by Francesca Polletta, Monica Trigoso, Britni Adams and Amanda Ebner
Comment by Anne Kane, University of Houston, Downtown
How do people read stories, and how do stories motivate action? This problem has been central to much investigation and analysis by cultural sociologists, and is the broad orienting question of “The Limits of Plot: Accounting for how women interpret stories of sexual assault” by Francesca Polletta and her co-investigators Monica Trigoso, Britni Adams, and Amanda Ebner. There are two distinguishing features of this article. First, it is based on an empirical study of how audiences interpret stories told along different plotlines. Second, the investigation extends beyond the much theorized element of plot to what the authors claim is under -theorized in narrative analysis - character. Indeed, the authors argue that both plot and character must be studied when evaluating narrative effectiveness in encouraging audience action, and suggest a “two logics” approach to studying narratives meant to persuade. Plot and character operated according to different logics. Plots make sense in terms of previous plots, in terms of genre; characters make sense in terms of dominant ideologies and prevalent role norms. A story is believable when the character in any genre upholds dominant status expectations.
The question of narrative effectiveness is posed by the specific type of stories investigated by this study: date or acquaintance rape stories, designed to encourage women to report being raped to the authorities. Efforts by agencies to increase the low reportage of date rape by using such stories have come under criticism for not being effective. The authors hypothesize that the time and space factor of ideology, or dominant beliefs, may be the problem, and that the portrayals of the main characters in the stories, the female rape victims, are often inconsistent with the dominant beliefs of the audience, young women. In short, while the narrative plot may resonate with readers, the character does not, and hence, the story is not effective.
According to Polletta et al, narrative plot genres transcend time and space, and are readily recognized by readers; tragedy, heroic, gothic, and rebirth are the genres used in the stories of this study. Character or protagonist portrayal – here, the rape victim – is dicey as to whether the audience will identify with, like, or sympathize with her because a reader brings time and space based beliefs to the evaluation of the protagonist. If a reader does not positively relate on some level with the protagonist - and most important, see the victim as blameless - the former will not be predisposed to act in response to the story.
The authors tested this hypothesis with a group of 180 female university students. The women read three stories about rape, and answered questions devised to flesh out whether they found each story believable; how they judged the story’s protagonist (the rape victim); whether they identified with the protagonist; and what would they do if they were the rape victim in the story. The stories were plotted along tragic, gothic, heroic and rebirth genre lines, and the rape victims’ character flaws were portrayed as romantic idealist (tragic plot), male dominated (heroic), naïve innocent (gothic), and passive (rebirth). While at least 90% of respondents found each story realistic along plot line, identification with and sympathy for the protagonist (character) was much lower. Smaller still was the percentage of respondents who thought the protagonist would report the rape to authorities or a friend. Thus, most respondents thought the stories would be ineffective in outreach efforts to rape victims.
The “two logics” approach advocated by the authors allows for a more nuanced analysis of the readers’ responses to the stories. This approach, and the findings from the study, suggests that “respondents read along the line of genre – but only when the main characters did not defy status expectations (23).” In the tragic narrative, readers did read along plot line. However many readers viewed the victim blameworthy in trusting a man solely because he is attractive, and found her to be immature, naïve, insecure and stupid. As the victim’s fatal flaw defies dominant beliefs, or norm based status, of twenty-first century young women, 45% of readers did not identify with her. And most (74%) did not believe victim would report her rape to authorities.
Respondents did not read the heroic according to genre: though brave in the end, the protagonist was not seen as heroic. As well, readers found her to be unfeminine in her “assertiveness.” Her assertiveness in challenging her potential rapist was not the problem; instead, it was her assertiveness in being a loner in terms of women friends. This contributed to her low score for character, as young college women believe that women should be loyal to and stick with girlfriends. Despite a low identification rate with the protagonist, the heroic story received the highest score, 58%, for whether the victim would report her rape.
In the rebirth story, the protagonist awakens from state of numbness brought on by rape to recognize her self-worth. Though readers viewed the protagonist as sympathetic and likable, many found her rapid transformation unrealistic. The innocent, sheltered, and reclusive protagonist in the gothic story was highly identified with by readers (69%), and 98% found the story realistic. Still, most readers did not believe she would report her rape to authorities.