Talk:The Seven Basic Plots
 | Daily page views
|
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Another list of possible stories
[edit]Another list of possible stories This list of possible stories covers non-fiction as well as fiction: journey, hunt, quest if you prefer; chase; man against nature (monsters) or man (war, fight, conflict), with one or other side triumphant at end; life of a person (rags to riches and rebirth would be included in this, but some life-stories, even without such a moral lesson, are just worth the telling) life of a group; history of a place; and romance (search for love). Any of each category can be comedies or tragedies or be straight stories with happy endings. 68.150.198.190 (talk) 16:56, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
Nonsense
[edit]Overall, this is nonsense. Comedy and Tragedy are not separate types. They can apply to any of the other basic types. For example, you can have a man against monster story that is a comedy. I don't know where this misinformation came from but it's total nonsense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.246.9.25 (talk) 23:14, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
- Similarly, the general class of porn fiction often describes little other than mechanics. Some romantic fiction's just a softer version of the same. Indeed, the very roots of fiction, describing relationships with minimal dynamic other than the emitional, fit this same wider context. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.212.193.57 (talk) 08:01, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
- This article is about a book. If you don't like the classification, you can complain to the author.—Anita5192 (talk) 18:03, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
All the plot names in the book are special terms
[edit]Dearmost editors who have not read the book - please do not follow your knee-jerk impulses. The books uses Comedy not for humor but for a complete resolution ending in a happy maturity and wedding, Tragedy - for some moral failure leading to a collapse etc. In this light plenty of the movie examples given are totally out of line with the book. The Ukrainian version was the best but then again someone 'helpfully' added examples of 'comedies' not as Christopher Booker speaks of them. Booker himself supplies plenty movie examples.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Balder-d (talk • contribs) 13:29, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
Booker asserts that the Rule of Three is expressed in four ways
[edit]It's a bit contradictory Nyarlat 1920 (talk) 20:10, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
- I don't see any contradiction in that.—Anita5192 (talk) 20:51, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
Rule of Three and this book
[edit]It is not clear to me how the Rule of Three is connected to the book. Could this be elaborated on? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hajekjm (talk • contribs) 09:00, 19 April 2022 (UTC)