The Secret
Narrative theory studies the devices and conventions governing the organisation of a story into a sequence: for our film, The Secret, some narrative theories can be applied to a certain degree and some cannot be applied at all. For example, Barthes was a professor who unravelled texts and wrote about the process of doing so. He discovered that some texts can be considered open, being unravelled in many different ways and having many different meanings, and some can be considered closed, where there is only one obvious string to pull on. Barthes had 5 narrative codes, some of which can be applied to The Secret: the Hermeunatic Code is that which refers to the mystery of the text, which can be clearly seen in our film, as clues are dropped about the main character’s sexuality and we are aware that he has a secret which is gradually unveiled, however there is always an element of mystery throughout the plot. Another one of his codes includes symbolism, and how objects and events in the text can have a deeper meaning than what appears. This can definitely be applied to the film - many of our props, such as a key with a LGBT Pride flag on it, had symbolism of the main characters sexuality, as well as the name of his love interest (Taylor) which could have been a female’s name or a male’s name and so, it automatically took on a double meaning and brought an element of suspense and surprise. We also included points of cultural reference, which Barthes’ Code can be applied to, such as the relevant political discussion being played on the radio and the slang being used.
Another narrative theorist is Todorov, who theorised that a narrative will always begin with equilibrium, face disruption which leads to a series of events, then the problem will be resolved and a new equilibrium will be created (also known as a classic Hollywood narrative). However, this theory cannot be applied to The Secret as the disruption is present throughout the whole film, from start to finish, whether the audience is aware of it or not, and the film ends with a problem instead of a new equilibrium being restored (however, this is not a whole film and is intended to be the opening of a much longer film, so this is not the full plot of what the film should be.)
Vladimir Propp proposed the theory, whilst studying Russian fairytales, that every text will have 8 character roles, each of which has a sphere of action (i.e. the hero defeats the villain, saves the princess, marries her) which amounts to a total of 31 narrative functions carried out by all of the characters combined. In our film, this theory cannot be fully applied. There is a number of villains in the story, and although their character is obvious, their actions are not necessarily predictable. The main character may be viewed as a 'princess' character, who has to be saved from an extremely right-winged family and society, however, his love interest does not appear to be the hero. This means that not all of the characters roles are clear, as Propp theorised, and that not all of their actions will be predictible, however, this may lead to a better narrative as it can bring more suspense and surprise.
Binary oppositions are sets of opposite values which reveal the structure of media texts, and there are many binary oppositions present in our film. Firstly, there are visual examples, such as the characters clothes: the protagonist is wearing light, casual clothes whilst his sister (who is portrayed to be entirely different from him) is wearing smart, darker clothes. Next, there are contextual examples, many of which may take on a deeper meaning: the extreme left-wing views on the radio and from his sister, and the right-wing views of the two main characters, as well as the openness of Taylor with his sexuality (wanting to hold hands in public) as opposed to the closed off nature of Will, perhaps due to his environment. These examples can also be seen as Symbolic Code, whereas the binary oppositions act on a wider level to show deeper meaning. Binary oppositions, which propelled the narrative of our plot with constant creations of narrative, were studied and produced by Claude Levi-Strauss who also said that narrative can only end in a resolution of conflict. This cannot be applied to the Secret because, like with Todorov's theory (much like that of Syd Field and Robert McKee), this piece of a larger plot ends in conflict and equilibrium has not been restored, however, it may be that conflict could have been restored by the end of the full film and not just the opening.
As for Kate Domaille's theory that every story told can be fitted into 8 narrative types, The Secret complies with Romeo and Juliet (a love story where the two love interests struggle to end up with one another.) This is because Will and Taylor intend to end up together despite the obstacles they face, such as society's standards and the pressures of Will's family, however it is not a typical scenario because the two main characters have already met and have known each other for a period of time prior to the beginning of the plot.
As I said before, the plot of the film we created is part of an even larger plot, which was part of an even larger story. What we created introduced the story and set the scene for the rest of the film however it does not explain it all and leaves an air of suspense and mystery for the audience. The audience is forced to connect the clues in the story, such as the homophobic views playing on the radio, Will's sister joking and Taylor fighting with him over the situation, to assume that these events have happened numerous times before whilst also being able to find out more about the story that has occurred before the audience are introduced. Because this story is set in real time, it was never manipulated in order to aid the narrative, however, it could be said that the radio interview and the conversation between Taylor and Will are standing in for flashbacks, so that the audience can learn the background of the story and what has happened before, without the temporal order straying from being chronological. The radio clip, along with the language used, can also be seen as cultural code: this is when something is read with understanding due to cultural awareness for example, slang used among teens that the audience will understand, or landmarks in a country that the audience from there will recognise.
The introduction, up until Taylor is on video call, is a restricted narrative as the audience does not know what is happening, even when his name is revealed because at that point, his gender is still either unclear to the audience or they assume that it is a girl. This does not necessarily create suspense because at this point, the audience doesn't know that it will be an issue, however it gives a surprise to the audience whenever they see that Taylor is male. The suspense comes into play when the narrative becomes unrestriced, when the audience knows what Will's sister doesn't (his sexuality), and everything that is said brings on suspense and unsettlement in the narrative, which creates a disruption and therefore propels the narrative.
