Aside from that reservation, a fictive tale even has the advantage of manifesting symbolic necessity more purely to the extent that we may believe its conception arbitrary.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
To have frequent recourse to narrative betrays great want of imagination.
Pretty much anything you care to imagine can happen in a fantasy, which in turn means you can really crank up the intensity of the tale you're telling.
I'm much more interested in allowing a story to happen, and people find whatever meaning is in there.
The purpose of narrative is to present us with complexity and ambiguity.
In terms of the mechanics of story, myth is an intriguing one because we didn't make myth up; myth is an imprinture of the human condition.
In character, as it were, the writer settles for an impression of what happened rather than creating the sense of the thing happening.
I've always thought abstractly - through theme and variations rather than narrative.
But if it not be true, the myth itself requires to be explained, and every principle of philosophy and common sense demand that the explanation be sought, not in arbitrary allegorical categories, but in the actual facts of ritual or religious custom to which the myth attaches.
Fairly tales are myths, and myths are only myths because there's a grain of truth in them.
The only obligation to which in advance we may hold a novel, without incurring the accusation of being arbitrary, is that it be interesting.