[HN Gopher] The Universal Structure of Storytelling
___________________________________________________________________
The Universal Structure of Storytelling
Author : animalcule
Score : 93 points
Date : 2021-12-01 20:12 UTC (2 days ago)
(HTM) web link (quillette.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (quillette.com)
| bsedlm wrote:
| I wouldn't say that this article is about the universal structure
| of stories, it's really about the universal purpose (or reason)
| common to stories in most (all?) cultures.
|
| IMO, the universal structural aspect is about how to tell good
| stories (hero's journey and such), however this article is
| actually about how storytelling in all cultures brings us
| together as a group and the actual universal about stories
| described in the article is moralism (good vs bad).
| watwut wrote:
| For it to be "all cultures", one would need to spend more time
| in cultures different then our own.
| heresie-dabord wrote:
| A valuable passage from the article:
|
| "We love the sensation of righteous indignation and the
| satisfying payoff of justice delivered. As the literary scholar
| Northrop Frye points out in The Anatomy of Criticism[1], "In the
| melodrama of the brutal thriller we come as close as it's
| normally possible for art to come to the pure self-righteousness
| of the lynching mob." And studies back this up: people get more
| satisfaction out of stories in which offenders are punished
| rather than forgiven.
|
| The unstoppable moralism of stories has a big upside for within-
| group bonding. But the universal grammar of stories can also be
| paranoid and vindictive. Stories show us problem-drenched worlds
| and encourage us to turn on the people who are lousing things up.
| In other words, to proliferate narratives is to proliferate
| villains. To proliferate villains is also to proliferate rage,
| judgment, and division."
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatomy_of_Criticism
| kwertyoowiyop wrote:
| Wow, thanks for the unrequested spoilers. You'd think an article
| about storytelling might be a little more careful.
| slowmovintarget wrote:
| The reason those examples are used is because they're widely
| consumed stories. This is an article on literary analysis, not
| a fan discussion board for TV shows.
|
| Norms for spoiler tagging would be awful in articles like this.
| kwertyoowiyop wrote:
| I blame myself for not having watched Breaking Bad yet.
| blockwriter wrote:
| Read Nietzsche's writing on the distinction between Apollonian
| revelation and Dionysian satiation in narratives and you will
| never need to worry about spoilers again. I think the relevant
| material is in The Birth of Tragedies.
| gota wrote:
| A bit unrelated to the article -
|
| An (initial) portion of my academic experience was researching
| Interactive Storytelling systems[1]. I was particularly
| interested in the methods for ensuring certain qualities of the
| plots, and modeled some constraint solving problems -
|
| but I did had the absolutely outstanding opportunity to interact
| with researchers in this area, and to read the seminal works on
| plot structure, Aarne-Thompson's index, Propp and other very,
| very, very cool stuff
|
| With no false modesty I can say that I had a 'knack' for writing
| from a young age, but after studying narratives in-depth, what
| they share, how they 'move', fabula and syuhzet, I became a much
| better writer - even a _technical_ writer.
|
| Turns out explaining a formal method shares a lot in common with
| telling a story. One of this days I'll try to pinpoint that
| overlap and write about it.
|
| [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interactive_storytelling
|
| P.S.: this is a good resource:
| http://tecfalabs.unige.ch/mediawiki-narrative/index.php/Narr...
| bsedlm wrote:
| I like to think (based on my shallow understanding of technical
| aspects of stories) that the basic formula of the hero's
| journey (a hero goes somewhere else and brings back some kind
| of change) is a general scheme to codify how to change things
|
| Ramping up the abstraction (generality) to 11:
|
| the hero is in a home (A) the hero goes on an adventure (->)
| the hero returns home but things have changed (B)
|
| i.e. A -> B
|
| It is probably useful to turn down the generality a little bit
| for this to be more usefull; but I'm most certainly NOT a
| storyteller.
| YeGoblynQueenne wrote:
| Can you say how the Hero's Journey template applies to the
| Illiad?
|
| How about the Odyssey?
|
| The Epic of Gilgamesh?
|
| The Kalevala?
|
| The Mahabharata (or just the Bhagavad Gita)?
|
| Or the Ramayana?
|
| Beowulf?
|
| My guess is you can't. The "Hero's Journey" is too narrow and
| too simplistic to be applied to the major epic works of human
| cultures across the ages. It is a limited abstraction that
| only serves to describe perhaps a subset of literary works
| from a particular historical and geographical era and area,
| but by far not the universal story structure that it is
| claimed to be.
