David Mamet (author of The Verdict and Glengarry Glen Ross, among other fine things) writes this in his new book Bambi vs. Godzilla: On the Nature, Purpose, and Practice of the Movie Business (a great book just loaded with great snark:
As we enter the cinema, we relax our guard. We do so necessarily, because to resist, to insist on reality in the drama, is to rob ourselves of joy.
For who would sit through he cartoon thinking constantly, "Wait a second, elephants can't fly!"
Politicians (notably the right, in both America and Britain) have cannily understood this suspension of disbelief and have, since World War II, staged their political campaigns as dramas, with themes, slogans, inflammatory appeals, and villains.
The approach has put their opponents at an unfortunate disadvantage; for while the right is staging a thriller, their opponents are stuck presenting a lecture (the preferred tool of the left).
Ouch -- it always leaves a mark when you get smacked so accurately.
Comments
View as Flat
Jon Rynn Posted 11:33 am
09 Aug 2007
At the end of the movie, the hero figures out that, in his words "we don't need you, you need us!", and the ants rise up to overthrow their overelords. All from the Disney Liberation Front.
Permalink
JMG Posted 11:44 am
09 Aug 2007
Save the world: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions 5% annually.
Permalink
Jon Rynn Posted 12:11 pm
09 Aug 2007
but the most relevant genre, it seems to me, is the horror flick, or monster flick. It's just like global warming/peak oil/etc.: an individual/group of people find out that there is a threat, nobody believes it for the first half of the movie, then people finally believe the heroes, and the rest of the movie is about defeating the monsters. Except we are all in the first part of the movie, and instead of a way cool monster, there is the banality of unconscious economic growth.
Permalink
Peter Madden Posted 9:29 pm
09 Aug 2007
I can't say I've mastered this yet, but three resources that I've found very useful are:
Christopher Booker's The Seven Basic Plots. A long read, so dip in or read the reviews. He argues that there are basic archetypal stories - rags to riches; the quest; voyage and return; the hero as monster; rebirth and so on - which fulfil psychological needs and which form the basis of much of our literature, films etc.
Steve Denning's stuff on storytelling in organisations or see a related UK site
http://www.storytellinginorganisations.org.uk/
And the work of Chris Rose, who used to be Director of Campaigns at Greenpeace UK and now advises on communication and campaigning. He stresses the need to tell stories of good and evil, with heroes and villains. He has a website http://www.campaignstrategy.org/ which is full of good tips.
Permalink
ac5p Posted 12:27 am
10 Aug 2007
He argues that the emotion-heavy soft touch campaign commercials are able to gain support from voters based on appeals outside of reason. The goal is not to emulate these commercials, but to have the dialog (needs to be two way) between candidates/issues and the public to be carried out in a different medium. He argues that the newspapers worked better because it was in print and people could write back. Radio was not so good. TV is horrible. But the internet, and blogs, in particular, are a big step in the right direction.
Permalink
David Roberts Posted 2:40 am
10 Aug 2007
Not sure what to do about it.
grist.org
Permalink
JMG Posted 2:56 am
10 Aug 2007
But Grist could certainly run a pro-environment story contest, providing space for short-short stories (under 1000 words), short stories of up to X000 words, and longer works (short novels). Provide the server space, arrange for some of the many gifted Seattle-based authors to make the picks, give away some prized (how about some BIKES and electric scooters this time, not damn hybrid SUVs).
Save the world: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions 5% annually.
Permalink
trock Posted 3:13 am
10 Aug 2007
Permalink
David Roberts Posted 3:20 am
10 Aug 2007
It just means fitting political reality into a coherent narrative with a recognizable arc and recognizable characters. For instance, the Bush administration sold the Iraq war by telling a story: a bad man was amassing weapons, getting ready to share them with our enemies, but by acting quickly we could defeat him and replace his empire of evil with a democracy of freedom.
It was nonsense, of course, but the point is, it was a compelling story. It's something that resonates with everyone, even people with no understanding whatsoever of the empirical details or policy implications.
We ought to be able to tell a compelling story about how humanity can free itself from dumb, brute force industry and learn to live smarter, cleaner, more pleasant lives, lives that enrich rather than depleting the earth's web of life.
Obviously I suck at this stuff, but somebody needs to do it.
grist.org
Permalink
JMG Posted 3:25 am
10 Aug 2007
"Practice, practice, practice."
DR, I get the difference between telling stories and creating compelling meta-narratives. But perhaps rather than throwing up your hands and saying "somebody really oughta" you could use the platform to provide people with opportunities to practice the arts. Storytellers are made, not born.
Save the world: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions 5% annually.
Permalink
Jon Rynn Posted 3:35 am
10 Aug 2007
Permalink
sunflower Posted 4:01 am
10 Aug 2007
It could be green oxygen supporting all life or purple hydrogen sulfide suffocating all life.
Permalink
GreenMom Posted 4:29 am
10 Aug 2007
The first half is coal and oil, and the narrative is along the lines of The Lorax (beautiful abundance, then overconsumption, then devastation). Maybe it features endangered snowmen, like in the debate.
But the happy ending is the second half -- wind farms, solar panels, and electric cars. Forests and polar bears. The snowmen survive.
Think we could flesh it out and plug it to Disney or Pixar?
Permalink
PermieWriter Posted 5:40 am
10 Aug 2007
Then there is Story, as in the story we are telling ourselves as we do what we do. Daniel Quinn has a lot to say about that. So does George Lakoff.
Our stories shore up our Story. We listen to the stories that support what we are telling ourselves as our Story. But stories can also shift the Story, I believe, if it's done right. That's an epic task, and one that needs doing greatly. I only have the vaguest notion about how to go about it.
Eat what you grow, grow what you eat
Permalink
jex Posted 10:19 pm
13 Jan 2008
Permalink
maladapted Posted 3:38 am
14 Jan 2008
Permalink