Lately I've been interested in different types of narrative structures, namely upon discovering Kishōtenketsu, the Japanese four-act structure and how it contrasts to the traditional western three-act structure.

Obviously narrative is not an exact science, and these structures are best thought of as guide rails to get you started, and a story can be told in so many unique ways. Which brings me to this post's title: The Bear.

The Bear has strong themes revolving around family and personal growth, that's for certain, but when it comes to narrative, it is very unique. Episode length can vary quite a bit, and so too can episode content. Episode 1 of the most recent season was a time-bending, heartstring-tugging montage. Episode 2 was essentially just a single conversation.

And while there are some episodes with a traditional narrative structure with a clear beginning, climax, and ending, I would say most episodes steer away from this concept. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that any sort of resolution is very rare in this show. Episodes, or even entire seasons can pass without many of the major conflicts or problems being resolved, which certainly adds to the high-pressure, anxiety-inducing mantra of the show as a whole.

I'd say The Bear leans heavily into the Slice of Life trope. Where we're being invited into brief glimpses of the lives of the characters, where relationships are complicated, problems aren't always solved, and life is simply messy and unorganized. The Bear doesn't follow any sort of formula that audiences would find satisfying (but that certainly doesn't mean it isn't enjoyable).

So, back to the question in the title. Does anyone know where I might read or learn more about the type of narrative structure that The Bear employs? Is there even a name for it? As innovative as the show is, is still has this certain air of nostalgia that reminds me a lot of Sopranos, which is another show that I believe breaks the mold of traditional story structure, especially in an episodic format.

Any insight would be greatly appreciated! Enjoy your day, and godspeed.

I put on Hit Man last night and about an hour into - it once some romance got going - I just.. stopped caring. I realized I just don't care.

I am strictly homosexual, important to note.

It wasn't even mainly a romantic movie. Nor a bad movie. It was pretty average but I often quite like these turn-off-your-brain type action/comedies. The weird thing is that the same director made the Before trilogy which are some of my favorite movies of all time, but maybe it's just that they're better movies?

In any case, it just kind of surprised me that I had this reaction since I usually don't mind this "tier" of movies. It's not disgust or anything either! I just.. didn't care. But if it were a gay or lesbian romance, I would have definitely been super into it.

I assume I'm not alone in this. I'm just having kind of an epiphany moment here! You'd think a 30 year old who's been out for years would have had this realization a bit earlier: we/I am not the "default" target audience.

Feels pretty weird?

I had a long-running discussion about this last year with a trans person on the Fediverse. Before that conversation, it had never even crossed my mind that Klinger was anything other than a cis-het guy desperately trying to exploit a weird Army regulation to escape from a war zone ... who may admittedly have become a bit too attached to his wardrobe in the process.

However, she pointed out that Klinger was the closest thing to a role model she had on TV growing up at the time, and that she had definitely seen and identified a lot of traits in Klinger that strongly suggest he (she?) was a semi-closeted trans character, effectively pulling a double-switch, pretending to be a "regular guy" who was pretending to be a cross-dresser just to get out of the Army, while actually having found a way to be openly trans in the US Army all the way back in the 1950s.

Thoughts?