What Society Feeds Us
Immersion, racism and police violence in the novel and film
version of The Hate U Give in the EFL classroom
Bachelor’s Thesis
Author: Carl Waldmann Bergvall Supervisor: Per Sivefors
Examiner: Anna Thyberg Term: Fall 2020
Abstract
Angie Thomas’ The Hate U Give is a young adult novel that covers controversial topics such as racism and police violence. In this essay, the concept of immersion is used to examine how the novel and its 2018 film adaptation differ in examining these topics. I claim that the film and novel versions operate through different methods of immersion. The novel mainly operates by immersion through characterization, while the film often prioritizes immersion through setting. In both cases, references are used to create immersion by grounding the novel within real historical events and relevant contemporary discourse. Furthermore, this essay shows that highlighting factors of immersion, history, and contemporary discourse, while working with adaptation in practice, can lead to a more productive way of working with racially aware literature in the EFL classroom.
Key words
The Hate U Give, immersion, film adaptation, young adult fiction, EFL classroom, racism,
Table of contents
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Previous research 3
2 Immersion and discourse in adaptation 4
2.1 Adaptation theory 4
2.2 EFL context 7
3 Immersion and discourse in The Hate U Give 9
3.1 The Hate U Give in an EFL classroom context 16
4 Conclusion 20
1 Introduction
In May of 2020, the African American man George Floyd was killed. After the incident, a video showing a police officer kneeling on Floyd’s neck went viral. This sparked a resurgence of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, and protests were being held in big cities all over the world. Questions about racism and police violence, which have tended to dominate American politics intermittently, or even continuously, for more than half a century, became even more of a staple on the political and societal agenda. Already in 1955, the brutal murder of the young black boy Emmett Till sparked heavy debate, an incident that is intertextually referenced in Angie Thomas’ novel The Hate U Give (2017), and that would become a major factor in the radicalization of the American civil rights movement (Houck and Grindy 4). In 1991, the Rodney King beating caused massive controversy all over the world. Dissatisfaction with racial and economic inequality was combined with rage over the fact that the police officers were not sentenced, and almost an entire week of riots and looting began (Sastry & Grigsby Gates). Even after the violence toned down, the national conversation about social injustice continued. Angie Thomas wrote the short story that inspired The Hate U Give in 2009, following the fatal shooting of young black and unarmed man Oscar Grant. The story started as a reaction against police violence towards African American citizens. The
continuation of the story, a process of adaptation in its own right, was motivated by similar events that happened throughout the United States in the following years (Anderson).
occurred earlier, and it effectively explores the same themes as the BLM movement raises. These themes can briefly be summarized as racism, identity, race relations and police violence. These themes are just as prevalent in the film version of the text. The film
adaptation came out in 2018 and was directed by George Tillman Jr. The title from the novel has been preserved, which potentially could be a clue to the film makers trying to stay faithful to the original source. Faithfulness to the source material may bring illuminating clues to the analysis but will not form a major part of this study. This will be discussed further in the theory section of the essay. The film will be analysed through adaptation theory, which means that it will be systematically studied based on its original source (Leitch 1).
This essay aims to examine how the book and film version of The Hate U Give comparatively reflect on the topics of racism and police violence. Additionally, it aims to examine how to efficiently use film adaptations as an aid when teaching racially aware literature in the English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classroom. This thesis claims that the novel and film adaptation of The Hate U Give operate through different methods of
immersion. The novel mainly operates by immersion through characterization, while the film often prioritizes immersion through setting. In both cases, references are used to create immersion by grounding the novel within real historical happenings and relevant contemporary discourse. Furthermore, this thesis claims that highlighting factors of
immersion, history, and contemporary discourse, while working with adaptation in practice, can lead to a more productive way of working with racially aware literature in the EFL classroom.
themes of police violence and race relations that are omnipresent in both the novel and film version of The Hate U Give. Because of this, combined with the level of language in the novel, I argue that these texts are appropriate for English 6 learners and will therefore base this essay on the English 6 syllabus. Furthermore, the syllabus explicitly states that the course should be taught through “film and other media” (Natl. Ag. f. Ed. 6). This brings further relevance to this study and stresses the importance of finding a way to use the film where it functions as a tool to teach through, not only as a complement to the novel.
