Kevin
i suppose its a matter of the tension suggests taht the characters will go through an ordeal and change.
12:49
actions don’t really make character change, they can reveal/develop characters but they dont make greater plot/development/character change.
12:49
tahts how im dividing the two.
im saying that good plots favor action or favor characters
12:51
and the ones that favor action generally don’t change their characters
12:51
e.g., indiana jones
12:51
we can learn about hsi back story and his motivations
12:51
but ultimately he’st he same indiana as he was when he ran away from the university
my argument is that one kind of favoritism begets a certain kind of plot/suspense/conflict
and I argue that for the good exercise of narrative devices, the use of suspense, etc. the plot must either make us expect some adventure around the next corner or that the characters will reach some real change
indiana jones, while showing off his character traits saving the girl is the same person that left at the beginning of the story.
my point wasnt to say that no action happens
1:19
its that hte action isnt central to the way the plot develops.
1:20
and the way the plot develops is driven by the forces that make the main character
h2. Nick
I mean, one of the basic narrative archetypes is the hero’s journey (cf. Joseph Campbell)..
12:52
Which is precisely the transformation of a character through a series of events.
12:52
Usually action-based, i.e. sex and violence.
I think it’s a false distinction you’re making.
The medium of the Iliad is a series of events which are turning points in the lives of the participants.
I would say these events are entirely about action and entirely about character.
I don’t see the dearth of action in the Iliad, and I’m not sure I see the dearth of character in the Odyssey.
1:04
In fact, I think that the idea of separating these things to the point where you can talk about them may itself be suspect.
1:04
Also:
Also: you make a distinction between the development and revelation of character.
1:05
I think this is probably invalid in the context of much world literature, which has an essentialist view of human nature.
1:06
I think in the majority of cases it is difficult to impossible to say whether a character development is best assessed as a change in the character or as the revelation (i.e. exposition, etc.) of existing character.
Let me rephrase: to attribute plot operation to a metaphor of forces is misleading.
soft determinism
AIM
1:22
why is that?
Burbletron
AIM
1:22
Because the interaction of words, ideas, etc. is not like the interaction of forces.
1:23
More like the interaction of parts.
1:23
Character is not like gravity or inertia.
1:23
It’s the sum of anecdotes, events, actions, reflections.
Whatever. I think that the psychology of a machine (i.e., human-engineered bits created with more or less precision that interact in a more or less orderly fashion to a specific purpose) is more pertinent than the psychology of forces (i.e., disembodied, invisible powers crafted by a deist god or no one, acting from an unspecified beginning towards an unspecified end).
A plan that is similar to a blueprint.
1:30
A deist god is essentially a mathematician elevated to the role of god.
1:30
An author is generally not like a mathematician.
1:30
An engineer is basically a mechanic.
(BTW: I think this got sidelined a while back, but the reason I was grinding down that tangent about essentialism in hero narratives was that you were making a distinction between the demonstration (i.e., revelation) of character and the formation of character, which, while a valid philosophical question, may not be a meaningful one in terms of plotting given the assumptions of historical ways of telling stories in the west.)

Created on February 12, 2006 21:34 by Nick Shere