Narrative often gets confused with plot and story, and honestly, I have made this mistake before as well. Today, I learned about the difference between the three, as well as the proper definitions.
Narrative is the way in which we receive a story. It can be watching a film or reading a book. It has also been described as “the art of storytelling”.
The plot is what is visibly and audibly presented and in what order.
The story is everything that happens in the narrative, as well as what we can infer or are referred to, for example sleeping and eating, which we can assume are included but are too boring and mundane to show in the plot.
There is also more than one type of narration – we learned about restricted and omniscient. Restricted narration is when we can see the event happening from one person’s point of view, which can add surprise as we discover things alongside them. An example of this is The Joker who is an unreliable narrator in the film. Omniscient narration is when there are multiple viewpoints and we are switching from one to another. An excellent example of this is Stranger Things, which uses this in a very clever way, building suspense as the audience learns information from each group of characters as a whole that individual groups have yet to find out. Keeping the audience one step ahead is what keeps them hooked, aching for the characters to find out and break the built-up suspense.
We can also refer to the order of events in different ways. A plot that moves forward in a straight line without flashbacks or digressions (beginning, middle, end) is called a linear narrative. This makes sense (linear line – straight line). Contrastingly, a non-linear narrative is a mixed-up timeline of events, often including flashbacks and flashforwards. A narrative device that is often seen in movies is parallel action, in which two scenes are observed as happening at the same time by cross-cutting between them. Multi narrative is when there are separate narratives, that often interlink in some way, with a focus on a particular character, place, or time. A movie I watched which is a good example of this is Mamma Mia 2 (Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again) in which our protagonist Sophie, grapples with running her mother’s villa while also expecting her first child. In the films, we see her learn more about her mother’s past and consequently, we understand how their lives reflect one another. The multi-narrative is used to switch between Sophie’s present and the time of her mum’s journey.
We also learned about the mode of address, which is the way the audience is addressed, including both visual and verbal methods. This has important implications, such as the way in which the audience responds to the text and can create different atmospheric effects. In Enola Holmes, a movie about Sherlock Holme’s sister, a direct address is used, sometimes Enola is quite literally speaking to us by talking to the camera. It makes us feel like we are there with her, solving the mystery and partaking in the adventure. The mode of address, in this case, draws you in and makes you a part of the story. Throughout the films, we also see newspaper clippings, maps, drawings, and other such things used to convey an idea or piece of information. This is a visual method of addressing the audience and not only adds to the atmosphere of the film, making for a more interesting output but also does important things like allowing the audience to process the information quicker. While on the topic of Enola Holmes, we can also discuss whether or not it had an open or closed ending (no conclusion or a satisfactory ending). This is really a matter of opinion because the mystery was solved and Enola and her mother met up again. On the other hand, and in my opinion, the ending could also be described as quite open, because a lot of questions were left unanswered, such as what Enola’s mother plans to do if Enola and the marquess will meet again, and what Enola’s future holds, having claimed that she will find her own path.
It was time for some theory! Vladimir Propp was a Russian formalist who studied fairytales and discovered that there were certain consistently repeating character roles within the stories. He called them character roles or spheres of action, one character can occupy several roles and not all characters have to be present. The eight roles that he found were the hero (leads narrative, seeks quest, etc.), the villain (sabotages hero’s goal, disrupts story, etc.), princess (prize or reward for the hero, can possess something caught after by the hero or villain), princess’s father (doesn’t have to be father, an authoritative figure), helper (supports hero, sidekick duties, etc.), donor (helps hero by providing something, object, information, etc.), dispatcher (teaches and guides hero), and finally the false hero (falsely assumes the role of hero). We were asked in our groups, to pick a movie and add characters to each role. Our group chose to do Shrek and we found that most of the characters fit more than one role. I thought that this movie fit Propps theory very well though, and I think that the reason for that was because the film is based on classic fairytales, like Rapunzel and Cinderella.
I wanted to try this task out for myself because there were so many films I had seen that had these roles and I found it quite interesting. For instance, I immediately thought of the animated series Avatar The Last Airbender when I learned of Propp’s theory. I decided, however, to use Maleficent: Mistress of Evil as my example, because I love the fact that Disney had taken a classic villain and showed their perspective to the audience, completely twisting the Sleeping Beauty story into something new and marvellous. I thought that this would be interesting to try and apply to the theory.
The Hero
For the hero, I had to go with Maleficent. I thought about picking Aurora but the story is really about Maleficent and her struggles within a world in which she is labelled a monster. She is the protagonist and carries the story. I found her redemption arc in the first film really interesting and I was quite curious to see what development she’d go through in the sequel – what dilemma would they chuck at our hero? She ends up discovering her roots and exploring her past, finding out who she is really and quite literally battling a monster at the end, which is all very hero-like. This is why I think she is perfect for the hero role.
