Smooth Talk and the Distortion Between Mediums

            In modern American culture, there is a feeling all too commonly experienced regarding remakes, reinterpretations, adaptations, inspirations, and so forth. A person acquainted with a story or franchise may suddenly find their favorite material turned into a bastard of its former self. Or, a narrative may become so stretched out, convoluted, and pressed for excitement that, after a number of books or movies, the plot has lost all significance. Such is the nature of a society driven by a need for economic sustainment and growth. At the end of the day, a freelance writer and business executive alike will want to see an intellectual property brought to its full potential (and then maybe dragged for a time). In beginning the film Smooth Talk, a film adaptation of Joyce Carol Oates’s “Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?” I possessed similar feelings.

            In fact, before even sitting down to watch the film, I had reservations. With “WAYGWHYB”, Oates created a very particular piece of literature, one born of many influences and tackling important critical themes. Of course, the story itself is rather short, a brief five to ten pages. Certainly, the life of Connie allows for some amount of creative exposition (as in, she is a teenager and thus does teenager things). However, the sheer discrepancy between the amount of material in Oates’s story and the length of Smooth Talk leaves a fair amount of room for silly and unnecessary filler.

            Smooth Talk notably portrays Connie’s home life as a teenager’s worst nightmare. Her mother is angry, acidic, and even insulting. Connie’s sister is a modest, adored comparison. The father is the only character that ever presents a sliver of familial comfort to Connie, but even he is negligent and awkward. While the family in Smooth Talk definitely bears resemblance to its incarnation in “WAYGWHYB”, certain elements are played out and exaggerated for effect in the film. The conflict with the mother is notable in this regard, and the frequent spats she has with Connie do nothing but burn time and make the watcher feel awash with pity.

            Ultimately, though, no amount of filler can compare with the way Smooth Talk handles Oates’s emotional ending. “WAYGWHYB” has a very indistinct yet impactful conclusion, one open to interpretation and analysis. In fact, the entire story is worthy of various close readings and thematic approaches. Whether viewing Oates’s story as Connie’s corruption, or her rapid maturation in an apathetic society, or a commentary on the twisting of youth, one cannot deny the fact that Connie is “taken” in the end. However, Smooth Talk throws such a notion out the window. Rather, the film presents the audience with a more conquering depiction of Connie where she returns safe from a ride with the infamous Arnold Friend.

            Yes, Connie still experiences violation at the hands of Friend. But rather than be lost in the end, as with “WAYGWHYB”, Connie returns safely. Sure, she gets a nifty bit of character development in the process. Regardless, the film’s end is a ridiculous and deviating version of the original story. Answers for this phenomenon may be searched for in a critical essay by Brenda Daly titled “An Unfilmable Conclusion: Joyce Carol Oates at the Movies”. In the title, Daly asserts the rather difficult task of putting the “WAYGWHYB” conclusion into the medium of film. I disagree and believe that creative filmmaking could have created a solution, but firstly I want to draw attention towards Daly’s treatment of Connie.

            In analyzing Smooth Talk, Daly states that “when Connie asserts herself in the film, she moves beyond her rapist, but her victory- unlike his (Friend’s) conquest of her- does not violate him” (Daly 155). This single statement presents a large issue I had with the film adaptation: emphasis on character. On the surface, my issue seems unwarranted, for surely development of character is beneficial. However, Oates’s story, to me, is more about ideas, conflicts, and an overall bigger picture than “Connie and Arnold Friend”. “WAYGWHYB” harkens to Charles Schmid and Tuscon, to roaming youth and a conservative culture, to loss and sacrifice beyond a physical level. With the film, I felt drawn down a more “real” and “grounded” story, one where the faces can carry more weight than the ideas.  When I mentioned the movie’s extrapolated bits of narrative earlier, especially in relation to Connie’s mother, I was finding conflict with character moments that detract from the focus of Oates’s original story.

            The distorting nature of film, especially when adapting a work such as “WAYGWHYB”, creates similar problems for the ending. Daly does not believe that the closing moment of “WAYGWHYB” can be filmed. Daly believes that “Oates’s non-ending is certainly ‘unfilmable,’ for it portrays an energy- an erotic, spiritual energy signaled by violence- that cannot finally, be contained by a work of art” (Daly 159). I find this notion confusing, for surely Oates was able to contain the energy in her writing. Daly does goes on, stating that “the conventions of realism especially- the insistence upon endings, and on ‘character’ bounded by material realities including anatomical features- do not allow this higher consciousness to be invoked in Chopra’s film” (Daly 160). A portion of Daly’s reasoning is acceptable, as higher consciousness is incredibly hard to visualize. However, her entire defense of Smooth Talk and its ending alteration is based on my previous complaint. The film becomes restrictive due to its emphasis on character and grounding the audience in the “reality” of Connie, rather than the concepts and meaning behind Connie. An audience may feel alienated if they watched a movie about a teenage girl turn into a spiritual and abstract conflict right at the end. Yet this only serves as further reasoning to not have adapted “WAYGWHYB” in the first place.

Works Cited

Oates, Joyce Carol. “Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?” Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been? Ed. Elaine Showalter. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2002. Print.

Daly, Brenda O. “An Unfilmable Conclusion: Joyce Carol Oates at the Movies” Where Are You   Going, Where Have You Been? Ed.   Elaine Showalter. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2002. Print.