The best storytelling starts with a sense of mystery to pull you in, but what is NOT a story? This is the opening to the “teaching and storytelling using Web 2.0″ session at Educause. An exercise in the room included comments around something that is not heard, something that lacks personal engagement, something that does not have narrative. This describes a lot of the way we present information.
Of course the web was used for storytelling before web 2.0: Dreaming Methods is a good example of this. So what is the difference now? I think the real difference is a) the ease in which everyone can now communicate online without needing to understand html and b) the ability to respond to stories, which is closer to the older concept of storytelling as a community exercise.
Bringing this back to make it a bit more relevant to this blog, I’m interested in the difference between fictional storytelling and personal storytelling. As we all use web 2.0 tools, how do we build and manage our own storytelling? This is described as character 101 in this session. We have the aibility to create characters online using persona, and to also use our personas to tell non-fictional stories without necessarily revealing our identity. This creates interesting nuances, with people following and befriending fictional characters (such as meerkats from adverts) and personas of real people that are entirely disconnected from the real person behind them.
Important take away from this session for me? what we do in Web 2.0 is no different from what we have always done. We Chat. We Gossip We Relate. We Discuss. We sometimes Work. Is Web 2.0 really all that different from attending a ball at Netherfield?
2 comments
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link
http://access.jiscinvolve.org/wp/the-last-man-on-earth-sat-alone-in-a-room/trackback/
June 20, 2011 at 8:56 pm
Jeannie
“I think the real difference is a) the ease in which everyone can now communicate online without needing to understand html and b) the ability to respond to stories, which is closer to the older concept of storytelling as a community exercise.”
Interesting take on this. I had never thought of it this way. I agree that much on web 2.0 is fictional, or written by those who perfer to write as personas, rather than themselves.
It can be entertaining, but I see two problems:
1. There is a lot of misinformation out there, be careful what you believe.
2. A person can end up saying far too much about their personal life in discussing what you find on web 2.0 sites. Once published on the internet, there is no taking it back.
June 30, 2011 at 8:35 pm
Annette
“We have the aibility to create characters online using persona, and to also use our personas to tell non-fictional stories without necessarily revealing our identity. This creates interesting nuances, with people following and befriending fictional characters”
Web 2.0 is an interesting phenomenon. Whether opperating as our true selves or a persona, I think it is something that is here for many years to come.
Do we just want to entertain and gossip, or do we want to make a difference in peoples lives. Both can be done. Which will be more fullfilling
and a better use of time? I like some of both, but focus on the later.