I finished ‘Middlemarch’ today and upon reflecting I have decided a few things.
A) I respond very strongly to narrative.
B) There are several types of narrative. Firstly the type which comprising themes, plot and character development, creates a thoroughly satisfying story experience. This sort of narrative lifts my mood and fortifies my spirit for several days afterwards, not to mention the pleasure involved in the process. This usually has a ‘happy’ ending. However there are ‘unhappy’ endings which, because of their structure and message, inspire me and energise me.
C) The other type of narrative, the one in which plot threads are not tied up, characters are inconsistent or in which random events occur without explanation, is generally an unsatisfying narrative. When I finish a story like this I feel depressed, frustrated, restless and morally ‘hollow’.
My theory about this is that as people who have generally been raised on stories and narrative, we have a need for resolution and redemption through story.
My next speculation is that as Christians, we resonate with the narrative of the centuries leading to Christ’s incarnation, ministry, death, resurrection and ascension. This story, that of God’s creation, our rebellion, God’s promise through 
My theory is that story satisfies, even before we understand God’s true narrative. It is a simulacrum, or parable or picture of the true narrative that we know we must belong to, as human beings. So every story that involves certain elements serves a parabolic purpose, to point us to the Grand Meta-narrative.
Luke and I were discussing this yesterday and we decided that Jesus uses his parables as pictures of the meta-narrative, and that even the true stories within Old Testament Scripture serve this purpose of mirroring the Meta-Narrative of God’s plan through the ages.
