Eric Yost writes But from the point of view of the production of a narrative, rather than from the vicarious analysis of literary products, form is the solution for the problems of content. Form is the solution to the problem you set yourself by the content you select. We spend our lives learning different narrative forms, forms that may have unconscious roots, that we may sometimes intuit rather than analyze--and when we write, it is this lifelong immersion in narrative form that we draw upon. It's like a guitarist improvising on a chord progression. The progression lets you know where you are going, except in writing improvised forms, you edit out the improvs that fail. The result is the unique and inseparable form of the narrative. ----- Thanks for the comments on 'narration' and 'form' and 'content'. I wonder if narration necessarily necessitates (as it were) some kind of content. It seems that it does, but maybe it does not. I mean, "He narrated that..." -- seems like 'narrate' you have to narrate _something_ (more like 'prose' than 'poetry'). But I believe Yost is using 'narrate' in a more general way to include poetry and, say, drama. I have not checked the etymology of 'narrate' -- not that it would matter much, but wonder if 'narrare' was essentially concerned with the _telling_ of a _tale_ -- as when we say, "not much of a narration". Cheers, JL ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html