Narrative, Reduction, and Recovery

Complex systems theory suggests that a whole is more than the sum of its parts (or something of the like). Perhaps similarly, a narrative is more than the sum of its parts. A narrative may be “more” in so far as the narrative is distinct from being merely a grouping of its parts, distinct from being merely an unwoven string of people and events. Like an intricately woven tapestry being something other than threads lain side by side on a table, a narrative is “more.” This may be close to the truth, but the past two hundred years of critical hermeneutics suggests otherwise.

Operating in accord with an atomistic perception of language, the past few hundred years of critical method have considered the meaning of a given text to depend upon individual parts. The meaning of a text relies entirely on individual words and the grammar, syntax, etc. Thus, the synergy of the narrative is ignored and is reduced to individual parts. This ignores the possibility that the whole may “more” or something other than a mere disconnected grouping of its parts. This sort of reduction of a narrative is tantamount to the vivisection of what I have previously referred to as “synthetic philosophy.”

Hans Frei does more to explain the effects pre-critical and critical methods have had on narrative than I suspect I will ever do. But I shall offer an egregiously brief summary here. Pre-critical methods accepted the narrative and its world, and critical methods judged the narrative and its world according to how we presently perceive the world. This change in method raised as many new questions as it answered previous questions. To answer the new questions, a sort of polarization ensued. Some asserted that the language in Scripture referred to actual historical objects (and the actual meaning of referents could be determined according to grammar, as mentioned above), while others asserted that the religious language found in Scripture narrative is merely time-conditioned consciousness which does not necessarily refer to historical objects, people and events and geographical places. This polarization disregarded the nature of narrative and its world. In both cases, narrative was lost.

How might narrative and for that matter its meaning be recovered? This is a loaded question, which requires thorough attention. For now just a tidbit will do. First, narrative’s distinctiveness from its parts must be acknowledged. Perhaps, an example will offer some further assistance. If we consider, the opening sentence of Flannery O’Connor’s “Green Leaf,” we might see the synergy of parts forming a narrative distinct from its parts. “Mrs. May’s bedroom window was low and faced on the east and the bull, silvered in the moonlight, stood under it, his head raised as if he listened – like some patient god come down to woo her – for a stir inside the room.” For the sake of brief analogy (and omitting the philosophy of language in which she is operating), let us pretend that each word represents a sentence or even a paragraph in a larger narrative. “Bedroom window,” floating apart from the whole may be interpreted to mean a myriad of different of things. Ah, but it is “Mrs. May’s bedroom window,” etc. In conjunction with its narrative, “bedroom window” has a specific meaning or use. This may seem to be a rather rudimentary observation, but this observation is distinct from saying only it has a referent or time conditioned consciousness. Allowing the narrative to shape and provide its own meaning is something rather different, and it is not simply giving preference to context (for that would atomistic). Letting the narrative retain its own world of meaning requires that we consider the narrative to be its own complex system, which has its own particular uses and meanings of words but also whose uses and meanings of words must be considered in light of the synthetic whole instead of its parts lest the meaning of the whole be lost. But alas this is only the beginning. However, at least, acknowledging narrative and its distinctiveness from its parts is a start. More of this later.