The (dis) appeal of Darfur

Several years before this very class started, I had watched a documentary film entitled “The Devil Came on Horseback”. I remember to this day that the documentary had actually left me more confused about the conflict in Darfur than I had been prior to watching. It had left me with a very unsettling feeling that I had somehow missed something important, yet I could not understand why that “something” kept escaping me.

At the time I watched this film(2007), the genocide was in its early stages, and seldom was understood by the outside world. I too, had very little idea of not only what I was watching, but as to why it was happening. The distant ramifications of what I was watching at the time went unnoticed for several years.

The documentary was filmed and narrated by a former US Marine, who was sent to the African Union as an international observer. His job was to watch and record and to document human rights violations, but to not enforce or intervene. In this role he was restricted by the Sudanese and African Union governments from travelling to many areas during the genocide. With these restrictions and no enforcement powers many events would go unobserved, undocumented and unreported. Much of the film had very little to show for the actual genocide. He obtained very few pictures during his time in Darfur and was restricted from observing areas that had been attacked by pro government rebels. Even in his vague description, of men on horseback attacking villages, he did not seem to fully grasp the nuances of highly localized events in the Sudan that preceded the fighting.

The reason I could not grasp the concept at that time, and why it has taken so long to raise awareness of the conflict are the very same reasons pointed out and discussed as being unnarratable. My lingering questions of the film were not a shortcoming of the documentary, but a result of the inability of the subject to effectively be transmitted and identified with by others around the world.

Many independent factors conspired to make this narrative disappealing. The conflict in Darfur happened in some of the most remote regions of the world, where travel is done on horseback and by foot and where information poverty runs deep. There are no computers or internet let alone electricity. The “proximity and nearness” that Galtung and Ruge identify as being newsworthy[1], place this conflict very far down on the news agenda. Another factor is that the Genocide happened largely without pictures and documentation. Without seeing the faces of and identifying with the people of Darfur it was even harder to find a narrative that was highly transmissible and circulist in nature. Without crucial images or daily news headlines of reporters or eyewitnesses bringing first hand accounts to our attention, the world was not drawn to Darfur because we could not identify. There was very little authenticity or verification from any authors because governments kept reporters out for many years to under report the genocide (This is in stark contrast to today’s images of the toppling of Governments in other parts of North Africa). A final causality added to the laundry list of factors is the very nature and concept of genocide. Genocide is an issue in which Robyn Warhol describes as “antinarratable” because it transgresses social convention and is genocide is generally taboo.[2]

Without access to twitter or iReports from computers and cellphones, the world slept while Darfur burned, and we either did not know, or simply did not care because we failed to identify with the people of Darfur. We failed to understand the nature of their conflict. We failed to understand them as a people. We failed to believe in the rumors and stories because we saw no evidence. We failed them because they are not part of our information and media system. They were cut off and isolated from the effects of globalization. We need to do much more to prevent this from happening again.

---

[1] Galtung, Johan/Ruge, Mari Holmboe: The Structure of Foreign News. The Presentation of the Congo, Cuba, and Cyprus Crises in Four Norwegian Newspapers. Journal of Peace Research, vol. 2 (1965) p. 68

[2] Robyn R. Warhol: Neonarrative; or, How to Render the Unnarratable in realist Fiction and Contemporary Film. In: Phelan, James/Rabinowitz: Peter J.: A Companion to Narrative Theory. Oxford: Blackwell, 2005.

LxC Tasks 3/4: Why is American football disappealing?

One of the most disappealing narratives in Russian media has to be American football. American football is rarely, if ever, shown on Russian television channels. There is a strong disconnect that exists between the American culture and Russian culture concerning American football. Events such as the super bowl do not make the news in Russia and therefore are widely considered disappealing.

In The Structure of News, Galtung states that “the more distant a nation is, the more will an event have to satisfy the frequency criterion.”[1] American football is a relatively constant event in America. Therefore, based on Galtung’s conclusion, it will not create a news presence across the ocean. Also in the article is the criteria for a news article to have demand. The demand is evidently not present for American football events and therefore it does not make headlines.

