As a former longform narrative nonfiction writer for newspapers, I wanted to agree with you! That genre is indeed dead. Only outlets like The New Yorker and The Atlantic seem to understand that extra column inches cost them nothing online. I've seen my entire profession, newspaper feature writer, reduced to rubble and all my old journalist friends had to flee and "reinvent" themselves. News consumers want video, they said! They want bite-sized news nuggets, aggregated from all over, they said!
I'm not so sure anymore. Readers responded to my longform narratives with passion. If the subject was in trouble the readers would donate money, jobs, cars, housing, everything! People want a good story and they want to help alleviate suffering.
Perhaps the key for the tldr generation is that narratives must be excellent. No wasted words or meandering points. And that requires a team of editors in a newsroom, imho, to nurture that. Content editors, fleet of copy editors, a writing coach. We don't have that right now, not even at the New York Times. Narrative isn't valued.
Which is a shame because a good story is timeless. Look at how much Shakespeare and Charles Dickens get retold. (I'd also argue that the latter was the inventor of the mystery story, maybe with his friend Wilkie Collins who wrote 'The Moonstone' and inspired Dickens to write 'The Mystery of Edwin Drood' which might be the best mystery of all because Dickens died before he could tell us whodunit!)
Thanks for the comment. I hadn’t actually thought about the generational difference here. When I think about my students, they’re often reluctant to read long novels and (this is just anecdotal) not very interested in long-form journalism, except maybe for certain podcasts. Good point on Collins & Dickens. I think Moretti’s criteria for what made a “detective story” was a little tighter and I don’t think he considered those to be in the same genre as the likes of Conan-Doyle.
Thank you for the thought-provoking read! You are so spot-on about the formula and how overused and manipulative it is.
"The commercial dominance of plot irks me. It’s so Darwinian. We’re predisposed to want to see goodies struggle but ultimately win, the baddies get comeuppance, and then have it all wrap up at the end, with no extraneous scenes in there, with the story entirely driven by people’s actions rather than deus ex machina. Aristotle clocked all this shit in 400BC and every screenwriting guide recapitulates the same advice."
Yes! And there are formula writers who have gotten rich with this loathsome method. (I'm looking at you, Mitch Albom.)
It IS wonderful to unharnass ourselves from the BS confines of plot and formula and work towards a form of storytelling which is more true to life. World-building is indeed a way to give readers more agency and sort of build a collaborative story. When the writer can build a world and wield words, I guess they get a Netflix deal? lol.
I don’t understand this division between plot and character. Seinfeld isn’t about plot? People don’t say, “I love the episode where George is neurotic, selfish, and endearingly cunning.” They say, “I love the episode where George lies to his date that he’s a marine biologist and has to save a beached whale to keep up the ruse - then finds Kramer’s golf ball in the blow hole.” Character is revealed through plot. You’re talking about shallow, underdeveloped plots.
Completely agree with this - storytelling is effective when plot is used as a tool to tell a more interesting story about character, morals, humanity, etc.
Stories with plots stick with us because they give us anchors on which to understand the greater meaning or development which occurs. In addition, they make stories easier to remember and retell.
Thanks for the comment SAK. Yes, maybe sitcoms were a bad example because they are both plot and character based... and I should know better having written about the plot of Seinfeld in particular. I guess I contrast sitcoms to genres where plot is THE focus, like a whodunnit.
I do see what you’re driving at. I’d just suggest considering different terminology. Maybe the question is whether a plot is mostly about thr unfolding of character or events (or half and half). I’m thinking of some of my favorite movies of the last 25 years that aren’t plot-focused in your sense of the word but are nevertheless plot-driven in revealing character: Babel, Amores Perros, Memento, Election, Good Will Hunting … even things like Beasts of the Southern Wild, Manchester by the Sea, Lady Bird, and You Can Count on Me. And there are the action-oriented shows and movies that deeply reveal character, like the Sopranos, Breaking Bad, the Americans, Training Day, the Dark Knight … And it’s always great when plot says “This is what the world is like,” which I’d suggest is the case with all of the above.
