Post originally by Herb at 2005-01-06 08:00:40
Converted from Phorums BB System

Kester Pelagius wrote:
------------------------------
>Or what if a director decided that Henry V >would be better "re-envisioned" with a >female lead: Henriette V?

While I don't know of this being done with Henry the number of gay versions (both male and female) of Romeo and Juliet, female Hamlets (not to be confused with the at least 150 year old tradition of Hamlet being played by a women when the director wants to emphasize his femininity), racially reversed Othellos, and (my favorite) Lady Macbeth as abused spouses out there, I'd say it was rather popular.

And less offensive to me than B&N's Shakespear without Fear series.

>Are you really saying it wouldn't matter to >you because, well, established "facts" >shouldn't get in the way of a good story?

Define "good story".

When SFC replayed the original Gallatica a few years back (New Years Day marathon) to build interest in the idea of the miniseries my reaction was "I used to love this?" and a quick retreat to "I was in 6th grade".

For some of us revisioning was a good thing.

>In 25 years time when they redo Star Wars >and decide to "re-imagine" the story by >having Luke be a transgendered midget who >falls in love with L-A, nicknamed "Leia", a >genetically created gender neuter clone >intended for organ harvesting by a >princess...

Well that last bit sounds kinda interesting actually...but at least that idea isn't as crazy as Lucas himself rearranging it to make Greedo shoot first. That would never happen.

However, when it comes to property integrity let me provide a great counter example: Arthur?

King Arthur and his knights have been through numerous reimaging in several hundred years. What is to most people the holy writ of Arthurian lore is in fact a retelling/amalgamation of several previous versions.

Each retelling of Arthur uses a majority of a certain set of basic building blocks (sword in the stone, Merlin, fostering by Kay, Guniverre, Lancelot, Grail Quest), changing some (most common varient historically is the identity of the Grail knight who was early on Percival and later Galahad), and ignoring others.

Some versions are truly horrid (First Knight anyone), most are passible, and a handful are brilliant, but each shows why the story survives: those key building blocks make a story more durable than any telling.

Now that Peter Jackson has done minor reimaging of LotR I'd love to see it as open as Arthur.

The point of this is BSG has often been called mythic. If the fundamental BSG story (which is mostly intact in the new series) is truly mythic it will have the enduring power of Arthur, able to be retold (reimaged) and rearranged and still tell it's tale.

BSG stands on the edge of a test of its mythic nature...fanboys can freeze it into one telling and then it is just a property...but if the new series success, even if it isn't as good, then BSG moves closer to bein an enduring story...and for any artist that would seem to be a better outcome.