In Narrative Interest as Cultural Negotiation, Herman and Vervaeck state that in order “for narrative interest to arise, the circulation on offer must to some extent coincide with the reader’s disposition as it derives from his or her cultural embeddedness.”[2] American and Russian cultures are completely dissimilar when it comes to American football. In fact, when I tried to search for “super bowl” on the main Russian news channel, I did not receive any results.[3]

As with most European countries, when “football” is mentioned, soccer is thought of. The disappeal of American football in Russia can explained by the criteria in the preceding paragraphs. Based on Prince’s definition in The Disnarrated, American football can be considered “unnarratable,” or “falling below the so-called threshold of narratability (it is not sufficiently unusual or problematic).”[4]

[1]Galtung, Johan/Ruge, Mari Holmboe. "The Structure of Foreign News." The Presentation of the Congo, Cuba and Cyprus Crises in Four Norwegian Newspapers.Volume 2 (1965), Page 66.
[2]Herman, L., Vervaeck, B. "Narrative Interest as Cultural Negotiation." NARRATIVE. Volume 17 (2009), Page 112.
[3]Результаты поиска: "супербоул." Первыи Канал. http://www.1tv.ru/allsearch/?s=%F1%F3%EF%E5%F0%E1%EE%F3%EB Accessed April 4, 2011. Internet

This is the result page of my search for “superbowl” on the Russian news website.

[4]Prince, Gerald. "The Disnarrated." STYLE. Volume 21 (1988), Pages 1-3.

The Appeal or Disappeal of the Bible

The appeal or disappeal of a narrative is based highly on the reception of the audience. The narrator must consider the role of “interest” [1] when transmitting their narrative. In Narrative Interest as Cultural Negotiation by Herman and Vervaeck appeal is defined by the audience's “interest thanks to the network in which they circulate and in which the reader takes part”[2]. They also note that on a simpler level, “Evaluative devices say to us: this was terrifying, dangerous, weird, wild, crazy; or amusing, hilarious, wonderful; more generally, that it was strange, uncommon, or unusual” [3]. In the most basic form, it all boils down to Gerald Prince's concept of making the audience interested in some thing they might not have gravitated to originally [4].To evaluate these ideas, the Bible will be utilized as an example of a key narrative.

Even with the enlightened, seemingly atheist, society of our generation, the Bible is still highly transmitted. Some try to distinguish its authority by pointing out historical and other factual gaps. As a child, growing up in an Modern Orthodox Jewish background, my class mates and I were forced to find a way to bridge tradition with modern society. We were taught to question the Bible as text but not be tempted with disbelief. At the time, I was rather rebellious against religion and continuously questioned specific portions that seemed fantastical. When backed into a corner with my incessant questioning, teachers would resort to answer with this final response: there is not a single extra word in the Bible. Every word was the word of G-d, who narrated stories to teach morality. Therefore the Bible should not be seen from a historical perspective because that was not of interest to G-d.

At that time the Bible was disappealing. All I could see was, “the unspoken agenda by which the tell ability of a series of events, the narrativity of this or that mode of representation, is assessed in certain contexts” [5]. The Bible seemed nothing more than religious indoctrination to view life from Judaism's agenda. However, as I have grown, the appeal of the Bible has generated value more based on culture and the evaluative devices employed [6] showing the mass and lasting appeal of a successful narrative.

[1]Prince, Gerald. The Disnarrated. Style. 22:1. 1988, p.1-8. Print.

[2]Herman, Luc, and Bart Vervaeck. Narrative Interest as Cultural Negotiation. 17. The Ohio State Universtiy, 2009, p.112. Print.

[3]Herman, Luc, and Vervaeck, Bart. Narrative Interest as Cultural Negotiation. 17. The Ohio State University, 2009, p.13. Print.

[4]Prince, Gerald. The Disnarrated. Style. 22:1. 1988, p.1-8. Print.

[5]Prince, Gerald. The Disnarrated. Style. 22:1. 1988, p.1-8. Print.

[6]Herman, Luc, and Vervaeck, Bart. Narrative Interest as Cultural Negotiation. 17. The Ohio State University, 2009, p.3. Print.

