Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on May 10, 2007 22:05:57 GMT
Ah. So you would argue that texts can never reach a state of hermetic distance? They're going to inevitably hold some sort of cord connecting them to the real world? Revision to my terms (it came to me while watching Gladiator):
A story is a sequence of events leading from one to another; cause and effect. A plot is a number of stories interweaved. A narrative is the structural shaping of plot.
You could say that The Godfather Part II has a more intricate plot than, say, Pi. *
A plot's intricacy or complexity stems from the number of possible stories it might attempt to tell; or the number of possible stories it gives hint to in order to form the story the author has decided to tell.
Narratives are deemed "muddled" or "unsatisfactory" when certain plot devices are misplaced or imbalanced. The inclusion of a possible, untold story (ie. a peripheral character such as Tim Robbins in War of the Worlds) seems odd and arbitrary because it does not have much of a dramatic impact or narrative purpose to the main plot strand.
* A more complex plot is not a 'better' plot. It is necessary to inform the main plot strand with several peripheral hints at other stories; but it might also be unnecessary for such inclusions - many times texts are criticised for having 'too much', for having plot strands that detract from the overall, main bulk of the text.
|
|
|
Post by svsg on Aug 2, 2007 18:53:54 GMT
I am still confused about 'narative' from your definitions. Is it the story translated (compacted or expanded) for the screen? Is it the non functional part of a screenplay?
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Aug 2, 2007 19:22:06 GMT
Put it this way... When I write a review for these boards, such as this one, the grey writing is the story told via one narrative. It is a synopsis. The film tells the same story through a different narrative, a more elaborate one - it is, I suppose, a script. The script and synopsis tell the same story - the former tells it more elaborately - but they are different narratives.
|
|
|
Post by svsg on Aug 2, 2007 20:28:37 GMT
sorry for being dense.... So when you are referring to the narrative of a film, you are infact referring to the script (or atleast the story elements of the script, that is not plot), right? If so, is there any non-plot story element in a script? If not, please explain further ( that is if you already are not mad at me for not understanding something simple)
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Aug 2, 2007 21:00:49 GMT
Elaborating helps me as much as it does you. I love discussions; there's a drought of them round here these days, though.
A few things to note:
A story is always selected and told in the absence of all other possible stories. Multiple stories are chosen and followed in parallel - and these comprise plot. In the most obvious example, you could say Babel tells three stories. Any synopsis would say that. But it's the same with any other film's plot, really - it's just those individual stories happen in the same time and place, and so they are taken to be the same story. But in The Godfather you could quite easily follow Michael's storyline and cut out Vito's... it wouldn't be as impacting a plot, and the film would be a bit flat as a result, but you could, theoretically, still select one and follow it without concentrating on the other. In Heat, some stories are told gratuitously, in my opinion - they're called "sub-plots", but they're still stories, just ones that don't really lead anywhere or add to the initial emotional weight of the overall plot - or the story of "cops and robbers" (Pacino vs De Niro).
To answer your question: Does a film script (or play script, or novel, etc.) have elements of "non-plot" story? Yes, it definitely does. Practically speaking, it would have to, in most cases, otherwise the storytelling would be too broad, neverending, it would have no boundaries (don't forget a story is chosen to be told; a story can never tell itself, and in order for it to be told, it has to be told in absence of all other possible stories - if I tell you about the story of a fox chasing a rabbit, I'm choosing not to tell you about the hunter which would eventually kill the fox after the story ends, or about the owl which was watching it happen).
As an example of non-narrative story (ie. things which happen without actually showing it - which I would call "the ecomonics of storytelling", or "economic storytelling"), think of the way in Heat that by the end of the film, De Niro and his girlfriend have a weighty relationship, but it hasn't really been explored all that much during the film's narrative time. We assume, in story time, that they've had sex (why else would they be so close?), but in narrative time (ie. the script), it doesn't need to be shown.
When in criticism I speak of or praise "narrative momentum", I am praising the way in which it has finely tuned a story into a dramatic narrative - stories are never interesting, they are neutral... and it is up to the narrative-maker, or the storyteller, to make them interesting, by investing emphasis on some events, and de-emphasising others. If a novel seems interesting because of a synopsis, it may not necessarily be interesting to read.
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Aug 5, 2007 0:14:03 GMT
May I add also that the stories I speak of, because of possible confusion (over overall "story" and individual "stories"), are better labelled as "narrative strands", or "narrative threads", as in the threads or strands of stories which a narrative encompasses.
|
|