——Gérard Genette
—
As Genette said in "The Narrative Discourse", when we hope that theory will serve commentary, we will involuntarily Let comments serve theory. It can be said that it is in the interactive relationship between theory and commentary that the two sides advance separately and develop together. Therefore, the writing of this article is not a single use of theory to discuss the specific art text to be reviewed, but to review the text while also thinking about the theory itself, so as to better understand the connotation and extension of the theory through a critical practice.
This article will take Prop's "seven action categories" and "six narrative units" as the main narrative model, Greimas's meaning matrix and the five codes proposed by Roland Barthes in "S/Z" as The theoretical basis is to understand structuralist narratology by taking Michael Haneke’s film "Fun Game" (1997 edition) as a concrete example.
Two
narrative analysis of the "fun game" at first sight Propp seven "action category" not suitable. Abandon our preconceived notion that Michael Haneke’s films are far from Russian folk fairy tales. Not to mention the concepts of "benefactor", "princess", and "fake hero" make it difficult for us to play in "Fun Games". Find a one-to-one correspondence in the image. But if we extend the meaning of these seven "action categories" to a breadth that is more suitable for the current understanding, a relative correspondence and understanding can still exist.
The "bad guys" in the film "Fun Game" obviously refer to Paul and Tom, and also refer to the current era of popular culture or the destruction or persecution of human nature caused by some malpractices in the capitalist society.
"Benefactor" in this film can be broadly understood as "dead", "deceived" or "castrated image". The "deceased" can correspond to the Fleet family, the neighbors who were killed when the son went for help; the "deceived" can correspond to the Laub family. Although they are able to help, they have been deceived from beginning to end; "being deceived" The "castrated image" refers to Joe, who was supposed to be a benefactor to help and save the family, but at the beginning of the film, he was interrupted and became a full "castrated image." It can be seen that the "benefactor" in this film is in a critical state of disappearance, and the image that could have become a "benefactor" has not played the role of "benefit" due to various reasons.
The function of "helper" in Prop's concept is slightly different from that of "benefactor", who tends to give assistance at a "special moment". Since all plot points in need of rescue in this film can be understood as "special moments" in need of rescue, "helpers" and "benefactors" in this film can be understood as having roughly the same function, that is, "benefactors". It is a "helper" or there is neither a "benefactor" nor a "helper".
"Princess" is missing in this film. The "princess" is not only the object sought by the opposing parties, but also the externalization of their inner motives. But the director in this film deliberately hides Paul and Tom's motives for committing the crime (but it is precisely because of this hiding that makes this film a stronger irony).
"Dispatcher". If you have to find an image as a "dispatcher" in this film, undoubtedly the whole social environment in which the characters are located can be regarded as a big "dispatcher". But obviously the "dispatcher" here is different from the positive "dispatcher" in Russian folktales, because it is a negative image that should be criticized (here it is easy to think of the influence of Western Marxism on capital Criticisms and reflections on the social forms of socialism).
"hero". In this film, the father, mother and son all have the opportunity to play the role of "hero", but in the end they all become "victims."
"Fake heroes" are a unique image of Russian folktales. If we have to understand Paul and Tom as a kind of "fake heroes", the reason is that what they do may be "heroic" in another society. In terms of the guidelines, there is obviously a suspicion of copying them mechanically.
After defining the characters, we are here to use Prop's six narrative units to explain the story of the film.
Unit 1, Preparation:
The first three points of the preparation unit are not available in this film. The preparation stage of the film started with "the bad guys are trying to spy on intelligence" and "the bad guys got some intelligence." Tom used the egg as an excuse to successfully inquire about the intelligence that "no one will visit Joe's family today" and got wet. Joe’s wife’s mobile phone fulfilled the function of “the bad guy tried to deceive the victim to control him or his possessions.” When his wife and Paul went to the dock to meet with the neighbors Robert’s family, the wife’s concealment of the truth was realized again. "The victim should be deceived to help the enemy" this function.
