Scan barcode
tandewrites's review against another edition
2.0
read for a uni project, here are the quotes i'm taking for the essay about the 'overcoming the monster' plot:
The realm of storytelling contains nothing stranger or more spectacular than this terrifying, life-threatening, seemingly all-powerful monster whom the hero must confront in a fight to the death.
One may sum up by saying that, physically, morally and psychologically, the monster in storytelling thus represents everything in human nature which is somehow twisted and less than perfect.
And we never have any doubt as to why the hero stands in opposition to such a centre of dark and destructive power: because the hero's own motivation and qualities are presented as so completely in contrast to those ascribed to the monster.
Despite its cunning, its awareness of the reality of the world around it is in some important respect limited. Seeing the world through tunnel vision, shaped by its egocentric desires, there is always something which the monster cannot see and is likely to overlook.
reader_cheryl's review against another edition
4.0
"The Seven Basic Plots Why We Tell Stories" by Christopher Booker is, at over 700 pages, overwhelming at times.
Overall, I see it more as a textbook. It goes into great detail about what he considers the seven basic plots: Overcoming the Monster, Rags to Riches, The Quest, Voyage and Return, Comedy, Tragedy, and Rebirth.
The book itself is divided into four parts with thirty-four chapters. There is a lot of information packed into the pages--analysis of stories, a lot of psychology, a lot of history. It's not really a book to sit down with and read cover to cover, but a book that needs a lot of time to really think about what Booker puts down on the pages. Since the book is required for school, time isn't a luxury I had while reading this book.
As a writer, I found the first twenty pages the most helpful (parts one and two). The types of plots Booker identifies are dissected in great detail, using well-known works as examples. I have a lot of highlighting and post-it flags in those two sections. There is a lot of helpful information in what Booker says; information that will be useful in my own writing. This is a book I will keep close at hand.
Overall, I see it more as a textbook. It goes into great detail about what he considers the seven basic plots: Overcoming the Monster, Rags to Riches, The Quest, Voyage and Return, Comedy, Tragedy, and Rebirth.
The book itself is divided into four parts with thirty-four chapters. There is a lot of information packed into the pages--analysis of stories, a lot of psychology, a lot of history. It's not really a book to sit down with and read cover to cover, but a book that needs a lot of time to really think about what Booker puts down on the pages. Since the book is required for school, time isn't a luxury I had while reading this book.
As a writer, I found the first twenty pages the most helpful (parts one and two). The types of plots Booker identifies are dissected in great detail, using well-known works as examples. I have a lot of highlighting and post-it flags in those two sections. There is a lot of helpful information in what Booker says; information that will be useful in my own writing. This is a book I will keep close at hand.
davehershey's review
4.0
Why do so many of our most cherished stories seem the same? There's an ordinary person who is probably an orphan (Frodo, Luke Skywalker, Harry Potter, etc.) who goes off on some sort of quest to fight against a great evil. This story has small differences, but the big picture is the same.
The reason is that there are, as Booker says, seven basic plots: Overcoming the Monster, Rags to Riches, the Quest, Voyage and Return, Comedy, Tragedy and Rebirth. Within these stories there is overlap as individual stories could have aspects of some, or all, of them. Booker excels in explaining each of these stories. I admit I skipped some of the summaries of stories and perhaps he could have shortened the summaries or added less. Yet offering as many as he did had value for each reader may want to read summaries of different stories.
Booker goes on to get down to the nitty-gritty, diving into the archetypes of our unconscious which has produced these similar stories across cultures. Humans had a wholeness that has been broken in some way so a repair is needed, something is wrong. There is opposition. Booker identifies male and female traits that need to come together for wholeness to happen (power and order with selfless feeling and healing). I imagine some readers may bristle at the traditional understanding here of male and female traits. What is interesting is that Booker does not say only males have male traits and only females have female traits. For a hero, or heroine, to be made whole all these traits may be present. This could happen in one hero acquiring the female traits. A hero who only has the male traits self-destructs (think Ahab in Moby Dick).