Distinguishing Between Narratable and Unnarratable

The difference between what is considered narratable or unnarratable is all in the eyes of the speaker. An event or story is considered narratable if it is relevant and necessary for the speaker to include in order to successfully portray an event or story to another person. The details of the story that are omitted because they do not contribute anything to the story or are too minor to be told are known as the unnarratable.

The problem in determining what is unnarratable is that everyone has a different view on what is considered necessary to tell a complete series of events. For example, I could tell a friend that I drove up to Binghamton from New Jersey and the trip took 3 hours. I would have portrayed my trip to school in a succinct manner leaving out any other details that the listener needs to hear. However, I would know that I left out some key details of the trip, such as the traffic jam on Route 80 or the eight consecutive red lights I had to sit at. Some listeners may be interested in hearing these details, however, since I omitted them from my story I considered these details unnarratable. Newspapers and news channels have to distinguish between what is considered narratable and unnarratable when creating headlines and reporting the news.

In some cases, such as in fictional stories or movies, talk that would typically be considered unnarratable is used to add more details and further develop the storyline. In his Dictionary of Narratology, Gerald Prince discusses the use of the unnarratable. “The level at which it functions, the relative frequency with which it appears, and the relative amount of space it occupies can be a useful tool for characterizing narrative manners, schools, movements, and entire periods. Thus, the realist text and, more generally, mimetic fiction, resort to the disnarrated mainly on the level of story…”[1] Prince agrees that the unnarratable can be an important tool when describing complete events. These unnarratable details that are left out are actually vital to portraying the entire event. However, people typically prefer to hear the summary of a story, without all of the minor details. Prince goes on to explain how the unnarratable “can, for example, become a rhythmic instrument by regularly slowing down narrative speed”. [1] Modern society expects to hear stories and news events as quickly and bluntly as possible, leaving room only for the narratable.

[1] Prince, Gerald. The Disnarrated. Vol. 22. 1988. 1. Print.

Narratable vs Unnarratable with Internet & Industry Hegemonies

The narratives that are picked and spread through social networks and the media industry are a small selection taken from the near infinite number of narratives that are created and told every day. The selection process divides narratives into a spectrum between narratable and unnaratable. In Dictionary of Narratology Gerald Prince defines narratable as something that is worth telling [1] so unnarratable using the prefix un- can be described as something not worth telling. All news sources, including the media as well as facebook statuses tell a story, and the probability and degree to which it is retold, whether it just be via local news stations or between a college network verse across the globe, is determined by how narratable it is.

In an effort to find a way to predict how narratable a narrative is scholars have used statistics to create detailed systems of analysis. One such method created by Galtung, Ruge, and Holmboe in The Structure of Foreign News [2] and then further evaluated by Harcup and O’Neill in What is News? Galtung and Ruge revisited [3] develop a numerical system where each narrative is measured based on specific characteristics such as relevance, unambiguity, unpredictability, positivity, scarcity, reference to elite people and many more. There are in total over 12 of these characteristics with some having more weight than others. These factors although discovered and analyzed through statistics are facets of human nature.

The difference between what is narratable and what is unnarratable is often quite interesting. For instance an anonymous discussion site called reddit(www.reddit.com) ranks links and articles submitted by users based on voting. Those links as well comments that the public like and vote up reach the top of the first page while those that are down voted or not voted on at all are buried in a sea of links or comments where they will rarely if ever be read. Thus those narratives which are narratable reach the front page while those which do not never get close. This creates an interesting example of hegemony described by scholar Herman in The Cambridge Companion to Narrative [4]. There it is described as “The dominance of a particular view or group over other views or groups, often through a process of manufactured consent, whereby those in a subordinate role are induced to participate in their own domination” [4]. On reddit unlike media services who dominate the public with their chosen narratives, the mob rules, which could be considered the lesser of two evils. Although, this hegemony has its problems, as often true but dissenting opinions are rarely viewed or discussed, it tends to benefit the public more than industrial news sources because the public controls it using its voting system creating a site more perfectly catered to the public. On sites like reddit articles discussing the fallacy of the political or corporate elite, which may not be shown in industrial media sources if an elite who controls the media source doesn’t want it to ruin their own or an allies reputation, are often placed on the front page because of their high relevance to the public. As seen by this thread here which links and discusses an article about the gulf oil spill but from a controversial website Al-Jazeera, that most likely wouldn’t be shown in a positive light on American television as it is here [5]. However, the most commonly found articles on reddit are of the humorous kind. This is interesting as most popular news stations on TV do not place nearly as much emphasis on the humorous, showing how in these hegemonies what is narrated may not be what is most highly narratable, but instead what the company thinks is most narratable or what is most aligned with there the ideas they wish to discuss. Additionally it may simply be the case that industrial media sources, with their limited staff, simply may not be able to compete with the billions of authors on the internet thus causing their lack of humorous and other highly narratable narratives compared to internet sites such as reddit.

