Steve Watson

Towards a ‘Virtue Theory’ for Literature (3)

I said previously that the narrative virtues, being associated with the literary elements that are widely accepted as requirements for fine literature, require little explanation. That little explanation, however, is required. We can begin by noting that the relationship to the listed literary elements is not quite so obvious as might be thought. For example, the analysis of these literary elements in the relevant literature often deals with aspects that are not obviously related to a ‘virtue’ associated with them: the virtue associated with the element of ‘Narration’ isn’t going to be much concerned with point of view questions or with omniscient narrators or unreliable narrators or other such things, the virtue associated with ‘Plot’ isn’t going to be much concerned with ‘the hero’s journey’ or the other supposedly necessary forms of plotline, the virtue associated with the element of ‘Character’ isn’t going to be concerned with whether the characters fill the roles of protagonist or antagonist, and so on. Moreover, at least one of the classic literary elements, ‘Conflict,’ doesn’t seem to be associated with anything I’d count as a virtue at all.

Five Narrative Literary Virtues

Thematic Engagement

Every narrative will be found to have one or several themes. A theme is, bluntly speaking, the point of the narrative, it is what the narrative is about beyond a simple recounting of a sequence of events. Although it is often stated that the theme can be described in a single word – like ‘love,’ ’revenge,’ or ‘loneliness’ – and that it is to be sharply distinguished from a ‘moral,’ in which a particular (usually normative) claim is more or less explicitly supported by the text, we find that the most rewarding treatments of a theme involve a great deal of usually implicit propositional content. A work shows the virtue of thematic engagement when a variety of attitudes and claims related to the themes are explored in that work – intelligently, though not necessarily systematically, and without necessarily endorsing or disapproving any of them. The associated vice of defect is seen in a lack of intelligent exploration of the theme(s,) in which case the narrative is intellectually unengaging and will be experienced as vacuous. The vice of excess risks making the work a treatise and overwhelming the narrative experience.

Plot Integrity

Every narrative has a plot, in the sense of a series of causally related events/situations/states of affairs: that is true almost by the very definition of narrative literature. From classical times (I’m thinking particularly of Aristotle’s claims in his Poetics relating to tragic theatre) it has been recognised that event sequences that fail to satisfy certain obvious criteria of causal integrity are experienced as unsatisfactory: thus, events in general should follow one another according to the normal way of things, and coincidences, extraneous events (outside the chain of causes,) extraordinary events, irrelevant events, and so on are not to be overly relied on to move the story forward nor to be allowed to distract from the plot. On the other hand, it is precisely some such unusual event that may precipitate the action of a narrative or create the unusual circumstance that makes the story worth hearing. The virtue of plot integrity finds the middle way between the vice of excessive reliance on such events – experienced as laziness or incompetence on the part of the story teller – and the vice of complete rejection of any unusual events – which will make the plot a nullity in the narrative experience and will usually nullify the narrative experience itself.

Character Accessibility

Where the plot of a narrative consists of a sequence of events, the characters in a narrative are those involved in the events, whether as patients or agents (or both.) Amongst the pleasures of narrative literature is that afforded by the exercise of our capacity for empathy which may thus be focused on one or several of the characters presented. In order for empathy with a character to be reasonably possible that character has to be adequately defined: motivations have to be comprehensible, actions and responses and emotions and so on have to be plausible given their history, circumstances, desires, fears, etc. In short, some work of psychological definition has to be undertaken in order to create a particular character that can be reasonably modelled by the reader’s theory of mind – though not necessarily through direct description, for the character may more effectively emerge through the actions of the story. Without this sort of definition, a character will lack sufficient detail to invite or permit empathy. The virtue of character accessibility lies in achieving a character definition adequate to permit empathetic identification without going so far into the complexities and details and peculiarities of those invented psyches that the narration becomes subordinated to the psychological exploration, which invites psychological analysis at a distance rather than empathetic identification and subverts the narrative experience.

Imaginative Appeal (of the Setting)

Events and characters necessarily exist in a particular place and time and milieu which provides the context and background for the narrative. Similarly to the pleasure of empathizing with characters, amongst the pleasures of narrative literature is that afforded by the exercise of our capacity to imagine ourselves in an alien environment, where things are otherwise than they are outside the narrative. In order for this imaginative immersion to be possible a sufficient description has to be provided of the narrative’s setting that the imagination can use to begin its inner construction of the narrative’s world, presented in such a way that it invites the imaginative effort. On the other hand, the background is just the background, and any descriptive work should not be allowed to dominate the narrative to the extent that the work becomes an exercise in world-building or socio-historical documentation rather than a narrative. There are rewards to those arts certainly, but they are not those of narrative literature. It’s worth noting, too, that the setting of a narrative may be used as a support for thematic or character elements, and some narrative pleasure can be gained from the setting in that use, but only if the setting has independently succeeded in appealing to the immersive imagination

Stylistic Distinction

Every narrative as presented necessarily has a certain style constituted by the distinctive way in which the author chooses words, structures the work, uses various literary devices, and so on. Style may be used to engage the audience, manage pacing, regulate tone and mood, and perform many other essential functions. A good style – in the most basic sense – is one that allows these functions and may be judged on that ground. Beyond such fundamental criteria for the acceptability of any style, an author may also use this as a place to display ludic literary virtues. For whatever reason, however, we also find pleasure in simply experiencing a narration delivered in a style that is distinct and particular to an author. The virtue of stylistic distinction is achieved by finding the middle way between a style that is pedestrian and unremarkable and indistinguishable from any number of other uninspired writers, and a style that in striving for distinction overshoots and becomes intrusive, so that the narrative becomes subordinated to the narration – or worse, the narrator.