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| I agree the hero's journey is too simplistic, but the
| hero's journey as a concept was popularized by Joseph
| Campbell who applied it to all those epics. It is pretty
| easy to google and find people applying the hero's journey
| to those epics - for example the Ramayana
| https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-
| b-d&q=joseph+ca... lots of people making arguments as to
| how it applies.
| bsedlm wrote:
| Dan Harmon (who is a pretty good storyteller) made a really
| good (and IMO fun to read) overview of how this plays out
| in "practice":
|
| https://channel101.fandom.com/wiki/Story_Structure_101:_Sup
| e...
| gota wrote:
| Well, the general reasoning you applied is in fact the basis
| of several 'plot-based' approaches; a sequence of 'events'
| that change the narrative world in a certain way is chosen
| based on (any number of) criteria
|
| I worked particularly on a system that involved an automated
| planning paradigm - so there were 'goals' that the story
| wanted to be met (and could be determined/influenced by an
| author-user) and a catalogue of abstract definitions of
| events as planning operators. It worked somewhat like you
| said, except (for practical purposes) mostly backwards (as in
| backwards-planning)
|
| I unfortunately lost contact with the research area a bit,
| and am not familiar with how it progressed - but it certainly
| is interesting in a distinct way; it really lets you explore
| a particular creative side that many things in computer
| science neglect
| robbedpeter wrote:
| The trouble with deconstructing story in this way is the lack of
| a clear stopping point. How many degrees of abstraction can you
| go before anything can be interpreted to mean anything else? What
| conditions are necessary to ascribe to a concept the meaning its
| author intended? What if the author meant to use ambiguity
| skillfully, so as to convey multiple meanings with a seemingly
| singular statement?
|
| What is right and correct thinking, and if there are exceptions,
| does that tie into some sort of meta-rule about rightness, and
| how should it inform our own internal storytelling as we manifest
| our lives?
|
| I'm always left at the zen koan: Before enlightenment, chop wood,
| carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood, carry water.
|
| Reality is that which remains after you stop believing in it.
| Interpretations and narratives with subjective contexts need to
| tie into the "chop wood, carry water" reality of the author, or
| your interpretation is invalid.
| [deleted]
| jelling wrote:
| Counterpoint argument based on the Japanese/Korean story
| structure called kishotenketsu:
|
| > The necessity of conflict is preached as a kind of dogma by
| contemporary writers' workshops and Internet "guides" to writing.
| A plot without conflict is considered dull; some even go so far
| as to call it impossible. This has influenced not only fiction,
| but writing in general-arguably even philosophy. Yet, is there
| any truth to this belief? Does plot necessarily hinge on
| conflict? No. Such claims are a product of the West's insularity.
| For countless centuries, Chinese and Japanese writers have used a
| plot structure that does not have conflict "built in", so to
| speak. Rather, it relies on exposition and contrast to generate
| interest. This structure is known as kishotenketsu.
|
| https://stilleatingoranges.tumblr.com/post/25153960313/the-s...
|
| Also, there are numerous highly regarded, non-Hollywood films
| that do not rely on the traditional confrontational story arc.
| "Killer of Sheep" and "Patterson" are two off the top of my head.
|
| So "Universal Structure of Storytelling" seems a bit over-sold.
| jxy wrote:
| Confrontation is a turn, which is the third act in this
| Japanese rendition, Qi Cheng Zhuan Jie . Nowadays people just
| want more and more of this crescendo phase of the story, as
| people can't sit long enough for a slow buildup of the first
| two phases. The four-act story is like a knock-knock joke, yet
| people grow up and only have time to enjoy one punch line.
| [deleted]
| elliekelly wrote:
| Quillette is garbage: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/quillette/
| mellosouls wrote:
| You really need a better source if you want to undermine
| perfectly reasonable websites that are maligned simply because
| they challenge the narratives of ideological bullies on the
| web.
| bambax wrote:
| > _From one point of view, it's obvious that, despite exceptions,
| most stories portray "goody-baddy" dynamics--from nursery rhymes
| to juicy gossip, from ancient folktales to Holy Scripture, from
| lowbrow reality shows to award-winning documentaries. The
| question is, why?_
|
| Because they are all, actually, from the same culture, as becomes
| obvious when reading the article. The author is a little quick to
| call this universal. It may be a little more "universal" than the
| World Series, but not much.
|
| There are many stories where there are no baddies, and others
| where there are no goodies (such as Greek Mythology for
| instance).
| jedimastert wrote:
| This is a _huge_ problem when you see discussions on music
| theory as well; claims that things like Pythagorean 12 tone
| scales are "universal" because of the simplicity of the
| ratios.
|
| My favorite is the claims of the universality of divisive
| rhythm; where larger units (measures, phrases, the like) are
| subdivided into equal portions and those subdivisions are the
| building blocks of all rhythm ever. I think music education has
| gotten to the point where plenty of people (who are used to
| euro-centric western music, that is) are able to comprehend
| that some cultures use smaller than half-step increments or
| other scales, but the way our rhythm works is so ingrained that
| trying to explain additive rhythm is almost painfully mind-
| expanding, even those it's very very common outside of sub-
| saharan africa and western europe.
