Narrative Vs. Non-Narrative

A narrative is a chain of events, linked by cause and effect, that tells some sort of story. Wikipedia (trustful resource, I know) defines cause and effect as ‘the relation between an event (the cause) and a second event (the effect), where the first event is understood to be responsible for the second’. In film, can there even be such a thing as a non-narrative? In watching Daniel Askill’s, ‘We Have Decided Not To Die’ in the week 8 lectorial, the media students deliberated this question.

Most, if not all films can embody some form of meaning, a story or idea to be told even without cause and effect. Though we are able to utilise our own experiences in order to fill the gaps and decide what the film may be about (aka, “non-sequiter closure” from Scott McLeod’s ‘Blood in the Gutter’), a lack of causality typically leaves the audience to see the actions unfold, but struggle to find the connection in between. Therefore, ‘We Have Decided Not To Die’ probably suits a title such as experimental, abstract of avant grade film rather than narrative. We can understand that it is not a narrative, by looking at certain elements that are present in conventional narrative films. Our experiences are what tells us it is different. There is no explicit correlation between the three people in the film, and the shots do not seem to be done in any form of chronology (except for the text: birth, between and re-birth) but instead jump around a lot. Shots are also played backwards, forwards and repetitively which jolt the viewer. There also seems to be no point of conflict or emotional development or progression of characters.