Pierre Corneille and the Deathly Hallows
OK, look, I’m back and I SWEAR this is the last entry about Pierre Corneille. He’s a nice guy and all, but third time is the charm. No more introduction; if you haven’t read the last two posts, don’t read this one. There’s just too much history behind it. Diving in:
For my senior project this year, I’m writing a story called The Best We Were (be sure to come to my presentation on April 28!). The story, with malice aforethought, I assure you, adheres to the three unities which Corneille mentions. Before you leap up and shout that something must be off here, since I started the story last year and only read this essay for the first time last Sunday, I’ll say that I did hear about these three unities somewhere before, and that I think it was in Helen Walker’s playwriting class. Now, my story is just that, a story, a short prose work, not a play. But ever since I was in Helen’s class, I’ve reflected on this idea of the unities. My story incorporates all three.
Unity of Action: All of the action in my story revolves around one set plot; several people come to a meeting, where a scientist shows them an immortality serum. Not a single thing happens in the story which is not, one way or another, about this plotline. There are subplots, but I made sure that each one ties in somehow (and if you ever get a chance to read it or hear it, keep this in mind. Some of the connections are kinda hidden).
Unity of Time: The action takes place from about 5:40 PM until around 7:00 PM on a Monday in November. There are brief, mental flashbacks, but everything always returns to the story’s present.
Unity of Place: Except for two well-thought-out exceptions, the entirety of the story takes place within a single room, an auditorium.
I think that Corneille is a genius. For keeping a story together, his ideas make a lot of sense. As an author, I like using all of the “dirty little tricks” that I can get my hands on, and Corneille’s ideas are pretty slick. While I am aiming to one day write more “high-brow literary” stuff in addition to my “lower-brow” writings (which I don’t see any reason to give up), I’m still on my way towards that goal, and am always happy to have an experienced writer, even one from the 1600’s, give me good and, above all, practical advice.
So ends the saga of AndrewTheory and Pierre Corneille. I hope this has been enlightening to you. I’ve enjoyed it over the course of this week. Tune in next time for . . . something completely different.
