Genette’s foundational move is a crucial distinction, adapted and refined from the Russian Formalists (Vladimir Propp) and earlier French critics:
For Genette, structuralism isn't a way to "kill" literature through cold analysis. Instead, it is a way to respect the complexity of the craft by focusing on the very structures that give literature its power. Gerard Genette Structuralism And Literary Criticism Summary
This deals with how often an event occurs versus how often it is narrated. Genette’s most profound impact was to legitimize a
Genette’s most profound impact was to legitimize a kind of criticism that does not judge . Before structuralism, literary criticism was largely evaluative: Is this novel good? Does it teach a moral? Genette replaced "good/bad" with "how." The critic’s job is to identify the narrative strategies —the use of analepsis, iterative frequency, or internal focalization—and explain their effect. Genette replaced "good/bad" with "how
Genette applies this logic rigorously. He is less interested in the unique genius of a particular novel than in the abstract system of conventions that makes any novel readable.
In the end, Gerard Genette reminds us that literature is not a mystery to be intuited but a craft to be understood. His summary is not a shortcut to meaning but an invitation to read more slowly, more precisely, and more structurally. And in that precision, new worlds of narrative art open up.