Scotness wrote:steve hyde wrote:....I'm reading "Waiting for Godot". I've read Act # 1 with much interest. It is really funny!!!
Steve
That's cool - make sure you tell us what you think when you've finished - particularly in relation to this
Scot
I appreciate your skepticism and approach these texts with quite a bit of skepticism myself. I have to take a step back and ask myself the *value* of these texts that all place emphasis on Joseph Campbell’s ideas. Personally, I hold Campbell’s work in high regard so I’m not comfortable writing it off as crap. I think mythic structure is well worth discussing here. Since I first posted this topic, I have learned that screenwriting software companies are building their software on this so-called “heroe’s journey†business, which makes me, and should make everyone, that much more skeptical. However, for the purposes of this conversation, I will maintain the argument that there is a difference between form and formula. An interesting idea is an interesting idea regardless of the story form used to articulate it. I hear critics tear movies apart by basing their critique on the plague of the formulaic script and I’ve come to read that as lazy criticism.
As a starting point, to make sure we are all on the same page, I should probably unpack the word “hero†and offer (a) definition. Hero is simply a Greek word that means “to serve and protectâ€Â. A hero is someone who is willing to sacrifice his/her own needs on behalf of others. The Hero archetype is a representation of the ego’s search for identity and wholeness. The hero is on a mission to become a complete human being. The hero is the central character of any story – another word for protagonist. A writer can essentially make a hero (or anti-hero) out of anyone. An anti-hero is a central character that seeks to serve and protect ones own needs and wants rather than others.
As you say, if one wants to, one can pick out the archetypes in most stories and trace a “heroe’s journeyâ€Â. In “Waiting for Godot†we have two heroe’s (waiting) – they have refused the “call to adventureâ€Â, they meet a mentor (Pozzo) who influences the heroe’s to take an inward adventure. The heroe’s question and transform and then tragically find themselves waiting beneath the tree again. Samuel Beckett’s story makes use of biblical mythologies and mythic archetypes. I could try to unpack them here to make this point and perhaps that would be a productive direction to take in this conversation,
but instead I think we should put our energy into discussing the many ways that archetypes and mythic structure do their work in the universal language that is cinema. “Waiting for Godot†is an excellent piece of dramatic writing that does not resolve. I have never seen the play performed, but I loved the script and found the story challenging to interpret. (apparently I’m not alone based on what I’ve read about its interpretations)
I’m most compelled to write on what you said about theme and about using characters to develop theme and idea. I agree that mythic structure should come after theme and idea. Theme and idea are the most important elements of any story. Dramatic stories must have action. Good drama is propelled by action, therefore every writer must have a strong sense and comprehensive understanding of what the story *action-idea* is so that it can be developed through character interactions. In Andrei Tarkovsky’s “Sculpting in Timeâ€Â, he says the most difficult task for a filmmaker is maintaining sharp focus on what he calls “conceptâ€Â. It is easy to let work sprawl. I use the term “action-idea†for what I think Tarkovsky calls concept.
I tried to unpack this notion of action-idea in the thread titled The Multiple Layers of Story where I argued *lying* was the action-idea that motivated the story and helped make it coherent and meaningful.
viewtopic.php?t=10093
Maybe we should begin by discussing theme and idea. How are theme and idea best developed in a story? I think we will all agree that character interaction is the key, but how do we write character interactions in a way that connects? I think we will inevitably return to archetypes and “heroe’s journey†will always be there.
Why are there so many stories of the hero in mythology, novels and films? Joseph Campbell would say – “because that’s what’s worth writing about.†In fact, when I stop to think about your own feature film “In My Image†– I’m reminded that you wrote about a heroes journey yourself……
I do not agree with the notion that we should try to put “heroe’s journey†ideas out of our mind if we can. I totally disagree. We should be embracing it and discussing the ways we can use it to convey our ideas and themes in ways that are authentic, original and culturally relevant.
Thanks for joining the conversation and thanks so much for recommending "Waiting for Godot". It inspired me. I see Nathan has just had the chance to see a production of it.
Cheers,
Steve
Edit: added a transitional phrase in green