1.1 Previous research
Because of the fact that the novel and the film were only published in 2017 and 2018, the amount of research that has been made on them is limited. However, it appears as if that is changing rapidly, and there are already articles and student essays written about the texts. All of these will not be covered here however, but only the ones that are relevant to the subject matter of this study. In his article “Finding the ‘Herstorical’ Narrative in Angie Thomas’s The
Hate U Give,” Adam Levin concludes that “the novel is guided and shaped by the ideologies
of the Black Lives Matter movement” (148). He argues that the novel encourages readers to find ways of using their own stories to instigate social activism. Furthermore, the article has a basis in gender studies. Levin concludes that even within stories that focus on the oppression of black people, women tend to be marginalized and become bystanders, while black men become the protagonists of the stories (148). Because of how politically aware the rest of the novel is, one could easily assume that it is a political standpoint in itself that the protagonist is a young black girl. Furthermore, one could argue that this is an example of directed
immersion. By having a young black girl as the protagonist of the story, the process of immersion becomes easier for young black girls, who are arguably the target demographic.
lens of the film version of The Hate U Give. First and foremost, he explains that when a society is unequal, there can never be a truly stable societal environment. As long as there are unbalanced power dynamics between different groups of people, a threat of conflict will be present (203). Furthermore, he traces these problems to how America’s history of slavery affects contemporary racism and how this contradicts with modern American ideals, leading to dissonance and by extension conflict (205). In the analysis, I will attempt to show how Beck’s statements relate to the film, the novel and to other research on power structures.
2 Immersion and discourse in adaptation
2.1 Adaptation theory
In A Theory of Adaptation, Linda Hutcheon stresses the importance of avoiding fidelity studies. She writes that “the morally loaded discourse of fidelity is based on the implied assumption that adapters aim simply to reproduce the adapted text” (7). Therefore, when singlehandedly focusing on this aspect, the adaptation loses its value as an individual piece of art. Instead, one should attempt to see the adaptation as a multilaminated work. A framework is needed where the adaptation, from the writer’s perspective, is considered a combination of “interpreting and then creating something new” (Hutcheon 20).1 The comparative analysis
will be shaped by these conclusions. Differences between the novel and the film should and will be discussed, but not with a basis in fidelity. Both texts will be judged by how they deal with the questions at hand from their separate perspectives, as different works of art with differing conditions. Moreover, this framework affects the application in the EFL classroom. In order to achieve a constructive conversation on both the novel and the film adaptation, the
1The concept of fidelity is discussed in similar ways in a lot of texts about adaptation. Among others,
pupils might be allowed to do more than discussing differences and similarities. This could be done by giving them the tools to discuss both works in relation to their own conditions. This aspect will be discussed further in the EFL part of the theory section.
Furthermore, Hutcheon discusses three different modes of engagement and says that these modes are characterised by different kinds and degrees of immersion. She then goes on to claim that we are “immersed differently in a world with which we interact than with one that we are either told about or shown” (138). Also, here, the conclusion from Hutcheon lends itself to this study in a couple of ways. First of all, the concept of immersion provides us with a concrete aspect to look at when analysing the novel and film version of The Hate U Give. How do the differing modes of engagement and degrees of immersion affect the experience and thereby how we respond to the inherent discourse of the story? Secondly, the concept of immersion, as defined by Hutcheon, might provide a valuable way of applying our findings concretely in the EFL classroom. As will be discussed further, students appear to respond positively to working in practice and actively with adaptation. Perhaps the immersion that takes place in this process is key to finding productive ways of working with adaptations in the classroom.
take advantage of the fact that a “combination of creativity and criticism makes setting practical tasks of adaptation a valuable pedagogical method” (Babbage 2). This theory does not only define the way adaptations should be studied for academic purposes, but it also creates a mindset that may be adapted by teachers attempting to teach adaptation. Perhaps most importantly, it provides us with even more tools for studying the original work of art and its adaptation in contrast, without focusing on the fidelity of the transformation.
