CODING
In order to better look at this question I decided to code the data in a particular way. Essentially, I broke my data into 4 categories that follow basic storytelling structure:
Characters
Circumstances
Confrontation/Conflict
Resolution
From there, I saw a few sub-categories and codes that I could use in analyzing this data. My coding looks something like this:
Characters:
Anthropomorphized animal/object
Human being
Stereotype/Stock character
Circumstances:
Outlandish Circumstances
Mundane Circumstances
Confrontation
Resolution
The characters are broken down in three ways. First, I have the anthropomorphized animals and objects that many shaggy dog stories use. This is the most fantastic of the character categories, as it requires a bit more imagination to picture an animal acting as if it were a human. The second category, "human being," is for human characters that aren't particularly stereotypical or stock characters. That brings us to our final category of character: "stereotype/stock characters." This is for characters who are not basic human beings, but embody all of the stereotypical traits that their profession or archetypal personality might dictate.
The next category is also broken down into two separate groups. For circumstance I have decided to look at both the outlandish circumstances that these stories might utilize in order to get their point across. I also looked at the more mundane, everyday situations that arise for some of these characters. In breaking this category down I hope to contrast the two and see if the more outlandish and fantastic circumstances aid in the reception of the stories.
Next, I have the general category of confrontation. This is for moments of conflict between characters and is a basic element of storytelling.
Finally, I have the resolution. All of the stories have a resolution, and often that resolution is a pun or a play on words.
CODED DATA
I only used the first 5 stories discussed in class, opting to narrow my data instead of having to code the additional stories we were given. In addition to the basic codes that I have already listed, I have also listed a "victor" at the end of each story. I was intrigued to see who came out victorious from each story, so I took the extra step to list that after the coded resolution. The data is as follows:
Story 1
There was a snake called Nate. His purpose in life was to stay in the desert and guard the lever. Theis lever was no ordinary lever. It was the lever that if moved would destroy the world. Nate took his job very seriously. He let nothing get close to the lever.
One day off in the distance he saw a cloud of dust. He kept his eye on it because he was guarding the lever. The dust cloud continued to move closer to the lever. Nate saw that it was a huge boulder and it was heading straight for the lever!
Nate thought about what he could do to save the world. He decided if he could get in front of the boulder he could deflect it and it would miss the lever. Nate slithered quickly to intersect the boulder. The boulder ran over Nate, but it was, in fact, deflected, leaving history to conclude that is was better Nate than lever
Victor: Technically, the boulder. Though, Nate saved the world.
Story 2
Some friars wanted to do more for their flock but their vow of poverty, simple lifestyle and lack of gainful employment meant that their supply of available funds was, to say the least, meager. Nevertheless, they put their collective heads together and came up with the idea of opening a small florist shop. They reasoned that they could grow most of the flowers on the church grounds, and what they couldn't grow, they could likely pick from the surrounding countryside.
As you can probably guess, everyone liked to buy flowers from the men of God and their little business flourished. So much so that the rival florist across town thought the competition was unfair. He asked the good fathers to close their little shop, but their flower business was providing them with much-needed funds for their good works and they refused. He went back time and again, finally begging the friars to close. By this time, they had tired of the florist's constant whining and they ignored him. The florist even asked his mother to go and ask the friars to get out of the flower business, but they ignored her, too.
By this time, the florist was nearly backrupt and in desperation hired Hugh MacTaggart, the roughest and most vicious thug in town, to "persuade" the good friars to close. Being a man of few morals and even fewer religious convictions, Hugh had no ethical problems with his assigned task and promptly gave the friars a thorough beating and trashed their store. He departed with a stern warning that he’d be back if they didn’t close the shop. Terrified, the friars did so immediately, thereby proving that only Hugh can prevent florist friars.
VICTOR: Hugh and the Florist
Story 3
A giant panda escaped from the zoo in New York. Eventually, he found his way downtown and walked into a restaurant, where he found a seat at an empty table. The maitre d', being a native New Yorker figures he's seen stranger things than this so he sends over a waiter to take the panda's order. In due course the panda's meal arrives and he eats.
