Post on 10-Apr-2023
DATABASE LOGIC, INTERACTIVE
NARRATIVE AND FILMS
MIKLÓS SÁGHY
Database Logic and Narrative
Not only is it a well-known fact, but also it is our common experience
that at the end of the 20th century and at the beginning of the 21st, a series
of critical changes was taking place in the history of media: digital data
storage and computers were both gaining ground, and, at the same time but
not independently, previously used data storage devices (books, photos, etc.) were merging into new devices. Photo based moving picture was no
exception to this process, as this latter greatly transformed cinematographic
distribution, storage and production mechanisms and procedures. No
lengthy statistics are necessary to demonstrate the changing rate of those
who watch films on a computer screen or in movie theatres, or the
changing proportions of time spent with shooting a film with actors
(weeks or months) and the years spent with digital post-production.
Another well-known tendency is the fact that distribution companies
prefer digital, even online distribution to the production and shipping of
expensive copies. Or, in other words, the whole spectrum of filmic
existence is permeated with digital culture.
Taking into consideration the procedures affecting media and film history lightly touched upon above raises the question whether these
fundamental historical changes in the media influenced the language or
techniques of narration as well. And in case of a positive answer: how and
to what extent are well-established procedures transformed?
Answering “yes” seems to be evident and one can quickly affirm it as
films like Avatar (James Cameron, 2009), Clash of the Titans (Louis
Leterrier, 2010), or Terminator Salvation (Joseph McGinty Nichol, 2009)
and others would not have been possible, had it not been for decades of
development of various software and hardware. Films like the ones
previously mentioned have brought something new to the fore, namely, the
achievements of novel digital technologies allowing for the pinnacle of
Miklós Sághy
317
photorealistic representation of reality. Or, to put it differently, these films
have pioneered the development of reality-based reference-driven aesthetics.
In this sense, feature films like the ones mentioned here simply enhance
through digital means what was aimed at by analogue technologies, that is
reality and photorealistic credibility (including the increase of the
photorealistic credibility of possible or fantasy universes). The “old” goals
and “old” procedures of the analogue mediums are transferred to the
context of “new” digital mediums, or, to use Bolter and Grusin’s term:
they remediate the old medium in the context of the new one.1
Two questions remain: in terms of moving picture in general, on the
one hand, is the digital revolution that is permeating the film industry a mere remediation, and, on the other hand, have contemporary medial
(trans)formations really left the language and narration practically
unchanged?
Answering these questions is to be started with cataloguing those
features that characterize computers, the fundamental medium of the
digital age, and then taking this list of characteristic features and checking
them against the corresponding features of films. Inventorying the medial
features of computers exhaustively and comprehensively exceeds
obviously the limitations of this paper, so we'll foreground the brief
overview of those (medial) features only that play a more important role in
the argumentation. As contemporary human culture and medial environment is basically
defined by computers, and mimicking the workings of the Gutenberg
galaxy, the metaphor of book culture, not surprisingly, the fundamental
theoretical metaphor for the digital age has become the software, or, to
refer to a more complete human experience: the cultural software.
According to J. M. Balkin, this metaphor merely refers to the comparison
of a culturally overarching principle or mechanism with software “that is
installed on a computer and that allows a computer to process information.
Simply put, cultural software enables and limits understanding as software
1 Cf. Bolter and Grusin (1999). In a way, all new mediums or technical devices undergo a remediation phase: if we take the first cars, they resembled buggies, or to put it differently, they recontextualized them under new machine-operated circumstances so that the new invention would appear to the users under the guise
of something familiar, and, consequently, something easily acceptable. Or, in a similar way, information appearing on the monitors of computers also mimics the format of previous mediums (television and books) depending on the nature of information: (moving) pictures or texts even though the storage and management of these happens digitally. That is, these media forms are remediated by computers.