Tarantino is an interesting case. His characters often don’t change much over the course of the film (though sometimes they do, like in Django), yet he certainly is doing something with plot, character, and mood far beyond a shallow murder whodunit.
Thank you for reading! I read the original Save the Cat for screenwriting and it certainly did nothing for me. The epitome of the commodification of story.!
Story is the part of novels that has saved my life in the midst of mental illness more than once (you'll grasp onto even imaginary straws when you're in the thick of it, so depending on a fictional work or two isn't uncommon). Plot is just the McDonald's drink tray it's served upon. It's both necessary and convenient, because they come in premade formats and templates.
That said, I do wish more people would share *their* story. In reality, we are much more concerned with the plot of others' lives and by extension ourselves--the milestones, achievements, circumstances, fortune, etcetera. Our stories, or inner lives, are kept secret or ignored by others or even ourselves.
I'm not saying that everyone should just trauma dump, overshare, and ruminate to every person they meet, but those moments of, "Wow! I had no idea I'm not alone in feeling that way," come way too rarely in a world that's developed faster than humans can evolve.
There are a lot of areas where one can go for stories, like The Moth or YouTube, but I think story should become a bigger part of our reality again. Too many of our lives have become nearly-empty plots. And who can blame you if you don't want to keep reading it?
Thank you, I really appreciate the comment. I’m not completely against story. Although that is literally the title of the piece, I admit. I definitely agree with your point about sharing personal stories. And I think you’re right, it’s easy to be afraid to share your personal story & worry that it’s not interesting. But usually, it is! And more interesting, I think, than formulaic fictional stories.
I kind of figured you weren't totally against story. I think your article/post/whatever they're called on Substack got a lot of people thinking, including myself. I'm a lover of nonfiction as well as fiction, something I didn't pick up until I was a slightly adultier-adult.
As a side note, I often know that what I'm reading is probably awful, or feels so familiar I actually have to Google the book it reminds me of to ensure it's not the same one. It's not a *great* thing for the literary world, but I enjoy it. Maybe that's hedonistic of me, but so be it!
We are pattern-seeking. It was probably the single most important talent of our large brain that kept us from going extinct 50,000 years ago. Afterall, we are slow, weak, and have limited senses of hearing, smell, and night vision. (Consider our pets for example.)
Empathy, mythology, and ritual kept us together. Togetherness was survival. Mythology and ritual emboldened us to feel that we might be heroically immortal, and that we were "created" and consecrated as "special" by an unseen, transcendent power.
Any story that borrows from this ancient schema affirms our deepest notions about us.
Stories contrary to that schema might be worth pursuing. Life is absurd, or so says Albert Camus. There are myriad realities we cannot know or control. Randomness is ubiquitous, and yet we create rationales for events, and force them into a comfy pattern.
There are stories to be told about a reality that pushes back against the patterns we create, and patterns we believe to exist. Absurdity is real. Finding meaning and rationality within this realization is difficult. Sometimes we cannot find a reason. Rather than make one up, tell absurd stories. They will be closer to truth.
This was really interesting and it’s the second time in as many days that I am reminded of a J.Krishnamurti quote: “One is never afraid of the unknown; one is afraid of the known coming to an end.” Are we similarly afraid of not having stories? 😀
While I am disappointed with the quality of most fiction, it has more to do with the quality of the plot than the formula. “Relaxing with a good book” is perhaps a rebuttal to “modernist novels are an acquired taste.” H. G. Wells, letter to Joyce about “Finnegan’s Wake” may do a better job of explaining why not everyone wants a challenging read: "you have turned your back on common men, on their elementary needs and their restricted time and intelligence [...] I ask: who the hell is this Joyce who demands so many waking hours of the few thousands I have still to live for a proper appreciation of his quirks and fancies and flashes of rendering?"
Thanks for reading. Yes, there are definitely other problems with a lot of recent literature too. I like that quote from Wells, I hadn’t seen that before. I guess I’m mainly writing against the assumption that story is everything and EVERYONE enjoys a timeless story. There are many reasons to read!