|
| This also applies to people who try to make statements about
| A432 or whatnot, which relies on having a _very_ narrow view of
| music theory as a whole
| bsedlm wrote:
| https://sethares.engr.wisc.edu/prelude.html
|
| this work claims that the 12 tones system (IMO not a scale)
| seems "universal" is in fact so widespread because of the
| timbres in the instruments used (i.e. the haromic spectrum of
| strings, wind instruments, and human voice, etc).
| YeGoblynQueenne wrote:
| I had to look up "additive rythm", eager for a (hopefully not
| too painful) mind expansion but I couldn't understand the
| explanation in wikipedia until my friend aksed "what, like
| kalamatianos?" (3/8 + 2/8 + 2/8 = 7/8). And then we had a big
| fight because she kept saying "so what, where's the
| difference"? :)
|
| Morale of the story: it's not just western music that's
| deeply ingrained into western peoples' minds. It goes the
| other way too.
| jedimastert wrote:
| From what I'm seeing yes, although it does go further.
|
| Imagine where every bar was a different length while still
| keeping a pulse. One might be 3+2+2 then 4+3 then 2+3+2+3
| and so on.
| the_gipsy wrote:
| Maybe I'm totally off here, because I don't really know
| that much about music theory. But I think this is exactly
| what happens in Flamenco. A Buleria song/performance has
| 12 beats, mostly 6/8+3/4, accented on 3, 6, 8, 10, 12.
| The chord changes on 3 and 10. The accents can change to
| literally anything, deviating from the 6/8+3/4, spanning
| multiple bars. As long as the chord change is there, or
| the 10th is heavily accented with a stop, when done.
| Because the chord change is asymmetrical, it never really
| feels like "just 3/4" or whatever is happening
| rhythmically.
|
| It's like a meta game to outwit each other, but always
| finding the common ground immediately.
| slowmovintarget wrote:
| I'd disagree with your characterization of Greek Mythology.
| There are "goodies," they just are not viewed that way through
| the lens of modern values.
| BryantD wrote:
| Yes. This is an interesting article, and if the author had
| resisted the tendency to generalize and just drawn the cultural
| conclusions available from his research I would have enjoyed it
| more. Unfortunately, I think in some circles it's too
| politically charged to say "Western cultures," because people
| will react badly to that phrase.
| [deleted]
| jacknews wrote:
| I find many popular shows are quite moralistic, but I'm not sure
| if that's cause or effect. Are they popular because we like
| moralistic stories, or because story-tellers want to moralize us?
| Many 'indie' shows, often European, are much more ambiguous and
| reflective of real life.
| reidjs wrote:
| This is especially noticeable in formulaic sitcoms. Any time a
| character lies, cheats, etc, they will get caught in the worst
| way possible. At some base societal level it's "correct" to
| punish the bad guy and reward the good guy. Our stories reflect
| this attitude.
| AnimalMuppet wrote:
| Well, for a sitcom, they get caught in the _funniest_
| possible way, which usually turns out to also be the worst
| (and funniest _because_ it 's worst). Humor drives, not
| morality.
| [deleted]
| bambax wrote:
| > _The golden rule of hunter-gather life is pretty simple:_
|
| Oh please. There are at least as many "hunter-gather lives" as
| there are tribes, and probably more, and it's very likely the
| author knows about none of them. This is rubbish of the highest
| order.
| tsegratis wrote:
| > Oh please. There are at least as many "hunter-gather lives"
| as there are tribes
|
| It seems the author is extrapolating game-theoretic choice
| beyond what they've experienced to examine it's generality
|
| Agreed the phrasing is more than unfortunate, though to try and
| pull good from it; the author's game-theory probably does
| apply; and the rule of seeking the best for society at the
| disadvantage of self is probably the missing key here:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29416606 (The break down
| of distributed society)
|
| You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye and tooth for
| tooth.' ... But I tell you, love your enemies
|
| Or, unhelpfully, the Code of Hammurabi: If a man proceeded by
| force and deflowered the virgin slave-woman of another man,
| that man must pay five shekels of silver.
|
| If a man knocked out the eye of another man, he shall weigh out
| half a mina of silver.
|
| If a man knocked out a tooth of another man, he shall pay two
| shekels of silver.
|
| My question would be: does game theory ever enable the golden
| rule?
| bsedlm wrote:
| so the author said something which can be nitpicked, therefore
| the entire article is rubbish?