American film theorist Dudley Andrew places fidelity of transformation as one of three possible modes of relation between an original source and an adaptation, the other two being borrowing and intersection (66). Furthermore, he argues that adaptation studies need to take a “sociological turn” (70). Film adaptations need to be considered as acts of discourse and we need to take the forces in society that motivate this discourse into account when studying them (Andrew 70). No adaptations happen in an empty space, but there are societal and often political factors that make the adaptation process relevant, factors that likely will be intertextually visible in the film. Because of the political framework of The Hate U Give, this way of looking at adaptation is highly relevant. The forces in society that are relevant here are primarily those of the BLM movement and the political currents that are related to it. The relation between these forces and the text will to a large extent be explored through Michel Foucault and his discussion on bio-politics. Foucault argues that the ambition of the ones in power has changed in modern times, and that governments now seek to control people’s lives, in contrast to threatening people with death in order to protect a sovereign power, as they have done historically (783). This change in perspective leads to certain procedures and
2.2 EFL context
To arrive at a framework where adaptation theory can be put into an EFL classroom context, several aspects need to be considered. Adaptations of books are, as Hutcheon states, “often considered educationally important for children for an entertaining film or stage version might give them a taste for reading the book on which it is based” (118). Perhaps this is the major reason for why teachers bring film adaptations into the classroom. However, while the aspect of motivation is important and should not be overlooked, this cannot be the only factor that motivates the choice of bringing an adaptation into the EFL classroom. As I will show, it might be necessary for the teacher to teach adaptation as a concept, instead of just using the adaptation as a crutch. In order to do so effectively, one must perhaps start with teaching both of the texts, as I have previously mentioned, as separate works of art.
In The Pedagogy of Adaptation, edited by Dennis Cutchins, several aspects regarding the teaching of adaptations are covered. He bases his assumptions in the pragmatic opinion that students learn best by doing, and therefore concludes that the best way for them to understand adaptation is to work with it in practice. The students themselves should adapt texts from one medium to another and in that way build the foundation for their own understanding of the nature of the texts that they are studying (xv). He also claims that the students must learn to ask questions about the intentionality of the author (xvii), which correlates with the act of looking at adaptations as acts of discourse, as argued by Andrew (70).
study where he attempts to counteract these problems when teaching Mary Shelley’s
Frankenstein (1818) and the 1931 film counterpart directed by James Whale. To do so, he
focuses on four major aspects, of which two are highly relevant to this study. Firstly, Phillips argues that it is essential to help the students investigate “cultural and textual influences on the novel in order to help students understand notions of intertextuality” (22). He also claims that it is important to let the students discover how film and printed texts offer different ways of “seeing.” In regard to Frankenstein, he puts this into practice by having the students paint a picture of how they assume the monster looks only based on the novel, and then comparing the results to the Boris Karloff’s version of the monster (29). In The Hate U Give, there are obviously no supernatural aspects to explore to this degree. But the same effect could be achieved by using scenarios instead. Students could be allowed to read passages of the novel and then illustrate them, either by painting or perhaps even more effectively by acting, in order to then compare their renditions to the film version of the text. This would both create immersion while simultaneously making the students work with the material in practice. The importance of these factors will be explored further in the analysis.
police brutality. These three are interrelated in several ways, but still have distinguishing features that separate them as individual issues. Violence, in this context, is overarching and covers all forms of both explicit and implicit violence. Police brutality emerges in the crossroads between violence and racism, as it is a tool of oppression that serves to uphold current societal hierarchies.
