Requirements of Narratives

The definition of a narrative at first seems fairly simple, as Abbot has stated: “Simply put, narrative is the representation of an event or a series of events… though some prefer the word ‘action’ “[1]. However, specifically speaking what a narrative requires is tricky. A narrative does not actually need an explicit narrator, but does need at least one event, a character, and a conflict.

Traditional scholars such as Prince believe that a narrative requires a narrator [2]. These scholars require that an actual person needs to be representing the story directly. However, this is not a true requirement. Abbott has stated “As we noted in the first chapter, even fixed, silent instruments like paintings can convey the events of a narrative” [2]. It is absurd to say a very detailing painting of a dog eating a child’s apple isn’t a narrative just because there is no explicit narrator while the simple sentence “My dog ate my apple” is. Just as an article is the author’s opinion without the author having to explicitly say so, a painting, film, play or other piece is a showing of events without a narrator having to say them explicitly, and so as long as it meets the other requirements of having a character and conflict they are narratives.

Abbot seems to require a character as well as an event: “By contrast, picaresque novels… are considered narratives because the events, different as they may be, belong to the same chronology from beginning to end and share the involvement of at least one character”[3]. However, while it is easy to identify an event, a character can be a bit difficult to define. “The rock fell and broke the bridge”, is most definitely an event, but is there a character? There are no living organisms, but could the rock or bridge be considered characters themselves. If we replace the rock with a monkey it becomes “The monkey fell and broke the bridge” and if we replace it with a person “Jimmy fell and broke the bridge”; where is the line drawn, must it be a living organism, or must it even be as specific as a human. If it must be human the entire movie “The Lion King” would not be considered a narrative, which seems wrong, so instead maybe anything living could constitute a character. Let us assume then that it must be a living organism, “With the development of naval power European countries have traveled across the land. America, which was found relatively late was dominated by European settlers. Eventually America became one of the greatest nations in the world, shaping the results of the world wars as well as the world’s political and economic atmosphere.” This does seem like a story, and although no country is technically alive, they seem like good characters.

However, what separates an event from a narrative. All events must have some kind of character based on the above definition. As every action needs to be acted on something every event will have an object and so a character. It seems then that their needs to be further requirements of narratives otherwise every event will be a narrative and simple sentences like “the paper exists” can be considered a narrative as there is an event: existence, and a character: the paper. Something it seems must happen. However, even the most mundane things have their place in a narrative “The fact remains, however, that a narrative is made up solely of functions: everything, in one way or another, is significant… Even though a detail might appear unequivocally trivial, impervious to any function, it would nonetheless end up pointing to its own absurdity or uselessness: everything has meaning, or nothing has.”[4] Sometimes boring parts can be used to make the climax that much more exciting, or to show how something that occurs later has greatly changed the atmosphere making it go from boring to exciting. Everything does indeed have its uses, and a conflict can be as simple as picking up a pencil, or as complicated as saving the world but it is still required.

[1]- Abbott, H. Porter. The Cambridge Introduction to Narrative. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP, 2002. Print. pg 13.

[2]- Abbott, H. Porter. The Cambridge Introduction to Narrative. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP, 2002. Print. pg 15.

[3]- Abbott, H. Porter. The Cambridge Introduction to Narrative. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP, 2002. Print. pg 14.

[4]- Barthes, Roland Introduction to the Structural Analysis of Narrative, New Literary History, Vol. 6, No. 2 On Narrative and Narratives (Winter 1975) The Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. pg 242