H. Porter Abbott

Bio: H. Porter Abbott is an academic researcher from University of California, Santa Barbara. The author has contributed to research in topics: Narrative & Narrative history. The author has an hindex of 13, co-authored 39 publications receiving 2181 citations. Previous affiliations of H. Porter Abbott include Sacred Heart University.

Strange Creatures Can Be Animals Too: A Response to Brian Richardson

Abstract: It is always a pleasure to read anything by Brian Richardson. Not only has he read more really weird books than I have ever read, or will, but he shores up his arguments so adroitly and writes with such a friendly eye on his reader that it makes it hard to disagree with him. But disagree I must. THE TERM ITSELF My first concern is that the term "unnatural narrative" is itself unnatural, despite Richardson's assertion that for him and his colleagues the word is "merely a narratological term" with "no extranarrative connotations" (393). And certainly he is right when he claims that they can deploy the term cleansed of any "position concerning any cultural practices, individual actions, or sexual preferences commonly designated as unnatural by society" (393). But "unnatural" is wedded to "natural," which in turn is wedded to "nature." This connotation is much harder to strip away. That the label "unnatural narratology" was prompted by Monica Fludernik's Towards a "Natural" Narratology makes it even more difficult to accept as devoid of "extranarrative connotations." Fludernik at least put "natural" in quotation marks, a cautionary move that Richardson has not made. Yet with or without quotation marks, "unnatural" misleads since what it applies to is entirely natural. In Unnatural Narrative, Richardson himself inadvertendy provided support for my point when he urged narratologists to follow the example of biologists who enthusiastically enlarge their field by including "unusual, extraordinary, or minority types": After all, biologists are excited by the discovery of new forms of life and are eager to extend or expand their models to include them, as recently happened during the exploration of geothermal rifts deep in the Pacific Ocean along the ridges of undersea volcanoes, which led to the discovery of hitherto unknown life-forms. Needless to say, no biologist tried to minimize or discredit them by saying they were merely "anti-biological" forms or demanding the discoverers admit that such entities are extremely rare. (163-64) But neither, needless to say, would any biologist call those hitherto unknown life-forms "unnatural." My case is that, just as those giant tube worms in the Pacific are an instance of the natural production of unexpected biological outliers, so the emergence of radical, antimimetic texts are instances of the natural production of unexpected narrative outliers. And just as the former process goes as far back as biology itself, so the production of strange antimimetic texts, as Richardson himself notes, goes back at least as far as "ancient Sanskrit dramas" (396). There is more than an analogy here between biology and the production of fictions. Both, I believe, share the same sequential evolutionary structure, dependent on a necessary process of variation and mutation. As Darwin showed, what we call "species" are in fact moving targets of ever-changing complexity, repeatedly throwing off variant forms, slight or extreme, that, enabled by a constant bricolage with the organic equipment they already have and the affordances available in the environment, evolve on their own or go extinct. In human beings, this flexibility increased by many orders of magnitude when we acquired the capability of abstract, symbolic thought and communication. At linguistic, social, and cultural levels, this capability has allowed us to adapt not only by maintaining a necessary order but also by creating opportunities for disorder. Disorder may be destructive, and seriously so, but it also creates possibilities and often does so out of destruction. This is our nature; it is what we do. If we are equipped with a need for order, we are also equipped with what Morse Peckham called a "rage for chaos." (1) We enjoy messing with things--especially in the comparative safety of fiction, where we have been messing with fictive worlds since we began making them. In other words, the production of strange, impossible, antimimetic new works of fiction is natural. …