Gareis’ views are mirrored by Stephanie Keenan, among others. In How to use
television and film adaptations, Keenan argues that novels are efficient in activating students’
imagination and that the teacher should work not to hinder that experience. Therefore, when teaching adaptations, the sequencing should be that the students work with the novel first and the film afterwards (1). Following this model, the students can do predictive writing exercises as an introduction to adaptation, and hopefully their own choices will illuminate their
reasoning about the director’s choices. However, if an effective comparative analysis is the end goal, we should perhaps once again consider the importance of looking at the adaptation as a separate work of art. To do so, she suggests that we should teach students “the
terminology, codes and conventions” of the separate mediums (2). This will be further explored in the EFL section of the analysis.
3 Immersion and discourse in The Hate U Give
Williamson’s, which is the private school in a more gentrified neighborhood that Starr attends, the film is blue and cold (6:23). While Starr on a surface level is safer in this world, and sometimes wishes that she never had to leave it, she can never truly be herself, which negatively impacts every relationship that she forms there. The same can be said about when she visits the police station, or about any instance of the film that takes place outside of
Garden Heights, which is the name of the area where Starr and her family lives. Even with her closest friends and boyfriend, she cannot truly relate. When in Garden Heights, warmer colors dominate the screen and the viewers are enticed into feeling what Starr and her family feel, that Garden Heights, despite all of the unrest, is homely and familiar (4:36). The prospect of moving away from Garden Heights and into a more gentrified suburb is simultaneously tempting and appalling. Feelings of safety and stability are contrasted with thoughts about betraying their neighborhood and leaving other black people behind. The book is able to continuously explore these contrasts through inner monologue and arguments between characters. The film version, because of its inherently limited format, can only do so intermittently. Therefore, the director compensates by using unique tools of the medium to create immersion and consequently understanding. These points might be of importance for the classroom context when these narrative conventions are to be handled. For example, is the novel more immersive than the film because of how it puts us inside of Starr’s head?
uncle is very sympathetic towards One-Fifteen, and one might even argue that he defends him. At one point, he even claims that he would possibly have done the same thing (1:31:38). This may be contrasted to the novel, where Starr sees her uncle’s bruised knuckles and it is implied that he assaulted One-Fifteen. Arguably, the film is more apologetic to the police officer altogether. When we see him instantly after the incident, he appears genuinely heartbroken, and seems to have thought that there was an actual gun there (27:10). In the novel, we are not told anything about the police officer’s initial reaction to the incident. We are only told that he is screaming towards Starr and pointing at her with the same gun that killed her friend (Thomas 28). The major difference here is that there is an actor in the film. One could argue that the police officer is likely to be sad in the novel as well, but since it is not described, that would only be a matter of subtext.
In the novel, an enlightening conversation takes place shortly after the murder, where Starr and her father discuss the philosophical implications of Thug Life. One could argue that this is where the moral of the story is presented. It is explained that Thug Life means “The Hate U Give Little Infants Fucks Everybody,” and they start conversing about the deeper meaning of the Tupac Shakur statement:
“Khalil said it’s about what society feeds us as youth and how it comes back and bites them later,” I say. “I think it’s about more than youth though. I think it’s about us, period.”
“Us who?” he asks.
“Black people, minorities, poor people. Everybody at the bottom in society.” “The oppressed,” says Daddy. (167)
law is death. As mentioned earlier, in bio-power, the objective is to take charge of life, rather than the historical approach of threatening with death to protect sovereignty. Therefore, procedures that measure and hierarchize people need to be taken, and the distribution of these measures is made based on the norm (Foucault 783). In the most extreme cases, an idea of racial purity can emerge, and this norm will be put into legislation, which will consequently lead to the government being able to punish people who do not conform to the norm.
However, explicit legislation is not a necessity for indirect punishment as long as the actions are justified in the eyes of the public.
The tendencies discussed above can be identified further as the dialogue moves forward, now introducing historical references that might be of great value:
“Yeah. We’re the ones who get the short end of the stick, but we’re the ones they fear the most. That’s why the government targeted the Black Panthers, right? Because they were scared of the Panthers?”
