The fight between novel and play

During the summer break, I have read the play version of “The curious incident of the do in the night-time”, written by Simon Stephens. Then, my curiosity forced me to see how excellent the novel version would be. Both of them talked about an autism boy, the death of a dog, and a separated strange family (Haddon). The plots seemed truly attractive, indeed. I couldn’t stop forcing me continue reading the book. Otherwise, the description of characters, the scenes, and language using are still different; due to the cutting details, I liked the book version better.

First of all, the role of characters changed slightly. For instance, the role of Siobhan, who was Christopher’s teacher, changed in the play version. She became one of the main characters of the play, but she was just a normal teacher that Christopher believed in the novel. According to the play version, Christopher always listened to Siobhan; whenever he did something with confusion, he would realized what Siobhan had told him to do so. For example, when he nearly got lost in the crowded train station, there was a script for Siobhan’s sound to tell him to say, “Left, Right, Left, Right” (Stephens). There wasn’t a huge amount of information about Siobhan in the novel version and she didn’t appear a lot in Christopher’s family life, even though she was important. For example, Siobhan wasn’t with Christopher when he found out Father kill Willington in the novel. Thus, the roles of characters changed due to the demand of the play. For the fight between characters, the play version won a little more of my appreciation by taught me to understand Siobhan more.

On the other hand, some of the scenes were cutting off in the play version of the book. Since the directors wanted to make a play splendid, it cannot be too long to make the audiences get bored. Thus, some scenes must be cut. For example, there were two scenes that Christopher went to visit Mrs. Alexander in the novel; they were combined to one in the play version since the information wasn’t so necessary to be separate in a play. However, for readers, having both of the scenes would give them a realistic feeling that they were figuring out the truth with the main character step by step. As a result, the novel version was catchier for the readers to read. Of course, the novel version won this round.

After that, compare to the novel version, the play version use an easier language but shorten or hided lots of details. The play was in the third perspective that readers saw everyone’s characteristic by hearing or reading what he or she said; the novel version was in the first perspective of Christopher that we understand the world in the novel by what Christopher told the readers. The novel told the story in a much more descriptive way and it used complex sentence to describe what happened detailed. For example, the play wouldn’t tell what the back ground looked like but the novel would describe the color of the floor, or what the rooms looked like. It’s a lot easier to read the play for having a sense of what happen, but it’s better to read the novel thus they could deliberate the literature. In my perspective, I would like the novel better.

Admittedly, the novel version probably won the fight based on literature in my mind. However, both of the works were excellent and the script cannot be considered as the whole play that it should be the full performance. I believed performance of the script was as beautiful as the book. I would recommend others to read the book and watch the play since they would gave audiences or readers an unforgettable experience.

Citation:

Haddon, Mark. The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time. New York: Doubleday, 2003. Print.

Stephens, Simon. The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time. New York: Dramatists Play Service, 2015. Print.