One of the more curious elements of Adrian’s lecture was his discussion with a colleague of what “defines” a story. He used the analogy of our own lives as being somewhat ‘a story in the making’ rather than a tale with a start, middle and end. Adrian had come to the conclusion that a life of a human being is not a story because an ending remains to be written, thus the same can be said for narratives.
SO does that mean a story should always have a beginning and than a conclusion?
But what about the stories that remain ambiguous right to the last second? The stories that end without that ‘demanded’ closure. Are they not a narrative because they leave viewers or readers wanting more and searching for answers?
I just finished watching Richard Linklater’s “Before Sunrise” (1995) and if I was watching the movie in 1995, I think I would’ve gone mental over the ending of that film. Do they get back together? Does one of them get left waiting at the platform? Or are they both unwilling to take a chance and rekindle what they once had? All these questions would have been running throguh the minds of thousands of viewers including me. Yet is this not a story because we don’t know what happens next? Linklater teases us even more in the sequal “Before Sunset” (2004) and again in “Before Midnight” (2013), as the trilogy constantly leaves us guessing of which path the duos lives are going down.
My point is that I disagree of how anyone can truly define what a story is. Its ambiguity leaves us guessing and its ending provides us with a certain closure that most people crave. In essence, I believe a story is anything and anyone…thats the beauty of telling one.