“Uh-huh,” Daddy says. “The Panthers educated and empowered the people.” (167) Maverick, Starr’s father, also asks Starr to mention another example of where the tactic of empowering the oppressed has been used and she references the 1831 slave rebellion, led by Nat Turner (Thomas 167). I argue that these two historical references serve different
purposes. The mentioning of the Black Panthers brings the reader’s thoughts to social activism. Here, Thomas’ challenge to the dominant discourse is starting to show more explicitly, a process that will continue further down in the conversation. The mentioning of slavery fills an important function as well, since it brings the reader’s thought to the
phenomenon that arguably is the root of the societal problems at hand. Both of the references serve as cases of immersive writing. By anchoring the conversation within real world
novel and by extension be immersed within the story. This process of immersion obviously puts some demands on the readers for prior knowledge, which in some cases will have to be provided from the teacher in a classroom context. In his article about the film version of the story, Beck writes that “the contradiction between American ideals and the enduring effects of racism in a post-slavery nation is expressed in the clash of conflict between minorities and social control agents” (205). This societal analysis is just as applicable to the novel, as we can see here.
When the historical context has been established, the conversation moves towards explaining how the problems are manifested in contemporary society:
“Why was he a drug dealer? Why are so many people in our neighborhood drug dealers?”
I remember what Khalil said—he got tired of choosing between lights and food. “They need money,” I say. “And they don’t have a lot of other ways to get it.” (168) With this quote, the conversation continues to be relevant in relation to Foucault and to the societal perspective in general. By only explaining Khalil’s situation, I argue that this
After they have established how people end up in poverty and criminal behaviour, they start covering the systematisation of the process:
“You got folks like Brenda, who think they need them to survive, and then you got the Khalils, who think they need to sell them to survive. The Brendas can’t get jobs unless they’re clean, and they can’t pay for rehab unless they got jobs. When the Khalils get arrested for selling drugs, they either spend most of their life in prison, another billion-dollar industry, or they have a hard time getting a real job and probably start selling drugs again. That’s the hate they’re giving us, baby, a system designed against us. That’s Thug Life.” (168-69)
Prisons are one aspect of what Foucault calls “the great instruments of state” (781). These are instruments that serve to uphold current power structures and to guarantee “relations of domination and effects of hegemony” (781). Beck, in his article about the film, writes that “the ever present danger of breakdown in the orderly practices of social life is created by the unsettled intergroup relations of groups in an unequal society” (203). This is applicable to both the film and the novel. What this means is that as long as there are instruments in place to maintain power structures, society cannot be completely stable. Riots and unrest are natural consequences that will keep on occurring for as long as society is unequal.
As the conversation between Starr and her father continues, it is made clear that they, and by extension Thomas, share the views discussed above:
“Everybody’s pissed ’cause One-Fifteen hasn’t been charged,” I say, “but also because he’s not the first one to do something like this and get away with it. It’s been
Daddy laughs and gives me dap. “My girl. Watch your mouth, but yeah, that’s about right. And we won’t stop getting fucked till it changes. That’s the key. It’s gotta change.” (169)
In this part of the conversation, systemic oppression is fully connected to the riots. The riots are, as shown in the previous quote by Beck, an unavoidable consequence of the oppressive structures in society.
After this, the narration offers another even clearer example of immersion through characterization, which further works to build on the relation between reader and text. Following Andrew’s model, where we are to see the text as an act of discourse, this is where Thomas undoubtedly attempts to incite social activism. Here, the reader enters the head of the protagonist, and is allowed to read her thought process. This process naturally evokes feelings of sympathy and immersion, and constitutes a tool that is unavailable for the film version of the text:
A lump forms in my throat as the truth hits me. Hard. “That’s why people are speaking out, huh? Because it won’t change if we don’t say something.”
“Exactly. We can’t be silent.” “So I can’t be silent.”
