The art of storytelling is not a modern invention, nor is adaptation. Despite their centuries-old traditions, both are relevant and evolving. Reading the same stories over and over would quickly become boring, but transcoding them into different media like movies or video games gives them new meanings, thus keeping them interesting. Adaptation opens up new dimensions for both creators and consumers of adaptations. However, when the same story – or an element of the story – is used in different media, it will inevitably spark debates about which is superior. Adaptations are often frowned upon because they appropriate and exploit adapted texts. There are many questions and doubts about adaptation, such as what can be adapted and why some works are easier to adapt. Linda Hutcheon's book, A Theory of Adaptation, examines these issues and attempts to theorize the process of adaptation. Using an impressive range of sources, the author sets out to explore the topic of adaptation without excluding neglected areas or more recent developments. His methodology for this involves "[identifying] a text-based question that spans a variety of media, [finding] ways to study it comparatively, and then [extrapolating] theoretical implications from multiple textual examples." According to the preface, the aim of the book is to challenge the idea that adaptations are merely secondary and derivative works to the adapted texts. Hutcheon also places emphasis on the analysis of intertextuality and the confrontation with the negative perception of adaptations so common in our society. The author claims that the examples provided in this book help readers become more familiar with the topic and relate to the issues... at the center of the paper... with full attention. Leitch's review states that this updated volume could have been improved by discussing interactive media in more detail. Apparently, the purpose of this book was to develop a theory of adaptation. By bombarding readers with irrelevant names and titles, Hutcheon made it very difficult to separate actual theory from the abundance of examples used in each of these chapters. However, I would recommend this book to anyone who is truly interested in adaptation studies and wants to have a broader perspective on the topic. However, since the author was so clumsily careful not to express strong opinions, this book is unlikely to spark productive discussion in classrooms. Works Cited William Whittington, Comparative Literature Studies, 45, no. 3 (2008): 404-406Thomas Leitch, "New! Expanded! Not Improved!", Literature Film Quarterly: 157-160