Database Logic, Interactive Narrative and Films
318
enables and limits a computer” (Balkin 1998, 4). The metaphor of cultural
software as proposed by Balkin is not different from the notion of
ideology, since similarly to a dominant ideology, human relationships,
behavioural patterns, procedures, etc. are either controlled and limited by
cultural software as well, or supported if that is what is needed by the
ideology. After this explanation, it is, therefore, an inevitable question how
the inherent operational properties of the new medium (computers) – or to
quote Marshall McLuhan, its medial message(s) – influence the workings
of the cultural software, or, to put it differently: the new ideology. Or, how
is the metaphor influenced by its literal meaning or its objective, real,
medial realization? In numerous texts, Lev Manovich analyses thoroughly the workings of
contemporary culture as characterised by a certain focus on computers
(operated by computers). One of his many piercing insights is that
database logic has become a dominant principle in sorting information,
following the logic of computers and the way in which these latter process
and store information. Or, to quote his words “after the novel, and
subsequently cinema, privileged narrative as the key form of cultural
expression of the modern age, the computer age introduces its correlate –
the database. Many new media objects do not tell stories; they do not have
a beginning or end; in fact, they do not have any development,
thematically, formally, or otherwise that would organize their elements into a sequence. Instead, they are collections of individual items, with
every item possessing the same significance as any other” (Manovich
2001, 218).
In the quote above it can already be seen that Manovich contrasts
narratives (as organizational forms) with databases (as forms of
information storage). Later, supporting his point with ample examples, he
characterizes the database as an easily distinguishable structure, or “as a
cultural form, the database represents the world as a list of items, and it
refuses to order this list. In contrast, a narrative creates a cause-and-effect
trajectory of seemingly unordered items (events). Therefore, database and
narrative are natural enemies” (Manovich 2001, 225). He proceeds then
with asking the question which of the two cultural forms will win this contemporary rivalry, or, in other words, whether in computerized culture,
narratives and databases have the same status.2 The answer then is as
follows: “database and narrative do not have the same status in computer
culture […] a database can support narrative, but there is nothing in the
2 Manovich (2001, 233–234) remarks that this contrast is not newly discovered since storing knowledge in novels or in encyclopedias meant a clear distinction already in the 18th century.
Miklós Sághy
319
logic of the medium itself that would foster its generation. It is not
surprising, then, that databases occupy a significant, if not the largest,
territory of the new media landscape. What is more surprising is why the
other end of the spectrum – narratives – still exist in new media”
(Manovich 2001, 228).
Manovich seems to be taking the side of databases, and if we may say
so, at the expense of narratives: the fact that these latter are still around is
presented as a surprise in the quote above. Manovich argues therefore that
today (as a result of the new medium) the database logic gains control over
more and more areas. These changes however cannot be fully traced back
to such unidirectional mechanisms as first computers came along (with databases and operations) and then database logic started to gain ground.
On the contrary, Manovich describes a dynamic relationship between them
in terms of the process above where (postmodern) social changes play a
role, as influential as the appearance of computers. And, this latter did not
happen out of the blue either, but was brought to life or at least was
necessitated and made possible as a result of philosophical and cultural
processes. In The Language of New Media, Manovich quotes Jean-
François Lyotard’s The Postmodern Condition, published in 1979, in
which, according to Manovich, the French philosopher already predicted
the possibility of a “computerized society.” Manovich interprets this
foresightful Lyotardian vision as a prophecy on the new, database logic type of organizational structure of human experience. In the same text, he
also interprets the Lyotardian description of the disappearance of grand
narratives as a possibility for the advancement of database logic because
“if after the death of God (Nietzsche), the end of grand Narratives of
Enlightenment (Lyotard), and the arrival of Web (Tim Berners-Lee), the
world appears to us as an endless and unstructured collection of images,
texts, and other data records, it is only appropriate that we will be moved
to model it as a database” (Manovich 2001, 219).
Having established the contemporary dominance of databases,
Manovich formulates the demand for the development of “a poetics,
aesthetics, and ethics of this database” in case his assessment is
appropriate. This thought leads us back to the domain of cinema and moving pictures since if database logic has aesthetic consequences, then
the question arises whether these influences resulting in poetic and
aesthetic changes can be detected in cinema as well. Or, in simpler terms,
has database cinema appeared and can we expect more of it?
