4 ms·

The problem with that point of view is that you can find a conflict everywhere if you try hard. For a definition, like "conflict", to be useful it must be clear

• TheOtherHobbes 9y ago
  That's because 'conflict" - which is a requirement first described by Aristotle - is being poorly defined. Western conflict is psychological and heroic. A jarring or unexpected element in the text is not enough. The standard pattern is that the protagonist encounters challenges, and either overcomes them through heroic effort, bravery, and self-discovery - or (less often) is destroyed by them. The prototype is martial and egotistical, in that the plot revolves around the protagonist's goals and actions. External influences are either enemies, helpers, or ambiguous distractions, as seen from the protagonist's point of view. Kishōtenketsu seems to have a more meditative and less confrontational approach. The protagonist is one character among many. They encounter other characters of equal interest and value. These other characters are not compressed into the enemy/helper dichotomy. Similarly, situations are unexpected but may be neither harmful nor helpful. This seems less abstracted and closer to real life, where other people and events are just there without having to be shoehorned into positive or negative roles within our personal dramas. I suppose Western audiences have set expectations, and it's not obvious that plots that take this approach will satisfy them. But it would still be interesting to see where this plotting style could lead in a Western context.