X hits on this document

PDF document

Towards a narrative theory of Virtual Reality - page 13 / 26





13 / 26

can be cited here. However the applicability of structuralist theories, presents many

difficulties to AI and VR, principally due to their very high level of abstraction.

Analysis of structure seems inescapably tied to a view of narrative-as-artefact which

seems to conflict with VR’s real time process based narrative approach.

It appears that, the analytical benefits of such approaches being evident, it is however

questionable to consider their use in the process view of building a narrative as VR

regards it. The interaction with the user being of prime importance in VR

applications, it seems that a process approach to narrative, based on character

interaction (among them the user) would be more suitable and appropriate. A similar

approach made by Heath [26], argued that, when considering the relation between

subject and text, the narrative organisation of images and representations maintained

the subject in position within the text. The subject is caught up by the text and bound

not into position but into the process of narrativisation, the text moving the subject in

a constantly shifting regulation and containment [27]. The consideration of

“narrativisation” and the role of the subject bringing there similarities within the

“storification” process and the role of the user in Aylett’s approach [28].

3.2 Conclusion

Both the mimetic and diegetic approaches to narrative considered here lead to the

conclusion that none of them seems to be directly applicable to VR. It is our belief

that a process view of story, as opposed to a chronological view of narrative, should

be adopted in order to provide VR with a more participative narrative form that can be

drawn upon from both mimetic and diegetic considerations.

Document info
Document views99
Page views99
Page last viewedFri Jan 20 06:44:51 UTC 2017