(First of all, Don't google "Showgirls effect" it's a throwaway term I make up to get a point across here)
So how important is a working knowledge of Narrative theories in the writing process? I'm just now taking a serious look at Todorov and Propp on account of being academically challenged. They seem kind of like relativity and quantum theory for fiction writers.
There are a lot of films that don't fit into the models, are not allowed by the laws of narrative physics, and yet succeed royally (Fight Club is an oft cited example)
There will never be an algorithm or field equation for what makes a great movie. Sometimes a bunch of really talented and experienced people who should know better get together and make a really egregious movie - the "Showgirls Effect" you might say. And there you have the paradox, the causality violation. that calls the theory into question
So, is it essential to know WHY a given story or character resonates, or can I get by with a more intuitive sense of what does or doesn't sound right?
4 people like this
It depends on the individual. Some people can only learn in an academic way, some are the opposite. None of the Beatles could read music ...
3 people like this
What movies did Todorov or Propp make? There are hundreds of decisions that could derail a movie, beyond the pages of script. Gotta learn how to make movies for a living. Expert Gurus don’t make movies. It’s too damn hard.
Read this article. This is a real example told by people who do it for a living. Pay attention to doers than theorists.
https://web.archive.org/web/20150716005847/http://barbra-archives.com/bj...
3 people like this
In my opinion is not physics but psychology.
In business school we learned about "groupthink".
At high levels most groups (including a script team) can be susceptible.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink
2 people like this
Yes, GROUPTHINK, there's the right word for... "Waterworld Syndrome," or whatever the hell I was calling it. Oh and Dan, in answer to what movies did Todorov and Propp make? I believe Todorov directed some gay porn projects in the late seventies, and propp performed in several of them under the screen name Captain Rim-job......I have the complete body of work on Betamax if you're interested.
2 people like this
Anthony Silverwood video them on your cellphone and post the link here. Art is art. I watched on the location set of a Playboy movie shot by a union crew and directed by the great Andrew Blake; he knows more about filmmaking than theorists or script Gurus because he does it for a living
2 people like this
Agree with CJ. Guys like Todorov and his existential wrestling partners like Roland Barthes wrote elaborate treaties on theories that could give you migraines. I mean.... Barthes and Todorov found deep meanings in things like signs, symbols, pro wrestling, detergent boxes and strip clubs that I never knew existed. Until I read them, and sometimes over and over. And over. And over.
But if you strip down Todorov's narrative theory to an index card with five bullet points... the essence of what he theorized....then yep... .I could/do write like that. He didn't invent storytelling, or how to define the methods. Storytelling has a natural essence that exists in all of us, and he and other theorists like him distilled that essence and put it in the right types of boxes with the right types of labels.
Some people are kinda anti-theory and anti-label....like...."don't tell me what to do or how to do it!".... but at its core... and no matter where you are in the world and no matter what century it is... good storytelling is good storytelling, and shares universal components.. Todorov's beliefs and labels are in parentheses.... and a story can have/should have (at least to me)
1. a beginning world (a state of equilibrium)
2. .a complication to that beginning (a disruption to that equilibrium)
3. knowledge of that (recognition of the disruption)
4. a journey that motivates characters and puts them on a path (an attempt to repair the damage)
5. an outcome to that journey (a new equilibrium)
Some of the biggest beefs with his extended version of this is that characters don't necessarily undergo a transformation. Some people believe they do/should, others don't think they have to. I think most/all characters do transform to some degrees, and some more than others. The real key/trick to all this, of course, is to now write a story that people want to buy, and that audience members want to see. That, of course, isn't up to guys like Todorov and Barthes...if they were alive....that's up to people like us.
Best of luck to all of you conformists/non-comformists...and even to the conformists who think they are non-comformists, but really are conformists. I kinda get off on busting their chops. Heh-heh.
(And all things considered, I thought Showgirls was really a ......ah, never mind. Heh-heh again.)
3 people like this
I'm gonna have to read and reread these posts because there is some awesome and enlightening shit here, especially these last two, and CJ's post (two floors up from this on) I feel the urge to spam that one to every writer on the planet.. Millions of years from now, I would hope some readable copy of this conversation can be unearthed from the fossil record
3 people like this
IMO a literary theorist's ideas are not transferable to all mediums.
I don't see screenwriters raving about Marshall McLuhan - and he had some incredible work that bears studying... Because he's good.
2 people like this
Not to sidetrack things, but I would like to mention that next Friday would have been Henri Bergson's 159th birthday. He was the French philosopher/linguist/semiotician/theorist to first offer thoughts on the then-future of film. Man..Todorov, Barthes, Bergson - all these guys are French. And the French regard Jerry Lewis as the genius that he really was. I'm starting to change my tune on French guys - they're all right after all.
Hi Anthony Silverwood. Great post. Thankfully there are those who refuse to be restrained by the boxes designed.
By the way - love your :Showgirls Effect' description.
Kevin Carothers I agree. How many 'business school Groupthinkers' really make an impact on the world of business? 'Group' anything prevents 'free-thinking', individual development and achievement. And as Janis referred - look at 'politicians'.
Thank you for referring us to the link. Rupert Murdoch left schooling at 14, and Kerry Packer (both media Gurus) whose achievements still impact the world. Packer's life-long desire was to represent Australia (in 'something - "even marbles". Unfortunately he died without having achieved this for himself but left us with much more.
1 person likes this
Thank you Bill Costantini and CJ.
1 person likes this
Currently, professional sports is relying on algorithms for on-field performance. The most famous example is probably “‘money ball” , used by Oakland A’s baseball general manager. The A’s have never won a World Series with “money ball” philosophy.