Okay. I think we're we're good to go. So good morning and welcome. We are recording the session today. So hello to everyone. My name is come there with us. I'm speaking to you this morning from from Melbourne on behalf of my Let me share my screen and then I'll just kind of threw a few preliminaries. So here we go. Right. So on behalf of my co-organizers, to be Grossman, total H. Smith in data on behalf of all of our contributors. Welcome to our symposium. To be continued defining, producing, performing, tuning, and theorizing cereals and adaptations. I'll make a few brief opening comments and then live directly to the first of our panels on aesthetics. But first, I want to signal that this symposium, at least in part time about through our shared interests and investment in to book series, adaptation in visual culture and screen see realities. Please. Why I can't pick up the sound on my earphones plugged in. I can we can sorry If I could ask others to replace mute because we can all hear that that conversation. You plug this in here. Right? I'll continue. But please everyone, if if you're not speaking, please have you muted. I guess I was about to say that 1228 contributors belong to the editorial board of these two series. And, and, and I bring together our common interests in adaptation and seriality. I said we've organized our speakers into four panels, aesthetics, representation, media, and reception. But we expect that these will overlap and interrelate the presentations across all four panels or teasingly brief. And we've done this so that I might serve our overarching aim. And that is to provoke discussion and to establish a conversation, hopefully one that will be continued. Between seriality and adaptation. Scholars study scholars. Picasso as a starting point to our first panel. Let me draw attention to a few comments that Frank, hello Tonight an interview with or by Henry Jenkins. The first is cavities comment that the study of seriality is often the study of specific temporalities, rhythms, speeds, frequencies, intermissions, and gaps. And of course, this immediately draws attention to the fact that two central components of seriality, continuity and also gaps. This point is night by pelleted, but also by Jason Mattel in his work on organic and operational seriality. And it's my differently in relation to adaptation studies by Tom LH in his essay, mind the gaps. So asked by Jenkins to define popular seriality, character said, I would preface any definition by pointing out that serial stories usually move forward in adaptive feedback loops with their own effects. And this then allows us to provide a definition. He says Series, and he refers here to both episodic and progressive formats. It says series can be defined as self observing systems. I guess having mentioned just these couple of points, I want to then move to the question or to the first here might be a little tweak that my first question. And this is not only for the first panel but rod across all four sessions. Is adaptation process of serialization or is serialization process of adaptation? My second question draws out a climb night by Andrew dolly in his visual digital culture book, and this is 20 years ago, way back in 2000. It rolls out a comment my bipedally and specifically the question is, in the new millennium, has seriality. A poetics of repetition displaced the notion of adaptation and framed contemporary cultural practice. Cinema in particular. In terms of intermediary. Alito's, there's a couple of opening questions, a couple of broader questions for us to begin with. Now had I had time, I would have drawn these questions out and some others through a recent example, namely H20 foods at Zola, the 2020 film adaptation of Asia's all the kings 148 installment serial media tweet From 2015. Seems to me that this example crystallizes our shared interest in issues of adaptation and seriality, but also intermediary. So I know that all 28 of our presenters will be addressing some of these common interests. So let's move directly to the first of our panel, a panel on aesthetics. We will run in the order of speakers that you can see here. And I will stop sharing my screen so that I can try to our first speaker. 2. Patrick portrays from the University of Antwerp. So thank you and other TA Patrick. Okay. Thank you. And thank you for having me. Good evening over here in Belgium. So I have like seven minutes, something like that. So very briefly, I've been working for the last couple of months, actually a little over a year now on Translation Studies on adaptations to this and more recently on intermedia the studies and on boundaries. The notion of boundaries has come back not only an adaptation studies, but also in screenwriting studies for example, other, in other fields. But getting back to Translation Studies and the three years, this year translations, that is, some of you may not be aware of that has actually a couple of decades already a go claimed that this to the all meaningful phenomena. So it's quite different definition from the common parlance definition of translation. And as you probably know, so have some, more recently, some, some adaptation scholars have made same claims and the same claims have been made and intermedia allergy studies. So one could say that and con, suggested that already, that one of the first worries or challenges might be definitions. And I've been looking for helping tools and the number of disciplines like theories of definition, theories of categorization, interdisciplinarity studies, then obviously in seven minutes. Second, just mentioned those. And I'll say a few words about those and then a few words about obstacles that may be common, not only to translation and adaptation studies, but perhaps also to seriality studies and familiarity or intertextuality studies in general. Theories of definition go back like most of our cultural practices to Greek antiquity. 1 maybe to mention here I think, is that they stress the point that we should include the definer and the definition. And this will bring me to that common obstacle or China. We have. Because then it's easy to define things. But apparently it's much more difficult to have two or more colleagues agree on a working definition. Theories of categorization, same thing, more or less. Go back to my ticket be antiquity. Maybe the 1 I mentioned there is that among lay people, people who are not specialized in these matters, To continue using Aristotelian or classic theories of categorization, which are all or nothing categories. So either a thing as a square or it's not a square. And this is of course not a very practical way of working when trying to distinguish between translational phenomena, adaptational phenomenon, seriality, and things like that. So more recent probabilistic theories of categorization could perhaps help out there. They account for Graded category membership based on features. But then again, like with the definitions, the theories of definitions, the categorizes needs to be included in the categorizing. And there we go Again, challenges or moral side of the categorizes apparently than on the categorizing. And then into the interdisciplinarity studies as an upcoming, emerging