I was pondering why my storywriting was always going against the 3-act structure and I would get confused, but realizing now that I grew up loving stories that follow Kishotenketsu structure it aligns much more, so this really cleared my head. Thank you for such a great video!
Wow!! Ty for this insightful view into this story structure!!! And love the comments!! Your response in defence of Rand and describing aspects of maturity is majestically positive. A message for our time. Ty
This is done very concisely. Thank you for making this. I know it must have taken a while, and it's something I have always wanted done right. You did it!
Tysm! Great content! It's funny to see how the literary sense of Stoicism you presented is almost a counter to Stoic philosophy. But I can definitely see why it makes sense as a literary term ofc
Thank you for taking the time at the beginning of the video to explain character archetypes and philosophies for the 3+4 Act structures. My MC has a 4 Act attitude for absolute certain. Thank you!
This is the first story structure that actually seems to fit with the book I am currently writing. Its a memoir. I have tried so hard to make it work with a 3 act story structure and it just doesnt quite fit. Would love some examples of books or movies following this structure, if you know any.
Interesting subject. I've read many books on writing and have ever heard of this before. What are some good stories to read, or movies to watch, that use Kishotenketsu?
correct me if I'm wrong but this Kishotenketsu is in western media as well. I say this because many of the ancient greek tragedies seem to incorporate what in a hero's journey would normally be the inciting incident or the stage where one leaves their everyday lives after something else, is the backdrop from which we start in greek tragedies. Something like Antigone has our world established and there's rising action in the sense that there's action but we don't get the revelation of the characters as an advantage to shape the world in the third act like in the hero's journey, but it's usually a reconciliation that comes after or during the third act. Feel free to correct me, this structure just reminded me of the greek tragedies.
Hi Blueknight. Thanks for the comment. You're correct in stating that the Kishotenketsu method (or at least a similar deterministic structure) is also found in Western media. I've attached Kishtoenketsu to anime and manga mostly because they are the most prevalent, familiar, and readily accessible examples of the form most people have access to. The important thing is not necessarily Kishotenketsu's connection to anime and manga, but the particulars of the form itself. The form also exists in myths and urban legends from around the world, jokes, some examples of classic literature, and even certain stories in the Bible are written in a similar structure. Thanks for the comment.
I read a lot of manga and it doesn’t follow this format, at least not how it’s described here. (Hirohiko araki covers it in his book but it just sounds like standard 3 act) The only one I can think of that does is Mushishi. And it’s an odd, acquired taste kind of series that lacks excitement. So, has western style storytelling conquered the globe?
most manga is a mix of the two. individual arcs follow 3 act story structure but the overall story follow kishotenketsu, I have noticed this in one piece.
Thank you for your thoughts as they spread reflection :) I like the idea of your channel and i support it, i just share some thoughts as well, don't take it as adversion! I think that interpretation of Aristotle and Homer is rather an interpretation of Campbell. Aristotle's poetic and Homer's Iliad are NOT works in which it is said that life is suffering to be endured without complaints (stoicism is a MUCH later philosophy in respect to Homer) and that the hero is in charge to change the world to show his power and come back with a new conquest. Otherwise: in Homer's Iliad this is PRECISELY the FLAW of Achilles, which in the end loses what Greek cuture valued the most: his friend. Also, in ancient Greece there was a strong sense of finiteness AND fate, so where they were individualists/romantic? We could go on and on with such references but the most astounding is that THEIR VERY GODS were some sort of enanched personification of passion, insofar as passion were "too strong" to be "only" a human thing. It is well known that Greek Math was all about translating into actual geometry their discovered formulas. otherwise, they were not interested. Why? beacuse they saw a participation of the divine into the world, which was not suffering but also intrinsically magical and terrifying. This is not merely "suffering". What you say at 3:35 is exactly what ancient greek philosophy classified as "hybris" (punished rebellion against divine order or logos).
Thank you for the comment. If by academic you mean scholarly (college or university level) I'm not aware of any. Most of my research was from sources I found on the web, which should be in the description of the video. Kishotenektsu is still fairly unknown in the West. This is the only book I could find about it on Amazon: "Lost in the Forest," by Garrett Ray Harriman. I haven't read it, so I can't vouch for it. (Link below. Not an affiliate.) www.amazon.ca/Lost-4rest-Garrett-Ray-Harriman/dp/1365297624/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?crid=VDFD2F5YT1QA&keywords=kisho+tenketsu&qid=1690341055&sprefix=kishotenkets%2Caps%2C199&sr=8-1-fkmr0 Since my videos on the topic are some of my most popular by far, I took the time to write a book about it myself. If you're interested, you can find it at the link below. I hope you can pardon the amateurish nature of the landing page. I'm searching for a professional to have the page re-done. thekishotenketsucompass.com/ Thank you for your comment.