Living a fulfilled, meaningful and purpose driven life is a rarity, difficult to achieve or maintain. Distractions from not being able to live as mentioned above is what drives many to pursue other avenues to recreate something similar and usually temporary.
The pursuit of story de-focused, sidetracked, and ruined many a promising game production effort. Data from 40(!) years ago said so.
Beginning in 1983 I was responsible for managing Nintendo of America’s formal in-house testing until I left there in 1991. I also set up and ran Microsoft’s game evaluation group. These groups used real players to evaluate games across a standard battery of subjective measures. We’ll over 500 games were evaluated under my watch. Analysis of the resultant data consistently told the same story. And it’s not the one many wanted it to be.
By a large margin, ratings of “story” had the lowest correlation with measures of game appeal; desire to continue playing, willing to recommend to friends, and professed purchase intent. Instead, game appeal consistently depends on the subjective quality measures of play control, graphics, and challenge.
In the mid ‘90s, many games companies, Microsoft included, pursued the story fetish, frequently at the expense of core gameplay design.
While story does not significantly help increase game appeal, character does both by the pleasing variety and predictability character archetypes afford and the enhanced agency players feel controlling their character.
"There are at least two kinds of games: finite and infinite. A finite game is played for the purpose of winning, an infinite game for the purpose of continuing the play... Finite games are theatrical, necessitating an audience; infinite ones are dramatic, involving participants..."
So glad you commented. I was just coming here to muse about extending this discussion to video games but without much knowledge other than observation. The really quality games seem to allow both: strict narrative with absolute literal heroes-journey AND a way to explore the world asynchronously just for the experience, characters, or mood as mentioned in the OP. I suppose that ultimately all video games are still hitting those buttons of reward no matter the avenues to access -- and so still not quite meeting the suggested alternative of the OP.
uuummmmm. much to reflect upon. I agree that the mindset that "I am my story" is no longer valid for me. So if one writes from that aspect, I feel unfed. I wrote a memoir - in answer to my students who asked, "what was your life like that you became a mystic?" In other words, were you abused, beaten left on a doorstep so why not let the world alone and find another way? I have come to believe that no one asks to be anything; experience and this inner spirit some call intuition leads us towards this and away from that until there is a dawning; I don't know the meaning or purpose of anything. That kept me awake nights. I am especially not what my conditioning has drummed into me. Something draws one to question and then experience leads one into a few rabbit holes and then one day? A realization that people truly believe that this world we perceive through sensations and thought is real? Not real? a veil? Possible? So when you belittle (and it seems to be just a way to ignite the reader's ah ha thoughts) bliss or sitting with the mystery rather than pretending to know something, I have to say, the circus of life includes each of our worlds - and they are all soo different! Each of us a world unto itself. And I truly love to hear how one is experiencing through song, story, poetry, memoir, painting - or a fusion. At least we are sharing. Life itself is a mystery. The mind packages it into stories....fairy tales being the first to honor the beginning, middle and end. Life is No-thing the intellect can ever capture, so why not make art around it'? Better yet, as the mystics say, existence is an utter mystery, so sit and truly enter the portal of the NOW. Reality with a capital R is in this moment - not found in story or poem, but in the diving beneath the mind. The mind itself conditioned. And see what happens. Many have given up all thought forms to simply relax into the Radiance of the Self as opposed to the mind. Once you are aware of this, the past and future are gone. Yet, I commend you for noting that stories excite some conditioning that satisfied. Let us become aware of where we are being taken. And? See what happens next.......
I do wonder, though, without story (plot), how do you know when something begins or ends? Where do you start and stop a piece of art? how do you ensure that your “point” - be it a resolution or an evoked emotion/theme - gets expressed without some sort of structure? I see what you’re getting at here, but I think like most things it’s a case of both/and. No, we don’t have to make every story CLIMACTIC. But we do need to use some sort of framework (and I think everyone does this, even if unconsciously, because that’s how our brains work as others have explained). Otherwise we’re left with a bunch of directionless mumble jumble that no one wants to read, at least in my case.
