During the course of my graduate work, I am seeing increasingly frequent mention of Joseph Campbell and his work in cultural mythology. An understanding of the Heroic Cycle is important for all storytellers, especially writers. However, Campbell’s work infers through its very existence that all humans share the ability to tell a story or at least recognize the elements of a good story. Certainly there are levels of sophistication and personal interest that affect how a story is told and received.
Campbell worked as a story consultant for George Lucas. He died in the mid/late 80’s, just about the time “Return of the Jedi” was being written. Prior to that, of course, Star Wars: A New Hope is a textbook example of the Heroic Cycle (no thanks to George Lucas, who might be a brilliant film-MAKER, isn’t a top notch writer*).
Looking at the original trilogy in a larger sense, A New Hope, The Empire Strikes Back and ever Return of the Jedi mark out a perfect three act structure, with the end of “Empire” being the “all is lost moment.” Vogler’s work by implication suggests that writers lack the natural and fundamental ability to tell a story, something inherent in all humans (it is memory and language, the combination of the two that make STORY – that make us human).
I was recently introduced to Christopher Vogler’s interpretation of Campbell’s work. I’m sure Vogler had the best of intentions when he set out on his quest to simplify something that’s not really simple, but I have to question his results.
I’ve seen hundreds of “whatever book for writers” and their simplicity and lack of originality shock me in nearly every instance. Vogler suggests that he “takes the [heroic cycle concept] out of the academic language” and makes it more accessible. ??Simplifying story-telling results in books and movies like “The DaVinci Code” and “Avatar;” Wildly popular, dreadfully predictable and ultimately poor examples of the writer’s craft. (Come on! You were thinking it in Avatar when you heard the word “Unobtanium” – you know you were!)
Further, I take issue with the idea that story can be reduced to a series of dots on a line. While I understand that structure is actually a side effect of the need for language to describe pieces of story (we do the same with art), I feel that structure as it’s being taught tends to become a crutch for the less inspired writer’s of the world.
As writers, if we can’t be bothered to study our classic literature, to analyze Homer and Sophocles (the world’s first depressed and moody artist) and to dig deep into the origins of myth and story telling, then perhaps we’re in the wrong line of work.
*Sorry George. You were the reason I went to film school. But those last three Star Wars films were pretty rough. People don’t always say what they feel. Is there such a thing as travel time in your universe? Anakin was a failure as a literary character because we didn’t care about his fall from grace. He was always tainted. That was un-epic.
