Although this argument never gets old, I believe that the film does a better job at grasping the severity of “passing” for being white than the novel Passing. However, the film does eliminate a lot of the details about Irene and Clare. I did not know that Clare’s father died (Nella Larsen 30). As Clare’s visits with other New Negroes became infrequent, her ability and desire to pass were indirectly related. Clare is able to pass more effectively without fear, guilt, or shame that some of her former New Negros know her secret. I also did not grasp the scene of Clare’s racist husband reading this section.
I was able to pick up on the idea brought up by my peers that Clare and Irene desire each other in the way that Clare writes to Irene about their encounter in Chicago.
I agree that the film does a better job of grasping the severity of “passing” and I also believe the film has a bigger affect on the audience than the novel. I also think Irene is a little jealous of Irene when she sees her “passing” with ease and no fear. The film didn’t mention anything about Clare’s father death but do you think that her father’s death is a apart of the reason why she so rebellious and a risk taker without fear?
I also agree that the film was better just because it easier to watch it then picture it in your head while reading but the reading does provided details that the film did not capture also how in the reading you can pick up on words and how they come into play with the rest of the reading like the symbolism used
I agree with your viewpoint. The major weakness of a novel is that it doesn’t convey an atmosphere nearly as well as a movie could. There’s no constant reminder of society, where there are glancing eyes everywhere you turn, and you can only look one direction at a time.
A novel lets you focus in on one point and tunnel vision on everything else, but a movie is wide and expansive.