If one takes into consideration and scrutinizes Hollywood movies like
the ones mentioned already (Avatar, Terminator Salvation, etc.) and as
mentioned above, the notion of remediation rather than revolutionary
Database Logic, Interactive Narrative and Films
320
change becomes relevant because in these works photorealistic (to largest
possible extent) imagery, linear, cause-and-effect narration, and invisible
editing are still decisive. In a previous text quoted from Manovich, he
himself refers to films as the embodiment of narrative logic. Even though
he modifies this opinion (several times) and he shades it to say that
“cinema already exists right at the intersection between database and
narrative,” we believe Manovich argues that film industry is not yet
impacted and transformed by database logic that would radically modify
the narrative structure of its products. As Manovich alludes, humans want
new media narratives “and we want these narratives to be different from
the narratives we have seen or read before” (2001, 237). Or, more radically put, “we do expect computer narratives to showcase new
aesthetic possibilities that did not exist before digital computers. In short,
we want them to be new media specific” (Manovich 2001, 237).
Having said that, Manovich also formulates a demand for a new way in
which the database and the narrative should merge and for the shifting of
films towards database logic (cf. 2001, 243). A positive and successful
example of the application of database logic from the 20th century is the
work of Peter Greenaway. In his films linear narratives are moved to the
background in order for the numerical layout to be foregrounded. Or, as
Manovich puts it, Greenaway’s “favorite systems are numbers. The
sequence of numbers acts as a narrative shell »convinces« the viewer that she is watching a narrative. In reality, the scenes that follow one another
are not connected in any logical way. By using numbers, Greenaway
‘wraps’ a minimal narrative around a database” (Manovich 2001, 238).
Besides Greenaway, Manovich considers Man with a Movie Camera
(Chelovek s kino-apparatom, 1929) by Dziga Vertov as the most
prominent database film of the 20th century. He describes it as follows: “In
one of the key shots, repeated a few times throughout the film, we see an
editing room with a number of shelves used to keep and organize the shot
material. The shelves are marked »machines« »club« »the movement of a
city« »physical exercise« »an illusionist«, and so on. This is the database
of the recorded material. The editor, Vertov’s wife, Elizaveta Svilova, is
shown working with this database – retrieving some reels, returning used reel, adding new ones” (2001, 239–240). According to Manovich, the
structure of Man with a Movie Camera is, therefore, characterised by
database logic.
Zoltán Dragon in an article entitled Software and films: the place of
films in digital culture uses more radical terms than Manovich about the
future of databases in films. According to his views, database logic seeped
into the logic of so called classic filmic narration techniques, or, in other
Miklós Sághy
321
words, he claims that the effect of computers on cinema is not superficial
(remediating), but a lot deeper than imagined by most theoreticians and
analysts.3 According to Dragon, “several examples could be cited where
the operation and logic of the cinematic narration is modified in such a
way that those particular features are changed that are considered
fundamental and classic. Two films released in the same year, Run Lola
Run (Lola rennt, Tom Tykwer, 1998) and Sliding Doors (Peter Howitt,
1998) both used a certain narration technique that had obviously been
adapted successfully from the narrative structure of computer games to the
screen. This narrative logic breaks away from classic cinematographic
narration and draws on the database logic that generates it” (Dragon 2009). Another definition worth mentioning from the same paper by Dragon is in
which he distinguishes one organizational logic from the other: “the basic
difference between classic narration and database logic lies in the fact that
while the former presents itself as a chain of apparently structurally
discrete events of cause-and-effect, the latter manages events and other
»ingredients« as a non-sequential list or series with no order whatsoever
assigned to them, let alone consequential” (2009). Moreover, as examples
for database logic, Dragon cites computer or internet films like Soft
Cinema or Animoto video expanding this list with online interactive films.
Manovich also mentions similar multimedia projects to exemplify
database logic and specifically points out pioneers of computer graphics for pictures and films like John Witney, Frieder Nake or Manfred Mohr.
At the same time, it is also important to understand that possible
database logic in films like Run Lola Run [Fig. 1.] or Sliding Doors [Fig.