"Narrative Literature?" Looking for Answers Across Disciplinary Borders

Abstract: It often seems that the various disciplines are like city-states, each with excellent plumbing, excellent standards governing the width of the pipes, the depth of the threads, the valves, the fixtures, the nuts and the bolts, so that internally each system works very well. But when you want to make connections at the borders, things start to break down. Nowhere is this clearer than in the effort to adapt terms and concepts (even the term "concept" poses problems of translation [1]). Complicating matters is the fact that the further a discipline is from physics, the likelier it is to tolerate a plurality of usage for any single term. Within literary study (a field very far from physics) there is, for example, no general agreement regarding terms like "narrative," "plot," "literature," "discourse," "representation." This lack is not necessarily a fault, but a sign of how the complexity of literary study requires a certain degree of play at this level of study. Efforts to establish a Prussian order in the term inology of literary study can do more harm than good. Nonetheless, terms bring with them ways of thinking, and it is the impacted nature of these ways of thinking that leads to infra-structural breakdowns at our disciplinary borders. It is possible that we will eventually achieve some kind of protocol for pan-disciplinary exchange that will allow us to connect with each other meaningfully. But I would like to suggest also, in this essay, that sometimes the shock of leaping borders and suddenly seeing your old familiar terms from a new disciplinary perspective can be salutary precisely because the differences of field are so great. This essay focuses on two terms, "narrative" and "literature," that have enjoyed a long and happy coexistence in humanist discourse. My argument is that, when looked at in terms of the cognitive operations they involve, these terms appear to be separated by a deep conceptual difference. Probing this difference may give some indication of where we might start to work in trying to match literary and cognitive understandings. At the same time, it shows how simply by trying to cross disciplinary borders we can give vigorous new life to old terms. Put briefly, the conceptual difference between narrative and literature, when understood as cognitive operations, is a kind of puzzle that goes like this: where narrative can best be described as a platform, literature can best be described as a set of toggle switches. To older generations, this may look like a mixed metaphor, but in the age of the computer, it works. A platform is something that persists in time, supporting a host of other operations that are carried o ut on top of it. A politician can stand on a platform and do many things (for example, give speeches) that may have little to do with the platform he or she stands on. In computers, a platform doesn't stand, it runs, but the deep concept is the same. While the platform is running, other operations can be performed on top of it. Many of these operations are controlled by toggle switches. They are either on or off, but the platform keeps running. I. Narrative As terms in the humanistic disciplines, "narrative" is more secure than "literature." We are usually pretty sure that we know it when we see it. And this goes for most of us, humanists and non-humanists alike. As soon as he came up, he leaped from his own horse, and caught hold of hers by the bridle. The unruly beast presently reared himself on end on his hind legs, and threw his lovely burden from his back, and Jones caught her in his arms. (Fielding 195) This is, in all its parts, "the telling of an event" (the commonest definition of narrative). It is discourse that lets us see that something happened. And if most of us are pretty clear about obvious examples of narrative like this, many (though perhaps not most) of us are also pretty clear about what is not narrative: The critic, rightly considered, is no more than the clerk, whose office it is to transcribe the rules and laws laid down by those great judges whose vast strength of genius hath placed them in the light of legislators, in the several sciences over which they presided. …

Adaptationism, postmodernism, and a biocultural narratology

Abstract: First generation humanistic Darwinists or adaptationists were openly antagonistic to what they saw as a near hegemony of sociocultural determinism in the humanities. Their common word for the enemy was “postmodernist,” applied in a blanket critique to poststructuralists, Marxists, Foucauldians, New Historians, Freudians, Lacanians, feminists, and others. This refrain of a postmodernist antagonist has remained remarkably uniform among adaptationists over the last 35 years. Yet, “cognitivist” work in the humanities has, by and large, enjoyed a more peaceful coexistence with “postmodernists.” In part, this is attributable to the flexibility and openness of an approach (cognitivism) as opposed to a more bounded theory (adaptationism). But, also, the scientific component, which is a necessity of adaptationist research, is incompatible with much of the necessary work we do in the humanities. Moreover, the adjective “biocultural,” applied frequently by adaptationists to their own work, aptly describes the work of both cognitivists and adaptationists.