Thank you for the thoughtful response. You're right — I guess there's a spectrum and some things are less story-ish than others but still have some kind of boundaries or framework, as you say. But sometimes I even want a directionless mumble jumble as well. Like some poetry or avant garde writing is pretty hard to fit into a framework but still manages to evoke a mood or spark a new thought. Maybe it's a good way of trying to stop our brains from imposing that structure too easily and to keep it on its toes.
Narratives are patterns and wet look for them because they exist. In fact we can only look because we're an ordered series of heirerarchical structures ourselves. Mathematics, physics, music, and personality are all narratives. I think it's a mistake to criticize narrative seeking as somehow less sophisticated. Are there unsophisticated narratives? Certainly, but anything to be gotten out of even randomness can only be gotten because the viewer places this randomness into a context (narrative).
Thanks for reading and responding. I see your point. I think we probably have fundamentally different ideas of what narratives are and how we perceive patterns. FWIW, I was much influenced by a book called How History Gets Things Wrong by the philosopher Alex Rosenberg.
mannnnnnnnnnnn I needed to read this! I feel so liberated! Like my brain is singing in my blood! I am *done* with Joseph Cambell! And super extra done with Aristotle. I own every single book on story plotting known to man and none of them have helped me find my way into writing. Zero. It's like reading a grammer book over and over thinking you're going to be able to speak the language.
As a former longform narrative nonfiction writer for newspapers, I wanted to agree with you! That genre is indeed dead. Only outlets like The New Yorker and The Atlantic seem to understand that extra column inches cost them nothing online. I've seen my entire profession, newspaper feature writer, reduced to rubble and all my old journalist friends had to flee and "reinvent" themselves. News consumers want video, they said! They want bite-sized news nuggets, aggregated from all over, they said!
I'm not so sure anymore. Readers responded to my longform narratives with passion. If the subject was in trouble the readers would donate money, jobs, cars, housing, everything! People want a good story and they want to help alleviate suffering.
Perhaps the key for the tldr generation is that narratives must be excellent. No wasted words or meandering points. And that requires a team of editors in a newsroom, imho, to nurture that. Content editors, fleet of copy editors, a writing coach. We don't have that right now, not even at the New York Times. Narrative isn't valued.
Which is a shame because a good story is timeless. Look at how much Shakespeare and Charles Dickens get retold. (I'd also argue that the latter was the inventor of the mystery story, maybe with his friend Wilkie Collins who wrote 'The Moonstone' and inspired Dickens to write 'The Mystery of Edwin Drood' which might be the best mystery of all because Dickens died before he could tell us whodunit!)
Thanks for the comment. I hadn’t actually thought about the generational difference here. When I think about my students, they’re often reluctant to read long novels and (this is just anecdotal) not very interested in long-form journalism, except maybe for certain podcasts. Good point on Collins & Dickens. I think Moretti’s criteria for what made a “detective story” was a little tighter and I don’t think he considered those to be in the same genre as the likes of Conan-Doyle.
Thank you for the thought-provoking read! You are so spot-on about the formula and how overused and manipulative it is.
"The commercial dominance of plot irks me. It’s so Darwinian. We’re predisposed to want to see goodies struggle but ultimately win, the baddies get comeuppance, and then have it all wrap up at the end, with no extraneous scenes in there, with the story entirely driven by people’s actions rather than deus ex machina. Aristotle clocked all this shit in 400BC and every screenwriting guide recapitulates the same advice."
Yes! And there are formula writers who have gotten rich with this loathsome method. (I'm looking at you, Mitch Albom.)
It IS wonderful to unharnass ourselves from the BS confines of plot and formula and work towards a form of storytelling which is more true to life. World-building is indeed a way to give readers more agency and sort of build a collaborative story. When the writer can build a world and wield words, I guess they get a Netflix deal? lol.
I enjoy your musings and look forward to more!
I don’t understand this division between plot and character. Seinfeld isn’t about plot? People don’t say, “I love the episode where George is neurotic, selfish, and endearingly cunning.” They say, “I love the episode where George lies to his date that he’s a marine biologist and has to save a beached whale to keep up the ruse - then finds Kramer’s golf ball in the blow hole.” Character is revealed through plot. You’re talking about shallow, underdeveloped plots.