2.] is different from computer films or multimedia projects referred to in
the papers quoted above. The former ones are classified as commercial
films, whereas (the vast majority of) the latter ones as avant-garde or
experimental movies. The distinction is important to emphasize because
the two categories signal two different film making processes and
aesthetics; it is safe to assume, therefore, that the issue at hand will surface
in different ways and forms in the two distinct categories. As far as we
know, Manovich does not refer to films from the first, mainstream
category that embody cutting-edge database logic but settled with avant-garde and experimental films (see his references to Vertov and
Greenaway), Dragon, however, strives to expand the take of this logic to
Hollywood productions as well.
3 In the article in question, Dragon (also) argues against remediation theories that ignore fundamental and far-flung changes.
Database Logic, Interactive Narrative and Films
322
Even so, it is also important that one of the examples used by
Manovich, Man with a Movie Camera, was produced before the
appearance and prevailing of computers, hence it is probably not the best
choice to illustrate a proposition that seeks to explain the database logic of
films by the appearance of digital mediums. Moreover, it could also be
claimed that film history has offered many film-makers like Fernand
Léger, René Claire or Man Ray, who did not (always) endeavour to create
cause-and-effect narratives but, according to the definition above,
produced database films. Or, more simply put, dadaism should also be
called a database logic-driven artistic movement because there can be no
other classification for a poem made out of words cut from newspapers and then arbitrarily assembled – a poem by Tristan Tzara’s definition –,
but the non-sequential (or, in other words, ordered by a random algorithm)
word-set of data. Can we really talk of a cultural effect of database logic of
digital mediums insofar as there has always been a branch in avant-garde
movements that set as an objective the transformation of unordered (or at
least ordered along non-linear narratives) elements into a work of art?
Shouldn't we rather say that a certain thing got remediated which has
always been present in avant-garde movements since the early 1900s? Or,
in other words, something (database logic) that used to be played down (as
the empty games of avant-gardists) is now foregrounded? Can database
logic, so far observed as an avant-garde cinematographic procedure, really seep into and be transposed to mainstream films? Can the revolution of
digital mediums, parallel with the expansion of computers in the film
industry, instigate such a change as foretold by Dragon?
It seems to me the answer is “no” because this logic would be quite far
from the original logic that produced these pictures, and far from those
aesthetic principles (however shallow they may be) that drive these genre
movies. In an overly simplified way, the logic of the majority of pictures
(ranging from family photos to Playboy-style nude photos of women) can
be described in the following way: images surrounding us create an
alternative universe, a universe in which things can be categorized,
arranged, touched and, not least importantly, owned and appropriated. The
basis of this feature of images is that they are placed before reality and instead of representing the world, they falsify it and eventually people start
living in function of pictures, created by people. According to Susan
Sontag, images arrange the world for us in such a way that we want to see
it. Or, as she puts it, “‘our era’ does not prefer images to real things out of
perversity but partly in response to the ways in which the notion of what is
real has been progressively complicated and weakened” (1999, 84).
Roland Barthes traces back the popularity of twentieth century (popular)
Miklós Sághy
323
myths, including mythical stories in films, to similar reasons. Arranging
and ordering the world is presented as possible in these myths and they
also offer the joy of a perfect comprehension of reality “in which signs,
unimpeded, and with no contradiction or loss of meaning can eventually
be in a harmonious relationship with reasons” (1983, 25).
The logic of images, therefore, simplifies, arranges, synthesizes and
provides the possibly complicated looking at things (in the world) with a
reduced narrative. The possibility of exploding these coherent world
explanations into an unordered system of data contradicts this logic. I do
not believe that such a destructive procedure would satisfy mass needs and
if somebody would want to make a fortune with such a data-movie, we doubt that they would succeed as it would be completely the opposite of
the logic of mass culture (which, as explained above, simplifies,
schematizes and appropriates). The apotheosis of this flood of images, the
computer, cannot turn against its own logic that actually brought it into
being.