Unit Two, Disputes:
In Unit Two, "the bad guy hurts a family member" is reflected in Paul breaking his father's leg, and "a family member needs or desires something" is reflected in the Joe's eagerness to escape this danger. The appearance of subsequent heroes is not reflected in this film.
Unit three, transfer and unit four, confrontation:
Since the "hero" identity in this film is more of a "victim" image, although everyone has resistance, such as the son and mother running away for help, the father calls the police at home. But all attempts to resist ended in failure.
Unit 5, Return and Unit 6, Acceptance:
The two units here do not have a one-to-one correspondence in this film. This is because most of the stories corresponding to Prop’s model are the happy ending of justice over evil, and this film Obviously, the ending cannot be expressed as "reunion".
By borrowing the Prop narrative model, we find that this model is a product of induction and summary of Russian folk tales. When applying stories in other cultural contexts, its limitations are undoubtedly revealed. Among them, the most important One of the reasons is that not all stories have a reunion model that ends in punishing evil and promoting good. This also shows that the Prop model applies to a single story type; but at the same time, its partial application also shows In different periods, people in different cultures have similar ways of thinking and willingness to express when weaving stories. This may be due to the inherent or transcendental structure of human beings (similar to Kant’s transcendental philosophy or Hussein’s A priori logic). As far as narratology is concerned, Propp’s model is somewhat powerless and hindsight when revealing the connotation of the story. Similar to this, we think that Tsvetan Todorov’s "balance/destroy" model is the same as that of Crow. De Bremont’s “branch structure model” is the same as Prop’s model, which belongs to the “summary/interpretative” narrative model. It reveals that the purpose of story types is greater than the purpose of explaining the connotation of specific stories. This problem lies in Gray Maas has been relatively resolved in his meaning matrix. (Since the matrix format cannot be uploaded, it is omitted.)
Third,
through the establishment of these two "Greymas meaning matrices", we found that there are actually only two opposing parties in the film, namely, the opposition between the Joe family and Paul and Tom. The establishment of matrix one is based on the external plot action of the story, and the establishment of matrix two is based on the internal motivation of the characters' actions. Whether it is matrix one or matrix two, whether it is from external behavior or internal motivation, we will find the very complex human characteristics embodied by the two characters Paul and Tom. On the one hand, they seem to be polite young people in society, and on the other hand, they are cold-blooded killers that normal members of society can hardly agree with.
These two sets of meaning matrices not only let us understand the story clues of "Fun Game", but more importantly, they let us understand the social and human reflections shown in the film. Whether it is Benjamin, Marcuse or Fromm, these Western Marxist scholars have deeply reflected and criticized the various drawbacks of capitalist society. For example, Marcuse pointed out that the “consumption control” of capitalism has turned people into “one-dimensional people”. What people need is no longer what they need internally, but the consumer society forces people to feel what they need. Man regards this "false pursuit" as a "real pursuit" so that he becomes a deformed and alienated person; in addition, Marcuse is absorbing Freud's instinct about life and death (attack Instinct) points out that it is the repression of human lust in capitalist society that has fostered human "aggression." People’s alienation and growing aggressiveness, aren’t these exactly what we have seen from Paul and Tom? Among the many functions of art, the criticism and reflection on the external society is undoubtedly an important one. Looking at Michael Haneke’s films, from "Glacier Trilogy" to "Fun Game", from " From "The Age of the Wolf" to "The Piano Teacher", from "Hidden Camera" to "White Ribbon", Michael Hanek has always expressed his strong criticism of the themes such as the alienation of human nature by society in a cold image style. .
We believe that the significance of Greimas’s meaning matrix is not to interpret the external clues of the story, but to enable the audience to understand the profound connotations conveyed behind the surface of the story through it. • Todorov's "summary/interpretative" narrative model is different from that of Claude Bremont, we call it the "understanding/interpretative" narrative model.
