Since Russian Formalists posited a fiction as form and initiated us to experience time in its displaced order, the two terms of fabula and sjuzet became the foundation on which the narrative studies built up, and those terms had been transformed into story and narrative by Genette, or story and discourse by Chatman. Nevertheless, the privileged narratology during the twenty century mainly relied on the French Structuralism along with British and American narrative theories, for without mentioning the names of Todorov and Genette, and of Wayne Booth and Dorrit Cohn, hardly can we compose anything about narrative. Not only the transition from the structuralists' universalism to the post-structuralists' narrative discourse, but even such various terms including "free indirect speech," "implied author," and "focalization" are the reservoir obtained by one centuries' investigation. For all these, do we need more studies with narratology? This paper probes the narrative theory after the classical period so called "post-classical narratology" designated by certain new scholars like David Harman and James Phelan. The general characteristics of new paradigm could be summarized as not an age of theories, nor of political corrections, but of reading materials exhaustively for the discipline of our mind. Cultivating the ethics, we are to be confronted by the broad areas of narrative analysis not to mention of literary field: film, music, history, media, law, medicine, and so on. While surveying and featuring the aspects of new method, this paper examines the interaction of space and time as one trend among others emerged in this "theory-practice" age.