The reasons that Ken doesn't read the novels: an in-depth interview by tape

[Doc Kwok]

So I've heard, but I generally don't watch Asian TV series made or distributed after October 31, 1988 (again, for very personal reasons that I can't fully explain and don't expect others to really understand).

I made a once-in-a-lifetime exception for China's 2007 SHANGHAI BUND (remake of TVB's classic 1980 THE BUND series), and that was OK. Bits and pieces I've seen of the 1990s remakes of the Jin Yong adaptations have just turned me off, though. They just looked *wrong*, from my point of view. I'm not even saying they're bad...they just seem wrong to me because I already have a very firm image (embedded from childhood and adolescence) on what these characters and their martial arts should look like, and I'm so annoyed by the differences that I can't even look at the newer versions for long.

I too grew up with the 80s TVB adaptations, and when I saw the 90s adaptations, they felt threadbare and sterile by comparison. By the late 90s though, my self-taught written Chinese had gotten to the point where I could read entire Jinyong novels without constantly referring to a dictionary, and I have never looked back since.

It was startling to see just how different the novels were from the 80s adaptations. In addition to the addition of tons of filler material, the very personalities of the characters were markedly different. One common tendency was to focus on some aspect of a character's personality or relationships, then blow that completely out of proportion while neglecting the others - e.g. Huang Rong's mischievousness, Zhou Botong's childishness, Wei Xiaobao's friendship with Kangxi, Yang Guo's friendship with Yelu Qi, Guo Jing's relationship with Genghis Khan etc.

For example, I cannot picture the novel Huang Rong doing any of the following:

• Stripping Hong Qigong naked (except for his underpants, obviously), tying him up to a stake on the beach and letting the tide come in
• Hanging Guo Jing upside-down from a tree on a rope for a whole day, then dropping him down to the ground after he fell asleep
• Slapping Guo Jing and threatening to kill him with a dagger after hearing about his relationship with Hua Zheng

Another example is that the relationship of Tony Leung's Wei Xiaobao with Andy Lau's Kangxi was far too casual. For example, near the beginning, you had Kangxi taking out his frustrations with Oboi on Wei Xiaobao to the point of spitting blood, then Kangxi gasping in horror, profusely apologising to WXB and whining about what a nasty man Oboi was (in that tone of voice). Later on, you had the two casually conversing and gradually changing positions, until WXB was draped casually on Kangxi's throne. The novel WXB would never dare do that in a million years!

I've written at some length before about the differences between novel and Andy Lau's Yang Guo, so I won't go there again. In a nutshell, I find the adolescent novel YG somewhat arrogant and aloof, whereas Andy Lau's was gregarious and... smarmy perhaps? Little Dragon Girl also seemed more aggressive and sure in her relationship with YG - e.g. in ROCH '83, she moved as if to kill YG when he said he couldn't take her as his wife immediately after the rape, and later on when she overheard YG saying that he was going to marry Guo Fu to the Wu brothers, she didn't believe it at all.

Aside from personalities, some events were reversed for some reason. e.g. in the novel, Zhou Botong was prevented from leaving by Huang Yaoshi, while in LOCH '82, it was ZBT refusing to leave and HYS trying to get rid of him. Or in the contest for HR's hand, the adaptation had Guo Jing lose the first contest (because ZBT helped him), and win the second one (which was a pure inner strength contest).

While there were an excess of additions to the 80's series, there were also a few curious omissions. The 2 pet eagles never appeared at all (except maybe at the beginning of ROCH '83, but it wasn't clear if they belonged to the Guos), and they made the giant condor fly instead. This meant that the death of the 2 eagles was missing, which was a great opportunity to really drive the 'Ask the world, what is love?' poem home.

A lot of these differences may seem trivial, but they have a big impact on the overall tone of the story, even if the overall direction of the plot is the same. Jinyong's novels tend to be more character-driven compared to those of his peers (which tend more towards being event-driven), with the later novels even more so, and proceed at a relatively sedate pace, going into great explicit detail about the characters' thoughts, motivations, strategies, interactions etc. By modifying or not showing such a major aspect of the novels, it often feels like the very essence of the story has been altered.

These things do tend to be rather hard to portray on television though. I do feel that the portrayal of characters in the 90s was more accurate by far (HSDS and Flying Fox excepted), but due to the limitations of the medium, most of the subtleties didn't come across and you end up with a skeleton of a story, stripped of most of the original meat from Jinyong. The 80s by contrast had a much larger skeleton with big chunks of the original meat replaced with lots of synthetic meat from the TVB scriptwriters.