discipline. They study the formation of knowledge, production, distribution, and consumption. For example. In terms of discipline, the unitization processes. And again, there are, I think some, some possibilities there. As for the obstacles or the problems. One of them is that what is common to these practices is that they were about boundaries, they were about categories. There were fences. Some people like them, some people dislike them. And of course, that's sometimes or not another debate. Some people, opponents of categories will say this is about policing. For example, if someone suggests the definition, what I have seen is that it's at least one common misunderstanding, maybe that should be corrected. And it's the idea that categories or definitions should be and goals. Whereas the way I see it in these, in these texts is that they are not end goals, they are starting points. If we can agree on what to call, what phenomena to call a chair and a table. Then we can start studying the use of tables and chairs. That's kind of a, of an idea. Anyway. The more important perhaps are more general and tougher obstacle I see, which is probably common to Translation Studies, adaptation Study Center modality studies. These studies, intertextuality studies more in general, is what I would call the romantic value system. This is the thing, I'm sure all of you know, it goes under different names. Some have called it the pre-modern and modern system. Lawton has called it the aesthetics of identity versus opposition. Put your calls it the aesthetics of continuity versus discontinuity. Phrases going back to late 4800 speaking in the 1800s. And 115. Not dying out with continuing as prevail and some would call it totalitarian ideology. And in the West until this day, merging with more recent fashions like postmodernism and neoliberalism. And the usual suspects while you all know them, artistic freedom, individual, genius, auteur creating out of nothing. Static. Independence is self-sufficient artwork. Know influenza is no social use. Originality, difference, change for the same, for the sake of change. Life as a zero-sum competition. First is first, second is nobody. As the gangster, Mr. Brown says in the combo. And I don't know, perhaps somewhat strangely these, these values have generally, at least in my view, being presented as positive. And already the way perhaps I present them here suggests that maybe there's another view. There is maybe a less positive view on, on these values are at least those values are not valuable intrinsically. Freedom, for example, is mostly about my freedom, not your freedom. It's individual freedom. Individualism, which excludes somehow collective creation. So there are, I think, a number of points where, well, I join those. I'm not inventing anything here. Or during those who have already for a couple of decades suggested that perhaps we should try to nudge back this, this romantic ideology too. Very romantic ideologies. You're making a sign out. So seven minutes, yeah. And so perhaps there are ways to, to re-frame this, the romantic ideology into its pre romantic state where craft-based values would be reappraised, like US, skills or competence and and grace. And that's what I'm working on. Perhaps we can discuss about this later on. Alright. Thank you. Public and sorry to 12 hours, a little over the southern minutes. We do need to be concise. Thank you for your contribution. We'll move now to Arianne, who delay from the University of parrots. Sorry. Thank you. I have it here. Thank you very much. Hello everyone from Paris. Can you see my screen and my PowerPoint? It's going to be very brief. So seven minutes off we go. So today I'd like to draw a parallel between adaptation and seriality by focusing on the suspicion they've both been exposed to. That is often associated with individuality. Film adaptations of literary works because their adaptations have been deemed inferior by nature, by literature specialists. And so the files I like to the latter, adaptation seemed inferior because they were derivative, not original. And therefore we're doomed to be bowing to literature as a superior art form. In literary circles, an audio visual adaptation was also looked down upon because the written text benefited from some additional interiority, prestige, and legitimacy. In studies of seriality, some reluctance towards intermediate approaches can be felt in debates about medium specificity. Notably when a subcategory like TV series, for instance. We're acquiring a higher cultural status through their association with other more established forms of art. In this regard, intermediate comparisons were considered as an nefarious form of cultural legitimation by Levine and Newman in 2011, for instance, who's Bourdieu's your critique lamented the damaging results of the valuing of so-called quality TV. They particularly criticize the tendency to elevate a certain form of television by bringing it close to already established and acknowledged forms in this logic into medial comparison would thus be doomed to be looking down at the newer form. If one needs to call it TV series, cinematic, or Literary to say it was good, It wouldn't necessarily entail that television as such, it's supposed to be mediocre or inferior. This suspicion has been receding. I feel first with the flourish of adaptation steady since the 1990s, 2000s, Sorry, I couldn't cram them all here. And sorry for those that I forgot. Studies that have moved away from one-to-one comparative approaches are issues of fidelity. In order to consider intertextuality and enter mediocrity more broadly, gradually establishing what Thomas lead calls textual studies that can span several media. As far as seriality has cancer. On the one hand, numerous aesthetic studies of specific theories have fruitfully brought forth intertextual connections and references. And on the other hand, ambitious attempts to study seriality. As such, have highlighted the necessary intermediary dimension of their enterprise. Allen and Brandenburg, for instance, stress the growing urgency of tracking and theorizing serialization across different media. I would suggest choosing an intermediate, choosing intermediate approaches to study TV series for instance, notably by focusing on the crossings and transfers between them. Two closest arts, which are literature and cinema, allows us not so much to pin down what would be the immutable essence of the TV series. But rather to reveal the heterogeneity or perform its protein and singularity and constantly evolving specificities. Thus, both adaptation and seriality studies help us navigate the notions of media borders, medium specificity and intermediate relations, which is a crucial enterprise in today's media and artistic indicated ecosystem. Some moments in media and art history, orange, it may be more likely to benefit from intermediate reflection. For Andre, goodwill and fill Mile. These moments correspond to what they identify as the different successive births of media. They distinguish three phases in the history of a medium. The chaotic period of the beginnings, the institutionalization phase, and finally, the state of hybridization. Each stage corresponds to different modes of into