If one reconsiders the filmic examples cited by Dragon in order to
prove the influence of database logic on narration in Hollywood films, it is
easy to see that in these films there is also a cause-and-effect narration
style, contradicting database logic. Run Lola Run and Sliding Doors both
focus exactly on the fact that different causes result in very different fates,
or, in other words, in different effects. An event that is seemingly accidental (Helen, the protagonist catches the train or not, for example)
will turn out to be a very important cause of the event happening
subsequently. Different causes lead to different effects and consequences
in both films. So, if we accept Dragon's definition above stating that a
classic narrative “presents itself as a chain of apparently structurally
discrete events of cause-and-effect” then we cannot, at the same time,
accept the popular films he cites as examples for database logic because in
those films, possible worlds and fates presented as consequences are very
tightly connected to different causes, so, in this regard, they are epitomes
of classic narratives.
I can only mention one recent Hollywood movie, Inception (Christopher
Nolan, 2010), that would partially fit the criteria of database logic. [Fig. 3.] In this movie, causes and effects are frequently in the background,
giving the spotlight to an inexplicable series of dream events (approaching
the database structure as defined above). Having seen the film, however,
several questions remain unanswered based on the internal logic of the
film. For example, if the protagonist had entered limbo earlier, why didn’t
he get older like his Japanese partner did who arrived later? Or, how could
they come back with one jump from limbo, the fourth level of dreams,
Database Logic, Interactive Narrative and Films
324
without having to pass through all levels while all the others had to go
through the levels, one by one? Or yet another question: if those people
who participated in a collective dream can recognize each other when
awake, then why doesn't the man in whose subconscious mind they want
to plant a certain idea recognize them after awakening? The list of
questions with no answers is a lot longer of course, proving that the cause-
and-effect system of the film is unfounded. Does this disintegrating cause-
and-effect structure mean that this film has entered the sphere of database
logic as suggested by Dragon’s definition? Or has it entered the sphere of
dream logic? Or has is simply remained in the sphere of Hollywood where
the key perspective is the constant good looks of an actor (Leonardo Di Caprio), rather than the internal logic of the film according to which he is
supposed to get old and ugly, just like his Japanese partner?
Whatever the name of these logical jumps is eventually (dream logic,
database logic, etc.) I don’t think their presence could be increased more in
commercial films than in Inception. The amazing shots can cover for
causal inconsistencies for a limited amount of time, but as far as we are
concerned, they are not likely to overwrite the fundamental linear narrative
logic of films. Or, in other words, more people can be expected to click on
torrent sites to download easily understandable narrative movies than on
sites like Soft Cinema in order to experiment with the questioning of good
old narration techniques for their own amusement.
Database or Interactive Narrative?
As far as I can tell, mainstream films lend themselves more easily to
categorization based on the narrative techniques of video games rather
than based on the logic of databases. Sliding Doors and Run Lola Run, the
two aforementioned films build on the (narrative) logic of alternate universes and imitate the structures created by video games in as much as
they allow for the possibility of taking multiple directions in virtual spaces
(in terms of the gamer’s skills, familiarity with rules, etc.). In Tom
Tykwer’s film, Lola, the protagonist's actions have a considerable
influence on the outcome of events (her deeds and decisions affect the
three narratives), and in video games alike it's the failures and successes of
the “protagonist” characters (controlled by the users) which influence the
outcome of the interactive “story.” In Sliding Doors, Helen, the
protagonist is quite limited in her actions; she is the passive sufferer of
interventions (first a little girl steps in front of her by chance and she is
held up whilst running and can’t catch the train, and the second time, she
eventually makes it to the train) and she cannot influence her own fate,
Miklós Sághy
325
unlike an action character in a game, controlled from the outside. At the
same time, however, both films create several alternate universes and the
(diverse) story lines in those pass through the recurring data or base items
(that appear in all story variants), similarly to the workings of an algorithm
linking the items of a database.
It is important to emphasize, however, that the game narrative and
database logic are not each other’s enemies because the intricate
operations of digital databases are the sine qua non of computer games.
Despite all this, I am convinced that when we examine the narration
techniques of contemporary mainstream movies, we can actually only
detect the effects of the narratives of computer games, but cannot perceive those of data-base logic. In order to prove this point, let us examine first
the relationship between database logic and computer games.
