Skein of Words

Is there such a thing as ‘natural storytelling’?

Out of the Past

Over the last half year or so, I have been writing in an older and more traditional style of storytelling. I chose this in part to reject the contemporary rules of writing, most of all the wrong-headed ‘show don’t tell,’ but I also wanted to study, through what I wrote, the methods of past masters.

Their way of writing was the only way two centuries ago, in the 1800s and 1900s. And today it feels to me more comfortable both to write and read. It feels so comfortable, in fact, that I want to call it more ‘natural’ somehow.

But is this style truly ‘natural,’ or is it just that I grew up on it in reading fairy tales and older books? Maybe I learned it then and this return now is only a step back to my roots.

What after all would ‘natural storytelling’ be like, if there were such a thing? It must, I think, flow from two sources.

1. The way man’s mind works
2. The inborn properties and traits of the medium in which the tale is to be told

Man’s Mind

A tale to start with was a recreation of a remembered experience. Tales have since then grown to include imagined experiences of imagined men, and to seem to take place concurrently ‘before our eyes’ as they happen or even in the future, but all the same they have clung to the model of memory in how they are shaped. Even the experimental talesmanship rejects or leaves behind this model of memory, and so can be said to spring from it. Thus, any ‘natural’ story style would reflect this way of thinking.

The nature of man’s mind is a tale for another day, and far beyond my ken. But this must be the foundation and bedrock of all talesmanship in all media as told by and to men.

Media

A tale told by written words must differ in whatever ‘natural’ expression it has from one told by spoken words; both must differ from tales told in performance with words (drama) and without (mime). All these must differ from tales told in written words and pictures (comics) and moving pictures with sound and without (movies). And so on with the other media in which tales are told.

The natural way of words is to use the words to create the illusion of a smooth flow of events. The natural way of movies is to use moving pictures to create the illusion of a smooth flow of events.

This ‘smooth flow’ might spring from the way man’s mind works. Or it might just help the illusion of remembered events. Or it might be an artifice of pseudo-logical connections. My guess is that it’s a bit of all three, and that the reason it works to help talespinning is that our minds developed to find connections in the events of our lives; in memory these connections are not solely observed and deduced, they have become ‘law;’ because our minds and memories work this way, tales that employ these and other devices create a better illusion, feel more compelling, and seem more ‘natural.’

Written Words

Here I will note some of the ways I think written tales can create the illusion of a smooth flow of events.

The connections of the written word are formed by several rhetorical tricks that intuitive, self-taught talesmen learn by noting what feels good and ‘right’ in the tales they hear, and by then aping these tricks in the tales they tell, and watching how the audience takes them.

Conjunctive words do this: words like ‘and,’ ‘then,’ and so on. Words that state logical or causal connections also do it: words like ‘thus,’ ‘therefore,’ and ‘and so.’ Reference words can do it too: words like ‘that’ and ‘this’ in phrases such as these:

That was the last he heard of the matter, and so he forgot about it.

This was only the first time she would wear the blue dress; later it got to her signature.

All segues and transitions work this way. So do repeated words, which work like reference words:

‘I wanted the green one.’

‘But it isn’t the green one you got; the green one was already taken; it’s the yellow one that’s left, and it’s the yellow one you’ll be taking.’

Words that refer to time and temporal relations between events work this way too, and are often part of transitions. Attributions for dialogue also smooth passages that are mostly talk: compare,

‘I won’t do it.’
‘You’d better.’
‘Well, all right.’

to

‘I won’t do it,’ Thom said.
‘You’d better,’ Joe answered.
‘Well,’ Thom said, ‘all right.’

These words and phrases make of a tale a net or skein of words that join all the parts and scenes together.

But (to note the other side) there can be an excitement to tales that drop these connecting words and phrases. The fact that such a style foregoes what makes the ‘natural’ style smooth makes this style a bit jagged, and it compels its readers to guess at, make up, and supply their own connections. This asks the reader to be a more active participant in the tale. It also feels more ‘raw’ and thus, perhaps, closer to an actual experience, rather than one mediated by a talesman and told to us.

(Composed with pen on paper Sunday 30 March 2008)