48
AdAptAtion in the Age of MediA ConvergenCe
diachronic perspective on culture from a critical point of view, the presence of the cultural product in a synchronous relationship with other
media, recipients, institutions etc. has increasingly become the focus both
in cultural production and in criticism. A network perspective suggests
that, entangled in a dense web of influences, allusions, and socio-cultural
affects, an artwork cannot be reduced to just one reference medium but,
depending on the perspective taken, it exposes a myriad of connections
to a whole system of adaptations. The same applies to its functions. An
adaptation functions not only as adaptation. Depending on its context, it
can be regarded as an independent work and as a potential seed for future
adaptations. In alluding to the shortcomings of teleological or etiological
theories of (biological) function based on cause and effect ascriptions,
Bence Nanay argues that a theory of “function” (whether in the sense of
biological function or in relation to artifacts) must take into account three
premises, namely
1. That “a trait can have two (or more) functions at a time,”
2. That “function attributions can depend on the explanatory
project at hand,” and
3. That “a trait can have a function but fail to perform this function.” 58
These preconditions demand that function needs to be theorized either
in relational terms, according to which the function of a trait token
is associated “with the property (or properties) that the trait is being
selected for in that regime” 59 or from within the individual adaptation
itself, independent from all other “texts.” Nanay argues that such a view
that focuses only on the trait itself (or the adaptation, for the purpose of
this argument), seems to contradict the concept of “malfunctioning” since,
if there is no other trait/text this particular object can be compared to, it
cannot lack any feature/function. Malfunctioning thus becomes a matter
of “would.” 60 If, for example, the BBC film adaptation of Jane Austen’s novel
Pride and Prejudice was to be considered primarily for what it signifies as
a text in its own right (and not as an adaptation), it would have various
specific functions independent from the “original” (e.g. to tell the story
of Jane Bennett and her sisters in an audiovisual medium or to partake
58 Bence Nanay, “A Modal Theory of Function,” The Journal of Philosophy 107.8 (August 2010),
412–414.
59 D.M. Walsh, “Fitness and Function,” The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science. 47.4
(December 1996), 565.
60 Nanay, “A Modal Theory of Function,” 420–421.
AdAptAtion in the Age of MediA ConvergenCe
diachronic perspective on culture from a critical point of view, the presence of the cultural product in a synchronous relationship with other
media, recipients, institutions etc. has increasingly become the focus both
in cultural production and in criticism. A network perspective suggests
that, entangled in a dense web of influences, allusions, and socio-cultural
affects, an artwork cannot be reduced to just one reference medium but,
depending on the perspective taken, it exposes a myriad of connections
to a whole system of adaptations. The same applies to its functions. An
adaptation functions not only as adaptation. Depending on its context, it
can be regarded as an independent work and as a potential seed for future
adaptations. In alluding to the shortcomings of teleological or etiological
theories of (biological) function based on cause and effect ascriptions,
Bence Nanay argues that a theory of “function” (whether in the sense of
biological function or in relation to artifacts) must take into account three
premises, namely
1. That “a trait can have two (or more) functions at a time,”
2. That “function attributions can depend on the explanatory
project at hand,” and
3. That “a trait can have a function but fail to perform this function.” 58
These preconditions demand that function needs to be theorized either
in relational terms, according to which the function of a trait token
is associated “with the property (or properties) that the trait is being
selected for in that regime” 59 or from within the individual adaptation
itself, independent from all other “texts.” Nanay argues that such a view
that focuses only on the trait itself (or the adaptation, for the purpose of
this argument), seems to contradict the concept of “malfunctioning” since,
if there is no other trait/text this particular object can be compared to, it
cannot lack any feature/function. Malfunctioning thus becomes a matter
of “would.” 60 If, for example, the BBC film adaptation of Jane Austen’s novel
Pride and Prejudice was to be considered primarily for what it signifies as
a text in its own right (and not as an adaptation), it would have various
specific functions independent from the “original” (e.g. to tell the story
of Jane Bennett and her sisters in an audiovisual medium or to partake
58 Bence Nanay, “A Modal Theory of Function,” The Journal of Philosophy 107.8 (August 2010),
412–414.
59 D.M. Walsh, “Fitness and Function,” The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science. 47.4
(December 1996), 565.
60 Nanay, “A Modal Theory of Function,” 420–421.