modality. Spontaneous when the new media is looking for it's own identity, negotiated when it reaches the hybridization phase. The historical term which represents within the history of TV series, for instance, the passage from terrestrial TV to cable then to online nonlinear television constitutes one of those rebirths, which leads the form to negotiate into modality, I quote, in its own way within an interaction with its own potential. In our time when the production, consumption and broadcasting models of audio visual works undergo unprecedented, an unprecedented revolution with the advent of streaming, OTT and BOD. It is also our job, I feel at academics and teachers to situate contemporary media and artistic works. Notably, by delineating the connections with older traditions, cultural forms inscribed in a shared but not necessarily hierarchical history. What we mean by cinematic, literary, or tele visual is constantly evolving and staying transmedia processes such as adaptation and seriality. If I feel very fruitful way to try and grasp these evolutions, to conceptualize and understand them. Thank you. Thank you, Ryan. Already quite a bit there for us to think about and carry into our discussion. So thank you for your contribution. And our next speaker is Amanda and climb from now I beg your pardon, annexed. The aura that we have them is very Carla money though, from Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. So very high pitch a year. Paint here. I'm just going to share my screen. Okay? Okay. There is some problem here. Just bear with me. I'll try another time, and if that doesn't work, okay. I think nouns working. Can you see my screen? Yes, It's working. Yes. Thank you. Okay, great. Now, hi, hi all. I'd like to talk about today the serial character as an adaptation and under examined area. Thus connecting in a way, seriality and adaptation as well. Just have a look at those pictures here and you know what I will be talking about. First, I would like to point out that they take aesthetics, the panel, the title of our panel, as based on the ancient Greek world, SVCs, meaning perception mainly through touch. And thus my comments and questions will draw from this definition and not aesthetics is defined as a set of principles about nature and appreciation of beauty. Now, I would like to open up this discussion about the performance and the function of the most popular known characters in serial adaptation, which is drawn basically four from decades long. Empirical observations, again, not like a 100 decades, but you understand what I mean. For example, my generation, my Gen X generation for us, James Bond will forever be Roger Moore. And why we appreciate, and of course we know and have seen, have watched Sean Connery and Daniel greg. It is more that we will always identify as the British spine. I find that the serial characters in adaptations pose problems for a number of areas. Acting not ontology, history, culture, and the media. And I'll make some brief remarks on each. First of all, let me start by saying that performance is not discussed as a major part of the adaptation or serial process, not even in film studies or television status for that mother. And we tend to omit, to forget that, as King said, it is only through the performance. Or in reality an ensemble of performance is that the text is fully realized. Kink in 1985 distinguished between two modes of acting. The first he called it impersonation. Let's just all think of metal strip at an actor who are really disappears into their character. The second is called personification. When we confuse the character with the image they have created outside the text. Based on my limited search, I see that the actors that play the city of adaptive characters mostly fall into the first category. They become the character which is already imbued with several attributes from different. They've got incarnations. This I think can in part explain why these actors, those actors that have embodied the various superheroes, superman will bearing Batman, James Bond, etc. Or not superstars to begin with. They become superstars up to after the fact, but they are not superstars to begin with. And this can also in part explain why George Clooney, the photo in the slide, a bonafide star when he got, got cast as Batman, actually failed as Batman. Now, we can grow into more details when discussing acting. As Humberto Echo remarked, vices, gestures, nervous tics permit us to find an old friend in the character portrayed. And they are the principal conditions which allow us to enter into the event. This shows, for me at least how important these characters are. We enter their narratives because of them, at least for a great percentage of the viewers. Should we look for those traits or other traits? Here, I found a structure analysis of characters in adaptation from Andre guardian in 1993, where he proposes we see them moving. This serial adopted characters, first of all as moving images. Then discuss the sounds, the tone of their voice, the music, we are accompanied with noise, especially noises. He also observed that these characters have multiple significations and they are always in flux and in constant transformation of quotes. We should always look at this iconography and trace the historical process that actually led to a character being this way in the 21st century. A form one could think, I could think of Thomas leeches chapter on Sherlock Holmes in that historical process which is most important. And finally, culture. I find that these characters serve important social, ideological, and political functions. What are they? Are they all role models or the archetypes, mythical figures? Sure, they all have an already accumulated symbolic capital. But this symbolic capital is also a changing one and is depended on a number of factors. More importantly, however, I find that their majority is invested with implied political power, especially those that play those characters that belong to the spies team, detectives. What superhero teams? I think they want, what they look for is order, peace, and stability. According to Sheldon walling, these words are all part of the vocabulary of political philosophy. And I would add that after all, these characters actions always affect larger communities or even the world. So I believe that an interdisciplinary approach of these serial characters in adaptations could be useful in tracing all the historical background and could lead to valuable results that would not only affect seriality and adaptation studies, but the study of character in general and in different media across the board. Thank you. I was on time gone. Yes. You will have every one of your stopwatch and you've clocked in at 6.5 minutes. Sorry. Thank you very much. All right. Thank you. So moving right along, it's now a Mandarin clade that we're tuning to from East Carolina University. And Amanda, hence the slides up. Thank you. Amanda, do you unmuted? All right. So as you can see, I'm going to be talking about American horror story. I like to use the case study model when asking big questions. And I'm going to be talking about it in terms primarily of its use of characters. So we'll have some overlap from baddies, grazed