[Dirt]

In DGSD 1980's, Xu Zhu and Duan Yu teamed up with Xiao Yuanshan at the end of the show because, earlier in the TV show, Xiao Feng, Xu Zhu and Duan Yu had made up a move that they executed together that was all powerful. But after Xiao Feng's death, Xu Zhu and Duan Yu couldn't use that move anymore and Murong Bo was on a rampage after learning a mega powerful kung fu (can't remember what it was) and the only way to stop MRB was to team up with XYS because only XYS had equal kung fu ability to XF to execute the super Xiao/Xu/Duan move.

1980's TVB made up stuff left and right. The 90's shows seemed to be more accurate like the 95(?) TVB DGSD and the SPW from the 1990's. Then came the 00's and Mainland China took over.

Good times. Good times.

[kidd]

A lot of these differences may seem trivial, but they have a big impact on the overall tone of the story, even if the overall direction of the plot is the same. Jinyong's novels tend to be more character-driven compared to those of his peers (which tend more towards being event-driven), with the later novels even more so, and proceed at a relatively sedate pace, going into great explicit detail about the characters' thoughts, motivations, strategies, interactions etc. By modifying or not showing such a major aspect of the novels, it often feels like the very essence of the story has been altered.

And that is why SOD96 is good.

Excepts from Moinllieon's review.

For example, one of the first, and best, parts of the story was the face-off between LingHu Chong and Tian BuoGuang in a tavern over the fate of Yi Lin. While Smiling Proud Wanderer 1984 (SPW84) and State of Divinity 2001 (SoD2001) both had the important plot points and the result right, they also left out about half of the dialogue in the scene. It was clear that they missed the point of the scene, the point of the scene was not just a duel, it was to show what kind of character LingHu Chong was, and all of that was conveyed entirely through dialogue. SoD96 kept the entire conversation in tact, even the little parts where Yi Lin couldn't stop herself from snickering a little here and there. There was another scene near the end where LingHu Chong, caught off guard about the arrival of some guests, went out to greet the guests without his boots on, for which everyone present had a nice fun at.

[Ren Wo Xing]

Everything Doc Kwok says is 100% correct. There's a darn good reason Jinyong is tired of TVB and has forbidden them from making (trashing) any more of his novels.

[pannonian]

While there were an excess of additions to the 80's series, there were also a few curious omissions. The 2 pet eagles never appeared at all (except maybe at the beginning of ROCH '83, but it wasn't clear if they belonged to the Guos), and they made the giant condor fly instead. This meant that the death of the 2 eagles was missing, which was a great opportunity to really drive the 'Ask the world, what is love?' poem home.

A dying bird and its mate preferring to die rather than live on was the origin of the actual poem.

[Doc Kwok]

A dying bird and its mate preferring to die rather than live on was the origin of the actual poem.

Exactly - to be more precise, the writer of the poem, Yuan Haowen, was inspired to write it by the tale of a hunter who had killed a wild goose, and its mate (who had escaped) refused to leave, eventually committing suicide by crashing into the ground. The fate of the two eagles was almost an exact echo of this.

[tape]

I thought this thread was kind of lame and indulgent on Ken's cry for attention , but it turns out to be a rather good discussion on adaptations.

[Ken Cheng]

I thought this thread was kind of lame and indulgent on Ken's cry for attention , but it turns out to be a rather good discussion on adaptations.

Hey, you started it by dragging my Deterioration Theory thread off course.

[leorio]

It was startling to see just how different the novels were from the 80s adaptations. In addition to the addition of tons of filler material, the very personalities of the characters were markedly different. One common tendency was to focus on some aspect of a character's personality or relationships, then blow that completely out of proportion while neglecting the others - e.g. Huang Rong's mischievousness, Zhou Botong's childishness, Wei Xiaobao's friendship with Kangxi, Yang Guo's friendship with Yelu Qi, Guo Jing's relationship with Genghis Khan etc.

TVB in the 1980's probably thought these antics would appeal to the audience more, and make the characters more charming. Er...
I remember reading the LoCH novel and thinking about Guo Jing and Huang Rong's thoughts, Jin Yong's observations on them, and how all those color the story as a whole. They certainly didn't make it to all the adaptations I've watched.

