It took me 20 minutes of googling simply to start to make sense of this week’s viewings. The first thing that helped me was a definition of digital storytelling. According to the Center for Digital Storytelling, it is “a short, first-person video narrative created by combining recorded voice, still and moving images, and music or other sounds.” I assume video is also allowed under this definition, as at least one of the stories I watched on the CDS YouTube channel included bits of video.
The benefit of telling a story using this method is that it is relatively simple. I feel usually pretty negative about my own ability to create compelling visual art of any sort, yet even I think I could potentially succeed with a method such as this. It feels accessible to me and makes me want to do one of the CDS workshops.
Another benefit to digital storytelling is it provides a way to tell a story after the fact. I always marvel at some of the things documentary filmmakers get on film. They were there for that?! The camera was rolling?! And it is amazing when it happens, but it isn’t always possible. and when it is, it requires a lot of advance planning. Alternatively, some filmmakers are able to really craft a compelling story posthumously without having actually been at the event. All three of the video assignments this week included stills, video, audio and music to tell a story after an event or series of events; however, the telling of the story became an event in and of itself.
Helen said the thread in these stories is listening. And she asked us to consider when you use just audio, a still, video, and print. I don’t have answers to each part; however, I think at certain points, using a still with audio allowed me to focus on the person’s words more because I wasn’t focusing any action or movements the person was making. And certain stills are compelling little snippets of time, or perhaps freeze a facial expression that is compelling and might underline the words the person is saying in the audio.
One of the CDS stories I watched was all stills, with audio by Matt MacArthur, remembering his dead grandmother. And it was moving. Another, also about a dead person, moved me to tears. Digital storytelling offers people who are not formally trained in film to create a film-like experience for viewers with both audio and visual elements that is more moving than print because you can hear the person’s actual voice.
I am really confused about context though. That’s what I was trying to google in the first place when I came across the CDS’s definition of digital storytelling. So I look forward to reading others posts and I hope some of them can explain how these viewings were “examples of context,” as Helen said in her Week 3 video.
Hmm, I just found a blog entry for the Columbia School of Journalism that kind of helps me with the context thing. Maybe it is simpler than I thought.
http://towcenter.org/blog/storytelling-with-data-visualization-context-is-king/
Hi Natalie – I can relate to your experience with the still shots and storytelling. They called it ‘Digital Backstory’ which is just a photo and a narrative. I LOVED this! I agree that by not focusing on what the person is doing while being interviewed, even if he/she is just sitting there my mind is noticing and taking away some of my concentration, the impact of their story is that much stronger.
I am posting the below question on others posts. What’s your answer?
If you were in charge of creating these types of digital storytelling videos, would you select people randomly? Would you select people based on the story that they want to share, or would you select people based on stories that you want to hear?
What has really stood out to me so far is how sharing stories provides people with a platform to help with their healing process. After reading your post, I went on to CDS’s YouTube channel to find Matt MacArthur’s video “Dear Grandma.” You’re right, it was a very moving and a really thoughtful piece. I think Matt’s video its a perfect example of how he is using this platform to not only share the story of his grandmother’s life, but to help heal from her passing.
Hey Natalie,
I too was confused about context and frankly I ignored referencing it in my post. After reading your post I read Brett Harmond’s week 3 post that you might want to check out. What he touches upon, and these are in my own words after better understanding the term, is that in many of these videos it’s the visual context that helps draw us into the experience. To spark our interest, engage us as viewers. The fact that we get to see the environment that the subjects of the Interview Project are found, we get to better understand who they are as people and feel what it’s like to be them in that time and space. It makes us more connected to their reality. Imagine those interviews took place in at an executive conference table? You’d likely feel a disconnect from the story and the context of which they are telling the story. I think it would take away any of the emotional experience or relevancy of the story. Similarly, are the videos from the Mapping Memories project. In going on a tour with the storytellers, we get to fill in the story with visuals that bring the story to life. It gives us a better sense of their experiences by being brought into the context of which their stories are created.
Is that similar to what you started gathering? Have you come across other resources or had other thoughts?
Yes, I can see how that is all considered context. But also I think context is created when David lynch in beginning simply introduces the interviewee, where they found him/her, and one fact about that person. For example.