Meaning: This quote by Patrick Marber, a renowned playwright, screenwriter, and director, offers a glimpse into the complex feelings that creators often experience when their work is adapted into a different medium or when others take the lead in presenting their creations to the public. In this quote, Marber expresses a sense of detachment from his own creation, acknowledging his role in bringing it to life while also recognizing the influence of others in shaping its final form.

At the heart of Marber's statement is the tension between authorship and collaboration. As the creator of the original work, Marber acknowledges his role in crafting the characters and storyline, emphasizing that he "wrote it" and "invented the characters." This highlights the deeply personal and creative investment that authors have in their work. However, Marber also acknowledges the role of others, particularly in this case, the filmmaker Mike Nichols, in bringing the work to a new audience through the medium of film.

The phrase "it's Mike's film" underscores the shift in ownership and creative control that occurs when a written work is adapted into a visual medium. While Marber may have provided the source material, the adaptation process involves the interpretation and reimagining of the original work by a director, cinematographer, actors, and other members of the filmmaking team. This collaborative effort often leads to a transformation of the original work, as different artistic sensibilities and creative choices come into play.

Marber's ambivalence about "doing the press and stuff" for the film reflects the discomfort that some authors may feel when their work is being promoted in a context that feels disconnected from their own creative vision. The promotional activities surrounding a film release often involve interviews, press junkets, and public appearances, where the author is expected to discuss and endorse the adaptation. For Marber, this may have felt "inauthentic" because the film represented a departure from his original artistic intentions, and he may have struggled with reconciling his own perspective with the promotional demands of the film industry.

The quote also raises broader questions about the nature of authorship and the evolving identity of a creative work as it moves across different artistic platforms. When a written work is adapted into a film, it undergoes a process of transformation, influenced by the vision and interpretation of the filmmakers. This transformation can lead to a divergence from the author's original intentions, prompting complex emotions for the creator as they navigate their relationship to the adaptation.

In conclusion, Patrick Marber's quote provides valuable insight into the nuanced dynamics of authorship, adaptation, and collaboration in the creative process. It illuminates the complex emotions that creators may experience when their work is adapted into a different medium and when others play a significant role in presenting and promoting their creations. This quote serves as a reminder of the multifaceted nature of artistic expression and the evolving identities of creative works as they traverse various forms of artistic interpretation and presentation.