Speaking of Moby Dick, Booker spends a lot of time talking about how stories have gone wrong in the last couple centuries, drifting away from the universal archetype. This is seen in how some stories resolve with only the outward appearance of wholeness. The reconnection with the true self, seen in the best stories, is both inward and outward. So it is not just that Odysseus comes home and reclaims his throne, but that he is a better person and better ruler than when he started out.
The book is long, maybe longer than it needs to be. Booker spends the last two chapters trying to connect the history of stories with the history of humanity. This is helpful and interesting but perhaps could have been more concise. That said, I enjoyed it.
One thing Booker was not clear on was whether he likes the stories. He seems to certainly prefer the stories that fit the archetype and is critical of more recent stories that take it apart. Moby Dick is one example of a story that misses the archetypal mark. But does he like Moby Dick? Does he like those mystery stories or dystopian rebellion stories that almost form an 8th and 9th story type? The reader may not be faulted for thinking Booker is kind of arrogant, disparaging anything that does not fit his traditional view of a hero overcoming the darkness to be light (or not overcoming it as in a tragedy). Really, I am just curious what value he finds in more modern stories, if any?
Overall, I liked this book. I have been listening to lots of Jordan Peterson, talking about archetypes and stories, as well as reading CS Lewis and JRR Tolkien and there reflections on the power of stories. I even think of the renewal of the importance of stories in theology from NT Wright's emphasis of the Jewish story in scripture to Kevin Vanhoozer's idea of the Bible as a drama. We are storied creatures. The question is, why? Booker's book helps answer that.
To some degree, this book makes me think of how there really are two ways to form a story: one with a hopeful and happy ending and one without. Game of Thrones, to this point anyway, is hopeless. It is realistic, in that there are no promises in the real world. Sometimes the potential hero dies a meaningless death. Then there is something like Lord of the Rings where there are powers moving behind the scenes in such a way that we know the hero will triumph. I wonder how much our culture's rejection of hope, rejection of a goal or purpose for humanity, rejection of myth, has led to our desire for "realistic" stories. We like stories that show real characters in all their dark glory (from Frank Underwood to Walter White).
Yet, we also want good to triumph. We want a glimmer that darkness does not have a last word. The archetype, the basic story we find in all cultures, gives us this. The question is, is this how the real world is?
I hope so.
Finally, this book has made me want to reread some of my favorites, as well as read some stuff I've never read before. So Dostoyevsky, Dickens, Shakespeare and more are back on my reading list.
The reason is that there are, as Booker says, seven basic plots: Overcoming the Monster, Rags to Riches, the Quest, Voyage and Return, Comedy, Tragedy and Rebirth. Within these stories there is overlap as individual stories could have aspects of some, or all, of them. Booker excels in explaining each of these stories. I admit I skipped some of the summaries of stories and perhaps he could have shortened the summaries or added less. Yet offering as many as he did had value for each reader may want to read summaries of different stories.
Booker goes on to get down to the nitty-gritty, diving into the archetypes of our unconscious which has produced these similar stories across cultures. Humans had a wholeness that has been broken in some way so a repair is needed, something is wrong. There is opposition. Booker identifies male and female traits that need to come together for wholeness to happen (power and order with selfless feeling and healing). I imagine some readers may bristle at the traditional understanding here of male and female traits. What is interesting is that Booker does not say only males have male traits and only females have female traits. For a hero, or heroine, to be made whole all these traits may be present. This could happen in one hero acquiring the female traits. A hero who only has the male traits self-destructs (think Ahab in Moby Dick).
Speaking of Moby Dick, Booker spends a lot of time talking about how stories have gone wrong in the last couple centuries, drifting away from the universal archetype. This is seen in how some stories resolve with only the outward appearance of wholeness. The reconnection with the true self, seen in the best stories, is both inward and outward. So it is not just that Odysseus comes home and reclaims his throne, but that he is a better person and better ruler than when he started out.
