Wednesday, June 1, 2016

Book vs. Movie: 12 Years A Slave






I started reading this book on the airport to New York (OMW to watch Les Mis!)


Before I read this book or watched the movie, the most I knew about this story was the basic premise:

Based on a true story...A free man sold into slavery, won best picture in 2012...Benedict Cumberbatch plays one of the southern slaveowners etc...


So when I was in the airport reading the book, I was expecting a pretty straightforward account of Mr Solomon Northup's horrendous experiences in the south of the United States; possibly sprinkled about with anti-slavery propaganda appropriate for the time in which it was written and the indended audience would obviously be the people of the north. Basically I was expecting a heavy-handed expose on the atrocities of the south.

These expectations were seemingly reinforced when I read on the back cover that the narrative had been completed with the assistance of a ghost writer. So, I didn't go into this book expecting anything extraordinary as far as literary quality (although his experiences would certainly be worth reading about). 

Well, I won't say that parts of this book aren't heavy reading: it deals with some very heavy topics. The story is told in a a first person account, and it reads like something of a psychological thriller/horror story. But as far as literary quality I was completely mistaken; I don't think Solomon needed a ghostwriter to tell his story. The account was absolutely riveting and it was accompanied by an extremely thoughtful and on-point analysis of human nature in general. 


My favorite part is when Solomon talks about his "Master" Edwin Epps' eldest son:


"Young Master Epps possessed some noble qualities, yet no process of reasoning could lead him to comprehend, that in the eye of the Almighty there is no distinction of color. [...] Brought up with such ideas--in the notion that we stand without the pale of humanity--no wonder the oppressors of my people are a pitiless and unrelenting race."


This is an idea that's revisited several times in the story: 

  • William Ford is a really decent guy, he cares about people, even slaves...even people who he considers to be inferior.
  • Mrs Epps is pretty decent too, when she's not supper jealous of Patsy.
  • Mr Epps...well he's actually a law-abiding man (ie...he's only as "bad" as the law will allow him to be.)

Solomon is not trying to paint the white people of the south as these atrocious monsters, these 'other' beings who need to be uprooted. He recognizes that these people see the world...not in the way it is...but the way they were taught that it is.

He's trying to understand them! And he's granting them a complexity of thought...a humanity...that he himself is denied. 



#ugh! #FEELS!


Another really interesting thing about this book is how he overcomes the whole slavery system they had set up in the south. I kept expecting him to run away and get rescued, which probably says something about the way I think about problems in general (the system as something that needs to be defied...) but we see numerous reasons in this book why that approach wouldn't work. Solomon repeatedly chooses to keep his head down, to work in this system rather than fight because he knows that people who run away don't get away. He knows he's not running from the masters but from a whole line of thought that's existed for a really long time and that permeates every aspect of their society. 


It's heartbreaking, gut-wrenching, thought provoking, riveting.  And the ending?! 




Definitely not a light read, but I highly recommend it if you want something that's exciting and thought provoking at once.






And now for the movie:





This is more going to be a "what the movie missed" section. For the most part, the movie is pretty loyal to the book. Solomon's home life being told in flashbacks and, of course, the book can give us an internal monologue that lest us get inside Solomon's mind in a way a movie can't but I was actually very surprised at how much they were able to fit into the film.


Here are the differences I noticed though:

  • Solomon and Anne had three kids, not two. Their names were Elizabeth, Margaret, and Alonzo. (I think they took Elizabeth out because they already had another character with the name Eliza).
  • Uncle Abram has significance in the story other than just dying. (In fact they kind of nerfed anyone who wasn't Patsy now that I think about it...)
  • In the book, we don't really know if William Ford was turning a blind eye to the possiblity of Solomon being a free man. In the movie, Solomon actually tells him and he just goes: "La-la-la I can't hear you!" in the book, one of Solomon's regrets seems to be that he didn't tell him because he didn't know if he could trust Master Ford or not. (Remember, it's not these people who are his enemies: it's a whole system)
  • They never show the Epps' children; the eldest son would have been around 12 or 13 at the end. So Solomon would have watched him grow from infancy.
  • The guy who "rescued" Solomon wasn't just Parker the Random Store Clerk, his name was Henry Northup. (I think this was done to avoid explaining why there is a black and white family named Northup, although the explanation is actually quite simple.)
  • In the book, Solomon never tells us anything explicitly sexual, however, it doesn't require a stretch of the imagination to realize the types of things depicted in the movie must have happened. It's there to show us how brutal this world is, there's nothing particularly seductive or explicit in it. 
  • Solomon's reunion with his family is even more of a tear-jerker: Not only did his daughter name the first grandchild after him, Solomon's son Alonzo was away with the aim of making money to make a trip down to the south to find his father.
Overall I'd say that the movie is a loyal adaption to the book, the changes made were minimal and understandable. However, I should mention the movie is Rated R, there are strong thematic elements, intense situations as well as depictions of torture and rape. I would not recommend this for children, particularly if they haven't read the book.

The acting of the three main leads is fantastic, the story is powerful, but I don't see this movie as one for casual viewing. I watched it by myself, and it's not one I wouldn't feel comfortable watching in a group unless we were gonna talk about it afterwards.




No comments: