Chels

Usually, my Talking Adaptations posts focus on literary works that have been adapted multiple times, listing my own favourites as recommendations. This week, however, I’m going to the other end of the spectrum. Much like Shakespeare, Austen, and Shelley, E.M. Forster’s works are part of the British literary canon. They’re also a huge part of British cinema history – but there’s really only one key adaptation for each of the novels or short stories. How come such significant works remain largely untouched, unlike Austen’s or Shakespeare’s, which have countless adaptations?

There are two reasons for this – the first is legal. When Forster died, the rights to his novels were given to the King’s College board of fellows. The initial executor of the books’ copyright refused adaptations of his works – Forster himself refused film adaptations of A Passage to India during his lifetime because of the criticism he faced at the time of publication. It’s hard to say whether the novel should have been adapted, after all, we don’t know if authors who died before the advent of cinema would have wanted film adaptations of their works, but in the end, it was. A new executor took over, and in 1981 a film adaptation was approved. Coincidentally, 1981 saw the release of Chariots of Fire, which marked the beginning of a new era for British cinema.

The English Heritage Cycle was a real powerhouse of cinema in the 1980s – its popularity helped keep the British industry afloat amid the popularity of Hollywood cinema; it encouraged tourism within the UK, and managed to both appease and criticise the traditional values of the government at the time. Heritage films were most often based on classic English literature, especially the works of Austen and Forster, and they showcased beautiful landscapes, lavish costumes, and a recurring cast of actors who became synonymous with period dramas. The real powerhouse of Heritage cinema, though, was Merchant Ivory, the production company founded by producer Ismail Merchant and director James Ivory. Merchant and Ivory were so dominant within the genre that even films they hadn’t produced were referred to as Merchant Ivory films – their names became synonymous with heritage cinema.

Merchant Ivory produced adaptations of three of the six Forster stories with screen adaptations. They weren’t involved with the production of A Passage to India (they requested to adapt the novel in the 1970s), many people assume that they were – after all, Forster and Merchant Ivory are almost impossible to separate. They did, however, create A Room With a View, Maurice, and Howards End. All three films won and were nominated for countless awards, including Academy Awards, and brought British cinema back to international fame – they’re still highly regarded today, 40 years later. These films created the iconography of English heritage, from sprawling countrysides to intricate Edwardian dress. They starred English actors that personified the English heritage aesthetic – from early career actors like Hugh Grant and Helena Bonham Carter to established icons Maggie Smith and Judi Dench. 

Where Angels Fear to Tread (1991) again wasn’t produced by Merchant Ivory, but by then, Merchant Ivory had become synonymous with the heritage film. It starred Rupert Graves and Helena Bonham Carter, who had previously starred in Maurice and A Room With a View respectively, and was firmly situated as part of the English heritage canon.

The English heritage adaptations were so iconic and became so associated with the novels themselves, that they almost became untouchable. Where Hamlet has been filmed countless times, and it feels impossible to choose a favourite Austen adaptation, the same culture didn’t emerge for Forster. It’s not like the films are seen as perfect, faithful adaptations – they’re not immune to criticism – it’s just that further adaptations don’t feel necessary, in a way. They’re definitely a product of their time, too – heritage cinema was so culturally and economically valuable in the 1980s and 90s.

Maurice has yet to be adapted again, nor has Where Angels Fear to Tread, and while A Passage to India returned to the stage following its 1960s run, there have been no further screen adaptations. A Room With a View was remade as a TV film by ITV in 2007, and Howards End as a BBC drama in 2017, but neither were particularly notable. I don’t mean that as criticism – they both performed well enough in terms of viewership; they weren’t unpopular, but they also weren’t huge cultural moments. They were rated fairly enough, again, they were above average, but not the best of television in their respective years. Perhaps they were just released at the wrong time – perhaps a Forster adaptation would find more success in the 2020s, after the success of Emma, The Other Bennet Sister, and Bridgerton. 

There’s one story I haven’t talked about yet. It’s the most adapted of Forster’s works, but probably the least well known. The Machine Stops is Forster’s 1909 science fiction short story, in which all of humanity now lives underground, having their needs met by The Machine. It wasn’t touched by the English heritage canon, presumably because sci fi and costume dramas had very different audiences. Instead, it’s been adapted for screen as short films and television episodes multiple times, and is hugely popular when it comes to student films. I think the fact that The Machine Stops wasn’t part of the Merchant Ivory era canon is why it is so often adapted – there isn’t one singular adaptation to be compared to; there’s no authority, no accepted conventions to be adhered to or to divert from.

I think perhaps the popularity of the 1980s and 90s Forster adaptations is a bit of a double edged sword. On the one hand, they are iconic, and they deserve to be celebrated, but on the other, I think they were so successful in many ways that they’ve hindered the production of other adaptations. The reason that adaptations were so popular in 80s British cinema, and continue to be in the 2020s, is that there was an established viewership of book fans who would be expected to watch the films. This has been part of the continued success of Austen adaptations over the years, and I do wonder why the same can’t be said for Forster.