- Tzvetan Todorov's theory.
- Vladimir Propp's theory.
- Roland Barthes Narrative theory.
- Levi-Strauss' theory.
- Allan Cameron's theory.
- Freytag's pyramid theory.
I'm going to go through each theory and debate why my story would suit or not suit these different narrative structures.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First of all, my narrative basically goes as follows. My main character, James begins the films in a house. He dies and meets the Grim Reaper, who is to guide him from death to the afterlife. The Grim Reaper and James converse for some time while they make their way towards a location the GrimReaper will not reveal. Eventually they arrive a bench in a nice park, as the Grim Reaper wants to take James to see him friends/family one last time. (I haven't decide which yet!) James then passes on to the afterlife, leaving the Grim Reaper alone.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tzvetan Todorov's theory
Tzvetan Todorvos' theory basically follows the idea that the film starts in a state of peace, where the characters are in a routine. Something happens to disrupt this routine and the characters life, which sets off a chain of events. The story ends with the problems resolved and the peace returned, however the character may be in a different position than they were at the start.
This fits with my narrative very well. My character starts in a state of equilibrium and in a sense he does end in another state of equilibrium, passing onto the afterlife. The issue that causes the chain of events is James' death, and his refusal to accept it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vladimir Propp's theory
Vladmir Propp's theory claims that all narratives have seven key characters. They are as followed.
The Hero or Victim - The protagonist. The one you follow and root for. This does fit my main character, as he is a victim of dying.
The Villain - The antagonist. Works against the Hero/Victim. No real character fits this arch type. While the Grim Reaper does kill James, he has no choice because it's his job. There is no evil intent.
The Magical Helper - The character who assists the Hero/Victim. I have no character fits this, as the James has no struggle that requires assistance.
The Princess - The one the Hero loves and wants to be with, and maybe even saves. In my short film there is no love interest and no one to save.
The Princess' Father - The man who tasks the Hero to save the Princess. However, no princess means no Father.
The Donor - The character who sacrifices himself to assist the Hero. However, in my story there is no need for a Donor.
The False Hero - Takes credit for the Hero's success. Again, there is no real for success in my story, so no need for this character either.
None of these characters really fit any of my two characters. Only the Hero/Victim really fits with James, but none of the others are needed for mine. So really, Vladimir's theory isn't that helpful for me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roland Barthes' theory
Roland Barthes' theory is when narratives are a bit more complex. The narrative jumps around, isn't always clear with it's meanings and sometimes require several re-watches until you really understand. The plot is sometimes described as a ball of thread that has been unraveled.
My plot is very straightforward. It has a simple premise with a clear start, middle and end. While there are some deeper meanings to it that are up to interpretation, there is nothing really that needs figuring out. It's all very clear.
My plot is very straightforward. It has a simple premise with a clear start, middle and end. While there are some deeper meanings to it that are up to interpretation, there is nothing really that needs figuring out. It's all very clear.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Levi-Strauss' theory
Levi-Strauss's theory revolves around binary opposites, things that oppose each other but are still linked in some way. For instance, good vs evil, old vs new. My story does follow this in a sense, as my character James is very against dying.
My story does sort of the binary opposites of Life vs Death.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allan Cameron's theory
Allan Cameron believes there are four narratives that a story can follow.
Anachronic - Includes flashbacks and flash forwards, sometimes confusing the audience. As mentioned earlier, my story is very linear and does not jump back and forth.
Forking Path Narrative - Shows two narratives, both only different by a small difference. My story as mentioned already, is linear and follows one story.
Split Screen - This shows two different characters who are only involved in a similar scenario, which are often linked. While I do only have two characters, they feature in the same narrative, as it does not split.
Episodic Narrative - This choice of narrative is split into different episodes, told over a longer span of time. My short film is, well a short film.
None of Allan Cameron's narrative structures fit in with my short film.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Freytag's pyramid theory
Above is the Fraytag pyramid. It's very similar to Todorov's narrative theory, which I think will fit for my short film very well.
Exposition is the start, which for me would be just before James dies. The rising action would be James actually dying and meeting Death. The Climax would be James realizing he is dead but refusing to pass on to the after life. The Falling Action would be James coming to realize that passing on isn't too bad, and the Denouement would be James passing onto the afterlife.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In conclusion, it seems that my short film fits the Fraytag pyramid and Todorov's narrative theories. It's very simple, doesn't jump around and is very open to interpretation. It doesn't require several re-watches, and does not feature a large cast of characters. It's for these reasons I chose the two narrative structures.
Reflective Comment: Going over the different narrative structures has been very helpful and has actually helped me confirm my actual narrative. Knowing what narrative structure I'll be following will certainly help me later down the line.
No comments:
Post a Comment