Two types of stories

(posted on 07/21/2011)

In a Face­book mes­sage this week, a friend asked, “Do you buy that there are only two types of fic­tion sto­ries: a stranger comes to town and a hero goes on a jour­ney?” I wrote back, “Yes and no. But it will take me longer to explain.”

This is my explanation.

First of all, any time you attempt to cat­e­go­rize art forms, you’re only look­ing for trou­ble, espe­cially since many artists live or die on their abil­ity to push beyond their audience’s pre-conceived notions of art. Tell an artist that there are only two types of any­thing and you’ll only inspire their next work of art, the one that says, “Oh yeah, well what about this?”

At the same time, the “stranger-comes/hero-goes” pair­ing com­mu­ni­cates a key ele­ment of (vir­tu­ally) any story — namely, that the story-world begins one way, and then some­thing hap­pens (in my creative-writing classes, we call this the incit­ing inci­dent). In a stranger-comes-to-town story, the “some­thing” is an exter­nal ele­ment that agi­tates the placid­ity of the story-world. In a hero-goes-on-a-journey story, the “some­thing” usu­ally forces the main char­ac­ter to depart from the placid world into the chaos beyond.

Here’s an inter­est­ing ques­tion: What kind of story is JAWS? It starts off as a stranger-comes story, with the shark play­ing the role of the stranger; but then Brody, Hooper, and Quint get on the boat, and it becomes a hero-goes story, with Brody play­ing the role of the hero. Should there be a third kind of story then? One that com­bines the other two?

Return­ing to my “first of all,” com­ment above, I don’t believe that the “stranger-comes/hero-goes” pair­ing defines the only two types of sto­ries (though with enough effort, a critic could prob­a­bly squeeze most sto­ries into either of those cat­e­gories). I’d rather sim­plify that pair­ing and say instead:

There are only two types of stories:

  1. Sto­ries in which some­thing sig­nif­i­cant happens
  2. Sto­ries in which some­thing sig­nif­i­cant does not happen

The for­mer is self-explanatory, but the lat­ter needs a lit­tle help. Allow me to enlist the words of Mark O’Connell, who just wrote an arti­cle titled, “On Not Going Out of the House: Thoughts About Plot­less­ness.”

The form [of the novel] tends to deal in sto­ries, in nar­ra­tives, in plots—which is to say that it con­cerns itself, by and large, with what hap­pens when people…go out of the house. The great nar­ra­tives are all about men and women going out­side and hav­ing things hap­pen to them.…but there is a small but fas­ci­nat­ing niche…, a sort of quiet back­street in the vast, hus­tling metrop­o­lis of fic­tion, where noth­ing ever hap­pens and no one ever goes anywhere.

O’Connell explores the books that make up this quiet back­street, nov­els by John Banville, Samuel Beck­ett, Ivan Gon­charov, and Nichol­son Baker. He then concludes:

The attrac­tion of plot­less­ness in fic­tion is less easy to account for than that of plot­less­ness in life. There is an awful lot to be said for a propul­sive narrative—it is, after all, usu­ally what keeps us turn­ing the pages, what keeps us com­ing back to find out what hap­pens next, how the char­ac­ters develop, how it will all end. But when a writer man­ages to cut away all this arti­fice, leav­ing us with just the raw pulp of per­son­hood, while still com­pelling us to read on, it is a fas­ci­nat­ing trick to pull off.

For my own part, I am inspired by the idea of the plot­less novel, but less as a fan of the genre and more as a philoso­pher of force and form. In fact, one of my works in progress is an attempt to write a story where “some­thing sig­nif­i­cant” both hap­pens and doesn’t hap­pen, where the “plot points” are present yet invis­i­ble, hap­pen­ing and not hap­pen­ing, except in the reader’s head.

Which is to say, as an artist, I’m inspired and chal­lenged by my own the­ory of the two types of story.

So, to my friend who asked the orig­i­nal ques­tion, I both believe and dis­be­lieve in the “stranger-comes/hero-goes” the­ory. I think it gets close to the heart of our under­stand­ing of story, but in its attempt to reduce the art of fic­tion, it only inspires us to cre­ate, as the great Jack Don­aghy said, that “third heat.”

(something to add? Tell me on Twitter)