sheep. We should talk online, we've got so in its current and tenth season American horror story, it is entitled Double Feature. And a key plot points centers on the use of a drug, a small black pill, which unlocks an artistic creativity. Under the influence of this pill, artists can create or perform their most brilliant work and can do so at a breakneck pace over and over with no apparent decrease in quality. The only downside to taking this drug is that once the magic pill kicks in, the user is overcome with the thirst for human blood, a thirst that must continue to be sated for the pill to continue to work. Like why should someone lacking talent take the pills? They won't produce great art. Rather they waste away mentally and physically and are known as the pale people. At the center of this plot is Harry, a TV writer who brings his family to Provincetown during its quiet off season so that he can finish his TV pilot. After struggling with writer's block. Here, he discovers that magic black pill and to his delight, he finishes his script in one sitting. Better yet he immediately begins working on a new series which he again completes in one night. Harry is hooked, not just on humans blood, but what it feels like to be good at something, a feeling that he can replicate again and again. Harry's ancestor, incessant production of TV series begs the question, what happens when the text has no end? When the story could go on forever because there are always more stories to be told. Before we get there, let's talk a little bit about American worst story for those who are not familiar. Here we go. Now in its tenth season, fx is American war story is a horror anthology series employing a stable, consistent actors. Oh goodness, I am on my wrong slide. There we go. Whose roles, storylines and settings change with each new season. Created by Ryan murky and Brad file Chip, who also wrote and produced many successful serialized TV shows focusing on visual and narrative access, including nip tuck Lee, American crime story and pose, American horror story remains the teams longest running series to date and shows no signs of stopping. Each season takes place in a different domestic setting. The home, the summer camp, the boarding school, the hair salon, the hotel room. And these settings become staging areas for the abject violence and sex that Born be aesthetic core of AHS. Each season develops a new set of monsters and conflicts, and then culminates in a finale with a definitive conclusion. But as soon as one season ends, a new different season begins with new characters and settings. Go to this American war stories, that's the basic definition of cereal television and that it sees and long narrative is segmented into hour-long episodes, released an order, and it culminates in a season finale that wraps up he conflicts. Jason Mattel, who's here right now, argues that seriality is best defined as quote, a temp, world practice, not a steeple, formal feature. Bless you of texts and quote. Meaning that TV series initially airing with Apps between episodes can be considered serialized. But this label changes once they appear on streaming services as full seasons. So although all seasons of AHS initially aired with a gap between each episode, these seasons have shifted to what Mattel describes as a boxed aesthetic. Since viewers have the choice to watch the series on their own timeline, creating their own gaps between episodes and seasons. In fact, it actually doesn't matter which order you choose to watch the existing 10 seasons since the series has multiple entry points. For example, I first watched during the 2014 season freak show because I happen to be teaching the todd browning film freaks during that same semester. And I didn't watch another season until 2016, roanoke, because I heard it was about reality TV, which is another interest of mine. And finally, it was not until the pandemic that I watched all other eight seasons I am proud to say, not based on when they were at least, but by which seasons look the most enticing to me. In other words, these 10 and counting narrative worlds, as well as hundreds of characters, can all exist at once and can be ordered and consumed in a way that is most convenient to the audience. So on DDR effects on Netflix where it was held all summer and now it's on Hulu. And new episodes go straight to Hulu as well. This does not generate confusion for the audience. Even though American horror stories are always starting and always ending all at month. So multi season serialized TB has an inter episodic narrative structure that stretches across seasons, but lacking that continuity of characters, subject, and narrative from season to season, what provides cohesiveness as a series for these 10 seasons and seasons of TV content. Behind, beyond its adherence to the iconography and conventions of Bihar draw, draw a genre. Laura joe, it argues that it is, AHS is casting practices. What Jeffrey Bas Illini calls the intertextuality of casting, which creates a continuity across seasons, even if narratives and characters remain season specific. For example, sarah paulson, who along with Evan Peters and Lily Rob, has appeared in nine out of 10 seasons of AHS, has been known to play multiple roles within a single season. In Roanoke, she plays three different roles. And in freak show through the miracle of CGI, she performs two roles simultaneously. The conjoined twins that and dot toddler. Paulson also pops up in other Ryan Murphy serialized productions like Ratchet and feud were paulson roles were linked to their connection to murphy, but nevertheless quite different in terms of character. Still it's sarah paulson body itself, which helps to link the series instead of causing confusion or distress. This intertextual casting creates continuity and anchor that generates a key part of the series is legibility to its viewers. It is sarah paulson body itself, a blank slate inserted into season after season, which stitches the various seasons of American horror story together, creating what Joe it calls a larger tell, a visual inter-text. While there are a few characters who appear across multiple seasons, for example, the witches from Kevin appear in Apocalypse. It will not create confusion to watch American war story seasons out-of-order, or even only watching one. How am I doing on time? You're just coming up to seven minutes retina act. So I'll end with my questions. So what I want to argue is that American horror stories, a great text for a media landscape in which multiple seasons of beloved serialized TV shows can be dinged on a multitude of platforms. Because it's anthology structure allows it to function as a series of standalone seasons, or what Rebecca gigantica argues is an anthology franchise. It builds a larger world of horror with its own sets of rules and codes and which the same actors are killers or, or killed in different permutations and different settings. So I'll just end with the anecdote I began with the idea of a drug that makes you write and write and write forever. And there is no sense of it stopping, particularly with American horror story because character storylines never get old because they're new with every single season. So my questions for today, how does an unlimited, how does unlimited serialization function and the context of an anthology show like American horror story. And can we say it's redefined our understanding of this type of storytelling about, Let's begin or end. What does it mean when a series could potentially continue forever? And how does it matter, or excuse me, how to its viewers navigate this text and how does American horror story maintain its legibility across seasons? Those are my questions for you. Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Amanda. I canceled. We might come back to some of those specific questions. But first, let's move over to Jason to tell from it'll be colleagues. Say, thank you, Jonathan. Thank you. Can thanks for the organizers. It's really great to be here. And by here, I guess I mean 97 different places around the globe all at once. But it's great to have this without the hassle of travel, although the downside of not actually being able to see everyone and socialize afterwards. But this, this Conversation is really exciting because I've been really interested as it's primarily a seriality scholar with the notion of adaptation and his Kahn mentioned in his introduction, I wrote an essay proposing this idea of hot operational seriality. And I'm not going to try to summarize a whole essay, although I did just pop it into the chat, the PDF to that work. So feel free to download and read it on your own time. I'm not going to dive into everything I say there, but, but in short, this concept of operations to reality is built upon the poor definition of seriality as convoluted to have continuity with gaps. Um, but I'm trying to, typically we think of continuity as narrative, diet gedit, continuity at continuing story. But what I propose is thinking about operational continuity, which refers to producers and consumers being aware of the iterative process of creating a narrative work over time and then reframing that work over years or consuming different versions of the connected works all function in a serialized format. And much like Amanda's piece about AHS is a good example. Even without narrative continuity, there is definitely a great deal of seriality. So essay, I primarily focus on a number of case studies around films. And I don't discuss adaptations per se, but for the purposes of this symposium, I want to talk about how we might apply it to adaptations across media. So the case study I want to talk about is high fidelity. The original 995 novel by Nick Hornsby, which begat the 2 thousand film, the 2006 Broadway musical and to dim the 2020 TV version. Now, each of these versions functions as an independent iteration of the same basic story. It's an adaptation. There is no narrative continuity between versions. They each are telling the story of Rob and Rob's record store, championship vinyl. But I would say that there is this process that both produce, producers and viewers come to regard these adaptations as part of a continuing operational cereal that really focuses not on Rob's story, but the continue telling of Rob's story. And continuity in storytelling is the operational seriality that I want to focus on. Now, as I was preparing this, I read a really great piece by media scholar Alex Bessie. She is writing about high fidelity and primarily the TV version. In forthcoming journal article, she wrote this blog post that I just posted in the chat as well. The link to that highlights her own connections to the high-fidelity franchise of the journey between her music fandom and the tensions with the constructions of gender in these taps as well as the real record store cultures that she was participating in and reading our account, it really struck me as a clear case of operational continuity with gaps. Her ongoing engagements with music fan them are punctuated by a transform or disrupt her understanding of this narrative. And ultimately frames high fidelity as an ongoing story, not the eugenically, but rather her own story of her relationship and engagement with the franchise. And I think discontinuities in the consumption and reconsider a station of these multiple versions. That to me strikes me as particularly serialized. Now, basically refers to the allocations of high fidelity as cover versions of the original novel, which I think is really apt and it's particularly apt in the TV show where Rob gets recast and re, characterized as a black woman play by Zoe Kravitz. The term of cover-up version seems really apt. I see cover songs as part of this operational seriality, creating this punctuated chains of associations and practices that resonates for listeners and music producers alike. Now just my own operational attention with high fidelity, as I was watching the TV series, was drawn to one of my favorite scenes in the book. In the scene, Rob is offered a chance to buy a truly incredible Rare record collection for a tiny cost by the collectors wife, because she wants to punish her husband for his lack of fidelity. Now this scene in the book was shot but cut from the final film, but it is available as a bonus on the DVD for discerning collectors, like me fans to the film. And in watching the series, I was anticipating the role of this scene because I read that it was going to be that sort of plot, key plot point of the fifth episode. So I, as I was watching that episode, I was doing so with this operational attention, how will it engage serially with this scene, strange history in the franchise? And how will it really reframe into the new gender patterns? Especially given that this episode was the only one that was actually co-written by Zoe Kravitz. Really fabulous episode of how the recommended and it adds new depth and layers that are lacking in both the book and it's deleted film scene and really taste it in new directions. That again, it's not just about the narrative, but about the this operational level as well. Okay, so just quickly to conclude. So what does it matter that we might frame adaptations as operational seriality as I'm proposing. Now, I'm not going to insist that all adaptations to simply be subsumed under this overarching umbrella of seriality. It's not a custody battle it here, but I do think there's something to be gained by looking at versions and adaptation is through a serial lens. And applying the insights about the practice cereal production and consumption explicitly to the realm of adaptation where narrative is not serialized and I would say likewise, seriality scholars can learn from the long tradition of adaptation studies to help a more sense of operational seriality, especially across media and thinking beyond just narrative continuity. So with all that in mind, I'm really excited to be having this version of this conversation today and look forward to the iterations that will happen later today and tomorrow. