SILVIANA SECARA 2nd year MA University of Oradea

THE COLOR PURPLE vs. THE COLOR PURPLE

A womanist writer as Alice Walker calls herself, she has long been associated with feminism, presenting black existence from the female perspective. The novel The Color Purple was praised by critics for the beauty of the language while others felt it portrayed black men in a negative light. However, the novel achieved great recognition and the writer was awarded the Pulitzer Prize and The National Book Award. The novel was made into movie in 1985, starring Whoopi Goldberg, Oprah Winfrey and Danny Glover and it was directed by Steven Spielberg. This paper tries to parallel The Color Purple, the novel, to The Color Purple, the movie, focusing on the main differences between Alice Walkers story and Spelbergs own vision. Steven Spielbergs 1985 adaptation follows the general plot somewhat faithfully and, occasionally, even literally. At first sight, the movie seems very similar to the original story expressed in the book. In the opening scenes Celies father even uses the same words: You better not never tell nobody but God. Itd kill your mammy (Walker, 2004: 1). But upon closer examination, it is obvious that one essential element is missing. The main difference is that the film doesnt show Celie talking to God about her problems. The epistolary style of the book allows Celie to first tell and share her feelings and problems with God and later on with her sister Nettie by writing letters. As the medium of film wouldnt allow someone to write all the time, Alice Walker developed a visionary version of Celies

conversation with God. As Walker remarks: Though it hurt to see in Spielbergs film that Celie ceases to be a writer, which she is to her very soul, when I had sat down to re-create her, it bored me to make her a writer, and so I thought of something else (Walker, 1996: 35). Related to this idea, Alice Walker points out that a major flaw of the movie is the lack of a process showing Celies reflections. She says that Celies character couldnt develop into a self-conscious woman who stands up and fights in the end without the process of telling someone her feelings. Although the movie doesnt present Celie as a writer, its visual power helps explain the close relationship between Celie and Nettie: a meadow of purple flowers serving as a backdrop for childhood scenes. Another important character in the novel and also in the movie is that of Shug. The movie introduces the central figure of Shug on a rainy day. Shug arrives with Albert and Harpo who carry her into the house. In the novel, Shugs first arrival happens in a sunny day, reflecting the difference between Walkers vision and Spielbergs. Spielberg introduced a melody in the movie, Sister, which evolves into the theme song of the motion picture. The song was written by Quincy Jones and is used in the juke joint scene as well. In this scene, Shug, wearing a provocative stylish red dress, entertains people. Celie and Albert are both watching her with admiration. Because she is wearing dark unfashionable clothes, Celie is laughed at. The growing connectedness between these two women is developed in a scene with lesbian tendencies. Celie, wearing Shugs red dress, tells her that Albert beats her up regularly and Shug starts kissing her softly. The movie follows somewhat faithfully

the plot of the book. At first, Shug laughs at Celie (What the hell is it?/ You sure is ugly.) (Walker, 2004: 54) but then gets closer to her. The scene in which the women kiss each other is more explicit in the novel. Celie, not knowing much about her sexuality, is supposed to look at her vagina. The lesbian relationship is not obvious in the movie; as Alice Walker remarks: In the movie almost all the women kiss each other, making the kiss between Celie and Shug less significant (http://www.theroot.com/views/color-precious). In spite of this, one major difference in the portrayal of Shug in the movie is the newly created subtheme of Shugs father, who is a preacher that doesnt accept the life she leads. Throughout the movie, Shug often attempts to please him. It is obvious that Shug suffers because of the situation she is in. Because of Shugs wish for reconciliation with her father, her character appears vulnerable. This is a major difference from the Shug we know from the book. Shug is the only woman in the novel who is totally free from mens oppression. She doesnt give into any kind of control. After Celies departure with Shug, her life in freedom is not described as it is in the book. Therefore, Celies independence is not underlined as it is in the book. For example, there is only one scene in the movie that shows Celies shop as a symbol of her life as a free woman. Spielberg had another vision concerning male characters. They are turned in the movie into caricatures, especially Harpo, who is Mr.-s oldest child, whose leitmotif is that of falling through roofs (see the juke joint scene). Although in the book the author stresses the idea of conjugal violence, as Harpo is beaten by his wife, Sofia, the director of the movie presented the idea in a humourous manner. Even Mr.- falls into buffoonery. This is powerfully reflected in the scene in which he is getting ready for Shugs first arrival.