After he finishes his dinner he stands up, calmly pulls out a gun from God-knows-where he had it hidden, and blows away several customers and a couple of the waiters. Then he turns around and walks toward the door.
Naturally, the maitre d' is horrified. He stops the panda and demands an explanation, at the very least.
The panda says to him, "What do I look like to you"?
The maitre d' answers, "Well, a giant panda, of course."
"That's right," says the panda, "Look it up," and he walks out.
The maitre d' calls the police. When they arrive the maitre d' relates the whole story to them, including the panda's comment about looking it up. So the chief detective sends a rookie out to get an encyclopedia.
He eventually returns with the Encyclopedia Brittanica, Volume P. The detective looks up "panda", and there's the answer: "Giant panda, lives in China, eats shoots and leaves."
Victor: The panda
Story 4
Robinson Crusoe fell desperately ill. Just before dropping into a coma, he called for his man Friday to help him. "Friday, get help! Get help!"
"Yes!" Friday replied, "Get help now!" Not knowing what else to do, he went outside of Crusoe's tent and danced and prayed for the gods to come and help his master.
Shortly afterwards, he went back into Crusoe's tent and found his master awake and staring at a beautiful glowing shape at the foot of his bed.
"Who is that?" Robinson Crusoe asked.
His helper answered, "Thank Friday! It's God!"
Victor: Unknown. Conflict is absent here.
All the top chess players show up at a hotel for an important international tournament. They spend the first hour hanging around the lobby telling each other of their recent victories. Their crows get progressively louder and louder as each one tries to outdo the others.
The hotel manager gets tired of this, so he throws them out of the lobby and tells them to go to their rooms. "If there's one thing I can't stand," he says, "it's chess nuts boasting by an open foyer."
Victor: Manager of hotel.
ADDITIONAL DATA
Outside of the basic data of the stories themselves, I also decided to look at the results the classes had about how funny the believed the stories to be. While I am not particularly looking for the humor of the stories, this data still aids in knowing how people received the stories. The data, taken from Dr. Chandler's blog, is as follows:
nate 1/1/3/1/-
1/4/4/4/1
friars 1/3/1/1/-
1/1/6/2/4
panda 2/-/1/2/-
7/4/-/1/2
Friday -/-/-/2/4
5/3/-/2/4
chess 1/-/1/2/2
-/2/4/5/3/
1/4/4/4/1
friars 1/3/1/1/-
1/1/6/2/4
panda 2/-/1/2/-
7/4/-/1/2
Friday -/-/-/2/4
5/3/-/2/4
chess 1/-/1/2/2
-/2/4/5/3/
By looking at this data set we can see that the majority of individuals who read the stories found the Panda one the most interesting, with the Friars and Nate stories coming in the middle. The least-enjoyed stories were the Friday and Chess stories.
RESULTS
Examining the codes gives a clue as to why this is. The panda story, arguably the favorite by far, is the story that uses the most fantastic elements. From an anthropomorphized character getting involved in an outlandish situation and ending up in a conflict with a stock character, this story has it all.
The friary story actually has very few imaginative or fantastic elements to it. In fact, it is actually quite similar to the chess story. It involves regular people getting into a conflict and having that conflict resolved. The major difference between the two is the length of the conflict. The friar story tells us more, we know more about the friars and the florist and their rivalry. The chess story leaves out almost everything except for the necessities. It can be surmised, from this data, that the length of an "ordinary" story helps us appreciate the resolution/play of words more.
The Friday story is the least intriguing in many ways. There are no fantastic characters, merely two stock characters that the audience must previously be familiar with in some capacity. The situation is also rather mundane. The entire story, which is not long, lacks conflict and the pay-off is minimal. This helps us to show that the stories can lack fantastic elements, as long as some conflict is apparent, and still amuse readers.
Overall, it can be assess from this data that fantastic elements of storytelling are useful in an audience's experience of them, but they are not the only important factor. Length and conflict are also incredibly important, and further studies might examine these aspects in order to get a better understanding of what makes shaggy dog stories work.
No comments:
Post a Comment