How Beckett Fails, Once More with Music

Abstract: romoting Beckett's later pieces for the stage, screen, and radio can be hard work. These moments of inaction, taking place in fuzzy, gray-lit zones, where sounds are barely audible and, when heard, barely understood-are they really good theater? Uncertainty on this score is one reason, I think, that the production of Beckett's later work has acquired its aura of sacramental mystery. It's a kind of trade-off. What you worship you don't necessarily have to like. The downside is that, as in the solemn reading of Holy Writ, the burden of religious obligation adds its own special weight to the effort to keep one's mind from wandering to pastimes of greater pleasure-like, say, mowing the lawn. Critics have compounded this difficulty of reception by insisting on Beckett's intuitive grasp of any medium, his unerring capacity to find its beating heart and turn it to his artistic advantage. They have insisted on this when, in fact, it's plain for all to see that Beckett makes a mess of it every time. Unerringly, he does not take advantage of what these various media have to offer but rather proceeds like someone just beginning to understand what we all learned long ago. His short plays are talky and uneventful; his television, gray and grainy; his film, black and white and melodramatic. In his earlier work, when Beckett openly broadcast the themes of failure and incompetence, deploying hapless characters and a constancy of acerbic wit, the failure and the art all seemed

Time and Narrative

Abstract: In the first two volumes of this work, Paul Ricoeur examined the relations between time and narrative in historical writing, fiction, and theories of literature. This final volume, a comprehensive reexamination and synthesis of the ideas developed in volumes 1 and 2, stands as Ricoeur's most complete and satisfying presentation of his own philosophy.

The Cambridge Introduction to Narrative

Abstract: What is narrative? How does it work and how does it shape our lives? H. Porter Abbott emphasizes that narrative is found not just in literature, film, and theatre, but everywhere in the ordinary course of people's lives. This widely used introduction, now revised and expanded in its third edition, is informed throughout by recent developments in the field and includes one new chapter. The glossary and bibliography have been expanded, and new sections explore unnatural narrative, retrograde narrative, reader-resistant narratives, intermedial narrative, narrativity, and multiple interpretation. With its lucid exposition of concepts, and suggestions for further reading, this book is not only an excellent introduction for courses focused on narrative but also an invaluable resource for students and scholars across a wide range of fields, including literature and drama, film and media, society and politics, journalism, autobiography, history, and still others throughout the arts, humanities, and social sciences.

Frank Kermode and the Invented World@@@The Sense of an Ending: Studies in the Theory of Fiction

Abstract: A pioneering attempt to relate the theory of literary fiction to a more general theory of fiction, using fictions of apocalypse as a model. This pioneering exploration of the relationship of fiction to age-old conceptions of chaos and crisis offers many new insights into some of the most unyielding philosophical and aesthetic enigmas. Examining the works of a wide range of writers from Plato to William Burroughs, Kermode demonstrates how writers have persistently imposed their \"fictions\" upon the face of eternity and how these have reflected the apocalyptic spirit.

Narrative communication in cancer prevention and control: A framework to guide research and application

Abstract: Narrative forms of communication—including entertainment education, journalism, literature, testimonials, and storytelling—are emerging as important tools for cancer prevention and control. To stimulate critical thinking about the role of narrative in cancer communication and promote a more focused and systematic program of research to understand its effects, we propose a typology of narrative application in cancer control. We assert that narrative has four distinctive capabilities: overcoming resistance, facilitating information processing, providing surrogate social connections, and addressing emotional and existential issues. We further assert that different capabilities are applicable to different outcomes across the cancer control continuum (e.g., prevention, detection, diagnosis, treatment, survivorship). This article describes the empirical evidence and theoretical rationale supporting propositions in the typology, identifies variables likely to moderate narrative effects, raises ethical issues to be addressed when using narrative communication in cancer prevention and control efforts, and discusses potential limitations of using narrative in this way. Future research needs based on these propositions are outlined and encouraged.

Fictionality and Perceived Realism in Experiencing Stories: A Model of Narrative Comprehension and Engagement

