Are all stories the same basic foundation with small variations but the same main idea? To answer that we need a clear definition of what a story is. A story is an account of imaginary or real people and events told for entertainment. Okay, so a story, by definition, is told specifically for entertainment. Then what if there are only 6 main arcs that people find entertaining. Then yes, all stories are basically the same because they all end in entertainment and only specific things can lead to entertainment. If I were to film a movie of me sitting in my room watching a wall of paint dry and then once the paint is fully dried, the movie ends. Is this a story? It doesn't really follow the same plot structures as other stories. Would this be considered a new storyline and a completely new story. Well, no, it wasn't entertaining so it doesn't count as a story. Okay, well entertainment is subjective, so let's say there was someone who genuinely found this interesting. Then it would be considered a story. So not all stories are the same? I bet you would be able to find one underlying structure of this movie, even if there was no intention for it to have this meaning. One could argue during my time watching the paint, I contemplated whether or not the paint would actually dry or not and when it finally did, I gained new insights and thus watching the paint dry was a personal quest or a rags to riches story. While none of this was the intent of the movie, it is a completely rational argument and it does make every story the same. Whether or not you think every story is the same, the variations from each basic story allows for more insights or entertainment and it's not like you're watching or reading the same exact thing over and over. So does it really matter?
This week in class we read a piece called Show and Tell by Scott McCloud. This piece showed (and told) the importance of pictures in readings. It started off with a short anecdote of this kid in front of his class explaining how his robot toy transforms into an airplane. He uses a mixture of words and plain showing how it does what it does. This develops the author's main argument that "words and pictures have great powers to tell stories when creators fully exploit them both," (McCloud 809). I believe that images in books don't make a work of literature any less intellectual. If the content is meant to be intellectual, pictures aren't going to make it any less. Actually, images bring a different dynamic and can allow for more intellectual content. If an author were to include a statement where there could be many interpretations, that would be considered intellectual, but if you add an image to that and turn it into a comic, there could be an infinite amount of i...

Comments
Post a Comment