As a typical representative of the structuralist narrative model, Greimas's meaning matrix is obviously using a synchronic and universal perspective to examine the deep structure behind the story. Although this structuralist narrative thought influenced by Saussure and Jacobson can effectively solve many problems, in the eyes of post-structuralist or deconstructive philosophers, this kind of dualism is established as a standard. The structural model of is obviously inconsistent with the truth of the world. After all, in the eyes of deconstructionists, the signifier and the signified are not stable, but a discrete or extended relationship. The five text codes proposed by Roland Barthes in "S/Z" can be said to be a manifestation of narratology from structuralism to post-structuralism.
4.
First of all, it is necessary for us to re-discuss and define the specific uses of the five Roland Barthes codes. This is because many people have different understandings of them (we do not expect to be able to make an interpretation that is absolutely in line with Roland Barthes' original intentions. , This is obviously impossible in an absolute sense, and it is not the original intention of this article to spend a lot of time on this. This code itself, but a re-understanding of it in a relatively practical sense is still very necessary for our next work).
"Hermeneutic code" (hermeneutic code). Roland Barthes said in "S/Z": "Expressing questions in different ways, answering questions, and forming or brewing questions, or delaying answers to all kinds of opportunities, such as all the units of this function, we call them interpreters Code." Zhu Liyuan pointed out in "Contemporary Western Literary Theory" that interpretive codes include all units that ask, answer questions, and explain events in various ways. Let's look at an example that Roland Barthes gave when analyzing "Sarasin". Fragments 16 and 17 of "Sarasin": "No one knows which country the Rondy family came from, or what kind of trade they were engaged in, what they embezzled, what piracy they did, or what inheritance they inherited. How can such a sum be estimated? Millions of wealth.” Roland Barthes thinks these are two examples of interpretive codes, which raise questions about the origin of the Rondy family and the source of property, which were not answered until the end of the novel. From this we believe that the important feature of "interpretative code" is to ask questions, or set up suspense. As for the answer or otherwise, it depends on the situation.
"Proairetic code" (proairetic code). Yang Dong pointed out in "Literary Theory" that the function of "plot code" is to guide readers to incorporate details into various action sequences, and each sequence can be named so that readers can grasp the plot structure of the novel. Zhu Liyuan pointed out in "Contemporary Western Literary Theory" that action codes (ie "episodic codes") refer to sequences that can reasonably establish the results of actions in the text. "Sarasin" fragments 122 and 123 wrote: "At this time, there was a rustling of dress, a woman's slight footsteps broke the tranquility, and the young Marianina walked in..." Roland • The "episodic code" listed by Bart at this time is "enter", and it is divided into: "enter": 1: announce with sound; "enter": 2: enter itself. From this we believe that "episodic codes" generally appear in the form of sequences, and are mainly sequences of actions.
"Semic code" or "semic code". Roland Barthes wrote in "S/Z": "As for the meaning elements, they are just explanatory. That is to say, it is neither intended to be tied to a certain character, nor is it like making arrangements between various meaning elements. So that they can be formed into a purely one subject area; we allow them to be unstable and discrete, which makes them become particles of dust, particles of indeterminate meaning." Yang Dong pointed out in "Literature Theory", " Meaningful code” (“meaning element code”) is a typical referent, which provides information about people and environment through the flash of semantics. Fragment 4 of "Salacin" wrote: "The bell of the Elysee-Bourbon Palace is ringing and midnight is coming." Laura Bart believes that this sentence conveys the message that the Rondy family is located in a private mansion in the suburbs, which points to " The term “wealth” means “wealth” here.
By comparing with the "interpretative code", "episodic code", and the following "symbolic code" and "cultural code", we find that these five codes are actually a reference to the signifier in the artwork. "A kind of understanding of the relationship, to be more precise, these five codes are actually all "referred", but the functions are slightly different. Through Roland Barthes's definition of "instability" and "discreteness" in Yisu, we understand "yisu code" as a type of reference in addition to the other four codes.
