Deconstructing Deconstruction

https://myarchitecturediary.blogspot.com/2010/04/deconstruction.html

Banner Image

Deconstruction, where writing is concerned, is when an author takes an established trope and uses it in a way that either grounds it in reality or defies it in someway. When used correctly deconstruction can be a powerful tool in any author's story. You can surprise the audience by seeming to follow a specific plot line only to end it abruptly, completely shift the tone of the story, explore themes that aren't typically used in fictional media, or see what the opposite side of a specific trope is. In many ways, deconstruction is a staple of writing in general.

Which is why it is disheartening to see it used so poorly in modern stories.

Deconstruction....and that's it

From the meteorically risen super hero movies, to their under performing comics, deconstruction has been a staple tool in stories about caped crusaders. Noble heroes have their ideals challenged by the realities of their lives. Heroic vigilantes have to contend with governments that don't want they around. And still heroes must sometimes come face to face with villains who's motives aren't always completely "evil". All these examples show how intrinsic deconstruction has become to contemporary entertainment in general. It would be no stretch to posit that it can be considered the modern ages' "hat" so to speak.

However, all these stories are lacking something. They all share a flaw that, in the long run, will make both the story and any story that comes after it suffer. Namely, that they have all forgotten that what comes after deconstruction is reconstruction.

Many contemporary tales are all too happy to deconstruct old tropes and stories, and then just leave them at that. The original trope/theme is shown in a different (usually negative/pessimistic light) and the story concludes. That is it. The author essentially sees an old brick pillar, notices some cracks in its foundation, grabs a hammer, smashes the pillar to pieces, then walks away calling it fixed. That is how many contemporary stories approach deconstruction, and it is a poor way to do so. Done like this, there is nothing left of the original story. The audience doesn't gain anything from it, they don't truly learn anything worthwhile, nor will they hold the story in their hearts when all is said and done.

To be specific, there is no Catharsis or purging of emotions. When there is a Catharsis the reader will remember the story and the emotions it evoked within them for the rest of their lives, as they will remember the feeling of fulfillment that it left them with. Deconstruction can't accomplish this as there is no Catharsis. It leaves nothing except an empty void in the reader. And when that happens, the reader will likely find something to fill that void which will likely be a vice of some kind. They will soon completely forget the story they just read, as it left them with nothing important. There was no Catharsis to reflect on, so there is no reason to remember the story.

This is why the thing that comes after deconstruction is so important in stories; Reconstruction.

Building Up What Has Been Destroyed

An important, yet forgotten part that comes after deconstruction, reconstruction is exactly that. The author takes the trope/theme that they just spent the story tearing down, and they build it back up again. They use the foundation that crumpled to create something new, stronger, and better than before. This way the author leaves behind more than a pessimistic view of a specific cliche used in a story. They leave behind the reason why audiences love these cliches, what makes them lovable, while still pointing out the flaws with them.

This returns the Catharsis factor to the story. The audience, now on a high from the original low point they were reduced to, feels a rush of emotions. They remain enraptured to the story, ready for an explosive climax that will leave them with all their feelings purged from their body. The story, and whatever the author wanted them to remember, remains with the reader, rather than disappears into a void of vices.

Reconstruction flips my original pillar analogy on its head. The author still destroys the pillar with a sledgehammer, but they do not walk away. They pick up the bricks, sands them off, buys new ones to replace the old ones, rebuilds the pillar, and gives it a fresh coat of paint. Instead of leaving behind a pile of rubble that no one will every want to see, the author has made it better than it was before. They have reinforced its foundation so that it may stand the test of time for years to come.

This is why reconstruction matters as much as deconstruction.

If something is simply destroyed, that's it. There's nothing worthwhile left afterwards that anyone will ever care about or pay attention to.

But, if you take something that is destroyed, and rebuild it to be better than before, it will captivate minds for years to come.

Conclusion

So, the next time you think about writing a story deconstructing or taking an new spin on a classic trope/story, do not think only of how you can tear it down. Think about how you can build it back up.