The nature of narrative in the age of networks.

http://jimbanister.com/?page_id=73

Storytelling vs. Storydwelling

The disparity between industries steeped in history and habit, and the “changed consumer,” which can be generally represented by the so-called Web2.0 movement, is a compound chasm… but I believe it can be characterized accurately and practically as a “change in narrative.”

If you can accept for a moment that the definition of *narrative* can be thought of as the “relationship between communicator or auteur with their intended audience,” then the disparity described above (and in the video) becomes clearer.

A “storytelling” narrative is necessarily one-directional. An individual or institution, however well-informed on the nature of the audience, packages a message– a story– in the form of 0:30 spot, television show, film, book, magazine article… whatever. It is a paternal, one-to-many kind of relationship that treats the “audience” as consumer– reader, viewer, listener, etc. The roll of the *creator*– individual or institutional– is to create the story… the message.

But what’s the role of the *creator* who created the game of chess? Or an MMOG? Or basketball? Or Facebook?

Their role is to create a WORLD– a themed framework with a set of social morays and rules (that, oh by the way, can be broken) within which audiences can and will do whatever they want… and then to watch that world, adapt to it, and evolve it. This is “storydwelling” form of narrative that requires the individual or institution to become world designer, world builder and world manager, wherein story *emerges* from audiences participation in that world. These are self-perpetuating engines of engagement.

Looked at this way, the creators of eBay, mySpace, World of Warcraft and team sports are of similar ilk, but vastly different from those who create film, commercials, tv shows, or print ads.

Storydwelling demands a completely different literacy than the ad industry is built around– a predominantly storytelling industry.

What about interactive agencies? Not quite. The best they’ve come up with are campaigns like Subservient Chicken, Elf Yourself, and an array of interactive apps that beget viral behavior. While brilliant in their own right, they don’t build permanently populated communities with their investment– a perpetual engine of engagement. And with the amount of money spent on ad campaigns, it’s a crime they aren’t *always* augmented with such an engine, that at the very least will provide long-tail value, and might resonate far beyond the exposure/engagement gleaned from the initial spark created by the core tv/radio/print/event campaign.

BTW– the storydwelling narrative process has been codified and can be taught, and executed with more predictability.

I stumbled across this whilst exploring twitter as a story telling platform and it really blow my mind. storydwelling rather than storytelling.Beautiful in its simplicity, this is very close to a definition of difference in the role of the transmedial writer and writer operating within a signal medium.