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Button. Thank you, Jason. I beg your pardon. I'm looking ahead to our next speaker. So thank you, Jason. And our next speaker is barton Palmer from from Clemson University. Are you there? Yes. And you're on mute still? You're still muted. All right. Great. Thank you. Super well, nice to join you all. I'm not I'm definitely the odd duck here because I am interested in why we call all-trans textuality, which is a tomb that would turn that subsumes seriality and adaptation are not, not just in terms of a media which I felt mess with too much. Also film stays, but also literary studies. I'm a practicing medievalist and a good deal of my work. And I'm looking at trans textuality has to do with certain issues that arise in the Middle Ages. Particular with regard to idea of continuation. I'm not going to spend our time talking about continuation. The notion of a trans textual form that results from the finishing or the padding onto an already completed texts. So that the trans textural model that Jeanette pushes in his book is kind of deconstructed by the fact that he includes continuation in the group of different forms. Since there are no two texts involved, there's a single texts and then there's a revised and added version to it. One of the things that results in, in the Middle Ages is the creation of huge morass of texts that are interconnected in various ways. By seriality, by adaptation, by remaking that are known in the Middle Ages as matters. The matter of France, the which, which concerns King Arthur. And the matter, matter Britain, which concerns other, are romances and Middle Ages. And at this, this form of production in the Middle Ages has everything to do with the way in which multiplicity operates. Within a huge series of texts that grow and grow and grow within which new works are, are inserted. And they were inserted in ways that developed numerous attachments among them from the outset. We don't really have anything in modern culture that connects students. And one of the reasons I'm interested in it is at, a lot of my work has to do with the pivotal period in the 14th century when we emerge to a new model of textual production. But I would call singularity where the, where the text is justified by the US use of it, of material derived from the author's life. And that is, that is a new feature of textuality. It starts in the 14th century and eventually crowd out the idea of the matter as a way of understanding how texts are connected to one another. So part of the problem I see with the, with the, with, with the notion of trans textuality I as a foundational theoretical background for our, for our discipline is that it, it has this dyadic model of, of two texts, I and I. It, it postulates notions of bonds there, which was when she calls them, that bind them together. But it doesn't take into account the The very form that Jeanette mentioned in the book, which is the continuation, which is something very different. If, if you think continuation is a kind of dead issue, well, it's not really. We have dead authors who continue to, to produce new texts, new, new story coming out two years ago by F Scott Fitzgerald based on a reconstruction from his remains of a story. And that text is a continuation. Find Scott Fitzgerald's novel, The Last Tycoon is such a reconstruction. Having ways Islands in the Stream. Such a reconstruction. And as air through the Tennessee Williams annual review. What I'm involved in constantly is the creation of new texts from existing archival materials through the process of continuation. That this is a kind of ongoing thing that I find very interesting. Another problem with our, with our model I think, especially with regards to thumb stays it is at, in applying seriality and adaptation as terms, we, we tend to be what I would call overly textual in concentrating on textual features rather than Performing Arts on the way that production itself is characterized by Uranus forms of reuse. In fact, to explain, the Hollywood studio system is classic, phase requires a U1 analysis of how reuse figures as a business model. Reuse not only of textual materials, which will get us into the kind of work that most of us are interested in doing. But, but also reuse in terms of production materials. So, so that the, the way the star system works, for example, is, is, is a question of adaptation and seriality. Start careers. Are serial careers. Their careers they build on previous performances, anticipate others, and are directed by the kinds of, of interest to Jason is just talked about operational interests in making the system work. So for, for my money, the, the field of, of adaptation studies and seriality, it is, is a somewhat too narrow way looking at the different forms of reuse and a textural connection with characterized not only literary history, but also connect in other ways too. The way in which film history evolved. Particularly in the classical studio period. Where were the production adaptation? Phenomenon creates what, what Amanda cause film cycles, cycles of texts that are not correct, it not, not connected in terms of their story materials, in terms of their posting, your lecture, screenwriting, structures, and so on. So you have an initial hit film like Maltese Falcon. And then that, that casting in that film is used in five others. Want some variations depend upon changing circumstances in order to recreate what was, what was there originally. But it's not that question of what do you want to call those films being part of a series as such? Or whether one is at station of another In a sense of textual materials. But more in regard to the way in which the, the system, the Hollywood system reduction system works to foment this kind of reuse. I would suspect that would de scholars here represented on this panel who are more knowledgeable about the wake into mediocrity works these days. That's somewhat similar kinds of things are operating in the contemporary film production system. That soy, where I write eight minutes. Wonder if you could wrap up, please, that's fine. I guess I'd just be sorry. Well, INR feel or we're going to call. Yep. Okay. Thank you. Welcome. Thanks to to Bouton and to all of the contributors. Of course, this is taken much longer to, to get through than that than I expected. So we are coming up to whatever they are is where wherever you are, three in the morning to me. So we have about 15 more minutes for for questions and discussion. And the order that will take this in is that I will invite questions or comments in the first instance from within the panel. I'll then go to our other panelists from the other three panels for questions. And then I'll open up to everyone. You can do this through handwriting or in the chat. If you're in the chat, I will throw to you to actually ask a question, so I'll stop with our panelists. Do we have do you have any questions among the among the group? And I guess I was thinking and to give you a minute, to think, they're just thinking at this idea of trends, textuality that button came to at the end. Reminded me of me then Herb, It might be here a number of years ago in an early essay, Dan was trying to get around the problems of talking about adaptations and, and re-mix by suggesting that we should talk about vision analogy versions instead of Arthur adaptations or, or re makes. But I'm not sure that these terms, even trans textuality, really come to terms with this, this key issue of gaps that comes up in a number of different forms. Decide you with discontinuity. Seems, seems quoting paradoxically