a story she told
by Joey Levesque
In this blog, Sarah Polley discusses the process of making Stories We Tell. I noticed the reoccurrence of concepts of narrative ownership; Polley expresses gratitude to journalists who refrained from publishing her story.
In a sense, this is not just her story. To a great extent this is her mother’s story, and Polley reflects on the investigation of multiple narratives that was necessary to construct a version of the truth. “I’m not claiming that my film lacks self involvement but what I wanted most was to examine the many versions of this story, how people held onto them, how they agreed and disagreed with each other, and how powerful and necessary creating narrative is for us to make sense of our bewildering lives.” I’m interested in applying the concept of a dominant narrative – which Fred Wah mentioned in class – to this process; Polley avoided using a first-person ‘voice of God’ narration because it felt “too self-involved”. In having her father read from text, Polley evades the constrictions of a dominant narrative; she uses her creative agency to develop a ‘truth’ through dialogue, or maybe a metanarrative that serves as a truth to the viewer: “Anything I want to say myself about this part of my life is said in the film. It’s a search still, a search for meaning, truth, for whether there can ever be a truth.” To me this quotation indicates a sort of heuristic (or analytic) mode of coping on Polley’s part, a need to justify the events of her conception. This of course is conjecture and I do not believe I have any real basis for that claim. I do like the idea she puts forward of “[getting] to know my mother who died when I was 11 in a way that isn’t usually possible for people who lose parents young”. Though the actual experience is out of reach, it has been remediated and retold, and Polley has learned to experience vicariously through narratives; “I […] didn’t want this story to be out there in the words of someone other than the many people who lived it. Now it will be written about in many other people’s words, and I’m finally at peace with that.”
One thing I’ve learned in this course is to pay close attention to differences between narratives. I find they often reflect aspects of the narrator that would not be evident without a counterpoint; these differences represent junctions in the guiding framework we tend to follow when constructing our own narrative truths. For me, this is why Stories We Tell works so well: they’re our stories, not just her story.
Harry posits a different perspective, as we see in the second half of the film; he states that all the stories can be heard but giving ‘non-players’ equal weight is a mistake. He believes that people tend to declare themselves in terms of what they experienced, and indicates that loyalties and relationships also play a part in shaping narratives. For me this is visible in Sarah’s metanarrative documentary.
Something else that stuck with me: while Harry unilaterally declares that the ultimate goal of art is to get at the truth, Sarah states that the truth is ephemeral and hard to pin down. Different philosophies, I suppose…
In your blog, Joey, what interested me was the lines you mentioned, which says: “One thing I’ve learned in this course is to pay close attention to differences between narratives. I find they often reflect aspects of the narrator that would not be evident without a counterpoint; these differences represent junctions in the guiding framework we tend to follow when constructing our own narrative truths.”
I think that as an audience, we’re always craving to understand the narrator a little more so we can better frame the narrative that we are consuming. But some, like Sarah Polley, hold themselves back because they want other narratives and truths to surface, without their personal narrative overshadowing those. As a result, we grasp at straws trying to figure them out. The point that you made about looking at the differences of how narrative is told to understand the narrator is an interesting idea to follow through with. And given the choices of the narrators to hold back, this may be one of the most accessible ways to understand them more.
I started to use your idea to compare Maus and Stories We Tell. Though both are meta narratives, Maus is a lot more transparent in choices regarding how much of the narrator’s personal narrative to share. While Polley is trying to show less of herself, Spiegelman actually inserts himself more into the text, showing the audience his motives, and feelings for choosing what to do and how to draw and write out scenes. Maus is more transparent in that it allows us to see what’s going on in the narrator’s mind. But I believe that their difference in narrative reflect that difference of goals and motives for creating the piece. By using the method you suggested, Joey, I’m able to better and more critically understand the author’s intent. Thanks! It’s a good framework of analyzing and comparing works of literature.