This document discusses several theories about narrative structure that may be useful for structuring a documentary. It examines Propp's theory of character archetypes, Todorov's theory of an initial equilibrium disrupted by a problem and resolved by a new equilibrium, and Barthes' theory of four narrative codes: action, enigma, semantic and cultural. While Propp's theory may apply to some documentaries, it is not relevant for a documentary about what makes people laugh. Todorov's theory of equilibrium could apply as the documentary seeks to resolve the curiosity of what makes people laugh. Barthes' enigma and cultural codes may also be applicable as the documentary aims to solve a puzzle and understand different cultures' senses of humor.

1. Narratives in a
Documentary
Joseph Toyer

2. What is a Narrative?
O The narrative is the account of connected events
making the story, which can be spoken or written.
O This is not to be mistaken with a plot, which would
follow the scripted writing of the story whilst the
narrative follows the timeline of events told in the
text.
O The role of a narrator comes from the narrative, in
which it would be told to the audience alike to being
read a book, though this is not compulsory for all
narratives.
O Narrative comes from the late middle English
language in the form of an adjective based on the
French word ‘narratif’ and further back ‘narrativus’ in
late Latin.

3. How is a Documentary
Narrative Structured?
O The narrative of a documentary depends on what
type of documentary is being produced.
O Documentary films would generally have the same
style of narrative that a fictional film would include.
O Some documentaries use the multi-strand narrative
for such as ‘Barely Legal Drivers’ which usually
focuses on three different stories per run whereas
others like ‘Meerkat Manor’ follow one story at a time.
O In most cases, the narrative is based on facts or the
true events themselves, though sometimes (i.e. with
Mockumentaries), the narrative would be re-written
so it would not only be informative but also
entertaining.

4. Vladimir Propp’s Theory
O This is the theory of characters in the
media text fitting a certain caption, as an
example, your main character could be
the ‘hero’ figure.
O This is a useful theory, particularly for
creating fictional characters however only
going by this would make them ‘Two-dimensional’.

5. Is Propp’s Theory Useful?
O I believe for most Documentaries I would say this
theory is not so useful, unless the subject matter
being documented involves rivalries.
O There are some documentaries however in which
this theory could be applied, such as ‘Meerkat
Manor’, this making predators to Meerkats appear
as the ‘villain’ characters. Crime documentaries
could also interpret criminals in such a way should
they be featured on screen.
O However for my documentary, Propp’s theory
would not be relevant to finding out what makes
people laugh or making a documentary of such the
matter.

6. Tzvetan Todorov’s Theory
O This theory is based upon the three stages of a
storyline; the beginning, middle and ending.
O Todorov interprets the narrative to start with an
initial equilibrium in which everything (usually)
would be normal.
O However the disequilibrium would interrupt this as
the stage when the problem in the story is
introduced and the consequences of such are
shown.
O By taking action against the disequilibrium and
defeating the problem. The solution of the
situation, which is usually different from the
beginning stage is the form of a new equilibrium.

7. Is Todorov’s Theory Useful?
O Generally this theory could apply to
anything, including reality, as there is
always a problem in life to overcome.
O For my own documentary, the original
equilibrium would be the curiosity of what
makes people laugh, and then going
along hopefully to a new equilibrium of
finding out what the answer to the
question is.

8. Roland Barthes’ Theory
O Roland’s theory, is about the narrative
being broken down into codes and rules.
These are used to control how the
information is represented to the
audience.
O There are four codes:
O Action Code
O Enigma Code
O Semantic Code
O Cultural Code

9. Is Barthes’ Theory Useful?
Action Code
O The action code claims for narratives to
be resolved through action. This usually
being an act of violence, by villain and/or
hero.
O My documentary requires no action of
such the sort as I intend to find out
information rather than resolve conflicts by
violence. Therefore the Action Code would
not be useful.

10. Is Barthes’ Theory Useful?
Enigma Code
O The Enigma Code is the device used to question the
audience and keep them interested in a subject matter.
It does so by presenting riddles or puzzles that need to
be solved.
O Sometimes extensive use is made of this code, such as
Steven Moffat’s ‘Sherlock’ and ‘Doctor Who’, or spy films
like the ‘James Bond’ collection.
O This theory can be applied to non fiction as well as the
headlines of a newspaper subtlety provide details of the
stories that are featured in the paper.
O I believe this is the central code of my documentary as I
want to explore into what it is that makes people laugh
and will therefore be trying to solve a puzzle, that this
theory has created.

11. Is Barthes’ Theory Useful?
Semantic Code
O The Semantic Code refers to part of the media text
suggesting additional meaning, alike to
connotation.
O Elements in the Semantic Code are called Semes.
This is what has the connotative function in media
texts, there being an extra meaning beneath it’s
literal meaning.
O Although I don’t believe this would be useful in my
documentary, it is possible that it may have some
relevance to answering the question because
sometimes it’s the hidden meanings behind a joke
placed into a comedy that makes people laugh.

12. Is Barthes’ Theory Useful?
Cultural Code
O This refers to anything within the media
text referring to an external body of
knowledge such as knowledge of culture,
science, history or politics.
O This may not be the main code used in my
documentary, however it is relevant to the
culture of the people that contribute to
answering the question, as humour is
subject to opinion.

13. Levi Strauss’ Theory
O Along side Barthes, Strauss saw that the way we
understand some ideas or words depends not on
their own meaning but by having an understanding
of it’s binary opposite.
O This can be explained using a coin, you
understand one side from knowing the other. This
can be applied to binary opposites such as
happiness and misery, requiring each other for
either one of them to exist, like the two sides of the
coin.
O It’s relevance to narrative comes from Strauss’
belief that binary opposites are essential to the
development of a narrative as the opposition is
what drives the story forward.

14. Is Strauss’ Theory Useful?
O I doubt that this theory would help me with
my documentary, however I can
understand how the theory becomes
relevant to my documentary.
O Because I intend to explore what makes
people laugh, I might also have to be
aware of what would make them cry, this
being the binary opposite of laughter.

15. References
O http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definitio
n/english/narrative
O http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_f
ilm
O http://www.slideshare.net/tlninmedia/narra
tive-theories-2723608
O http://www.slideshare.net/sarahlambe/bart
hes-5-narrative-codes-12063567