in some ways things quite important to, at least to our ideas of seriality. And I guess that's why I wanted to mention it. And mentioned that Tom also talks about gaps at the at the beginning. So I wonder if we have any questions or comments around, around that in particular. Maybe if I, if I can calm place Petrov, perhaps they're borrowing remembers and in my, in my book on adaptations to this, in an earlier study in the 990, it's already mentioned, for example. All right. I say read your book with enthusiasm. Yeah, Thank you. I mentioned, for example, parts of that, things that were used by by movies to be made for next door, to be used for next B productions, for example, which could also be seen as part of seriality or part of the adaptation, where even if the movie was based on a book. Now other parts of the production and post-production we're using other models, other settings in this case, which could also be part of this continuation or whatever the level of analysis this one is focusing on. Actually, one of the reasons I've found Jason's presentation so fascinating is that you're, you're taking into account the, the dynamics of reading and production, which, which are, which are not textural features as such. But what are features of the way in which works become known to those who consume? And that, that's sort of what I was gay as well. Yeah. That that, that, that to get beyond the textural features to the other aspects of the way that the Works exist, including reception and production. So the gap is very interesting concept that time wrote the book The Joy and I did, which is just fascinating piece, something very new. And none of us had thought about before. And they're very interesting. Thanks burden. I think that one of the things that strikes me listening to these presentations is how many of us are thinking about the reception of these adaptations, right? So American horror story, Amanda talking about the way in which she didn't follow the order. Or Betty talking about how different generations have different concepts of different different characters and actors and whatnot. And I think that this is something that at least within Syria, seriality studies seems to be core, which is this idea that a serial needs to be understood as something which is can see, consumed and participated in, right? And I think that I'd be curious for those who are more tied to adaptation studies, the degree to which that has or has not been as much part of the vocabulary. I know that one of the panels tomorrow is focused primarily on on reception. So I look forward to that. I'll I'll throw a question in here too, because I was when we all met last way to kinda talk about what we were going to be doing today. I remembered that. I think it might have been better, but it might have been someone else. You talked about. The Mad Max movies. And do the Mad Max movies even need a Mad Max anymore to be Mad Max movies. And I found that, and that actually kind of led me in my, in my thinking about American horror story because there is nothing between the different seasons. There's every once in while there's an overlapping character. But really, what is the consistency and what makes This all belong to the same series and it really does seem to be the certain actors. And so that kinda got me thinking about when you take someone out of this world. So Evan Peters is a good example. He's been in nine seasons of American horror story. He finally appears in mirror these town, anyone's an Emmy? And so I think that's kind of an interesting testament to how we view some of these tax, some of these serialized tax, these anthology series. And why the performance went in a standalone kinda series elicits an AMI, but not these, what I would consider far more growling and interesting and intricate roles that this actor plays elsewhere. And so kind of two questions. There are two things to think about, which is one, how do you, how do after signify tax in these kind of repetitive texts? But then also why the lowbrow status of so many of these repetitive tasks and how that seems to persist even though we all say that it doesn't really matter anymore, but it still seems to matter. Hey, if I can add something here. One thing I didn't talk about, but one thing that I wanted to talk about in regards to my character approach, which is in its beginning, is the emotional involvement. We ate with those characters. I don't care if, and I'll take a series, a series that has that there isn't a way and adaptation of a seed alkalotic their house at me. I don't care the medical crime, the medical mystery that will be solved in the episode. I care. What, how's will do I care all all about him. It's all about him. And it's all about those got up there sometimes. And the emotional attachment we form as fans, as academics as whatever. This can branch out to different things. We can discuss funds, reactions to these categories. But first of all, I think we need to do, in a way theorize what their position is because we forget them. In television studies, film studies, the act or slash data. There is. We never talk about it. We never discuss it. It's about how we yeah, I see what you're saying. Json. You leave them out. Debate. Okay. Maybe it's because of the lowbrow. Why should we discuss I'm not talking about stars. I'm talking about the CDO. Got a person adaptation as I say, because the adaptive data today, this, the CDO got today is, for me, it has, has undergone so many adaptations that we need to trace historically. And up here we have the gutter in the 21st century. And down here we have the original data there from ANOVA, Let's say. But between those two dates, we have a whole host of different media from painting, gotta get the actual work not that create this character. And my question at the last conference I did in Greece in 2017 was that, okay, we got X-Men in 2000 and the Hugh Jackman played. It will vary based on the comics they created a character, okay, in that CQL, Hugh Jackman accepted again that all Wolverine was this serial adaptation of the data there based on that comics or on how he was adopted in the first film? I mean, this is a question I'd like to have an answer to because he was wearing and let's say the X-Men suit from the comics is missing. And some funds where disappointed in that. But they kept him in the same clothes and either some makeup and whatnot. Anyway, I think there are a lot of things we can discuss about on the subject. And of course, the problem of casting and the extra actual parameters as well. Always to be taken into consideration when we do media studies and television studies today. Thank you. Thank you, Betty. I do have a question waiting in the chat for you, but just before I turn to that, I realized we're running short of time. I'll just ask around if she has anything she'd like to contribute before we move on, would you like to comment on any of that? Yes. Maybe to connect with the JSON was the question Jason was raising about adaptation and when Betty just said about the sort of sedimentation of several performances, because that's really what I feel is what about adaptation? The fact that when you go see a new adaptation of Jane Austen or a new adaptation