Completely agree with this - storytelling is effective when plot is used as a tool to tell a more interesting story about character, morals, humanity, etc.
Stories with plots stick with us because they give us anchors on which to understand the greater meaning or development which occurs. In addition, they make stories easier to remember and retell.
Thanks for the comment SAK. Yes, maybe sitcoms were a bad example because they are both plot and character based... and I should know better having written about the plot of Seinfeld in particular. I guess I contrast sitcoms to genres where plot is THE focus, like a whodunnit.
I do see what you’re driving at. I’d just suggest considering different terminology. Maybe the question is whether a plot is mostly about thr unfolding of character or events (or half and half). I’m thinking of some of my favorite movies of the last 25 years that aren’t plot-focused in your sense of the word but are nevertheless plot-driven in revealing character: Babel, Amores Perros, Memento, Election, Good Will Hunting … even things like Beasts of the Southern Wild, Manchester by the Sea, Lady Bird, and You Can Count on Me. And there are the action-oriented shows and movies that deeply reveal character, like the Sopranos, Breaking Bad, the Americans, Training Day, the Dark Knight … And it’s always great when plot says “This is what the world is like,” which I’d suggest is the case with all of the above.
Then there's the genius of Tarantino's humor in extreme violence..........
Tarantino is an interesting case. His characters often don’t change much over the course of the film (though sometimes they do, like in Django), yet he certainly is doing something with plot, character, and mood far beyond a shallow murder whodunit.
As a storyteller, I was drawn in by your title. I once ordered a copy of SAVE THE CAT! WRITES A NOVEL
I made it to page 41.
Why, as a person with a creative spirit, would I write via a formula? If money and fame are the answer, I’m NOT having it.
“They’re the recipe approach to art. Get all the right ingredients, follow the algorithm, and dish up pabulum that goes down easy.”
Thank you for this thoughtful and thought provoking article.
Thank you for reading! I read the original Save the Cat for screenwriting and it certainly did nothing for me. The epitome of the commodification of story.!
Story is the part of novels that has saved my life in the midst of mental illness more than once (you'll grasp onto even imaginary straws when you're in the thick of it, so depending on a fictional work or two isn't uncommon). Plot is just the McDonald's drink tray it's served upon. It's both necessary and convenient, because they come in premade formats and templates.
That said, I do wish more people would share *their* story. In reality, we are much more concerned with the plot of others' lives and by extension ourselves--the milestones, achievements, circumstances, fortune, etcetera. Our stories, or inner lives, are kept secret or ignored by others or even ourselves.
I'm not saying that everyone should just trauma dump, overshare, and ruminate to every person they meet, but those moments of, "Wow! I had no idea I'm not alone in feeling that way," come way too rarely in a world that's developed faster than humans can evolve.
There are a lot of areas where one can go for stories, like The Moth or YouTube, but I think story should become a bigger part of our reality again. Too many of our lives have become nearly-empty plots. And who can blame you if you don't want to keep reading it?
I've gotten totally off course here, sorry! 😆
Thank you, I really appreciate the comment. I’m not completely against story. Although that is literally the title of the piece, I admit. I definitely agree with your point about sharing personal stories. And I think you’re right, it’s easy to be afraid to share your personal story & worry that it’s not interesting. But usually, it is! And more interesting, I think, than formulaic fictional stories.
I kind of figured you weren't totally against story. I think your article/post/whatever they're called on Substack got a lot of people thinking, including myself. I'm a lover of nonfiction as well as fiction, something I didn't pick up until I was a slightly adultier-adult.
As a side note, I often know that what I'm reading is probably awful, or feels so familiar I actually have to Google the book it reminds me of to ensure it's not the same one. It's not a *great* thing for the literary world, but I enjoy it. Maybe that's hedonistic of me, but so be it!
Thanks for provoking my thoughts. Cheers.
Completely agree about sharing our own stories.
We are pattern-seeking. It was probably the single most important talent of our large brain that kept us from going extinct 50,000 years ago. Afterall, we are slow, weak, and have limited senses of hearing, smell, and night vision. (Consider our pets for example.)
Empathy, mythology, and ritual kept us together. Togetherness was survival. Mythology and ritual emboldened us to feel that we might be heroically immortal, and that we were "created" and consecrated as "special" by an unseen, transcendent power.
Any story that borrows from this ancient schema affirms our deepest notions about us.
Stories contrary to that schema might be worth pursuing. Life is absurd, or so says Albert Camus. There are myriad realities we cannot know or control. Randomness is ubiquitous, and yet we create rationales for events, and force them into a comfy pattern.
There are stories to be told about a reality that pushes back against the patterns we create, and patterns we believe to exist. Absurdity is real. Finding meaning and rationality within this realization is difficult. Sometimes we cannot find a reason. Rather than make one up, tell absurd stories. They will be closer to truth.
Amen. Well said, and thanks for reading!
Yes. Plot is what a writer does when they've lost their story.
ooo nice line, I like that
This was really interesting and it’s the second time in as many days that I am reminded of a J.Krishnamurti quote: “One is never afraid of the unknown; one is afraid of the known coming to an end.” Are we similarly afraid of not having stories? 😀
While I am disappointed with the quality of most fiction, it has more to do with the quality of the plot than the formula. “Relaxing with a good book” is perhaps a rebuttal to “modernist novels are an acquired taste.” H. G. Wells, letter to Joyce about “Finnegan’s Wake” may do a better job of explaining why not everyone wants a challenging read: "you have turned your back on common men, on their elementary needs and their restricted time and intelligence [...] I ask: who the hell is this Joyce who demands so many waking hours of the few thousands I have still to live for a proper appreciation of his quirks and fancies and flashes of rendering?"
Thanks for reading. Yes, there are definitely other problems with a lot of recent literature too. I like that quote from Wells, I hadn’t seen that before. I guess I’m mainly writing against the assumption that story is everything and EVERYONE enjoys a timeless story. There are many reasons to read!
Living a fulfilled, meaningful and purpose driven life is a rarity, difficult to achieve or maintain. Distractions from not being able to live as mentioned above is what drives many to pursue other avenues to recreate something similar and usually temporary.
The pursuit of story de-focused, sidetracked, and ruined many a promising game production effort. Data from 40(!) years ago said so.
Beginning in 1983 I was responsible for managing Nintendo of America’s formal in-house testing until I left there in 1991. I also set up and ran Microsoft’s game evaluation group. These groups used real players to evaluate games across a standard battery of subjective measures. We’ll over 500 games were evaluated under my watch. Analysis of the resultant data consistently told the same story. And it’s not the one many wanted it to be.
By a large margin, ratings of “story” had the lowest correlation with measures of game appeal; desire to continue playing, willing to recommend to friends, and professed purchase intent. Instead, game appeal consistently depends on the subjective quality measures of play control, graphics, and challenge.
In the mid ‘90s, many games companies, Microsoft included, pursued the story fetish, frequently at the expense of core gameplay design.
While story does not significantly help increase game appeal, character does both by the pleasing variety and predictability character archetypes afford and the enhanced agency players feel controlling their character.
My 2 cents...
Great comment, thanks. I don’t know much about games, but those results are fascinating. And interesting that player agency is the key...
It's funny how this whole thread reminds me of the story of it that is told in the fascinating 2014 TV series 'Halt and Catch Fire.'
"There are at least two kinds of games: finite and infinite. A finite game is played for the purpose of winning, an infinite game for the purpose of continuing the play... Finite games are theatrical, necessitating an audience; infinite ones are dramatic, involving participants..."
--James Carse, Finite and Infinite Games
So glad you commented. I was just coming here to muse about extending this discussion to video games but without much knowledge other than observation. The really quality games seem to allow both: strict narrative with absolute literal heroes-journey AND a way to explore the world asynchronously just for the experience, characters, or mood as mentioned in the OP. I suppose that ultimately all video games are still hitting those buttons of reward no matter the avenues to access -- and so still not quite meeting the suggested alternative of the OP.