Daddy stills. He looks at me. I see the fight in his eyes. (169-70)
Here, the conversation finally completes its move towards the riots. In dramaturgical terms, this is where the involuntary hero is pushed into the adventure. She chooses not to be silent and to risk her own comfort and safety in order to make a difference in the world. As an act of discourse, this is where Thomas tells the reader to organise and join the fight for social
that riots are a natural response to an unequal society, and now it takes this message one step further and tells the reader that it is our duty to organize and attempt to create change.
A concept that appears to be highly prevalent in the film, while virtually nonexistent in the novel, is the motif of cameras. While it is explicitly stated in both versions that people should use their voices as weapons, it appears that the film alone also argues that they should be using cameras as their shields. It is sporadically throughout the entire film brought up that you should always film when encountering the police, a phenomenon that appears to signify one of the major messages of the film. The novel does not do anything analogous, which further points to the hypothesis that this is an isolated choice made by the filmmakers.
Furthermore, this serves as a kind of meta-device, where the filmmaker brings attention to the film medium. This is a technique that goes back to the filmmakers of the French new wave and can be considered a kind of soft breaking of the fourth wall (Thompson and Bordwell 406). In this context, the act of putting cameras in the spotlight could therefore be argued to serve as a case of anti-immersion. Thomas Bjorner writes that “lack of medium awareness is actually a defining element of an immersion-related experience” (3), which creates a stark contrast in relation to a film that reminds the audience of the film medium. These facts suggest that the filmmakers were potentially aware of this phenomenon but decided that it was worth the sacrifice of immersion in order to put forward what they considered to be an essential message. Just as likely, however, is that the filmmakers did not consider these consequences to any larger degree, and simply considered the message relevant enough to integrate into their film.
3.1 The Hate U Give in an EFL classroom context
While adaptations have clearly been put to much use in the EFL classroom, it remains
the original source. Both works are, as I have shown in the theory section, separate pieces of art and must therefore be treated accordingly. When adaptations are used proficiently, the students are aware of the adapting process and have a set theoretical framework that can be used to understand it. For this to be possible, it might be necessary for the teacher to be knowledgeable in the field, and be ready to set aside the time that is necessary for the exercise to flourish. Therefore, every case where adaptation studies are used in the classroom will be time consuming but at the same time possibly highly rewarding. The teacher may want to carefully consider if this is the most effective way to spend the time. What we are attempting here, based on the findings previously discussed, is to create a progression that moves from context to immersion.
As Nathan Phillips has shown, it is essential to establish “the cultural and textual influences on the novel in order to help students understand notions of intertextuality” (34). Therefore, I argue that an element of CLIL could be introduced at the start of the teaching module, in order to properly prepare the students for their analytical work. They could be taught about the history of the BLM movement and race relations in the United States, and then learn the contemporary relevance of it as well. This would also lay the groundwork for the students to approach the film adaptation as an act of discourse, and furthermore, to ask questions about the intentionality of the author. This, as we have seen, follows the framework that has been established by both Andrew and Cutchins. In this context, the author is analysed as a product of the discourse of which they is a part. Only after a comprehensive
understanding of the historical framework has been established, are the pupils ready to start working with the texts individually.
makes the separate works of art stand out in their own right. As we have seen, Keenan argues that we should teach students terminology, and conventions of the separate media in order to achieve this (1). Following her model further, we may want to start with the novel, and therefore teach them the language and tools that are necessary in order to work with the novel as an isolated text. However, based on the pragmatist approach that has been presented, it is crucial that we let the students work with this in practice (Cutchins xv). Therefore, it might also be relevant to revisit Phillips’ argument that we should teach students different ways of seeing. An example of this would be for the students to pick a passage or chapter of the book and rewrite as a romantic poem. This approach obviously requires some grounding in
romantic poetry, which if the pupils do not already have an established understanding means that the teacher must decide whether creating this is a proficient way to spend their time. If this approach is chosen however, the pupils can practice allegory and allusion as they attempt to paint a picture of the landscape in Garden Heights, or perhaps how it contrasts with
Williamson’s. They practice poetry, which is covered in the English 6 syllabus (Natl. Ag. f. Ed. 6), at the same time as they are starting to understand the process of adaptation and hopefully are further immersed into the world of the story. Such visualization would be the most
meaningful if the students have not yet seen the film, which synergizes well with the opinions of Keenan. Therefore, this approach is only advisable in the cases where the teaching is divided in a way that first puts the emphasis on the novel in isolation, before moving towards applying the film to the reasoning.
