Emma's Focus: Is it More Than Love?

Something I've noticed when thinking about adaptations and "fidelity" is that many films seem to pick a few key points from a novel to focus on instead of trying to show them all. This makes sense because they can spend more time developing a few important themes and do them justice, rather than glazing over each theme  an have the audience miss the point because they've tried to fit in everything. One theme that always seems to make its way from a novel to the center of a film is love. Somehow, love becomes the "go-to" focal point for many adaptations, even if it is not the point of a given novel, or barely exists in said novel. I get it, love is exciting; it sells tickets; it's what people want to see in order to live vicariously through the characters, but if it isn't the point of the novel, should it be the point of the film?

Emma by Jane Austen is one such novel that is frequently adapted into a sweeping romance, such as the one directed by Douglas McGrath, starring Gwyneth Paltrow as Emma. While there are pining hearts, professions of love, and weddings in the novel (it wouldn't be Jane Austen without them), these are not the point or purpose; they are merely surface things that occur and help convey the "bigger picture." A great example of this romantic exaggeration is the scene at Box Hill. In both the film and the novel, there is tension between Emma and Mr. Knightly, but in the film, a much bigger deal is made of this scene and the resulting changes Emma makes. The novel would have us see Emma's change as slightly less dramatic, and I believe, more due to Emma's self-reflection. Granted, this self-reflection is brought on by Mr. Knightly's reproof, but she ultimately decides her behavior was wrong and thus should be rectified. The film, however, makes Emma's change out to be as a result of her love for Mr. Knightly. She hasn't fully realized the depth of her feelings (yet), but we are led to understand that her reaction and subsequent change of heart is all for him.

The novel provides important reflection time for both Emma and Knightly to realize and develop their feelings for one another. It also gives Emma time to think about who she has been and how she wants to change that. In the film, we see almost instantaneous attachment between the two in their looks and body language, and from this point on, the film's focus is on their relationship. Emma's change of attitude is also fairly quick, and as I mentioned before, it is motivated by her desire to look good to Knightly.

So what? Why should we care that one medium focuses on the love story more forcefully than the other? I would say that it isn't much of an issue, unless the film forgets the more important themes Austen is trying to convey, i.e. having equivalence of meaning. In Emma, Austen focuses on the importance of things that happen during dull, everyday life. Of particular importance are the things that women see, say, and do, which is why the novel is full of relationships. The relationships are not the point, it is the women discussing them and how they go about doing so in their daily lives. This is what a film should strive to capture. Does the Box Hill scene of the movie ruin what Austen is trying to achieve? No, I don't think so, but I think it may be missing the part of the point by skipping over Emma's self-reflection and slow, deliberate transformation, which involves quite a few other women, not just Mr. Knightly.