Reminds me of Lydia Davis’ The End Of Story.
Thanks for the tip. I love Lydia Davis but haven't read that!
uuummmmm. much to reflect upon. I agree that the mindset that "I am my story" is no longer valid for me. So if one writes from that aspect, I feel unfed. I wrote a memoir - in answer to my students who asked, "what was your life like that you became a mystic?" In other words, were you abused, beaten left on a doorstep so why not let the world alone and find another way? I have come to believe that no one asks to be anything; experience and this inner spirit some call intuition leads us towards this and away from that until there is a dawning; I don't know the meaning or purpose of anything. That kept me awake nights. I am especially not what my conditioning has drummed into me. Something draws one to question and then experience leads one into a few rabbit holes and then one day? A realization that people truly believe that this world we perceive through sensations and thought is real? Not real? a veil? Possible? So when you belittle (and it seems to be just a way to ignite the reader's ah ha thoughts) bliss or sitting with the mystery rather than pretending to know something, I have to say, the circus of life includes each of our worlds - and they are all soo different! Each of us a world unto itself. And I truly love to hear how one is experiencing through song, story, poetry, memoir, painting - or a fusion. At least we are sharing. Life itself is a mystery. The mind packages it into stories....fairy tales being the first to honor the beginning, middle and end. Life is No-thing the intellect can ever capture, so why not make art around it'? Better yet, as the mystics say, existence is an utter mystery, so sit and truly enter the portal of the NOW. Reality with a capital R is in this moment - not found in story or poem, but in the diving beneath the mind. The mind itself conditioned. And see what happens. Many have given up all thought forms to simply relax into the Radiance of the Self as opposed to the mind. Once you are aware of this, the past and future are gone. Yet, I commend you for noting that stories excite some conditioning that satisfied. Let us become aware of where we are being taken. And? See what happens next.......
Thank for reading my words & taking the time to respond. And I commend you on your open-mindedness & embracing of mystery.
You are a Prince. Onward.... E
I do wonder, though, without story (plot), how do you know when something begins or ends? Where do you start and stop a piece of art? how do you ensure that your “point” - be it a resolution or an evoked emotion/theme - gets expressed without some sort of structure? I see what you’re getting at here, but I think like most things it’s a case of both/and. No, we don’t have to make every story CLIMACTIC. But we do need to use some sort of framework (and I think everyone does this, even if unconsciously, because that’s how our brains work as others have explained). Otherwise we’re left with a bunch of directionless mumble jumble that no one wants to read, at least in my case.
Thank you for the thoughtful response. You're right — I guess there's a spectrum and some things are less story-ish than others but still have some kind of boundaries or framework, as you say. But sometimes I even want a directionless mumble jumble as well. Like some poetry or avant garde writing is pretty hard to fit into a framework but still manages to evoke a mood or spark a new thought. Maybe it's a good way of trying to stop our brains from imposing that structure too easily and to keep it on its toes.
Narratives are patterns and wet look for them because they exist. In fact we can only look because we're an ordered series of heirerarchical structures ourselves. Mathematics, physics, music, and personality are all narratives. I think it's a mistake to criticize narrative seeking as somehow less sophisticated. Are there unsophisticated narratives? Certainly, but anything to be gotten out of even randomness can only be gotten because the viewer places this randomness into a context (narrative).
Thanks for reading and responding. I see your point. I think we probably have fundamentally different ideas of what narratives are and how we perceive patterns. FWIW, I was much influenced by a book called How History Gets Things Wrong by the philosopher Alex Rosenberg.
Could be, I enjoyed the article all the same. Will take a look at Rosenberg.
Not exactly food for thought, but rather a Feast for deep contemplation. Savoury and sweet. Enjoy !!
mannnnnnnnnnnn I needed to read this! I feel so liberated! Like my brain is singing in my blood! I am *done* with Joseph Cambell! And super extra done with Aristotle. I own every single book on story plotting known to man and none of them have helped me find my way into writing. Zero. It's like reading a grammer book over and over thinking you're going to be able to speak the language.