Here, a crossroad emerges in choosing the appropriate approach to continue with the teaching. If the teacher has chosen to use romantic poetry as suggested above, the next step must be for the students to watch the film and compare what is shown to their own
the film. If the approach of romantic poetry was not chosen, two steps should potentially be taken. Firstly, the teacher might want to find another way of teaching the novel that still follows the guidelines that have been accounted for here. Secondly, I argue that the students should finally begin their own adaptation processes.
Following the second alternative, as accounted for above, the pupils should finally be ready to create their own adaptation processes. Several possible options are available for the teacher here, and positive results could be gained in varying ways. The adaptation could potentially be going in both directions, not just turning novel into film but also the other way round. The essential aspect is that the pupils use what they have learned about their original source and, while keeping the inherent discourse of the story, create a new text within a different art form.
- Turn part of the film into a poem - Turn part of the film into a short story - Turn part of the novel into a painting - Turn part of the novel into a short play
- Turn part of the novel into a script for a short film
A challenging, but most likely highly rewarding, aspect for the teacher here is to ensure that the adaptation processes maintain the focus on political context. This will also help in making sure that the teaching thematically follows the syllabus as closely as possible.
opinions will have the opportunity to come forward. It might be necessary here to mention that it is not an objective fact that the film censors the riots in any substantial way. This opinion is highly subjective, and the riots in the film version of the text clearly contain some violence and controversial elements. Furthermore, perhaps even if the film glosses over things, that in itself could make for interesting classroom discussion.
4 Conclusion
The aim of this essay has been to analyze the similarities and differences in how the novel and film versions of The Hate U Give reflect on the subjects of racism and police violence.
Additionally, this essay has investigated how to efficiently use film adaptations as an aid when teaching racially aware literature in the EFL classroom. This has been done in accordance with the learning objectives as stated in the syllabus for English level 6.
As expected, the analysis has shown that the film and novel versions of The Hate U
Give operate through different methods of immersion. The novel mainly operates by
immersion through characterization, while the film often prioritizes immersion through setting. In both cases, references are used to create immersion by grounding the novel within real historical happenings and relevant contemporary discourse. While these differences are undoubtedly present, the division is not completely dichotomic.
Furthermore, the novel and the film are very similar thematically. Both texts cover racism and police violence, in general in similar ways. Slight differences have been uncovered in regard to sympathy with the police officer, where the film appears to be more sympathetic towards his perspective. Whether this is a conscious decision, or a natural outcome of the inherent functions of the separate mediums, is still to be uncovered. Either way, these
discourse, which is further enhanced by interviews given by both Thomas and Tillman Jr. Both the film and the novel attempt to incite social activism, however in slightly different ways.
In addition, regarding the EFL classroom, the concept of adaptation can clearly be used in several ways and serve productive purposes. However, it is only with careful consideration from the teacher that the film adaptation alone can serve as an enriching experience, and at the same time enlighten the literary work at hand. The analysis has shown that highlighting factors of immersion, history, and contemporary discourse, while working with adaptation in practice, could lead to a more productive way of working with racially aware literature in the EFL classroom.
For further studies on The Hate U Give, there is a myriad of choices regarding in what direction to go. To completely confirm or disregard what I hypothesize in this essay, a study of more empirical nature would be highly beneficial, where you put what has been suggested here into practice and then analyze the results. This could potentially be done in comparison to a student group that works with the novel in a more traditional way, or one where the teacher teaches the novel and film comparatively but without focusing on the adaptation process, as is suggested here. Furthermore, both the novel and the film are new enough texts for the field of research to be exceedingly open. While there are obviously several other aspects to explore regarding the film and novel in comparison, both versions also have much more to discover as isolated texts. A study where the book in isolation is examined in relation to Foucault’s discussion on bio-politics could further highlight sociocultural aspects that were impossible to integrate in this limited study. The same can be said about a study that
Works Cited
Anderson, Tre’vell. ”How the deaths of Oscar Grant and Trayvon Martin inspired ‘The Hate U Give.’” Los Angeles Times, 30 Aug. 2018.
https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-ca-mn-sneaks-hate-u-give-20180830-story.html. Accessed 14 Dec. 2020.