Abstract: This article offers a theoretical framework to explain circumstances under which perceptions of “unrealness” affect engagement in narratives and subsequent perceived realism judgments. A mental models approach to narrative processing forms the foundation of a model that integrates narrative comprehension and phenomenological experiences such as transportation and identification. Three types of unrealness are discussed: fictionality, external realism (match with external reality), and narrative realism (coherence within a story). We gather evidence that fictionality does not affect narrative processing. On the other hand, violations of external and narrative realism are conceived as inconsistencies among the viewer’s mental structures as they construct mental models of meaning to represent and comprehend the narrative. These inconsistencies may result in negative online evaluations of a narrative’s realism, may disrupt engagement, and may negatively influence postexposure (reflective) realism judgments as well as lessen a narrative’s persuasive power. Resume « Fictionnalite» et realisme percu des histoires : Un modele de comprehension et d'implication narratives Cet article propose un cadre theorique visant a expliquer les circonstances dans lesquelles les perceptions d’« irrealite» affectent l’implication dans les narratifs et les jugements subsequents de perception de realisme. Une approche par modeles mentaux du traitement des narratifs forme la base d’un modele qui integre la comprehension narrative et les experiences phenomenologiques telles que le transport et l’identification. Trois types d’irrealite sont commentes : la « fictionnalite», le realisme externe (concordance avec une realite externe) et le realisme narratif (coherence d’une histoire). Nous reunissons ici des preuves a l’effet que la fictionnalite n’affecte pas le traitement narratif. D’autre part, les violations des realismes externe et narratif sont percues comme des incoherences dans les structures mentales des spectateurs, puisque ceux-ci construisent des modeles mentaux de significations afin de representer et comprendre le narratif. Ces incoherences peuvent avoir pour resultats des evaluations negatives du realisme d’un narratif sur le coup. Elles peuvent egalement interrompre l’implication, influencer negativement les jugements de realisme a posteriori (jugements reflexifs) et amoindrir la puissance persuasive d’un narratif. Abstract Fiktionalitat und wahrgenommener Realismus beim Erleben von Geschichten: Ein Modell zum narrativen Verstehen und Erleben Dieser Artikel bietet einen theoretischen Rahmen, um Bedingungen zu erklaren unter denen die Wahrnehmung von Unwirklichkeit die Art und Weise des Erlebens von Geschichten und daraus resultierend Realismusurteile beeinflusst. Unter Ruckgriff auf einen Mentale-Modelle-Ansatz zur Verarbeitung von Narrationen werden narratives Verstehen und phanomenologische Erlebensweisen wie Transportation und Identifikation im Modell integriert. Drei Typen von Unwirklichkeit werden diskutiert: Fiktionalitat, externaler Realismus (Passung mit der externalen Realitat) und narrativer Realismus (Stimmigkeit mit der Geschichte). Unsere Daten zeigen, dass Fiktionalitat die narrative Verarbeitung nicht beeinflusst. Allerdings wird deutlich, dass Verletzungen des externalen und narrativen Realismus als Inkonsistenzen in den mentalen Strukturen der Zuschauer wahrgenommen werden, da Zuschauer mentale Bedeutungsmodelle konstruieren, um die Geschichte abzubilden und zu verstehen. Diese Inkonsistenzen konnten in negativen Ad-Hoc-Bewertungen von narrativem Realismus resultieren, konnten Erleben storen oder postrezeptive (reflektierende) Realismusurteile negativ beeinflussen - und letztendlich die persuasive Kraft der Narration verringern. Resumen La Ficcion y el Realismo Percibido en la Experiencia de las Historias: Un Modelo de la Comprension y el Compromiso Narrativo Este articulo ofrece un marco teorico para explicar las circumstancias bajo las cuales las percepciones de “irrealismo” afectan el compromiso de las narrativas y los juicios de las percepciones de realismo subsequente. Un modelo mental de aproximacion de los procesamientos narrativos forma un modelo fundacional que integra la comprension narrativa y las experiencias fenomenologicas como por ejemplo la transportacion y la identificacion. Tres tipos de irrelismo son discutidos: ficcion, realismo externo (correspondencia con la realidad externa), y realismo narrativo (coherencia dentro de una historia). Juntamos evidencia que la ficcionalidad no afecta el procesamiento narrativo. Por otro lado, las violaciones al realismo externo y narrativo son concebidas como inconsistencias entre las estructuras mentales de la audiencia dado que ellos construyen modelos mentales de significacion para representar y comprender la narrativa. Estas inconsistencias pueden resultar en evaluaciones online negativas de una narrativa de realismo, pueden trastornar el compromiso, e influir negativamente sobre los juicios de realismo despues de la exposicion (reflectiva) asi como tambien disminuir el poder persuasivo de la narrativa. ZhaiYao Yo yak