of a famous Shakespearean play. The producers and writers know that there'll be basing their new adaptation, not just of course on the original texts, but also on the layer of previous adaptations that these audiences may have seen it. So that it creates this sort of complex set of layers. I mean, of course, for, for, for Jane Austen's very blatant with the adaptations of Pride and Prejudice, which very often referred to the 995 BBC adaptations and dorsal diving in the lake, which has become in a way part of the Austin verse. Though. So there is this, the sort of sedimentation I feel that that also draws adaptation and serialization together probably. Thank you. And thanks for those who are starting to ask questions there in the in the chat. I haven't seen any hands up, so I will go to to my tunic. Has a question by Would you like to direct your question to Tibet concisely and place? Yeah, yeah, that's, that's quite high. So I was thinking about the examples of characters with a lot of iterations that you giving your presentation to you use, for example, use Sherlock Holmes alongside Dracula. And I was thinking about what do you think is the difference in iterations of characters that are serial in their original text versus characters that come from something like a single novel or standalone taxed. Well, make ME thank you. I cannot see you, but I hear your voice. That's great. Well, actually, these are, this is the beginning of, of a new area for me. But I think that some characters like homes and James Bond and dracula, as you rightly said, all the devil. As I also mentioned, we've had this great incarnation in Lucifer. I think that it doesn't matter if they come from a single source or multiple novels. As with Sherlock Holmes, that what matters is that they have transcended that original stories. And they have become these iconic figures, especially through mass media, that we somehow want to see over and over again because we want something from these characters. And then with the accumulation effect and what Arianna added up, they get more and more not complex, they get new. They, they retain their basic characteristics. Otherwise they would differ a lot. But at the same time, they take different paths. And that interests us. And what we forget sometimes and I forget sometimes is Arjan mentioned the 1995 BBC, Jane Austen. Yeah, but we know these for some other people for the younger generation. And I've seen it on TV with my students. For them, their first encounter with those characters comes in the form of ADH on there will be a visual text. They had no idea that Sherlock was even a literary hero. That's something we also need to think about how these, these figures in main, popular for so long. Okay, Ancient Greek tragedies are still popular, but they are high-brow. We still consider, and I agree with Amanda, this is still a lingering divide, the high and the low. And I think we need to search why. What do these characters say to the rest of the world? At least the Western world? I'm not, I don't know if they are popular in in all parts of the world thing. I'm sure they didn't ask me answer your question. No, it's really interesting. It's actually really relevant to my research there. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And we're not going to have enough time even to get through the questions that we have here. And I'm sure that there are others, but I think just going through them in order. Jeremy Strong has a question here. Jeremy cannot throw to you to ask a question. So I successfully unmute. Yes. Yes. I think it's question I guess to sue anyone. I'm I was struck as I, as I listen to presentations about different types of cereal television show, say, well, I'll just read out my question, which is, I'd be interested to hear panelists thoughts on what changes and what stays the same between what we might think of as the standalone cereals, things like Mary's time already mentioned. The anthologies, for example, treat its active. And I've just discovered American horror story and longer running serial shows. For example, homeland. Before. Can I just, sorry, just it just the example that I was going to bring in earlier and ask a man to this question. And it was the example I was going to speak to had did I had I had time is the case of fast and furious. I guess if impart because it's, it's, it's current because these questions of water and discontinuities, same, actually watch these things out-of-order in the first instance and it didn't make any difference. There is some kind of continuity there. But everything that we've been talking about relates to as much to American horror story as it does today. So sorry, JSONB, we're going to jump in there. Well, I was just going to say to Germany's question, I think that this is a sort of shifted in one of the big innovations of American horror story was the sort of the creation, the launching of this format of the anthology mini series. The idea that it's the season long single story which then reboots every season that has become increasingly popular. True Detective, as you mentioned, Fargo is another one. It's embargo is an interesting case study because it's number one, an adaptation. It's also kind of continuity me It does, It does take place in the same narrative world. So there are characters that crossover, but it's indifferent times, so it's always different actors. So it's up that way. It's kind of like the crown, as someone said in the chat. So I do think that there is, we're seeing the sort of variations, the vocabulary around them is different. It's different in different countries. In the US, what we call a series is different than a season, whereas in the UK, US means a season, what we call season. So, so yes, I think that the vocabulary is very much emerge and I think there is a kind of industrial motivation for this. Specifically with stars, It's a lot easier to get a star like Kate Winslet to do a single limited run, many serious than to commit to an ongoing series. And likewise, for Matthew McConaughey and Woody Harrelson doing a single season of True Detective. They had the idea that it will it has a brand name that will continue year after year for better or for worse now. But I do think that the, the cost and the commitment involved getting stars is a lot harder for an ongoing series right now, although I think that, that is changing, especially post COVID where what is a film anyway, if it's just launch it on Disney Plus. So great. Thank, thank you very much. Indeed. Thank you, everyone. I am looking at the time and I see we have come up to 315, so I will be a hotline timekeeper and suggests that even though we still have standing questions, we do have a recorded the side of the question, so we may want to open up conversations individually, privately. A long, long list of comments and questions there. So I might even try to get to those. I'll just conclude by thanking our panelists for their contributions today and for starting off the symposium in, in such a fine manner. So thank you very much to everyone for your for your presentations. We going to go to a short break now, a 15 minute break. So we'll resume in 15 minutes. So thanks again, everyone and we'll see you soon.