The movie shows Albert in various ridiculous situations: for example, when he is not able to make breakfast for Shug. Albert seems more like a caricature of the strong dominant character described in the novel The Color Purple. After Shug arrives, the movie doesnt show any violence towards Celie whereas the book does. Celie still has to suffer because of Albert and the relationship between him and Shug. She feels hurt by the fact that Shug loves Albert: He love looking at Shug. I love looking at Shug. But Shug dont love looking at but one of us. Him. But that the way it spose to be. I know that. But if that so, why my heart hurt me so? (Walker, 2004: 132). In the movie, Celies life is shown without any hurt or violence at all. Because of these differences, the character of Albert also evolves differently, as towards the end of the movie Albert is put at the center. We see him in a totally dirty house, addicted to alcohol. The audience is tempted to pity him because his suffering is depicted in such a way. By focusing on Alberts bitterness the importance and tragedy of Celies painful experience is undermined. She is no longer at the center of the story and most importantly she is no longer the only person who suffers. Walker imagined a happy ending that would show Celie reunited with her family and Albert and Shug standing in front of the house. This complete harmony is not achieved by the movie: Albert is separated and stands on the field accompanied only by his horse. Alice Walker points out that: [...] to end with him on his horse seems to John Wayne-ish, and makes it seem hes more responsible and in control of the happiness hes observing than he is. [...] The feeling of the people is circle, not hierarchy (Walker, 1996: 156). There are also invented scenes in the movie. To make it more appealing to the public, Spielberg invents the duelling voices scene: Shugs at Harpos juke joint vs. an

unnamed lead choir singer in the church. Predictably, Shug chimes in with her blues version of the gospel and leads a procession that bursts into the church and turns the religious service into a spectacle, ending with the reconciliation between Shug and her estranged preacher-father. Another invented scene presents Celie preparing to shave Mr.- (and possibly to slit his throat), Shug running back to prevent that possibility, all this paralleled by the scene of Nettie in Africa witnessing a ritual of initiation involving scarification. Pauline Kael admits that Spielberg wanted to make a serious movie, but that he probably liked Celies childlike character and the books lyrical presentation of the healing power of love more than he did the seriousness of the story. (http://www.theroot.com/views/color-precious) African-American novelist Ishmael Reed also spoke out against Walkers general treatment of males. However, when the movie appeared, protesters picketed screenings, complaining about the further demonization of black males by whites and finding easy targets in Spielberg and Meyjes (and in white studio executives). Ironically, the movie allowed the protest to be transferred from within to the outside of the black community. Therefore, there are various differences between the novel, as Alice Walker imagined it, and the movie, directed by Spielberg. But making a novel into a movie involves also a risk. Ask any reader who has seen the movie version of a favourite novel, and the answer will usually be, The book was better. That's because readers of a novel have already made their own perfect movie version. They have visualized it, fleshed out the locations and set the pace that is why some people tend to reject the movie. It is up to us which we consider better but remember books are the seed of creativity. Movies can be the result. And reading is the ticket to get there. (http://www.helium.com/items/1195474-reading-is-more-important-than-movies)

References Hobby, B. (2010). Encyclopedia of Great American Writers. Vol. IV: 1945-1970. New York: Facts on File.

Tibbetts, J. C. (2005). The Encyclopedia of Novels into Film. Facts on File Inc. Walker, Alice (2004). The Color Purple. London: Orion Books Ltd. http://www.theroot.com/views/color-precious [ 2011, January 4] http://www.helium.com/items/1195474-reading-is-more-important-than-movies [2011, January 4]