-
3 stars
Trying to consolidate and categorize the entirety of human fiction into a handful of neatly-defined archetypes has been attempted multiple times, but that doesn't mean it's an easy task. Rudyard Kipling thought there were sixty-nine. Carlos Gozzi thought there were thirty-six. Aristotle argued there were only two. Why does this book land on twenty? Well, why not?
The "Master Plots" as they're laid out are logical and defended in a fair manner with lots of examples, both from literature and screenplays and movies. I was well past the halfway point when I noticed that all of the examples being given seemed oddly dated and nothing past the 80's was being referenced, and it was only then that I clocked that this was published in 1993. I think that goes a long way into explaining why a lot of the suggestions and guidelines provided here felt strangely conservative to me.
Nothing …
Trying to consolidate and categorize the entirety of human fiction into a handful of neatly-defined archetypes has been attempted multiple times, but that doesn't mean it's an easy task. Rudyard Kipling thought there were sixty-nine. Carlos Gozzi thought there were thirty-six. Aristotle argued there were only two. Why does this book land on twenty? Well, why not?
The "Master Plots" as they're laid out are logical and defended in a fair manner with lots of examples, both from literature and screenplays and movies. I was well past the halfway point when I noticed that all of the examples being given seemed oddly dated and nothing past the 80's was being referenced, and it was only then that I clocked that this was published in 1993. I think that goes a long way into explaining why a lot of the suggestions and guidelines provided here felt strangely conservative to me.
Nothing terribly groundbreaking here, but I enjoy occasionally reading something meta-level about fiction, and I'm sure I'm gonna start fitting these "Master Plots" to whatever books I read next, seeing how neatly they line up with the tried and true approaches.