The Nature of Storytelling: Dynamics within the cultural interconnection through the story
(written for "Crossing Over" 2006)

 

     "We all tell our stories in a certain way, in terms of  how we talk, how we dress, how we interact with others. I do not think that it is possible to fully open oneself to the others especially from the emotional point of view. However, I believe that we can display our intentions and our internal self by ways of communicating our ideas to the world. What do I mean by that? Let me focus on the dynamics of story-telling. In the way we tell a story we inevitably open part of ourselves to the external world. If we all had to tell the same story, each one of us would focus on a certain idea or display certain aspects of the story that are not visible for the other. We can tell the story from the emotional point of view and spark an emotional response in the audience; or we can walk around within a circle and connect to the audience physically. We are able to elevate the story to its spiritual heights or illustrate it from the intellectual point of view. Whatever we filter out of the story, we actively create and re-shape it. But, the story itself gains its power from its relation to the audience. There is always an action and a reaction. Thus, when we have enough courage to open ourselves by storytelling we have to keep in mind that we are situating ourselves in the circle of re-creation. Consequently, we not only shape the story by  our own ways of storytelling but we are exposing ourselves to the external changes and need to accept that our audience shapes and transforms us by means of listening to our story and reflecting upon it. The question remains, whether we are willing to accept the mutual relationship between action and reaction. I think that it takes courage to actively expose oneself under the critical lens of the society. It take courage to accept values that change our internal self. However, I also believe that to accept our own transformation that arises from every interconnection that we make is the only way to expand our views, to broaden our horizon and to situate ourselves in the realm of universal interconnectedness."

     What is the nature of storytelling? Drawing along the lines of my previous reflection on the nature of storytelling, I would like to further illuminate characteristics within the culture of storytelling to shed light on its importance in terms of cultural interconnectedness and its generational responsibility. In our modern society, we are influenced by the written knowledge of various subjects. Even in the educational sphere, the process of a free storytelling is reduced to objective perception of cultural reality and removed from the emotional and spiritual connection to the knowledge we gain. The higher the educational level continues, the less important becomes the concept of storytelling. Looking closely at the pedagogical structures of our society, storytelling is mainly used within the frame of the children's pedagogy. But, even there the storytelling is not the mere domain of the pedagogy but is contrasted with the process of the story-reading. While the storyteller re-creates the story in the process of telling, the reading of the story is rather bound to the written script reducing the creative flexibility of the storyteller. Further, the storyteller is free in his or her ability to modify the voice, apply gestures allowing more spontaneous flow of the process which in itself creates a magical atmosphere. Consequently, storytelling becomes an expression of individual art  projecting the emotional, intellectual, spiritual and physical connection of the storyteller to the story, reflecting his or her understanding of it. Moreover, the storytelling becomes an expression of individual performance which is consequently bound to the audience. The relationship between the storyteller, as an artist, and the audience gains a theatrical quality. This means, that not only the artist tells its story waiting for the audience to become the passive receptors of the story but he or she modifies the story during the performative process by re-interpreting the reaction of the audience. Thus, it  has similarities to the characteristics of the theatre. Our understanding of the theatre has its origins in the cultural development of the performative art in Ancient Greece. The plays of Sophocles, Euripides and various other writers have set a model for the further development and transformation of the theatre. The physical setting of the half-circled Amphitheatre where the audience was positioned on the elevated level to the stage enabled the audience to gain not only a better view but also created an atmosphere of superiority and detachment between the artists, thus the storytellers and the audience. The notion of Catharsis was developed to engage the audience within the plays allowing an emotional and spiritual approach to the story when thinking int erms of the medicine wheel. The effect of Catharsis embodies the purification of emotions and spiritual renewal though the release of the tension that is incorporated in the narrative development of the play.

Amphitheatre. Epidaurus, Greece.

