The film adaptation of accordingly allows the viewer to not only distinguish Mike, Anna, Charles, and Sarah individually, but analyze Charles through Mike and Sarah through Anna.Though the director is not as noticeably present within the film as Fowles in his novel, Reisz is embodied by Mike and Anna as contemporary actors personifying their roles as well as conveying their twentieth century perspectives on their nineteenth century characters.Fowles weaves the unspoken boundaries of the nineteenth century throughout his work just as they were nuanced in the Victorian attitude.
The film’s absence of the novel’s depth and weight on character evolution and freedom, nevertheless, addresses a critical aspect of the novel: Sarah’s unusually advanced attitude losing momentum, an indication of the reality that is the end to the progress of self.The Bridge by Artifice of Freedom Just as stagnation is seen in many facets of life (intellectual achievement, moral and philosophical revelation, emotional fervor and zeal) exhibits this deterioration of progression in Sarah.The reader is presented with a pariah, supposedly conscious of her actions and influence, creating her own ostracism and misery.Fowles ties the reader’s view to Sarah’s self reflection, all the more trapping him/her into perceiving freedom as a reality. The implication of impulse and randomness supports the idea she exists and acts outside the constraints of Victorian society and even beyond Fowles’ power.When Charles questions Sarah’s manipulative actions, effectively transforming his destiny, Sarah cries, “Do not ask me to explain what I have done. Once again, Fowles reinforces the humanity and mystery within Sarah’s behavior, bonding her struggle with the reality of human choice, to blur the disparity between the reader and Sarah through the common conflict with decision and free will.As the reader pictures their struggles with a twenty first century framework, Fowles’ twentieth century perspective grapples with distant Victorian society to create a bridge between three centuries of shifting ideologies.In a similar manner, Karel Reisz, director of the film adaptation, tackles the concept of the bridge with the innovation of a film within a film.The Bridge by Multiperspectivism The façade of freedom emphasized by Sarah’s character is put forth by Fowles’ implementation of literary postmodernism.Postmodern multiperspectivism essentially forms the reader’s relationship with , with Fowles as the lens through which the reader views the novel, and Fowles beyond the position as the author. Fowles anticipates the contemporary perspective as a postmodern author and places his expectations of the reader’s response into the creation of his own role in the “cast” of his novel.The film’s challenge in meeting the standard of the novel is interesting, however, because it is an intimation of our own societal restrictions., in literary and motion picture form, indicates the inability of society to fully free an individual and its inadequacy to support such person.