Story over structure

I watched the Studio Ghibli movie, Pom Poko, recently and it was a ride. It was part of a movie night with a friend of mine as an ongoing adventure of me finally watch every SG movie ever. Incidentally, Pom Poko isn’t a point of reference for the rest of this topic but somehow it started here. Besides the beautiful animation, the very well executed depiction and discussion around deforestation, activism and assimilation to oppressive forces — my biggest gripe was the length. For me a lot of plot points, characters and sequences could’ve been condensed. In my discussion with said friend, I mentioned that ultimately — even without all the excessive narrative decisions (at least from my point of view) — act two was just too long.

And that got me thinking.

When does the story become greater than the structure? My friend pointed out that there was a balance and the meandering around the topic through the amazing animation and transformation sequences of the raccoons was something that made the movie enjoyable but more importantly, palatable. Even though I could accept that, and agree with her points, I wonder if it still justified some of the choices that were made. I was more of the mind that difficult topics should be heavier or at least not watered down for the sake of the audience — with exceptions of course. But having watched a movie like Grave of the Fireflies, I couldn’t help but compare. [A bigger] But is that as a fan of Takahata’s work and the layers of personal experience, heart and creativity he puts into his films, I have no choice but to respect his loyalty to the story he wanted to tell in spite of what dictates a “reasonable” structure. So with that, I can’t help but believe that the story is more important.

When I say the story is more important than structure I first think of two types of writers:
1) Writers that are overly concerned with what the audience will think and take away from their movie. There’s almost a fantasy of the blog posts and video essays they’ll produce about their work.

2) Those married and committed to the art of structure. Whether it’s Save the Cat or any other craft/industry recommendation, these writers think in Act 1, Act 2 and Act 3.

And I wonder: Where do story and structure find their balance? If no balance exists, which becomes more important?

I’m going to be biased. I’m marking this as solely my opinion.

Storytelling should take priority. Orwellian, Shakespearean, “the next gone girl”, “in the vein of master storyteller Toni Morrison”, A la Tarantino or Martin Scorsese — in all the genres and subgenres that have been created thanks to a specific storyteller, we have proven that story trumps structure. When doing the first draft a beginning, middle and end are important. Imperative, even. Your acts, beats, scenes and page numbers are rules of the road but not every country drives on the left. In that same vein, your story doesn’t have to be like everyone else’s. In that first draft, your only concern should be getting that story down in writing. Your final product won’t be presented with an explanation of its parts. Your audience wants to focus on the flow because that’s what they paid/agreed to consume.

Now, this isn’t to say that structure isn’t a necessary tool. An outline of any sort is a great foundation, no matter how vague or detailed it may be. But it matters what you put on top. 100 writers could get the same 8-page outline and end up writing 100 different stories. The better stories won’t be the ones that can follow an outline well but rather the stories that become their own because the writer made it believable.

Let’s take a heist movie for example (not a big heist fan but I’ve got some faves). The Ocean’s movies, whichever you prefer, focuses on the heist itself. There are subplots, character development and action of all kinds that surround it but the movie is about — the heist.

Then take Time to Hunt, a recent South Korean release. The heist happens in act one. It is the inciting incident — or an element of it. The movie itself focuses on the consequences of the heist. It centres its action around the desperation of the main characters to have a better life in a near-future dystopia that admittedly doesn’t seem too far off societies that exist already. Regardless both movies fall under Action → Heist and though with enough knowledge of structure you can place it into boxes of Acts and scenes, you can’t, and most likely don’t, want to force these movies into that kind of deconstructed state.

You want to talk about the characters, themes, action, twists and storylines but you don’t want to break it down out of its fundamentally consumable form. I know I am doing just that but unless you’re someone actively trying to understand the craft behind stories, you really won’t care.

That’s my point.

We don’t ask our friends about their tinder dates or arguments with their landlord for a perfectly structured piece. We ask them for the story and for the entertainment. We are and were storytelling creatures before people started writing about how to do it.

So should you ignore recommended structures, routines, habits and rules when it comes to writing? No. You learn them, test them, then make your own. No one but you can write your story.