This is fascinating. I sometimes pooh-pooh the worldview that everything is a zero-sum conflict, Us vs Them, if you're not with us then you're against us, etc. But that's the basis for all Western literature — situation, conflict, and someone wins. That's what all the writing books say. But is conflict actually the only way to build a plot? Apparently not …
(h/t +Fred Kiesche)
Embedded Link
The significance of plot without conflict
In the West, plot is commonly thought to revolve around conflict: a confrontation between two or more elements, in which one ultimately dominates the other. The standard three- and five-act plot…
Google+: View post on Google+
58 view(s)
Are you sure zero sum conflicts are "the basis for all Western literature"? I have this vague feeling that if I was more literate, rather than a well-read maths type, I would be able to come up with a few examples of triangular, or more complex plots. Then again, I think I have failed to finish quite a few books whose plots lack any conflict…. The description given of the Japanese plot structure was interesting.
Perhaps a bit of hyperbole, but the basic idea of conflict driving the narrative, and the expectation, even desire, to see a victory of some sort over the circumstances, antagonists (or the tragedy of not attaining such a victory) is, arguably, at the core of most if not all Western lit.
(Thinking now of the simplistic but rather comprehensive "Man vs. Others, Man vs. Nature, Man vs. Himself" summary of all the stories "in the world".)
It's ages since I ploughed through Ulysses, so I'm not sure, but I feel that was just a long texture with no real events. Anyway, back to the grind.