Narratives are categorized in a range of narratable where those most narratable are most circulated. Narratable stories have characteristics that are desired by the listeners and are based on that communities’ nature and for global narratives the nature of mankind. However, in hegemonies not controlled by the public using voting or similar systems, what is shown may not be what is most narratable but what the dominating characters want to be discussed, which is often determined and limited by monetary gain. This monetary gain can be controlled by the viewers who control advertisement revenue, or by corporate or political sponsors, the latter which may cause highly narratable news not to be shown.

[1] Prince, Gerald: Narratable. In: Dictionary of Narratology, p. 56f

[2] Gultung, Johan/Ruge, Mari Holmboe: The structure of Foreign News. The presentation of the Congo, Cuba, and Cyprus Crises in Four Norwegian Newspapers. Journal of Peace Research, vol. 2 (1965), pp 64-91.

[3] Harcup, Ton/O’Neill, Deirdre: What Is News? Galtune and Ruge revisited. Journalism Studies 2001, vol.2, no. 2, pp. 261-280.

[4] Herman, David (ed.): The Cambridge Companion to Narrative. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2007, p. 278.

[5] Mepper. "This Is Everything That Is Wrong with Corporate America: The Owner of the BP Oil Rig That Caused the Biggest Oil Spill Ever, Transocean Ltd, Has Just Awarded Its Top Executives with Bonuses for "the Best Year in Safety Performance in Company's History : WTF." :Reddit: the Voice of the Internet -- News before It Happens. 03 Apr. 2011. Web. 03 Apr. 2011. http://www.reddit.com/r/WTF/comments/ghlkx/this_is_everything_that_is_wrong_with_corporate/.

Unnarratable to the Narratable

The narratability (or visa, Disnarratability) always seemed to be a more conscious act. Possibly comparable to an artist understanding colors without an education, a musician understanding rhythms without reading music. Of course, not all of us can create art or have ears that understand music, but most of us can understand what makes good narratives and wasn't doesn't, we just don't always now how and why this is. The first word I have noticed repeatedly in both Prince's and Herman's works is 'interest'. One must find an interest in a particular narrative to be worthy of drawing attention. To go deeper, a narratable topic will have "meaningfulness" and/or "relevance" [1].


When starting this blog entry, the idea of narratable topics that are strictly entertainment (a comedian for example) might break this relationship up, but after debating, humans still find a connection of relevance with these comedians or other funny entertainment. If we didn't find this connection, the chances are we wouldn't laugh. There is a definite act of participation "which combines the impact of the text with the activity and the cultural embeddedness of the reader" [2]. There needs to be some relevance to draw interest.

Now, drawing back to the comedian example, one can also understand the unnarratable and how an unnarratable topic can still become narratable if given a different outlook. Comedians do this all the time when they bring up common unnarratable events and give them a very narratable or relevant situation, which again, people find a common with.

In conclusion, its hard for myself to really understand the possibility of a unnarratiable subject due to the vast ways a narrator can tell a story. The only way for true unnarratibility would to have absolutely no knowledge or relevance to the story, which becomes quite hard granted all of the ways people communicate (whether it be phone, TV, Internet, etc.) as of today.


__________________________________________________________________



[1] Prince Gerald: “The Disnarrated”, Vol. 22, No. 1
(1988)

[2] Herman, Luc/Vervaeck, Bart: "Narrative Interest as Cultrual Negotiation", Vol. 17, No. 1 (2009)