Lev Kushelov carried out an experiment where he showed people shots of an actor with food, a dead woman and a baby then asked an audience to interpret his expressions which were largely interpreted as hungry, sad and affectionate despite the fact that his expression remained constant throughout the shots. The Secret does not strongly portray this theory, however it can somewhat be linked, as the signs and clues are more obvious on the second viewing when Will's sexuality is known to the audience: the rainbow coloured keys and his texts are now signs of his "secret" and the clips playing on the radio are now viewed as being more detrimental to what Will is going through, as we now know that he is living in a society that does not accept him. Since the audience will always connect events to try and make sense of them, it works well that the shots are placed in this order, i.e. he walks in, texts Taylor, Facetimes him etc. and the viewer is not forced to make the mental jump from shot to shot if they were not linked (as Sergei Eisenstein believed was better), because there is already an air of mystery and the viewer is already trying to determine the answer through many other narrative devices such as binary oppositions, therefore it would not create a clear, structured narrative to have this happening.
Vladimir Propp proposed the theory, whilst studying Russian fairytales, that every text will have 8 character roles, each of which has a sphere of action (i.e. the hero defeats the villain, saves the princess, marries her) which amounts to a total of 31 narrative functions carried out by all of the characters combined. In our film, this theory cannot be fully applied. There is a number of villains in the story, and although their character is obvious, their actions are not necessarily predictable. The main character may be viewed as a 'princess' character, who has to be saved from an extremely right-winged family and society, however, his love interest does not appear to be the hero. This means that not all of the characters roles are clear, as Propp theorised, and that not all of their actions will be predictible, however, this may lead to a better narrative as it can bring more suspense and surprise.
Binary oppositions are sets of opposite values which reveal the structure of media texts, and there are many binary oppositions present in our film. Firstly, there are visual examples, such as the characters clothes: the protagonist is wearing light, casual clothes whilst his sister (who is portrayed to be entirely different from him) is wearing smart, darker clothes. Next, there are contextual examples, many of which may take on a deeper meaning: the extreme left-wing views on the radio and from his sister, and the right-wing views of the two main characters, as well as the openness of Taylor with his sexuality (wanting to hold hands in public) as opposed to the closed off nature of Will, perhaps due to his environment. These examples can also be seen as Symbolic Code, whereas the binary oppositions act on a wider level to show deeper meaning. Binary oppositions, which propelled the narrative of our plot with constant creations of narrative, were studied and produced by Claude Levi-Strauss who also said that narrative can only end in a resolution of conflict. This cannot be applied to the Secret because, like with Todorov's theory (much like that of Syd Field and Robert McKee), this piece of a larger plot ends in conflict and equilibrium has not been restored, however, it may be that conflict could have been restored by the end of the full film and not just the opening.
As for Kate Domaille's theory that every story told can be fitted into 8 narrative types, The Secret complies with Romeo and Juliet (a love story where the two love interests struggle to end up with one another.) This is because Will and Taylor intend to end up together despite the obstacles they face, such as society's standards and the pressures of Will's family, however it is not a typical scenario because the two main characters have already met and have known each other for a period of time prior to the beginning of the plot.
As I said before, the plot of the film we created is part of an even larger plot, which was part of an even larger story. What we created introduced the story and set the scene for the rest of the film however it does not explain it all and leaves an air of suspense and mystery for the audience. The audience is forced to connect the clues in the story, such as the homophobic views playing on the radio, Will's sister joking and Taylor fighting with him over the situation, to assume that these events have happened numerous times before whilst also being able to find out more about the story that has occurred before the audience are introduced. Because this story is set in real time, it was never manipulated in order to aid the narrative, however, it could be said that the radio interview and the conversation between Taylor and Will are standing in for flashbacks, so that the audience can learn the background of the story and what has happened before, without the temporal order straying from being chronological. The radio clip, along with the language used, can also be seen as cultural code: this is when something is read with understanding due to cultural awareness for example, slang used among teens that the audience will understand, or landmarks in a country that the audience from there will recognise.
The introduction, up until Taylor is on video call, is a restricted narrative as the audience does not know what is happening, even when his name is revealed because at that point, his gender is still either unclear to the audience or they assume that it is a girl. This does not necessarily create suspense because at this point, the audience doesn't know that it will be an issue, however it gives a surprise to the audience whenever they see that Taylor is male. The suspense comes into play when the narrative becomes unrestriced, when the audience knows what Will's sister doesn't (his sexuality), and everything that is said brings on suspense and unsettlement in the narrative, which creates a disruption and therefore propels the narrative.
Lev Kushelov carried out an experiment where he showed people shots of an actor with food, a dead woman and a baby then asked an audience to interpret his expressions which were largely interpreted as hungry, sad and affectionate despite the fact that his expression remained constant throughout the shots. The Secret does not strongly portray this theory, however it can somewhat be linked, as the signs and clues are more obvious on the second viewing when Will's sexuality is known to the audience: the rainbow coloured keys and his texts are now signs of his "secret" and the clips playing on the radio are now viewed as being more detrimental to what Will is going through, as we now know that he is living in a society that does not accept him. Since the audience will always connect events to try and make sense of them, it works well that the shots are placed in this order, i.e. he walks in, texts Taylor, Facetimes him etc. and the viewer is not forced to make the mental jump from shot to shot if they were not linked (as Sergei Eisenstein believed was better), because there is already an air of mystery and the viewer is already trying to determine the answer through many other narrative devices such as binary oppositions, therefore it would not create a clear, structured narrative to have this happening.
Comments
Post a Comment