The Villain
Now, this was an obvious one. Or was it? It is Maleficent’s very story that teaches us that the villain is really a point of perspective. To someone, the person that everyone thinks is evil may very well be a saint. But for Propp’s theory, the one who opposes the hero is the villain, and let’s be honest, we all hated her. She did some absolutely despicable things – Queen Ingrith. From the very start, there were some awfully obvious clues to her being an evil character, and this was confirmed when she started to irritate Maleficent and provoke a response out of her. Throughout the film, she grew steadily worse, each command from her more horrid than the next, intentionally framing Maleficent and committing downright murder. She was clearly trying to sabotage Maleficent with her misguided beliefs and lies, making her the antagonist and a clear villain.
One of the main reasons I love this film is that even though it is based on a fairytale, and can very much be applied to Propp’s theory, it is done in the opposite way to what we would expect. The opposite of the story of Sleeping Beauty, in which Maleficent is the villain and the royal family is all pure and innocent. This film spins all of that on its head. Look at the two images above. Without any content or knowledge of the story, who would you label the hero and villain? Obviously, side by side, Ingrith looks good and Maleficent looks positively evil, and there is such a side to her. This is because the Queen is always seen wearing white, a colour associated with purity, whilst Maleficent wears darker colours, and a lot of black, which makes her look evil when she actually isn’t. In the picture, I have used particularly, her costume design, horns, and grin all scream evil and that’s what I find so appealing; the message of the film is to not judge a person on the outside, that things are not always as they seem and that everyone has good and bad inside of them and it is a choice which side to listen to.
The Princess
An easy choice, of course, it is princess Aurora. She can be considered ‘a prize’ for the hero or even the Prince, although I don’t like to view her that way. The film definitely attempts to shy her away from looking like a reward, and she certainly has a distinct personality of her own, rescuing the creatures of the moors and trying to mend the broken bond between the human world and the magical world. Despite this, she still sits comfortably in the princess role, being the very person Maleficent, the hero, is fighting for. She also had something the villain wanted, at the start: a story. A story, which the Queen could very easily turn into a weapon to target Maleficent and all things ‘unnatural’. She never considered Aurora as her daughter, but as a pawn to use in her war. So, despite Aurora’s character being one to challenge how a princess is viewed, she is still used and treated as a pretty figurehead at least once in the film.
The Princess’s Father
My first thought for this one was King John because, in the end, he does become Aurora’s father and seemed like a very fatherly type – kind, generous, and understanding. However, Maleficent was definitely a viable candidate, being the princess’s parent figure and a very authoritative character in general. She raises Aurora as her own daughter and extends a hand toward the human kingdom for her sake. This is rather difficult though because the princess’s father is such a person for the sake of the hero or heroine. Usually, this would be a wizard or King, that helps the hero begin their quest. Maleficent is the hero, but she is like a mother and father to Aurora, who isn’t. Inevitability, I couldn’t pick and so nominated both for the princess’s father role.
The Helper
Now a helper is basically a sidekick. They offer the hero support and encouragement, and usually either contrast the protagonist or have a similar personality to them. My choice for this role is Diaval, who was established as Maleficent’s sidekick way back in the beginning of the first film. He mostly shares her beliefs and also wears dark colours like her, which instantly creates a link between them in the audience’s mind. However, he is also more soft-hearted and helps Aurora quite a lot, which again leads us to question whether she is a hero or not. I sill firmly believe that is Maleficent despite this, because she is the one who rescued and recruited him, and even if he is in a life-servitude, I think that he has grown to love both her and Aurora and would stay even if set free.
The Donor
I actually struggled quite a bit on this one because I was torn between the two dark fey besides Maleficent that are important to the story. Both give her something vital to her quest/journey and can be called donors in that sense, however one was more suited to the dispatcher role, so my decision for the donor would be Borra. I have seen Borra to be quite a controversial character, and also quite undermined because of it. He is, in a sense, Ingrith’s direct reflection. He opposes her beliefs but shares her hatred and methods, being violent for most of the movie. Ingrith believes the magical to be unnatural and wants to rid them of the world and steal their resources. In contrast, Borra believes the humans are unfair and egotistical, seeking only their destruction. They both want to end each other and wage a war that would not resolve anything. Whilst this is definitely true, and Borra serves the function of heightening the message that there is good and bad in each of us, and we are all the same no matter the background, he also serves a very important role in Maleficent’s story, and that is quite overlooked. Borra is the one who ignites a flame in Maleficent – a flame that she had buried and therefore allowed to build up inside her and take some very strong roots – a hatred for humans. A very justifiable hatred, towards those who view her as a monster and hate her home, the moors, and for those who betrayed her. A hatred, which she ignored, for the sake of Aurora. Borra is the character that tips her over the edge and reminds her where she is actually from, awakening an instinct to protect her own. If he hadn’t done this, if he hadn’t given her that realisation, she would never have made the right decision in the end. Maleficent learns that Aurora is her own, despite their differences, and accepts her magical family, the dark fey as well, unifying the two kingdoms and creating a bridge between the humans and moor folk. She wouldn’t have come to this place without Borra – instead her hate and hurt would only fester until she became too blind to see Aurora as her daughter and assume the monstrous label that Ingrith created for her.
