Weeeeeeeeewwwwww, I pride myself on my reading, it is one of my biggest hobbies, however this chunk from Ryan had me flicking through my dictionary at almost every line.

I quite honestly, had a hard time getting my head around it and deducing what was being said – let alone constructing my own opinion. However, what I gathered led me to be divided upon Ryan’s contention. I believe that narrative is an overused and often abstract term to easily describe something which perhaps is not. However, I don’t believe that it has such strict constraints, that must tick some dot-points. In particular I don’t believe something can not be a narrative if it is a “bad story” or consists exclusively of mental events.

Which takes me to the point on which I am most divided upon – that is of narrative being narrative as a “dimension relative to the context and interests of the participants”. I.e something that takes form only through subjectivity. I err on the side of believing this not to be true. I believe that a narrative can exist without intention, context or the interest of participants. I don’t know why and I don’t think I can express myself quite in the same eloquent, complex yet succinct way as Ryan but I believe that there is potential for (lack of a better word) an objective narrative to exist.

Square 1 from Grace Lovell on Vimeo.