In The Language of New Media, Lev Manovich defines a database as a
cultural form which “represents the world as a list of items, and it refuses
to order this list” (2001, 225). In his understanding, “the most obvious
examples [of databases] are popular multimedia encyclopedias, collections
by definition, as well as other commercial CD-ROM (or DVD), that
feature collections of recipes, quotations, photographs, and so on” (2001,
219). Disorder, it seems, is an important criterion for Manovich in the
definition of databases. He does not consider computer games databases,
and, what is more, when he refers to the idea that all new media objects are not databases, he specifically quotes these structures: “Of course not
all new media objects are explicitly databases. Computer games, for
instance, are experienced by their players as narratives. In a game, the
player is given a well-defined task – winning the match, being first in a
race, reaching the last level, or reaching the highest score. It is this task
which makes the player experience the game as a narrative” (Manovich
2001, 221– 222). From the point of view of the user, therefore, the
computer game appears to be a story, where everything is motivated and is
in a causal relationship with her gaming activities. Manovich uses a
technical term from computer science, algorithm, to name this specific
game logic because “while computer games do not follow database logic,
they appear to be ruled by another logic – that of an algorithm. They demand that a player executes an algorithm in order to win. An algorithm
is the key to the game experience in a different sense as well. As the player
proceeds through the game, she gradually discovers the rules which
operate in the universe constructed by this game. She learns its hidden
logic, in short its algorithm” (222). As you can see, Manovich isolates the
database from the algorithm and describes the latter as a structure that
orders unordered sets of data into various forms and relations. Obviously,
Database Logic, Interactive Narrative and Films
326
in one database, several algorithms can run, and, consequently, a host of
algorithms can be linked with a particular database. At the same time,
however, the two cannot be separated from each other because (unordered)
databases and algorithms are the two halves of a computer's ontology.
“Data structures and algorithms drive different forms of computer culture.
CD-ROMs, Web sites, and other new media objects organized as
databases correspond to the data structure, whereas narratives, including
computer games, correspond to algorithm” (Manovich 2001, 226).
According to Manovich, a database and an algorithm are thus like the
recto and verso of the same system. He also considers algorithms to be
related to narratives in a certain sense. More specifically, he assumes a narrative to be a special algorithm which realizes one of all possible
algorithms (these latter are also known as a hypernarrative). Or, as he
himself proposes, a “traditional linear narrative is one among many other
possible trajectories, that is, a particular choice made within a
hypernarrative” (Manovich 2001, 227), in this respect, a computer game
offers a plethora of algorithms among which only one is realized in the
given game by the player who creates the current narrative of the game.
Because of the presence of choices, an algorithm, therefore, is much more
than a traditional narrative as the former is one single variation among
many, whereas the latter is the only option that cannot be modified.
Having said that, it is essential to see that the game never presents itself as a database to the user, who has an overview of the connections of
the current algorithm only. The units of the database so ordered are
perceived, therefore, as the units of a narrative and not as unordered items
of a database. Had it been the unordered items of a database, the
experience couldn't be considered a game. Or, in other words, it is
impossible to experience database and algorithm/narrative at the same
time during a game. I am either creating a narrative because I am playing
or I am facing an unordered set of items of a database which has nothing
to do with my notion of a game. Algorithms and data are two sides of a
thing, suggests Manovich, adding that the two cannot exist without each
other. The user, however, cannot experience the two at the same time.
In order to see the crux of the matter, let us see an example from a movie. In one of the scenes in The Matrix (Andy Wachowski and Larry
Wachowski, 1999), on board of a ship called Nebuchadnezzar, Neo and
Cypher are staring at the screens of the control panels and pointing at the
downward flowing characters Cypher says that he has learned to see them
the code as blonds and brunettes. [Fig. 4.] The scene is funny because as
long as you can see the alphanumeric codes of digital data, you cannot see
the world, the matrix, and the attractive women built from them. At best, a
Miklós Sághy
327
programmer or a cryptographer can be assumed to know what forms or
changes (lovely women) are generated in the matrix. Neo is the only one
who is given the possibility to see or to experience the digital code and the
world built from it at the same time but in the story of The Matrix, he
becomes a divine creature because he can transcend the dichotomy of
human perception (he is “the Chosen One”).