The book is long, maybe longer than it needs to be. Booker spends the last two chapters trying to connect the history of stories with the history of humanity. This is helpful and interesting but perhaps could have been more concise. That said, I enjoyed it.
One thing Booker was not clear on was whether he likes the stories. He seems to certainly prefer the stories that fit the archetype and is critical of more recent stories that take it apart. Moby Dick is one example of a story that misses the archetypal mark. But does he like Moby Dick? Does he like those mystery stories or dystopian rebellion stories that almost form an 8th and 9th story type? The reader may not be faulted for thinking Booker is kind of arrogant, disparaging anything that does not fit his traditional view of a hero overcoming the darkness to be light (or not overcoming it as in a tragedy). Really, I am just curious what value he finds in more modern stories, if any?
Overall, I liked this book. I have been listening to lots of Jordan Peterson, talking about archetypes and stories, as well as reading CS Lewis and JRR Tolkien and there reflections on the power of stories. I even think of the renewal of the importance of stories in theology from NT Wright's emphasis of the Jewish story in scripture to Kevin Vanhoozer's idea of the Bible as a drama. We are storied creatures. The question is, why? Booker's book helps answer that.
To some degree, this book makes me think of how there really are two ways to form a story: one with a hopeful and happy ending and one without. Game of Thrones, to this point anyway, is hopeless. It is realistic, in that there are no promises in the real world. Sometimes the potential hero dies a meaningless death. Then there is something like Lord of the Rings where there are powers moving behind the scenes in such a way that we know the hero will triumph. I wonder how much our culture's rejection of hope, rejection of a goal or purpose for humanity, rejection of myth, has led to our desire for "realistic" stories. We like stories that show real characters in all their dark glory (from Frank Underwood to Walter White).
Yet, we also want good to triumph. We want a glimmer that darkness does not have a last word. The archetype, the basic story we find in all cultures, gives us this. The question is, is this how the real world is?
I hope so.
Finally, this book has made me want to reread some of my favorites, as well as read some stuff I've never read before. So Dostoyevsky, Dickens, Shakespeare and more are back on my reading list.
meganclancy's review against another edition
2.0
This book started off strong, but then fizzled. You can read only the first half and not lose much of the interesting content.
prynne31's review against another edition
I read the first section on the seven types of plots, and that's all I'm interested in!
chinney's review
challenging
informative
reflective
slow-paced
3.75
lit and crit masquerading as writing guide
titi_miranda's review against another edition
3.0
MEGA INTERESANTE
aunque el autor esta terrible de desactualizado. Pana, estamos en el siglo 21.
3.5 estrellas
aunque el autor esta terrible de desactualizado. Pana, estamos en el siglo 21.
3.5 estrellas
grubstlodger's review against another edition
1.0
I read the book in one sitting, powered through the sheer weight of verbiage by the force of my hatred for it.
To say there are 7 plots and they represent ways of talking about overcoming the ego is fair enough - but when he can't find a single novel that properly exemplifies these ideas, it may have been time to ditch the theory.
Instead he concludes that all authors since the romantic movement have not been emotionally mature enough to fit his theory, so it must be the author's fault. Not a fault with the theory.
This then goes on to dig its own deep hole, where an author can show their emotional immaturity by having a female hero, or an ugly person or a gay relationship - or pretty much anything really.
I would recommend this book, but only to argue against.
To say there are 7 plots and they represent ways of talking about overcoming the ego is fair enough - but when he can't find a single novel that properly exemplifies these ideas, it may have been time to ditch the theory.
Instead he concludes that all authors since the romantic movement have not been emotionally mature enough to fit his theory, so it must be the author's fault. Not a fault with the theory.
This then goes on to dig its own deep hole, where an author can show their emotional immaturity by having a female hero, or an ugly person or a gay relationship - or pretty much anything really.
I would recommend this book, but only to argue against.
brantelg's review against another edition
5.0
Very very well researched breakdown of the impact of storytelling but also VERY long and dense.