2. Adaptation as Connection : A Network
Theoretical Approach to Convergence,
Participation, and Co-Production
Regina Schober
Abstract
Cultural production is increasingly understood along the lines of
self-organizing network dynamics instead of as linear and more or
less stable (translation) processes with clear-cut creator-recipient
dualisms. Participation and remediation, however, have always been a
constitutive factor in cultural production. I propose to treat adaptations
as embedded in and shaping the complex, non-linear, and decentralized networks of culture that operate along the lines of shifting and
contingent connections between human and non-human actors. In
doing so, I will show why it can be helpful for critical adaptation studies
to take seriously the notion of cultural “function.” Making productive
insights into biological adaptation for cultural adaptation studies, I
aim to shed light on the connotation of adaptation as temporary and
contingent “knowledge.”
Key words: Network theory; cultural functions of adaptation; biological
vs. cultural adaptation; adaptation as a form of contingent knowledge
Adaptation as processual knowledge
Contrary to some public discourse, adaptation studies is far from thinking
of adaptations as “poor” derivatives of original source texts. The so-called
“fidelity discourse” has been successfully deconstructed or, as Kamilla Elliott
and Simone Murray suggest, has never played as big a role in adaptation
Fehrle, J. and W. Schäfke, Adaptation in the Age of Media Convergence, Amsterdam University
Press, 2019
doi 10.5117/9789462983663_ch02
Theoretical Approach to Convergence,
Participation, and Co-Production
Regina Schober
Abstract
Cultural production is increasingly understood along the lines of
self-organizing network dynamics instead of as linear and more or
less stable (translation) processes with clear-cut creator-recipient
dualisms. Participation and remediation, however, have always been a
constitutive factor in cultural production. I propose to treat adaptations
as embedded in and shaping the complex, non-linear, and decentralized networks of culture that operate along the lines of shifting and
contingent connections between human and non-human actors. In
doing so, I will show why it can be helpful for critical adaptation studies
to take seriously the notion of cultural “function.” Making productive
insights into biological adaptation for cultural adaptation studies, I
aim to shed light on the connotation of adaptation as temporary and
contingent “knowledge.”
Key words: Network theory; cultural functions of adaptation; biological
vs. cultural adaptation; adaptation as a form of contingent knowledge
Adaptation as processual knowledge
Contrary to some public discourse, adaptation studies is far from thinking
of adaptations as “poor” derivatives of original source texts. The so-called
“fidelity discourse” has been successfully deconstructed or, as Kamilla Elliott
and Simone Murray suggest, has never played as big a role in adaptation
Fehrle, J. and W. Schäfke, Adaptation in the Age of Media Convergence, Amsterdam University
Press, 2019
doi 10.5117/9789462983663_ch02