|
| I guess we all do this to a certain extent given that there's
| so much content to parse through and anything that will allow
| us to quickly dismiss something lets us use that energy for
| something else
| bambax wrote:
| > _so the author said something which can be nitpicked,
| therefore the entire article is rubbish?_
|
| I'm sorry, but yes. This shows the author wasn't thinking and
| is intellectually lazy and incurious -- like if he was laying
| out bigoted theories in the first paragraph, and making whole
| deductions out of it.
|
| This is actually bigoted, by the way: to declare that there
| is just one way to live the life of a hunter-gatherer, and
| that it's "simple".
| sharker8 wrote:
| Agreed on that one can interpret the author's stance as
| bigoted because there is a cultivated myth here which is
| sentimental and all about how stories pre printing press
| were all about banding tribes together. People love this
| myth because it fits the mold of 'techno-optimism'. They
| were of course also about kinda boring things like record
| keeping about crops, but westerners ignore that and say
| those aren't stories because they don't have characters or
| something. As if we can generalize about things for which
| we have absolutely no record in many cases. Also as if
| western people invented the concept of a narrator (implied
| in this article but I've heard it elsewhere).
| mistermann wrote:
| As I see it (as someone fascinated with this phenomenon),
| this is somewhat of an example of what the author is
| talking about.
|
| The claim:
|
| >> The golden rule of hunter-gather life is pretty simple
|
| ...post-processing, is perceived as:
|
| > There are at least as many "hunter-gather lives" as there
| are tribes, and probably more, and it's very likely the
| author knows about none of them.
|
| ...dropping "the golden rule of".
|
| Ironically, this is followed up with:
|
| > This shows the author _wasn 't thinking and is
| intellectually lazy and incurious_ -- like if he was
| [laying out bigoted theories in the first paragraph], _and
| making whole deductions out of it_.
|
| I wrote more about a theory I have about this phenomenon in
| a recent thread:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29430192
| bambax wrote:
| You're playing with words. The rest of the paragraph in
| TFA does describe the _life_ of hunter-gatherers, not
| just one "golden rule" (which is never enunciated).
|
| > _If you happen to be blessed with muscle, don't throw
| it around. If you happen to be a great hunter or a
| dazzling beauty, don't flaunt it over others. Be one of
| the good guys, in other words._
|
| This is completely gratuitous and unsubstantiated. It's
| ridiculous. And then there is more of the same.
| mistermann wrote:
| > You're playing with words.
|
| So you interpret and perceive (and then assert as True).
| But then, aren't we all "playing with words", at all
| times, to some degree?
|
| For example, I could say that you are "engaging in
| persuasive rhetoric" when you say that.
|
| >> If you happen to be blessed with muscle, don't throw
| it around. If you happen to be a great hunter or a
| dazzling beauty, don't flaunt it over others. Be one of
| the good guys, in other words.
|
| > This is completely gratuitous and unsubstantiated. It's
| ridiculous. And then there is more of the same.
|
| _gratuitous: uncalled for; lacking good reason;
| unwarranted_
|
| Don't throw your muscle around, don't flaunt exceptional
| characteristics over others, be a good guy - in the
| building and maintenance of a successful community, these
| things are "uncalled for; lacking good reason;
| unwarranted"?
|
| _unsubstantiated: not supported or proven by evidence_
|
| Here you have a better case, but when it comes to the
| "not supported by" part, I suspect these are not entirely
| new ideas in the fields of anthropology and social
| evolution (I speculate).
|
| Out of curiosity, did you read my other comment? I put a
| fair amount of work into it, and I believe it has some
| relevance. Perhaps you could critique it!
| [deleted]
| Jun8 wrote:
| Interesting read! Here's the the template mentioned for powerful
| antagonists:
|
| "Antagonists should be hyper-individualistic bullies. They should
| threaten the social order and induce righteous indignation in
| protagonists, incentivizing them and their peers to band
| together, fight back, and finally affirm their prosocial values."
|
| I disagree. The above describes someone like a Bond villain,
| which are easily dealt with, or whose legacy quickly dissipates
| after they are dead. The really dangerous antagonist is one who
| creates powerful memes and bands together their followers against
| the established order.
|
| Defining them this way dissociates antagonists from simplistic ,
| because the "evil" antagonist of today is tomorrow's charismatic
| leader, as happens many times in life.
| potatoman22 wrote:
| Is banding people together and creating powerful memes behavior
| that marks an antagonist, though?
| sharker8 wrote:
| No, it is as the author argues the effect of stories with
| clearly defined antagonists and protagonists.
| oblak wrote:
| I like sci-fi actions and cheese one liners. None of the slow,
| pretentious artsy shit. But... I really, really like the The Man
| from Earth
|
| Turns out I like all kinds of stuff, provided it's done right
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-12-03 23:01 UTC)