The Science of Fiction
“A quest for an integrated theory of fictional narrative must begin by asking why human beings listen to and tell stories.”
“Fictional narratives expose us to what life’s concretes can teach us, without endangering our lives every minute of the ‘lesson.’ Ayn Rand has a different emphasis. She contends: ‘The primary value [of art] is that it gives him [man] the experience of living in a world where things are as they ought to be.”
“Higher the emotion and more frequent the changes in emotion, the more one is entertained. At first glance, this makes no sense, but we do seek entertainment that causes affect. We seek songs that induce sadness in us much more than music that does not move us at all.”
“Unless the artist wants to inculcate a sense of life characterized by ineffectualness, he will resolve the situation or conflict. Ironically, Aristotle is still the master most quoted at screenwriting school, even as Hollywood delves more frequently into unresolved drama. His words ring true: ‘[A] well-formed plot is therefore closed at both ends, and connected in between.’”
“Fictional narratives expose us to what life’s concretes can teach us, without endangering our lives every minute of the ‘lesson.’ Ayn Rand has a different emphasis. She contends: ‘The primary value [of art] is that it gives him [man] the experience of living in a world where things are as they ought to be.”
“Higher the emotion and more frequent the changes in emotion, the more one is entertained. At first glance, this makes no sense, but we do seek entertainment that causes affect. We seek songs that induce sadness in us much more than music that does not move us at all.”
“Unless the artist wants to inculcate a sense of life characterized by ineffectualness, he will resolve the situation or conflict. Ironically, Aristotle is still the master most quoted at screenwriting school, even as Hollywood delves more frequently into unresolved drama. His words ring true: ‘[A] well-formed plot is therefore closed at both ends, and connected in between.’”
The oldest known writing consists of inventories of goods. The Gilgamesh was written some 2000 years later.
Our "modern" languages are about 6000 to 8000 years old. Anthropologists theorize that language might be 100,000 years old, but offer little proof. We accept that our highly conceptualized thought expressions originate in animal calls. Ravens have over 30 "words" in three dialects -- or so I saw on Nova... But the distinct difference is that for us, the purpose of language is not communication. The purpose of language is to enable thinking. For that, we do have hard evidence, artifacts in clay. In fact, the oldest known clay artifacts are not pots and cups, but counters, abstract symbols for natural and artificial objects such as sheep and cloth.
The Savvy Street has good conservative credentials. If the original article had been written by Al Gore for Huffington Post, you would be less willing to endorse it without question. But it is highly questionable nonetheless. I point out that even ewv failed to challenge the claim that we are "hardwired" for stories, even though Objectivism demands very strong evidence for any human behavior that is alleged to be inherited.
- communication, the popular and usual idea of language
- problem solving, enabling construction of models in the mind to follow up logical consequences
- emotional relief, an important often ignored function of language
Have these functions always existed for humans?
Agreed, the study of language in animals gives insight.
Animals communicate to and with each other. They produce sounds and movements to
express emotion (when in isolation so there is no communication).
But do animals solve problems - yes, but with language?
Do animals tell stories? I think not. So how did story telling arise in humans?
Does story telling serve some evolutionary purpose?
That story telling started round a campfire is an easy explanation. It could have started by
describing a place where a herd passed by, or a thicket of berries, or a clean stream.
(re. the dance of bees!). Then language developed to discuss various
ways to get to that location, what weapons and containers to carry - thus problem solving.
Then, language developed to allow boasting, joking and so on (emotional relief).
When the group was tired, but before sleep overtakes, someone would tell a story unrelated to instructions or to problem solving, the story just holds the interest of the individuals as a group, its evolutionary purpose promotes group identity and cooperation.
This cooperation enabled humans to become better hunters than individual carnivores, cats,
and better than pack animals, wolves.
Conclusion-
Story telling is now essential in human life as it establishes effective work groups.
The entertainment and emotional enrichment are by-products.
Hardwired- no need to assume this.
Evidence- the proposition has been stated, does the evidence support or refute?
We are 'hardwired' with the ability and necessity to think. "Stories" are one form of that, with the content created by those who do the thinking. The cognitive role of fiction in its different forms is described in The Romantic Manifesto.
The article claiming to represent a "science of fiction" is not very good, including the strained rhetoric of referring to fiction as something called "virtual reality technology", but at least he knew to cite Ayn Rand's ideas on the subject.
I would contend that such has been around since the beginning of man, as within the art of conceptualizing fiction lies the heart of every inventor and scientist.
Take the Star Trek communicator, for instance. It was envisioned as a wireless communication device when common communications were still tied to cords and cables. It was very much science fiction at the time, but now it is science fact and commonplace. Space travel was conceived in the heart of a fiction writer far before NASA was ever created or launched their first satellite. And it can be argued that every other invention has precisely the same origin: fiction which then became realized.
I am adept at world building. That said, there is one aspect missing in the article that should have been stated as a purpose, the harbinger. As with my stories, most present a matured vision of things to come IF we do not change our current mindset and actions. I agree that people are hardwired to be receptive to stories but I also must contend that far too many content being spoon fed images and ideas rather than making the effort of and taking enjoying in the epiphany of connecting the intricacies of a plot themselves.
What might be? There is a hardly a "might be" to what I wrote anymore. Things today represent the equivalent of dotting the "i" or the crossing of the "t" i my stories and it scares the hell out of me.