12
AdAptAtion in the Age of MediA ConvergenCe
Many instances of what these critics have labeled as transmedia storytelling,
world-building, or transmedia worlds, are not adaptations in the narrow sense
of an attempt to recreate existing stories in a new medium. Rather, they expand
on the original instantiation of a storyworld, expanding its hyperdiegesis
as they adapt, transform, and add to what Klastrup and Tosca call the “core
elements” of a fictional world. 12 In most cases of transmedia storytelling, “a
process where integral elements of a fiction get dispersed systematically across
multiple delivery channels for the purpose of creating a unified and coordinated
entertainment experience” and even more clearly in less tightly orchestrated
transmedia expansions, we have texts which relate to each other, in some cases
depend on each other, and often mark this relation very clearly and explicitly. 13
Despite the linked feature of intertextuality, Jenkins has nevertheless excluded
adaptations from his concept of transmedia storytelling, insisting on a distinction “between ‘extensions’ to the core narrative or the fictional universe and
adaptations which simply move content from one medium to another.” 14
In contrast to Jenkins, the contributions in this volume suggest that there
are benefits to conceptualizing transmedia franchising and the related
and Teaching, With an Afterword by Linda Hutcheon, ed. Nassim Winnie Balestrini (Heidelberg:
Winter, 2011), 83.
It is worth considering to what extent the separation between official products and ancillary fan
productions, which at least implicitly underlies most critics’ focus on official (i.e. commercial)
creation, is helpful and where it is either unnecessary or even hinders our understanding of texts
and practices. I discuss this question below with regard to fanfictions, but it seems worth pointing
out here that one of the effects of concepts such as “transmedia storytelling” is a championing of
commercial productions. Mark Wolf, for instance, only mentions fan creations towards the end
of Building Imaginary Worlds. While he acknowledges the long history of “unauthorized sequels”
and muses that such “fan productions can be seen as an extension of what audiences do all the
time while experiencing a world; filling in gaps as world gestalten occur,” Wolf nevertheless
ultimately relegates them to the margins. Brushing fan creations, engagement, and interpretation
off, he proclaims that such “theories and gap-filling ideas” are thought by “many fans” to be
“canon, when they actually [!?] are not” (Wolf, Building, 279). What is clear from Wolf’s wording
is that he grants commercial culture a primacy that de-authorizes fan work and seems to allow
fan creations to become canon only when it is officially recognized and even then it “is usually
only accepted at a lower level of canon” (Ibid., 280).
12 Klastrup and Tosca, “Transmedial Worlds,” 413.
13 Henry Jenkins, “Transmedia Storytelling 101,” Confessions of an Aca-Fan. The Official Weblog
of Henry Jenkins, March 22, 2007, accessed February 15, 2019, http://henryjenkins.org/2007/03/
transmedia_storytelling_101.html. The concept of transmedia storytelling has been contentious
from the beginning, cf. from a narratological perspective: Marie Laure-Ryan, “Transmedia
Storytelling: Industry Buzzword of New Narrative Experience?” Storyworlds: A Journal of Narrative
Studies 7.2 (2015): 1–19.
14 Henry Jenkins, “The Aesthetics of Transmedia: In Response to David Bordwell (Part One),”
Confessions of an Aca-Fan. The Official Weblog of Henry Jenkins, September 10, 2009, accessed
February 15, 2019, http://henryjenkins.org/2009/09/the_aesthetics_of_transmedia_i.html.
AdAptAtion in the Age of MediA ConvergenCe
Many instances of what these critics have labeled as transmedia storytelling,
world-building, or transmedia worlds, are not adaptations in the narrow sense
of an attempt to recreate existing stories in a new medium. Rather, they expand
on the original instantiation of a storyworld, expanding its hyperdiegesis
as they adapt, transform, and add to what Klastrup and Tosca call the “core
elements” of a fictional world. 12 In most cases of transmedia storytelling, “a
process where integral elements of a fiction get dispersed systematically across
multiple delivery channels for the purpose of creating a unified and coordinated
entertainment experience” and even more clearly in less tightly orchestrated
transmedia expansions, we have texts which relate to each other, in some cases
depend on each other, and often mark this relation very clearly and explicitly. 13
Despite the linked feature of intertextuality, Jenkins has nevertheless excluded
adaptations from his concept of transmedia storytelling, insisting on a distinction “between ‘extensions’ to the core narrative or the fictional universe and
adaptations which simply move content from one medium to another.” 14
In contrast to Jenkins, the contributions in this volume suggest that there
are benefits to conceptualizing transmedia franchising and the related
and Teaching, With an Afterword by Linda Hutcheon, ed. Nassim Winnie Balestrini (Heidelberg:
Winter, 2011), 83.
It is worth considering to what extent the separation between official products and ancillary fan
productions, which at least implicitly underlies most critics’ focus on official (i.e. commercial)
creation, is helpful and where it is either unnecessary or even hinders our understanding of texts
and practices. I discuss this question below with regard to fanfictions, but it seems worth pointing
out here that one of the effects of concepts such as “transmedia storytelling” is a championing of
commercial productions. Mark Wolf, for instance, only mentions fan creations towards the end
of Building Imaginary Worlds. While he acknowledges the long history of “unauthorized sequels”
and muses that such “fan productions can be seen as an extension of what audiences do all the
time while experiencing a world; filling in gaps as world gestalten occur,” Wolf nevertheless
ultimately relegates them to the margins. Brushing fan creations, engagement, and interpretation
off, he proclaims that such “theories and gap-filling ideas” are thought by “many fans” to be
“canon, when they actually [!?] are not” (Wolf, Building, 279). What is clear from Wolf’s wording
is that he grants commercial culture a primacy that de-authorizes fan work and seems to allow
fan creations to become canon only when it is officially recognized and even then it “is usually
only accepted at a lower level of canon” (Ibid., 280).
12 Klastrup and Tosca, “Transmedial Worlds,” 413.
13 Henry Jenkins, “Transmedia Storytelling 101,” Confessions of an Aca-Fan. The Official Weblog
of Henry Jenkins, March 22, 2007, accessed February 15, 2019, http://henryjenkins.org/2007/03/
transmedia_storytelling_101.html. The concept of transmedia storytelling has been contentious
from the beginning, cf. from a narratological perspective: Marie Laure-Ryan, “Transmedia
Storytelling: Industry Buzzword of New Narrative Experience?” Storyworlds: A Journal of Narrative
Studies 7.2 (2015): 1–19.
14 Henry Jenkins, “The Aesthetics of Transmedia: In Response to David Bordwell (Part One),”
Confessions of an Aca-Fan. The Official Weblog of Henry Jenkins, September 10, 2009, accessed
February 15, 2019, http://henryjenkins.org/2009/09/the_aesthetics_of_transmedia_i.html.