Consequently, when we want to compare computer games with other
mediums, e.g. with films, we need to determine which aspect of the
computer game will be in focus. We cannot examine the logic of
algorithms and the logic of databases under the same circumstances due to
the radically different experiences of the two. Because at the moment narrative films are under scrutiny, it seems to be practical to foreground
the game-algorithms. Or, in other words, if we want to know how the logic
of computer games affected films, it is advisable to compare films,
creating a narrative with the algorithm-logic and not the database
structures of computer games. Databases and narratives are so very
different from each other that it is very difficult to place them in the same
theoretical framework. Narratology, for example, cannot even be
considered because databases are not narratives and when they become
one, they cease to be databases. In short: they are incompatible categories.4
That is why I have already suggested to replace the unsuitable database
vs. (film) narrative framework with an axis with “traditional” narratives on one end and interactive narratives of computer games on the other end.
This would offer a space between the two extremes for the description of
the changes in the narrative techniques of mainstream movies prompted by
the new media. Ludology (game studies) will provide the theoretical
framework for this as it examines thoroughly the issues of differences and
similarities of algorithms (interactive narratives) of video games and
narratives of traditional films. It is easy to see that it is in the vested
interest of ludology to separate the two as discreetly as possible and to
prune the new approach from those narrative analyses that attempt to
describe video games as traditional stories without taking their special
characteristics into account. There are several papers in ludology which
illustrate very tangibly the interactive (and not static) nature of the stories in video games pointing out several narrative trajectories and algorithms
offered to the player who can only realize one, based on her skills and
4 Obviously, this statement is only valid as long as we include the criteria of no order and no causality in the definition of databases. Manovich himself disregards these criteria, for example when he calls the footage of film production “databases” even though it was shot in terms of a larger system: the overarching narrative of the film, so they are quite ordered materials (cf. 2001, 236).
Database Logic, Interactive Narrative and Films
328
activity. Each game creates an algorithm of the hypernarrative, the name
given by Manovich to the sum of all the trajectories intersecting in the
database, realizing one of the theoretically infinite number of possibilities.
As I already pointed out, the alternative universes represented in Run
Lola Run and Sliding Doors can be described as the manifestations of
several different algorithms, a characteristic feature of video games, within
one single film. Even though the different story lines are not identical with
the interactive narratives of video games, they however are manifestations
of parallel universes illustrating how the different choices of the
protagonist result in different ends and can thus imitate the logic of
restarting a game. The narrative technique in Groundhog Day (Harold Ramis, 1993) can
also be analyzed in terms of the influence of interactive game narratives.
Phil, the protagonist in the film is obliged to behave like a character who is
doomed to retry again and again a particular level until he succeeds in
completing all the “tasks” necessary for “winning” (learning to play the
piano, becoming cultured, becoming nice, polite, etc.). For Phil, the
“course” to run is February 2 and he cannot leave until he becomes a better
man and wins his colleague's, Rita's love. This is such a closed “course”
that even suicide does not provide Phil with an escape route (even though
he actually tries to commit suicide several times, in all sorts of different
ways in his desperations) as after his death (as if a caption said game over), he goes back to square one: 6 a.m. on Groundhog day, starting
anew, a fresh 24-hour cycle on the same old well-known course. As the
reruns give him not only a familiarity with the course but also a deeper
understanding of who he is, he is evolving which turns out to be the
essential prerequisite to completing the seemingly unbeatable level. By the
end of the film, Phil, of course, becomes a better man (player) and can
leave February 2 behind and move to the next level of the game: “being in
a relationship”.
Computer games are characterized by loops and as a result of the
influence of digital mediums on films, this loop logic can actually be
found in films. Lev Manovich explains in his work cited above that
grouping chains of data in short, repeated loops was a popular device applied by digital media programmers in the 90s in order to use the limited
memory of computers as economically as possible. Computer games also
draw heavily on loops. “Since it was not possible to animate every
character in real time, the designers stored short loops of character’s
motion – for instance, an enemy soldier or a monster walking back and
forth – which would be recalled at the appropriate times in the game”
(2001, 265). A filmic example for a game loop could be found in eXistenZ
Miklós Sághy
329
(David Cronenberg, 1999) because there are halted and frozen characters
in it, repeating the same movements; or similar loops can be seen in The
Matrix, where glitches in the virtual world result in loops, warning the
characters: Neo and his comrades are warned by a black cat passing by
them twice, repeating the loop (program), signalling to them the imminent
arrival of the agents.