"Symbolic code" (symbolic code). Zhu Liyuan pointed out in "Contemporary Western Literary Theory" that "symbolic codes" are regularly repeated in the text and are image models with specific meanings formed in the development of culture. In the fragments 120, 123, and 150 of "Sarasin", Roland Barthes pointed out that the symbol of "castration" appeared, but the specific expression of the symbol was different. In addition, there are different opinions on the meaning of the word "symbol", so here we borrow from Goethe's understanding of "symbol", that is to say, "symbol" embodies the transformation from the individual to the general. This "symbol" is actually very close to the "symbol" conveyed by Baudelaire's symbolic poetry. Therefore, in our specific application, we understand "symbolic code" as an image model with specific meaning that embodies the transformation from the individual to the general.
"Cultural code" (cultural code). Roland Barthes wrote in "S/Z": "Cultural codes are references to science or wisdom codes. We point out these codes only to indicate the type of knowledge they refer to (such as biology, physiology, medicine, etc.). Psychology, literature, history, etc.)." Yang Dong pointed out in "Literary Theory" that "cultural code" provides readers with various cultural backgrounds involved in the text. Fragment 25 of "Sarasin" wrote: "This mysterious family has all the charm of Byron's poetry..." Roland Barthes thinks that the "cultural code" here is "literature (Byron)". Therefore, we believe that an important feature of "cultural code" is that it can arouse people's cultural associations.
Let's take "Fun Game" as an example, give some examples of each kind of code, and take a look at the specific use of these five codes in movie criticism.
"Explanatory Code". 1. At the beginning of the film, the wife asked her husband who was the author of the opera played in the car and which one it was. The question was raised here. The husband answered that it was Hande’s opera, but did not guess which one it was. ; 2. When playing the opening captions, the film showed close-ups of a family of three. The son seemed to be full of fear and anxiety. This will make the audience full of doubts about his son’s expression, and their subsequent misfortunes are here. The close-up shots of Frieze corresponded and answered; 3. When the family met Fleet’s family for the first time, both the wife and husband were puzzled by Fleet’s inexplicable answer, so the wife asked her husband what happened to Fleet. After the question was raised, the film answered the question. It turns out that the Fleet family also suffered the torture and killing of Paul and Tom. At the same time, the wife asked her husband who the two boys were next to Fleet. Two villains of the film; 4 When Paul interrupted Joe’s leg, Joe asked them why they did it. This brings up a very important question in the film, that is, Paul and Tom tortured and killed Joe’s family. What is the purpose of the film, but this question did not give a positive answer until the end of the film.
"Plot Code". 1. Guess the riddle, the wife asked her husband to guess the name of the opera, Paul kept the golf on the ground and asked Joe to guess what it was, etc.; 2. Help, the son ran away to the neighbor’s house for help, the wife ran away to the neighbor’s house for help, the husband used the phone Help, etc.; 3. Torture, Joe’s leg was broken, his son’s head was put in a pillowcase, his wife was tied up, etc.; 4. Killing, Tom killed Joe’s son, Paul killed Joe, Paul killed Joe Wife waiting.
"Medicine code". 1. Cars, sailing boats, and country houses refer to the status of Joe's family; 2. The red subtitles and manic music in the beginning of the movie refer to danger, rebellion and uneasy emotions; 3. The remote control that can turn back time refers to gameplay; 4. , Paul and Tom refer to game characters outside the normal social order; 5. The opera, forest, and sunshine appearing at the beginning of the film refer to the "idyllic" life illusion of the bourgeoisie.
"Symbolic Code". 1. Golf clubs and shotguns refer to penis, indicating that husband Joe is a castrated male image; 2. TV and TV programs, symbolizing the external real world dominated by media and popular culture; 3. Full of bloodstains The TV shows that the external society may be dangerous to people and the alienation it may cause to people.
"Culture Code". 1. The music at the beginning of the film refers to opera; 2. The opening music refers to rock music; 3 The text design and music style of the opening refers to popular culture or pop culture; 4. Paul asked Joe's wife to pray to refer to Christianity; 5 , Paul and Tom’s way of speaking refers to TV shows such as game quizzes.
