The Guardian carries an excellent piece today by veteran screenwriter and filmmaker Paul Schrader (“Taxi Driver”) which offers a different take on the issue of Hollywood’s current penchant for narrative recycling — that the increasing number of media formats contributing to daily life is limiting our capacity for fresh stories.
His argument is that, with everything from Twitter to YouTube to reality TV supplying us with a consistent feed of mini-narratives, it’s harder for the less spontaneous medium of feature film to maintain a sense of innovation:
Writers have always known there are a limited number of storylines … We do tell variations of the same stories over and over. That’s not what I mean by the “exhaustion of narrative”. What is new is the omnipresence and ubiquity of plot created by media proliferation. We are inundated by narrative. We are swimming in storylines.
Originality has always been in short supply. Does the proliferation of media mean that it is harder to be original today than it was 50 years ago? Well, yes. Today’s viewers live in a biosphere of narrative. Twenty-four-seven, multimedia, all the time. When a storyteller competes for a viewer’s attention, he not only competes with simultaneously occurring narratives, he competes with the variations of his own narrative. That’s real competition. The bar of originality has been raised. The media marketplace puts a premium on anything “new” or “fresh” and, at the same time, inundates its viewers with continual and competing narratives.
Schrader goes on to offer a selection of responses to this challenge, ranging from reality TV (no, thank you) to historical reenactments to the create-your-own-narrative possibilities of video games, all of which he believes counter the contrivances of conventional narrative cinema. None of these strike me as especially desirable solutions — but then I tend to believe that good writing can compensate for any amount of narrative familiarity. (Witness how “The Hurt Locker” plays compellingly within the boundaries of classic war-film storytelling.)
Nonetheless, it’s an intelligent piece that offers real insight into the doubts and insecurities plaguing the contemporary screenwriter, even one as accomplished as Schrader.
On a side note, Schrader’s piece neatly ties in with this Slate article about a TV reality show successfully defying its own narrative limitations in its 17th season. I must confess to having only faintly heard of “The Real World/Road Rules Challenge,” much less having watched it, but it’s interesting to read the amount of brazen writerly ingenuity that goes into sustaining a trashy formula TV show. Perhaps the Hollywood minds behind such Hollywood rehashes as “Wolverine” should be taking notes.
Comments
5 responses to “Exhaustion of narrative”
***Paul Schrader (”Taxi Driver”)***
It should be Paul Schrader (“Mishima: A Life in Four Chapters”). The knowledge of that movie must not fade.
No disagreement there. But I reached for the obvious for the sake of any readers who might not recognise the name. (Not too many of those, I should hope.)
Thanks for pointing out this article. I shall read the whole thing. I’ve always liked Schrader and I think he talks a good deal of sense.
And, I agree about Mishima. Great film.
He does make interesting points, and I agree that coming up with fresh narratives are harder. And that’s okay. Like you said, good writing should compensate, and I feel that THAT is never in short supply. More likely, it’s bravery on the part of the major studios that is most lacking.
There will always be great books to adapt. I understand the concern with original narratives. But there are plenty of great original writers.