The Dispatcher
Propp describes the dispatcher as one who teaches and guides the hero and sends them on their way. For this role, I could have chosen Borra, as he does send her on the battle in a way, referencing her unique powers from the moment he met her. However, I don’t think Maleficent’s decision to go was because of him, but because of Conall, who I chose as the dispatcher. Conall saved Maleficent when she was shot and dying and brought her to the hidden home of the fey, where he told her of their past and taught her about their ways. Through him, Maleficent learns about the source of her magic the oppression of the fey. Conall not only gifts her with knowledge but also assumes the role of her mentor, preaching peace and unity. Unfortunately, while this was the right path, Maleficent would not have found it with his beliefs just yet, she needed Borra to spur her incentive to. Conall’s death also played a major part in Maleficent’s persuasion. In the very powerful and emotive scene when Conall is dying by the and of the humans, he reminds Maleficent where she comes from and gives her his last remaining power, thus placing his belief and love to be a part of Maleficent. Thanks to Borra and Conall, she achieved her final form, accepting herself and her daughter.
The False Hero
I think that this role has mostly been abandoned in modern-day stories. I had a hard time deciding who falsely assumed the role of the hero in this movie because nobody really had the intent of placing themselves in Maleficent’s place. I settled on two characters, who both, in a way, can be described as a hero, albeit a false one. Firstly, Ingrith again, because throughout the movie, she was trying, and succeeding, at fooling everyone. Her “mask” or “protection” was righteousness and heroism, pretending to be the one who saves everyone from the evil fairy that poisoned her husband. Even at the end, in the battle, she clung to her belief that she was doing something good and being a hero for the world. I also believe that her son, Prince Phillip, can be said to be a false hero. Unlike his mother, he wasn’t pretending to be a hero and wasn’t after Maleficent’s position in any way, but in a sense, he was also fighting for Aurora. For his kingdom and father, yes, but also for Aurora, who is was to be his bride. Also, throughout the film, he did many things associated with the hero and being a courageous prince who stood by his beliefs even when he found out his own mother’s betrayal, he fits the role of hero quite well. Alas, he is not. In the original tale, he would be, but because Maleficent is the hero, I labelled him as the false one.
So there we have it, my take on Propp’s theory, with a film that I love! To conclude, I agree with Propp, and I certainly think his theory is valid in folklore and fairytales, as even modern spins on them are applicable, like my example. However, it cannot be said for all stories, especially now that people are branching out, changing things up, and exploring new ways of storytelling and presenting characters. We also have to consider their limitations. For example, the idea of there being a ‘princess’ that is the reward for the hero is very out of date and doesn’t fit in with the feminist views that society holds today. Women can fit into any role that men can, and this empowerment has led to the downfall of stories where the damsel is always being saved by a knight in shining armour. however, the fairytales where this happens are still beloved classics, and I am certain that there will be more films to come with them as inspiration, which tells me Propp’s theory will be used for a while yet.
Another theory we looked at was by the Franco-Bulgarian philosopher Tsvetan Todorov. I was quite thrilled to be learning about someone from a similar background to mine, and who shares my name! I also agree with Todorov’s theory, in which he proposed that all media texts have a recurring formula.
I am in agreement that most stories follow this structure. Sometimes it is in a different order, or certain parts are repeated, but in general, that is what we usually expect when watching a film or reading a book. Especially the ending. It is quite necessary to put emphasis on the ‘new’ in ‘new equilibrium’ because whilst the problem has been resolved, things can never be the same as they were before it. There has to be some change or difference to show progress. I think most films stick to this structure because it is quite familiar and therefore comfortable. The audience wouldn’t feel at ease if an entirely new structure was shown, because they wouldn’t understand it well. I also think that this method is proven to work well, and so is used again and again. It is a good way to show development in characters, when they face a problem, and also to present big ideas and concepts by choosing which problem to use. Periods of time in history, revolutions, important messages, anything really can be used to spread an idea, by plucking that period directly or using it as a base to build up a new story out of.
For the rest of the lesson, we took all of the knowledge we had acquired from the previous sessions, and this one, and applied it. As a class, we watched the first episode in a new series called Raised by Wolves, a sci-fi drama with a very interesting prospect on what the future will be like. With the deep themes of just the very first episode, there was a lot to analyze, which we did in a discussion. I contributed some of what I had found and taken note of in my document, and added ideas I agreed with.
