Document Type : Research article


1 M.A in English Language and Literature, Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Golestan University, Gorgan, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Department of English Language and Literature- Golestan University – Iran

3 Assistant professor of English language and literature, Golestan University


The history of literary adaptation is as long as the history of cinema itself. Given the undeniable fact that literary classics guaranteed a large number of viewers, it is no surprise that the first filmmakers turned to literature to gain their materials for the screen. Since the development of the field called adaptation studies, the relation between cinema and literature has been analyzed through numerous approaches. One of the most recent theories which can shed light on the unstudied interaction between the two sides from new perspective is dialogism as developed by the Russian critic Mikhail Bakhtin. The present paper is set to perform a comparative analysis of Tennessee Williams’ A Streetcar Named Desire and its cinematic adaptation, Biganeh (Stranger), directed by Bahram Tavakoli. The research takes Bakhtin’s notions of unfinalizability and chronotope as two key constituents of dialogism to investigate changes the Iranian director has made in his version of the play. The study found that a literary work is open to changes if the adapter seeks to challenge it in an innovative way. It is in this unfinalized, dialogic process that new meanings are created. Thus, Tavakoli’s film proves that a classic play is both worthy and capable of being adapted for modern audiences if the filmmaker goes beyond common oversimplifications and represents unresolved tensions which lie beneath the veneer of the play.


Aragay, M. (2005). Reflection to refraction: Adaptation studies then and now. In M. Aragay (Ed.), Books in Motion: Adaptation, intertextuality, authorship (pp. 11-37). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Rodopi B.V.
Bakhtin, M. (1981). The dialogic imagination. Texas: University of Texas Press.
Bakhtin, M. (1984). Rabelais and his world (H. Iswolsky, Trans.). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Bakhtin, M. (1985). Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics (C. Emerson, Ed.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Bakhtin, M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Eds.) (V. W. McGee, Trans.). Texas: University of Texas Press.
Barth, K. (1968). The epistle to the Roman (E. C. Hoskins, Trans.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Berkman, L. (1967). The tragic downfall of Blanche DuBois. Modern Drama, 10(3), 249-257.
Bezeczky, G. (1994). Contending voices in Bakhtin. Comparative Literature, 46(4), 321-345. doi:10.2307/1771376
Beyad, M., & Hassanzadeh Javanian, M. R. (2018). Bakhtinian intertextuality and contextuality in adaptation studies: Kenneth Branagh and Michael Almereyda’s dialogues with William Shakespeare’s Hamlet. ANAFORA: Journal of Literary Studies, 5(2), 381-402. doi:10.29162/ANAFORA.v5i2.6
Blake, E., & Rosario, R. (2007). Journey to transcendence: Dostoevsky’s theological polyphony in Barth’s understanding of the Pauline KRISIS. Studies in East European Thought, 59(1/2), 3-168.
Boxill, R. (1987). Tennessee Williams. New York: Macmillan Education.
Cartmell, D. (2012). 100+ years of adaptations, or, adaptation as the art form of democracy. In D. Cartmell (Ed.), A companion to literature, film, and adaptation (pp. 1-15). West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Fleche, A. (1997). Mimetic disillusion: Eugene O'Neill, Tennessee Williams, and U.S. dramatic realism. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.
Ghandeharion, A., & Anooshirvani A. (2013). New comparative literature and literary adaptation: Tennessee Williams’ The Glass Menagerie and Bahram Tavakoli’s Here Without Me. Comparative Literature, 7(1), 10-43.
Gremaud, A. N. (2012). Rowan Williams and Mikhail Bakhtin: The appeal of polyphony. London, Ontario: University of Western Ontario Press.
Harrison, K. (2017). Shakespeare, Bakhtin, and film: A dialogic lens. London, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
Heintzelman, G., & Smith-Howard, A. (2005). Critical companion to Tennessee Williams. New York: Facts on File.
Holquist, M. (2002). Dialogism: Bakhtin and his world. New York: Routledge.
Hooper, M. (2012). Sexual politics in the works of Tennessee Williams. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Hutcheon, L. (2013). A Theory of Adaptation. New York: Routledge.
Kelly, M. (2013). Chronotopic perspectives of dialectics and life in Dostoevsky’s art and the response to human suffering. New Zealand Slavonic Journal, 47/48, 1-26.
King, V. (1988). How to write a screenplay in 21 days. New York: HarperCollins.
Knowles, R. (1998). Introduction. In R. Knowles (Ed.), Shakespeare and carnival: After Bakhtin (pp. 1-13). London, England: Macmillan Press Ltd.
Macovski, M. (1997). Dialogue and critical discourse. New York: Oxford University Press.
Malekan, S. (Producer), & Tavakoli, B. (Director) (2014). Stranger [Motion picture]. Iran.
Morrow, R. A. (1998). Bakhtin and Mannheim: An introductory dialogue. In M. M. Bell & M. Gardiner (Eds.), Bakhtin and the human sciences (pp. 145-163). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Morson, G. S., & Emerson, C. (1990). Mikhail Bakhtin: Creation of a prosaics. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
Murphy, B. (2014). The theatre of Tennessee Williams. London, England: Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.
Nazemi, Z., Aliakbari Harehdasht, H., & Movahhed, A. (2018). The representation of Women’s gender roles in the Iranian cinema: A study of The Stranger (2014). Deposito de Investigación, 7, 555-564.
Olufunwa, H. (2005). Achebe’s spatial temporalities: Literary chronotopes in Things Fall Apart and Arrow of GodCritical Survey, 17(3), 49-65.
O’Neill, E. (1946). The Iceman cometh. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Pechey, G. (2007). Mikhail Bakhtin: The word in the world. New York: Routledge.
Preis, E. (1990). Problems in screenwriting. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Roberts, J. (2012). Discourse or dialogue? Habermas, the Bakhtin circle, and the question of concrete utterances. Theory and Society, 41(4), 395-419.
Saddik, A. (2015). Tennessee Williams and the theatre of excess. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Sandywell, B. (1998). The shock of the old: Mikhail Bakhtin's contributions to the theory of time and alterity. In M. M. Bell & M. Gardiner (Eds.), Bakhtin and the human sciences (pp. 196-214). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Smith, W. J. (2012). My friend Tom: The poet-playwright Tennessee Williams. Jackson, MS: University Press of Mississippi.
Stam, R. (2000). Beyond fidelity: The dialogics of adaptation. In J. Naremore (Ed.), Film adaptation (pp. 54-78). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Steinby, L. (2013). Bakhtin’s concept of the chronotope: The viewpoint of an acting subject. In L. Steinby & T. Klapuri (Eds.), Bakhtin and his others: (Inter)subjectivity, chronotope, dialogism (pp. 105-127). London, England: Anthem Press.
Vlasov, E. (1995). The world according to Bakhtin: On the description of space and spatial forms in Mikhail Bakhtin’s works. Canadian Slavonic Papers/Revue Canadienne Des Slavistes, 37(1/2), 37-58.
Williams, T. (1947). A streetcar named desire. New York: Penguin Modern Classics.