Writing Summaries of Arguments and Narratives
Step One: Mapping out the values
Key to summarizing narrative is to distinguish what McKee calls the controlling idea and counter idea embodied in the conflict that structures the narrative. For class purposes, we will call the controlling idea the "purpose of a controlling value," and the counter idea will be the "context of a controlling value." Please see the lecture on distinguishing networks of controlling values for a full explanation of this.
Following McKee's method, locate the narrative's last act, the very moment of crisis in which all things are decided in the climax. Whatever value "wins" in that moment of the action, that will become the "value" in the sentence that expresses the controlling idea. You then must go back through the narrative to determine what caused the change from the initial state of affairs at the beginning, to the new state of affairs at the end. This will supply you with the "thematic" dimension of the narrative: summary is expository, akin to something called diegesis. Diegesis may be understood as those moments in a narrative when "telling" is more dominant than showing (mimesis).
|
Any unit within a narrative could be analyzed according to its controlling and counter ideas (purpose and context). For instance, you could discern what value wins in a chapter, or a paragraph, or even a sentence. This is what you are doing when you graph the values at conflict within a narrative. |
Step Two: Writing out the controlling and counter ideas
The next step to write a summary of a narrative calls for you to put the "cause" and the "value" together into a single statement.
At the same time you need to articulate the counter idea as a "cause producing an effect (value)," though the value expressed in the counter idea will be counter to the value that wins in the narrative, as expressed in the controlling idea. |
Step Three: Writing the Summary
Merely write out the struggle between the controlling idea and counter idea in concise, but well-crafted prose, using the characters of the narrative to flesh out the details of the conflict. Writing any summary requires beginning with the text (book, article, film, etc.) and the author or director. Remember: books and films are italicized; articles, songs, poems are placed in "quotes."
For example: |
The Matrix, a film by the Wachowskis, is the story of a young man, Neo, who is trapped in an illusionary mind-set that tells him he is free and normal, when in fact he is a slave and suffers the most evil form of exploitation imaginable. A group of people (Morpheus, Trinity, etc.) who have already freed themselves from the slavery of the matrix, believe Neo to be a sort of savior. Guided by this belief, they seek Neo out, eluding the seemingly unstoppable agents, and free him in order to battle and ultimately overcome the forces (i.e., the agents) who relentlessly enforce the order of the inhumane matrix. Through realizing the truth of his humanity, Neo ultimately overcomes the necessary limitations of the matrix even the agents must obey, and so wins the battle at hand, letting instinct and humanity triumph over reason and servitude. The challenge is to get it all into as few words as possible without compromising the integrity of the narrative.
|
Summarizing Academic Texts
One useful method for working toward summarizing the argument of a text is to first determine the central concept on which the argument of the piece hinges.
A clue for that may be in the title, but not always. For instance, for McKee's chapter "Structure and Meaning," perhaps the central concept is "meaning," and then the argument will have to do with how the quality of structure impacts the meaning of a story. Once you have a candidate for the central concept, next try to map out the steps the author takes to demonstrate what the audience should value and not value concerning that concept. Here you are trying to show what the author considers "good reasons" to support her or his claims. So for McKee, what kind of structure does he value and why does he think his audience should value what he does? What kind of structure does he not value and why? |
This next step asks you to bring into a single statement what the author values and how the author believes that value will lead to a good end, and how not valuing that value will lead to a negative, undesirable end.
A general rule to think about is that any text projects toward what it values (the "purpose" of the argument) as a way to compensate or avoid what it does not value (the "context" of the argument). Please read through the lecture notes on "Controlling Value" to help in understanding how to crystalize an argument into its context and purpose. |
For the most part, begin the summary by writing the title and author in the first sentence.
Also in this first sentence, try to capture the thrust of the argument, using verbs such as: claims, asserts, argues, objects, attacks, defends, contends. There are many more. Experiment with the possibilities. From the get go, show what the author is arguing for and against. Then show how the author argues for and against. Once you've gotten the first major statement where you introduce the author and title of the text and present the central claim, then you will need to lay out in more explicit detail what the author values, and what exactly the author claims will bring about the expression of this value. What good reasons does the author have for the audience to accept her or his claims? You will also need to lay out what the author does not value and what, if left unaltered, would produce this undesirable value. In the process of laying these two sides out, you will need to define key terms the author uses. |