Oh yeah. They don't affect the world at all. Certainly not in Naruto, Bleach, One Piece, Fullmetal Alchemist, Hunter X Hunter, Fairy Tail, Soul Eater, Fire Force, D.Gray-man, Nurarihyon No Mago, Kateikyoushi Hitman Reborn, Air Gear, Gamaran and pretty much any shounen.
Thanks for the comment. Some do. Some don't. I've found that the anime I've watched follow it to varying degrees. Some follow it extremely rigidly, some don't, some use a western 3-act structure and some combine forms to create something new. But that's not even really the point. The point is the style itself. I only tie it to anime and manga because that is the most readily available form of the style most people know and have access to. It's also available in Japanese Rakugoh and Noh plays. Bollywood films sometimes borrow from it, though Bollywood borrows from a lot of things. And even the Bible makes use of a similar style in its stories. But these things aren't always as accessible or popular as anime and manga. So the point is to introduce writers to a new style they may not have experienced before. I find Kishotenketsu adheres fairly closely to the anime I watch. But you obviously don't, and that's fine. Maybe the anime you prefer relies on a more Western structure. That's possible. Thanks for the comment.
A warning to all vierwes: I appreciate that RU-vid is turning towards a more mixed approach in video recommendation so smaller channels get a chance at growth. But in this instance, no thank you! The explanation of Kishotenketsu is half-decent, but still shallow. Discount everything he said about freedom, the individual, "eastern-western" tropes, romanticism and god forbid Ayn Rand. Don't touch that shit under any circumstance, that stuff rots your brain, trust me I've been there years ago. The viewers wanted an explanation of the story-telling method, not half a lecture of undergrad libertarian rambling.
@@reginaldforthright805 I fell into the libertarian grind when I was 14, now I'm studying political science and history and have amassed a small library of literature, turns out, if you actually read you'll be a leftist in a short while -- all capitalist and libertarian arguments have been debunked time and time again, all the while being pretty ridiculous themselves. On the other hand, I have yet to come across a convincing argument against the Marxian economic and social perspective. All "debunkings" circle back to a fundamental lack of understanding of the source material or total refusal to engage with it at all. Das Kapital, for example, is a pretty hard text, but it is still the best analysis of capitalism there is. Ayn Rand, Peterson, Shapiro and all those others are perfect examples of a stupid persons idea of a genius.
@@ynk1611 hopefully you grow out of your Marx phase soon, kid. That shit is poison. I’ve seen the Twitter meme of stupid person’s idea of a smart person and it’s always just popular right-wing commentators. But no one thinks they’re geniuses, they just have basic critical thinking skills, which puts them well above the idiots and sycophants in establishment media.
@@ynk1611 Here, I'll give you a good reason why Marxism doesn't work: The human is made to be selfish, we as an individual value what we consider is "our side" and most of the times it includes us and a selective group. To try and change that nature in favor of collectivism is to be naive. The reason why there's the rich and there's the plebeians is because the rich took what they could when they could, not out of hate but out of nature. The state is gonna do the same thing (it already did every single time socialism was tried) and take whenever they can ignoring what Marx wanted in the first place; again, not out of hate but out of nature. Marxism is a utopia. And while I agree that it could benefit us all if it were to work, the issue is rooted in the way we humans work, in our nature. We Can't, that's it.
Dropping Rand without any qualifiers about the sheer idiocy of her belief system is irresponsible. It’s fair to surmise your intention is to innocuously spread the contagion of her belief system under the guise of explaining kishotonketsu.
