueless for example; the match made
between Mr. Weston and Miss Taylor in the
first chapters of the book is similar to the
match made by Cher in the film between her
two teachers. Both Emma and Chers fathers
are respectable men, the counterpart to
Robert Martin is Travis (a boy with a good
heart but who is deemed as socially
unacceptable to court Harriet (Tai)), Mr Elton
is simply named "Elton" in the film and the
very important character of Mr Knightley has
the counterpart of Josh, Chers step brother,
in the film. Lastly, Frank Churchill, (who, in the
book is secretly engaged to be married
already), has Christian to represent him in

Clueless where instead of being engaged, he

screen, by poor acting or poor choice of

is gay (thus rendering him similarly

actors (think of the 2004 film version of

unavailable).

Asimovs I, Robot). I was amazed when I reread Emma and the penny finally dropped
that there was a way for an old classic to be
turned into something more modern without
losing some of the hidden jibes and jokes that
Austen wrote into the original.

Film can do so much

enormously much that is
beyond the scope of the
printed page (Hawthorn).
The concept of transforming a book set in the
Home Counties in 19th century into a story
relatable to the youth of today is genius. I
mean, there have been numerous
unsuccessful attempts at adapting and
appropriating various classics over the years
but the way that Heckerling brought this, fullon into mainstream culture is sheer brilliance.
It turned twelve year old me onto the idea that
books have the ability to be seen through
different eyes and can capture concepts in a
variety of ways and that the way I visualised
the characters in my head, wasnt always the
same as anyone else.
So many films these days bear little
resemblance to the original material, whether
by failure of the translation from paper to

The mockery of the social class system she

was used to enabled Austen to write a clever
and satirical classic examining the roles of
women, of family, of class and of social
structure.
The book relies on the observational and
interpretation skills of the writer whereas the
film relies on a great deal of skill in the
appropriation of an entertaining story and
resetting it in a very different historical
context. As a keen reader, the way I interpret
the characters and visualise them based on
their descriptions is half the joy of picking up a
book. In film, none of your imagination is
needed: the screenwriter, Producer and
Director all have a say in the finished visual
appearance including the actors, the choice of
set, even the choice of which excerpts from

the original will be faithfully reproduced in the

final product. A good example of this is the
Box Hill incident in the original version of
Emma; this is a turning point in the book. A
moment where Emma makes fun of Miss
Bates (when asked to name either one very
clever thing or three dull things, Emma
declares that there may be a difficulty.
Pardon me, but you will be limited as to
numberonly three at once.) and Mr
Knightly berates her for doing so , bringing
Emmas flaws to light. In Clueless, it would be
difficult for Heckerling to replay this incident
faithfully with a picnic so she opted for Cher to
make an insensitive comment to her maid.
When she explains to Josh that she said she

We have control over our

private reading of a book in a
way that we do not have over
film: we can pause, flick back
to refresh our memory of
earlier scenes, increase or
decrease the speed of our
reading or even stop and
think about what we have
read (Hawthorn, p.184)

couldnt understand the maid because she

didnt speak Mexican, Josh responds with
the single line shes from El Salvador, its a
totally different country. A simple put down
followed with humour as opposed to the
scalding rebuke from Mr Knightley.
As a film, Clueless was always up against stiff
competition in my eyes: I love books. I feel as
though I always have but Im not so sure that
12 year old Alex would agree. The whole idea
of watching or reading something historical or

In Clueless the hypotext is mirrored, a dance

is attended by the main characters. It is here
that (Mr) Elton snubs Tai/Harriet Smith, Josh
steps in to save her from embarrassment and
reveals himself as a true gentleman and much
more worthy of attention than perhaps
Emma/Cher had originally given him credit for.
It is at this dance where in both formats the
protagonist sees Mr Knightly/Josh as a
potential suitor.

period was enough to put me off from the

Shortly after the dance, the scenes from both

start. A film, however, set now with funny

formats mirror each other once again (proving

characters, funky soundtrack and appealing

again that this is more than just a mere

mise-en-scene, makes the whole ensemble

appropriation of the original text), and here,

much more relatable to its intended audience.

the carriage manoeuvres are repeated with

the teenagers' cars. Elton professes his

been subject to, faced with such a threat?)

feelings for Cher in a car after the dance and

had at the time of her attack.

attempts to kiss her which she rejects much

as Emma does when Mr Elton attempts to do
similar.
Much as I love this film for its quirkiness and
silliness, it also irks me when it doesnt follow
true to the original storyline. Dont get me
wrong, Heckerling did a great job in
transforming a 19th century piece of literature
into a more manageable (and enjoyable?)
modern appropriation but theres a couple of
things that bother me.

The more Ive pored over both the original

Firstly, there is no counterpart to Frank

and Clueless, the more my mind is set. Emma

Churchills secret wife, Jane Fairfax, with

is a brilliant work of fiction by a woman far

Cluelesss Christian. Okay so being gay

ahead of her time. The story is interesting and

brings him more in line with social norms of

highlights many themes and issues that

this era but maybe if there was a hint of him

Austen herself (and her audience) considered

having a clandestine partner on the side, it

to be important. Heckerling, however, used

might ring a little truer to the original. A gay

the bare skeleton of the same story and

character would be practically unheard of in

appropriated the hell out of it in order to turn it

Austens era so Heckerling has made a nice

into the wonder that is Clueless. Through

conversion of character but Im not sure it

spending time examining the skills that both

adds anything of value to the story.

Austen and Heckerling used in order to bring

the story to life, I am more firm than ever that

Secondly, in the book, Harriet is threatened by

Clueless wins out over Emma. To be able to

gypsies which is a terrifying experience for

take a story, relate it to the here and now and

her. In the film its just two boys in the local

yet retain some of the original satirical and

shopping mall: although these boys threaten

mocking elements that Austen utilised takes a

to throw Tai off a balcony, I think it perhaps

great deal of skill and bravery!

doesnt equal the emotional impact that

Harriet (and women in general with the same
socio economic background) would have

References
Austen, J (1989) Emma. London: Virago Classics.
Eberle, H (2011). How Jane Austen Uses Marriage to get what she wants. University of Tennessee.
Tennessee.
Hawthorn, J (2011). Studying the Novel. London. Bloomsbury.
Heckerling, A (1995) Clueless. Paramount.