Andrew, Dudley. “Adaptation.” Film and Literature: An Introduction and Reader, edited by Timothy Corrigan, 2nd ed., Routledge, 2012, pp. 66-70.
Babbage, Frances, et al. “Adapting Wilde for the Performance Classroom: No Small Parts.“
Redefining Adaptation Studies, edited by Dennis Cutchins,, et al, Scarecrow Press,
2010, pp. 13-26.
Beck, Bernard. “No City for Young Boys: The Hate U Give, When They See Us and African American Youth.” Multicultural Perspectives, vol. 21, no. 4, 2019, pp. 202-205.
Taylor and Francis Online, DOI: 10.1080/15210960.2019.1690381. Accessed 14 Dec.
2020.
Bjorner, Thomas, et al. “How to Describe and Measure Obstacles of Narrative Immersion in a Film? The Wheel of Immersion as a Framework.” Nordicom Review, vol. 37, no. 1, 2016, pp. 1-17. Sciendo, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/nor-2016-0004. Accessed 2 Jan. 2021.
Cutchins, Dennis, et al. “Introduction.” The Pedagogy of Adaptation, edited by Dennis Cutchins, , et al, Scarecrow Press, 2010, pp. 1-8.
Foucault, Michel. “Right of Death and Power over Life.” Literary Theory: An Anthology, edited by Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan, 3rd ed., Wiley Blackwell, 2017, pp. 778-791.
pp. 220-222. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/40027140?seq=1. Accessed 14 Dec. 2020.
Houck, Davis W., and Matthew A. Grindy. Emmett Till and the Mississippi Press. University of Mississippi, 2008.
Hutcheon, Linda. A theory of Adaptation. 2nd ed., Routledge, 2006.
Keenan, Stephanie. “How To: Use Television and Film Adaptations.” The Times Educational
Supplement, no. 5172, TES Global Limited, 13 Nov. 2015, pp. 1-4.
Leitch, Thomas. Film Adaptation and its Discontents: From Gone with the Wind to The
Passion of the Christ. John Hopkins University Press, 2007.
Levin, Adam. “Finding the ‘Herstorical’ Narrative in Angie Thomas’s The Hate U Give.”
English Studies in Africa, vol. 63, no. 1, 2020, pp. 148-166. Taylor and Francis Online, DOI: 10.1080/00138398.2020.1780762. Accessed 14 Dec. 2020.
National Agency for Education. “Syllabus English 6.” 2013.
https://www.skolverket.se/download/18.4fc05a3f164131a74181056/153537229. Accessed 28 Sep. 2020.
Phillips, Nathan. “Frankenstein’s Monstrous Influences: Investigating Film Adaptations in Secondary Schools.” The Pedagogy of Adaptation, edited by Dennis Cutchins, et al, Scarecrow Press, 2010, pp. 1-17.
Sastry, Anjuli and Karen Grigsby Gates. “When LA Erupted in Anger: A Look Back at the Rodney King Riots.” NPR, 26 April. 2017.
https://www.npr.org/2017/04/26/524744989/when-la-erupted-in-anger-a-look-back-at-the-rodney-king-riots. Accessed 14 Dec. 2020.
Thomas, Angie. The Hate U Give. Walker Books, 2017.
THR Staff. “’The Hate U Give’: Film Review – TIFF 2018.” The Hollywood Reporter, 7 Sep. 2018. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/review/hate-u-give-review-1141145. Accessed 15 Jan. 2021.