In the 1990's TVB tried to be more faithful (LoCH 1995, DGSD 1997 - unluckily for me I haven't found SPW 1996) but my main objection is that the actors look wrong for a wuxia series. The ladies especially look too modern, not beautiful enough, and sometimes not young enough.

[pannonian]

TVB in the 1980's probably thought these antics would appeal to the audience more, and make the characters more charming. Er...
I remember reading the LoCH novel and thinking about Guo Jing and Huang Rong's thoughts, Jin Yong's observations on them, and how all those color the story as a whole. They certainly didn't make it to all the adaptations I've watched.

In the 1990's TVB tried to be more faithful (LoCH 1995, DGSD 1997 - unluckily for me I haven't found SPW 1996) but my main objection is that the actors look wrong for a wuxia series. The ladies especially look too modern, not beautiful enough, and sometimes not young enough.

LOCH 2003 captured the novel perfectly, not just in its translation of text to screen, but also in its depiction of wuxia as historical fiction. LOCH is supposed to be an unusual wuxia piece in that respect, but the 2003 adaptation brought that forward perfectly.

[Banh Mi]

SOD96 really annoyed me. It made my favourite story look bland boring and crap.

[leorio]

LOCH 2003 captured the novel perfectly, not just in its translation of text to screen, but also in its depiction of wuxia as historical fiction. LOCH is supposed to be an unusual wuxia piece in that respect, but the 2003 adaptation brought that forward perfectly.

Which is why this is my favorite LoCH version. For one thing, it depicts young Guo Jing's Mongolian days so well. And by well I mean in loving details. This version even makes me like Huazheng.

[Ken Cheng]

more importantly, where's tape now?

I thought this thread...

See, y'all: tape didn't get taken away by sinister men in dark overcoats in some dark alley in a bad part of the city, never to be seen by mortal eyes again.

Of course, there's always next time...

[Ken Cheng]

It'll be a win for everyone.

As long as people approach me with the attitude of it, "Read it, or ELSE," then forget it.

Don't blame me: blame those who needlessly came into that subject with an attitude about it.

As soon as they acknowledge they were wrong to do that, then I'll reconsider.

[minutemanwayne]

I haven't seen anyone rudelessly demand that you read it. It's a forum, you can't demand anyone to do something that you wouldn't like. Besides, even if everyone does come out to apologize, you'll come up with another excuse NOT to read the novel.

[tweety365]

I too haven't seen anyone giving off the attitude of "Read it, or ELSE." For the majority of members, I think the general consensus is that it is rather ironic for an avid member and also moderator of the forum to be so interested in the Condor Trilogy yet refuse to read the novels. Most of the questions can be answered based on the novels. I just don't understand the reasoning of requesting info from another person when the answer only needs to be read directly from the source .

[Ken Cheng]

Besides, even if everyone does come out to apologize, you'll come up with another excuse NOT to read the novel.

Why don't we TRY it first and see instead of speculating?

I'd LOVE to read them, honestly, but I'm not going to do it if people rudely demand it as if I *owe* it to them. Would *you* willingly do something if people rudely demanded it of you when you didn't owe it to them?

I'm not going to sit here and name names. Those who've done it know who they are. Let them decide.

[devilz91]

I try really hard not to comment but:

Why don't we TRY it first and see instead of speculating?

Nobody is going to apologize to you, nor do they owe you such an apology.

I'd LOVE to read them, honestly, but I'm not going to do it if people rudely demand it as if I *owe* it to them. Would *you* willingly do something if people rudely demanded it of you when you didn't owe it to them?

Firstly, you don't owe anyone anything. Secondly, why wouldn't you read something that you actually want to read and it is beneficial to you? You are acting petty to spite people who in the end probably don't really give a shit whether you read it or not, it doesn't affect them. The only thing you succeed in doing is screwing yourself over.

Probably the only thing this thread will end up doing is make you want to read them even less. But actually, nobody really cares whether you read them or not.

[Ken Cheng]

Firstly, you don't owe anyone anything. Secondly, why wouldn't you read something that you actually want to read and it is beneficial to you? You are acting petty to spite people who in the end probably don't really give a shit whether you read it or not, it doesn't affect them. The only thing you succeed in doing is screwing yourself over.

They chose to behave in the manner they did to get what they wanted.

In response, I choose not to give them what they want.

Sounds fair to me.

[devilz91]

They chose to behave in the manner they did to get what they wanted.

In response, I choose not to give them what they want.

Sounds fair to me.

Not exactly. You lose much more from this exchange than they do. So in the end, they still win.