What do you think “narrativist” means?
Dec. 12th, 2017 02:52 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
madunkiegThe root-word of narrativist is narrative. Because of my training in narratology, I know that one meaning of narrative is that they follow one character. Stories contain one or more narratives. Thus a narrativist game deals with individual plots, rather than a story-based game which focuses upon one main plot. This also fits with the idea of players wanting more drama because conflicting goals creates just that. Or that's what I thought...
Edwards designed the narrativist genre to revolve around a premise. Later versions of narrativism would include thematic rules, morph the premise into an open-ended question, and recognize the beneficial effects of improvisation, but these were only small adjustments to a new way to play.
So, which one’s right? Both of them.
Everyone has their own definition of “narrativist.” Edwards, and a few others, tried to convince people of their own definition’s superiority. Their success helped turn an idea into a genre. I’m going to be studying that process, but that means recognizing other definitions as equally valid.
All of this is why I’m reading about Schleiermacher’s hermeneutics (academic-ese for interpreting language). It requires multiple readings of the threads to determine both the writer’s perspective and the different definitions of each word. Unfortunately, I’m not sure if Edwards and his friends took the same approach. I’ll just have to analyze the threads and see.
Edwards designed the narrativist genre to revolve around a premise. Later versions of narrativism would include thematic rules, morph the premise into an open-ended question, and recognize the beneficial effects of improvisation, but these were only small adjustments to a new way to play.
So, which one’s right? Both of them.
Everyone has their own definition of “narrativist.” Edwards, and a few others, tried to convince people of their own definition’s superiority. Their success helped turn an idea into a genre. I’m going to be studying that process, but that means recognizing other definitions as equally valid.
All of this is why I’m reading about Schleiermacher’s hermeneutics (academic-ese for interpreting language). It requires multiple readings of the threads to determine both the writer’s perspective and the different definitions of each word. Unfortunately, I’m not sure if Edwards and his friends took the same approach. I’ll just have to analyze the threads and see.