Introduction
In the novella titled A River Runs through It, written by Norman Maclean, the two essential topics are fly fishing and religion. Nevertheless, the inherent meaning of the novella by Maclean (1976) goes beyond these two because of other themes that interfere with the plot. Therefore, it may be safe to say that there will be several crucial differences between Maclean’s novella and Redford’s movie. Speaking of the adaptation, it was intended to reflect the mysterious and beautiful nature of the state of Montana while dwelling on the fate of the story’s main characters. The depictions of Norman and Paul, two completely dissimilar brothers, are carefully taken by Redford (1992) and turned into a strong plot device. The primary objective of the current paper is to validate the argument that the changes made by the director of A River Runs through It allowed him to add to the depth of the original novella with the same title.
Key Differences between the Novella and the Adaptation
The primary difference between the novella and its movie adaptation is the depiction of Paul and his life. Even though some of Paul’s mischief is touched upon across the original literary work, the movie tends to put a much bigger emphasis on his love for gambling and a glamorous lifestyle (Redford, 1992). The best example to highlight this difference would be to mention the scene where Paul and Norman were depicted going down the river together in a stolen boat. Even though this episode is missing from the novella, it is a great opportunity for the director to amplify the difference between the two brothers. While it is evident from the plot that Paul has a huge influence on his brother Norman, the movie goes beyond superficial descriptions and provides the audience with straightforward hints at the natural differences. From a young age, Paul was much more of a trouble-making figure than Norman, and the movie A River Runs through It does not take a toll on the novella by focusing on the boat scene and amplifying the dissimilarities carried by Paul and Norman.
Another stylistic device that was masterfully utilized by Redford (1992) was the reduction of fishing-related talk in favor of displaying interpersonal relationships and highlighting their importance to the story of the Macleans. The novella seems much more hasteless in terms of narration because Maclean (1976) was keen on pointing out every little detail about fly fishing and its importance for intrafamilial relationships. Understandably, the movie ignores the majority of fishing talk to focus on Norman, Paul, and their father. Redford (1992) took this step not to overload the story with narration elements that most likely would not work in a movie in the same way they did in the novella. Thus, the movie represents a transition from interpersonal relationships to paternal love, while the novella represents an ode to how many fathers represent the core bonding element within families while lacking a thorough emotional range. Nevertheless, the reduction of exposition revolving around fishing did not influence the movie in a negative manner.
The third instance of variation between the novel and the film is the presence of inconsistencies related to the timeline. There are two major examples of how Redford (1992) condensed the contents of the novel in order to improve the narration process and make the story flow better. The first one is how Maclean (1976) depicts Norman talking about his wife Jessie for the first time when they have already been married for some time. In Redford’s (1992) movie, Norman and Jessie meet and then get married throughout the movie. The second example of the director breaking the timeline is Norman coming back to Montana in 1926, whereas in the novella, he only returns in 1938 (Maclean, 1976; Redford, 1992). Again, this was an instance of the director exploiting an artistic device to make it look as if Paul’s murder occurred very soon after Norman’s return. The emotional connection between the main characters and the audience grows stronger throughout the movie because Redford’s (1992) initial focus is on the relationships between brothers.
Conclusion
Bearing in mind the contents of the novella and its film adaptation, it may be safe to say that there have been several important adjustments introduced by the director to add detail to the original A River Runs through It. Both can be considered consistent works of art capturing the differences between brothers carefully, with wittiness and poetic elegance. Robert Redford’s efforts were essential because they contributed to the creation of a striking film that translated the energy from the novella into a deep story of how boys become men. From Paul’s mischievous behaviors to the brothers’ preoccupation with fishing, the adaptation shows all the true colors of life in Montana and the struggle that Macleans had to experience over the years. The universal language of love depicted in the form of fly fishing became a source of unity for brothers and also connected the novella to its film adaptation. Despite the slight changes made by Redford, the movie titled A River Runs through It remains one of the most touching metaphors for how one could express love.
References
Maclean, N. (1976). A river runs through it. University of Chicago Press.
Redford, R. (1992). A river runs through it [Film]. Columbia Pictures.