Hi Arp. Thanks for your comment. I'm sorry I couldn't respond sooner, but my work schedule makes checking in on my RU-vid on a timely basis difficult. Regarding Rand, it's not my intention to "innocuously spread the contagion of her belief system under the guise of explaining Kishotenketsu." I mention Rand for a couple main reasons. 1) I've found that people either love her or hate her with very little in between. The reason for this, in my opinion, is because her writing is so vivid that she paints her worldview extremely clearly. With that clarity, you can't help but be polarized by her worldview, one way or another. 2) She exemplifies principles of Stoic Romanticism, which I offer as a counter to the Determinism of more traditional Kishotenketsu in this series. She sees Determinism, as the counter to Romanticism, as objectively evil and a style no one should use. I disagree with her sharply on this as I believe there's a place for Determinism in our media. I've also stated other ways I've disagreed with her in my other videos. That aside, let me extend an olive branch. Here are a few points where I disagree with her off the top of my head. 1) I'm a born-again Christian. She's a militant Atheist. 2) I can see some value in a Deterministic worldview. She considers it abjectly evil. 3) Some people call her love scenes rapey. Some people are right. An issue I've covered in my series "Should you include love scenes in your work?" 4) She tends to focus on her message at the expense of her story. The result is a body of work that can seem a bit preachy. Like reading a gospel tract for her philosophy of Objectivism. These are just the things I can think off the top of my head. If you and I were to brainstorm we could probably come up with more. As for her philosophies being "Idiotic", this isn't a political channel and I don't intend it to be. I created this channel to focus on literature and the art of writing. I agree that she's publically filled her pants more than once, but I'm not going to discount a talented writers thoughts on the craft just because some of the other things she says are goofy. And you're right, they are goofy. But as the old saying goes, "Chew the meat, spit out the bones." In short, I like Ayn Rand. Even if she fills her pants from time to time. I like her work. Even if it's a bit preachy. As a mature individual, I can forgive these things because I don't need to agree with everything someone believes to enjoy their work. And as a mature individual, my wife also refuses to read her work for many of the reasons I've stated. I don't force her and she doesn't burn my books. So I'm not going to stop reading, recommending, and referencing Rand. The fact that we're having this conversation is proof that she hits home as an author. She's memorable if nothing else. I try to be frank about the virtues and deficiencies of her work and separate the meat from the bones for my viewers as much as possible. Thank you for your comment.
What is idiotic about Rand's belief system? That all men should work at what they are best at? That happiness is each individual responsibility and no one elses? That everyone should follow logical reason above anything else? Yeah, how idiotic.
@@calamuspress1487 people call Rand preachy, but they forget or don't know, that she was a kid during russian civil war and bolsheviks took her family's house. In her works she wanted to show to americans what communism really is and why it's bad, because many didn't understood it then. And it looks like don't understand it still
Aryn Rand is an extremely ideological driven figure, and her writings are inseparable to her ideology. So I can't help but believe that you only recommended her to spread her ideological beliefs. Even if that weren't the case, couldn't you have thought of a better author that wasn't so blatantly political-relious? It makes me think you're working in bad faith here. When the video began, I had hoped that I found a new educational channel, but now I can't subscribe believing that you have ulterior motives
Hi, Jonathan. Thanks for your comment. Her writings may be inseparable from her ideology, but that isn't the point. The point is her writing style which I find very assertive, clear and vivid. One might even call it masculine. And I think it's the vivid clarity of her writing which has led to the divisive and polarized nature of her career and ideology. She can communicate her philosophy so clearly that you either love or hate her with nothing in between. The only reason I can take a middle-of-the-road stance with her is that I focus on the technical qualities of her writing, which I find captivating. To extend an olive branch, while I find her philosophy of Objectivism interesting, I don't even agree with every aspect of her work. I'll list a few things off the top of my head that I disagree with: -I'm Christian. She's an atheist. -She believes greed is a virtue. I think she's miscategorized the concept of greed altogether. -Her love scenes can be a bit extreme. Bordering on r@p3 even. -She believes Romanticism is the only worthy virtue in literature, and Determinist thought is outrightly evil. I disagree and see value in both. -And, if I can be blunt, she can be an opinionated @$$ at times. If she were alive today, I think we would grate on each other relentlessly. That's what I can come up with off the top of my head. If we were to brainstorm, we could probably come up with more. And yes, I could have chosen someone else. But I didn't. This is my channel. I like Ayn Rand for her acumen as a writer despite her faults. I'm not apologizing for that. And while I acknowledge her flaws, I still find her philosophy of objectivism interesting, if incomplete. I'm not apologizing for that. So, I will continue using her and her work as a teaching tool regardless of who is offended by it. And I'm not apologizing for that, either. As for who you can and can't subscribe to... you do you. I'm grateful for the audience I've reached, but I'm not begging for subs. I created this channel for learning. My learning as well as my subs. I'll put out whatever content I please as I am able to do so. Thanks for the comment.
There’s also a prominent Asian saying that goes “the child who knows how to cry is the one who gets milk” so I’m not sure your philosophy comparison stands.
