I learn by making distinctions (stories vs. reports; coaching writers vs. fixing stories). I'm playing with a new one, and could use your help in working through it. Let's imagine two distinctive types of narrative. For shorthand, I'll call one a WHAT narrative; and the other a HOW narrative. A WHAT narrative creates a narrative line based on a relentless sequence of scenes, a "what happens next" momentum. We keep reading because the end is in doubt: Does the patient live or die?
In a HOW narrative, the reader knows the outcome before the story begins. In "Romeo and Juliet," for example, the audience knows, in the first 14 lines, that the death of the teenage lovers ends the feud between their families. But you still need to experience the play to discover HOW this came to pass.
I've recently read
"The Looming Tower," by Lawrence Wright, an amazing narrative that provides a long prologue to the events of 9/11. The book ends when the planes hit the towers, but the story reveals HOW this came to pass, beginning with events in 1948.
How did that happen? versus
What happens next?It may be possible that when we read a book or see a movie more than once, we come to learn the outcome and convert WHAT narratives into HOW narratives. In other words, we know how all the love connections come out in the film "
Love Actually," but continue to enjoy the HOW of the story.
Help me explore this distinction. Can you think of examples of these two kinds of narratives? Have you ever written a HOW narrative?
Here's another classic example -- Tolsoi's Anna Karenina. The first...