The Truman Show (Peter Weir, 1998) is a good example of films
where we can detect a loop-form: the universe of the protagonist, Truman
is a studio full of loops, so, like in computer games, the infinite
possibilities of reality cannot be reproduced within the limits of a game
show, as it would require an infinite amount of energy and an infinite number of people. Therefore, Truman’s immediate world and the
movements of his acquaintances are grouped into short loops. A nice and
funny example for a filmic loop structure is the scene where Truman,
starting to become suspicious, uncovers a story loop. He makes his
girlfriend watch how a lady on a bicycle, a man with flowers and a VW
Beetle pass them (again) in the (usual) order set by the director. And when
it all happens, the loop finishes a full cycle, and he is delighted to declare
to his girlfriend his ability to foretell what is going to happen. [Fig. 6.] He
understood the operations of the loop, and so his suspicion grows about
the world he lives in, that it might be as well-designed and well-calculated
as a soap-opera. To summarize, I believe that even though databases and computer
games (algorithms) are as inseparable as two sides of the same coin, it is
only valid to compare (filmic) narratives with the latter, interactive
narratives. I stand by this choice even if in the majority of recent films
database logic does play a very significant role, making the existence and
eventually the generation of digital images possible. Database logic is not
a narrative category. As Zoltán Dragon puts it, “if we speak of a computer
game, one of its fundamental building blocks is database, its organization
and logical structure, however, does not necessarily have to be database-
like” (2011). The ontological inseparability of the two, nevertheless, does
not motivate the adoption of the same theoretical framework, narratology,
for their examination. When such comparisons do appear, I tend to liken these comparative (intermedial) investigations to the efforts of trying to
understand the aesthetic “message” of a bronze figurine through the
inventory of the physical properties of bronze: its melting point, its
ultimate strength, its electrical and heat conductivity, and other
Database Logic, Interactive Narrative and Films
330
aesthetically irrelevant properties.5 I am not claiming that these properties
cannot become important at one point or other in the process of the
interpretation of a statue, but I am not sure they would necessarily lead to
a more profound understanding of the figure, event, or rather the whole
work of art. 6
References
Balkin, J. M. 1998. Cultural Software. A Theory of Ideology. New Haven
and London: Yale University Press.
Barthes, Roland. 1983. Mitológiák. [Mythologies], Budapest: Európa
Kiadó.
Bolter, Jay David and Grusin, Richard. 1999. Remediation. Understanding
Media. Cambridge, MA and London: MIT Press.
Dragon Zoltán. 2009. A szoftver és a film: a film helye a digitális
kultúrában. [Software and films: the place of films in digital culture].
Apertúra 2009/winter. http://apertura.hu/2009/tel/dragon
Dragon Zoltán. 2011. A film a digitalizáció korában [Films in the Digital Age]. Apertúra 2011/Spring. http://apertura.hu/2011/tavasz/dragon
Manovich, Lev. 2001. The Language of New Media. Cambridge, MA and
London: MIT Press.
Sontag, Susan. 1999 [1977]. The Image-World. In Visual Culture, eds.
Jessica Evans and Stuart Hall, 80–94. New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
5 Of course, those works of art that focus on their own materiality reflexively are excluded from this comparison. 6 The research for the article was supported by the János Bolyai Research Fund in Hungary.
Miklós Sághy
331
Figures Figure 1. Run Lola Run, (Tom Tykwer, 1998)
Figure 2. Sliding Doors (Peter Howitt, 1998)
Database Logic, Interactive Narrative and Films
332
Figure 3. Inception (Christopher Nolan, 2010)
Figure 4. The Matrix (Andy Wachowski and Larry Wachowski, 1999)