3 ms·

I personally see a danger in over-narration. History and journalism alike are written by people trained to be storytellers. But why should there be an overarchi

by jl6 13y ago

I personally see a danger in over-narration. History and journalism alike are written by people trained to be storytellers. But why should there be an overarching story? The real world is messy and rarely breaks down into simple, digestible narratives. There is no beginning, middle and end. There are no villains or heroes. There are, at best, subplots. Trying to connect the dots is what fuels conspiracy theories - which are typically compelling because we believe deeply that somebody has to be in control somewhere, that there has to be order behind the chaos. Perhaps there are patterns if not stories. Perhaps statistics could tell the story properly, if we had any good data (we don't). History stories typically gloss over nuance, with the aim of producing a more manageable summary. In the local dialect, you might call them the ultimate leaky abstraction. I don't have any solutions so mope over!

humanrebar 13y ago
I had a similar thought. Important events are already ignored or downplayed because they don't "fit the narrative". Also, different media outlets are fishing for different narratives. I would argue that the balkanization of news exists because we're already looking to apply narratives. It's just that different news outlets have different narratives and people listen to the narratives they think they like.
igravious 13y ago
> But why should there be an overarching story? I think that I can answer your question. Bear with me. I think the reason stems from the same place why Jesus shared his worldview through parables (for instance), and why Orwell and Huxley outsell Nietzsche and Bentham. I think that narrative is a very effective way to get a point across, and it also may be how we (as cognitive beings) are fundamentally wired. Did you ever stop to think that your life which appears to have a coherent narrative thread only appears so because you internally and involuntarily constantly construct and reconstruct this narrative thread overlaid on the messy indigestible complex fragments of your existence. Like the persistence of vision allows the discrete frames blend into continuity. The pattern is us.

by jl6 13y ago

humanrebar 13y ago

I had a similar thought. Important events are already ignored or downplayed because they don't "fit the narrative". Also, different media outlets are fishing for different narratives. I would argue that the balkanization of news exists because we're already looking to apply narratives. It's just that different news outlets have different narratives and people listen to the narratives they think they like.

igravious 13y ago

> But why should there be an overarching story? I think that I can answer your question. Bear with me. I think the reason stems from the same place why Jesus shared his worldview through parables (for instance), and why Orwell and Huxley outsell Nietzsche and Bentham. I think that narrative is a very effective way to get a point across, and it also may be how we (as cognitive beings) are fundamentally wired. Did you ever stop to think that your life which appears to have a coherent narrative thread only appears so because you internally and involuntarily constantly construct and reconstruct this narrative thread overlaid on the messy indigestible complex fragments of your existence. Like the persistence of vision allows the discrete frames blend into continuity. The pattern is us.