On the one hand, Roland Barthes followed the research method of structuralism and systematically analyzed the text. On the other hand, he abandoned the analysis method based on the principle of synchronicity. Instead, he emphasized a diachronic research, so that he no longer pursued it. A fixed deep structure in a text. For "Fun Game", we are not using Prop or Greimas' model to generalize the plot or connotation of the film as a whole. Instead, we use these five kinds of codes to use scattered points and fragments. The analysis of the style is used to interpret the specific images that appear in the film one by one, so that we can understand many allusions in "Fun Game" from the perspective of semiology, and have a more comprehensive understanding of the meaning of the film. However, there are also many problems in interpreting the film in this way. For example, Zhu Liyuan proposed in "Contemporary Western Literary Theory" that since all codes are necessarily cultural, the "cultural code" has caused a lot of controversy among these five codes. We believe that the same problem also appears in the "symbol code". If the "memo" code has the characteristics of "instability" and "discreteness", can we understand it as the "memo code" can actually include all the other four kinds of codes? This involves more complicated research on the openness and closedness of the concept's connotation and extension. For another example, according to Derrida’s deconstructionist point of view, there is no inevitable one-to-one correspondence between the signifier and the signified, that is to say, the whole signification process between the signifier and the signified is unstable or The inconsistency, coupled with the personal interpretation of Roland Bart’s way of understanding, makes the use of these five codes to understand works of art a bit of impressionist criticism. In this way, Roland Barthes’ distinction and definition of the five codes is more like a “game-style” definition, that is, the reason why we define the concept in this way is to use it as a means to understand the work. Does this mean that we can also use completely different codes to understand the work? Presumably, Roland Barthes's way of understanding works of art has something to do with the post-modern emphasis on the playful interpretation of works. Therefore, we call this narrative model of Roland Barthes "game/interpretative" model.
5.
Through a brief analysis of the three narrative models of Propp, Greimas and Roland Barthes, we clearly see the development process of structuralist narratology from structuralism to post-structuralism, and understand structuralism and post-structuralism. Or deconstructionism is understanding the different ways of thinking and humanistic attitudes in art and even the world. For "Fun Game" or film criticism, three different models give us three different thinking dimensions to grasp the external narrative and internal story connotation shown by the entire film. Narratology, as a young science, has found common or similar deep narrative structures in many narrative texts in the study of literary narratives based on novels and film narratives based on feature films, which helps us to sort out The narrative method commonly used by people when telling a story; more importantly, it allows us to understand exactly how to tell a story, so that the story itself has a stronger empathy effect, so as to better elicit a broad sense. "Catharsis" effect on the Internet. In addition, it is not difficult to find that the classic Hollywood screenwriting method described by Robert McGee in the book "The Story" is related to the "balance/destroy" model of Tsvetan Todorov and the "Balance/Destruction" model of Claude Bremen. The "branch structure model" is actually very similar. The creation of gaps in the screenwriting advocated by McGee is also to destroy the original internal balance of the story. This shows the significance of the classic narrative model for film and television screenwriters.
The understanding of narrative structure is based on the understanding of human beings. The establishment of narrative structure is also the establishment of humans. Then, the person who establishes the narrative structure must read a large amount of story text in the process of establishing the narrative structure. In the process, is there a kind of "expectation horizon" or "blank" in their minds preconceivedly? In this way, structuralist narratology is connected with reception aesthetics; is the formation of "expected horizons" or "blanks" in our minds due to the linking effect of our subjective intentionality? In this way, we have returned to Husserl's phenomenology; is the existence of imagery because of the existence of a transcendental structure that can understand the external world in our a priori or transcendental structure? In this way, we have further retreated to Kant’s transcendental philosophy... Such a one-way logical inference is not to show the metaphysical infinite retreat thinking, but to illustrate: a thorough understanding of any problem , Will inevitably involve the answers to many more profound philosophical questions related to it. Only in this way can our understanding reach a balance and perfection in the sense of a relative level.
View more about Funny Games reviews