     While the connection between the artist and the audience occurred in the culture of Ancient Greece through Catharsis, Bertold Brecht, the German writer, redefines the function of the theatre in terms of its inter-dynamic between the two parties within the theatre. The phrase Brechtian theatre reflects his theories of the role of the theatre and is even today a standing term when discussing modes of theatre. Unlike ancient classical theatre, Brecht argues that the theatre should provoke the audience in terms of self-reflection enabling a critical view on the actions of the play rather than leaving the audience with the self-satisfied relieve and emotional purification as its is characteristic of the cathartical notion of the classical theatre. Consequently, while the Greek plays target the individual engagement of the viewer with the story, the Brechtian notion of theatre reveals the social implication of the theatre, motivating the audience to use the critical perspective of the story or the play and re-shape their own view on the reality. It is interesting to observe how the play, not only in its performative ability but also in its contextual frame is able to influence the perceptions of the audience. Does it then imply, that the power of the function and the transmitting message of the story relies within the creativity of the storyteller? How can the artist influence the perception of the audience? Any art form, in a way reflects its social and cultural world, so that the artist transfers his or her own critical views on the reality into his work of art, here the storyteller ingrains his own subjectivity into the way he or she tells the story. Further, the Brechtian theatre also transformed the physical staging of the plays. The audience faced a stage that was elevated from the level of the viewer and the half-circled amphitheatre form was reduced to a rectangular shape. The function of this setting was to disrupt a physically  superior perception of the play as in the frame of the amphitheatre but rather to move the stage and the audience closer together, reinforcing the interconnection between the audience and the artists, the storyteller. However, while the plays should offer a critical perception of the reality, the physical setting of the theatre should remind the view that he or she is witnessing a play not the actual reality. Hence, the fictional effect is here preserved through the physical space. The classical and the Brechtian version of the theatre carry interesting aspects that shed light on the performative art from different perspective. In Frankfurt, I once experienced the classical play "Antigone" by Sophocles in a Brechtian theatre setting. Combining the characteristics of both theories the play gained new dynamic. The Cathartical moment has expanded itself beyond the individual consciousness while the play became a socio-cultural critique on the contemporary reality. The individual and the social narratives have fused together creating a new definition of performative storytelling. Thinking about the concept of the storytelling, it seems to me that that fusion between the individual relationship of the storyteller to the audience (as in the classical theatre) and the social association (as in the Brechtian theatre) within the process of the storytelling is best demonstrated in the Aboriginal culture. The way of how they incorporate the storytelling within their culture on all levels of social interactions displays a new perception of performative storytelling. Situating the storyteller within the circle which is shaped by the audience creates a new way of interconnection between the the artist and the audience. The concept of the circle is unmistakeably connected with the medicine wheel which represents the four aspects of human nature, the emotional, spiritual, intellectual and the physical. The circle, thus becomes an expansion of the human nature emphasizing its connection to the nature itself. Unlike the amphitheatrical and the Brechtian stage, the circle enhances the performative freedom of the storyteller by enabling a physical connection between the audience and the artist, here the storyteller. This aspect is very significant in the culture of First Nations. The artist or the storyteller disrupts the individual sphere stepping outside of this space and connecting to the external world. This gesture unmistakably implies and cultural interconnectedness that reaches beyond the individual perception.
Interestingly, in the culture of First Nations the main storytellers were the Elders of the community whose stories were transferred to the younger generations thought he oral tradition. Here, the storytelling is connected with wisdom and is the medium of inter-generational connection which nourishes the source of social implication associated with the process of the storytelling in terms of its performative aspect. As a culture that is mainly based on the oral tradition, First Nations have developed the theory and practice of storytelling in a unique way combining the spirit of the generations within the medium of the story which becomes the witness of a social transformation throughout generations. The story, is undergoing a circle of birth and re-birth that is not only  shaped in the form of the circle but also in the story itself since the various storytellers have added their own perception and individuality to the story. Thus, the story told today carries a timeless culture of its ancestors at the same time finding new resonance in the audience as the perceiving generation. The circle elevates itself from the physical shape and connects generations though the spiritual experience of the timelessness.

 

     The inter-generational connection, characteristic to the culture of storytelling within the First Nations exists beside the notion of intimacy in the storytelling. This perspective originates from the idea that since the story is modified by the creative imagination of every storyteller, a certain intimacy is re-shaped between the storyteller and the story. This intimacy can be seen in the context of the ceremonial performance. The process of absorbing of the story, the transformation of the story within oneself and the final expression of the story in the creative action of storytelling displays the ceremonial tradition. The story and the storyteller undergo a process of growth which fuses them together in their mutual intimacy. However, this intimacy is disrupted when the story is told then it becomes in a way the property of the listeners who then are free to shape the story according to their own individual perceptions of the reality. The listener becomes the new modifier or the new storyteller who will undergo the process of growth developing a mutual intimacy and emotional connection to the story. However, something of the story remains in the storyteller after the story is told, the memory of the cultural growth. The storyteller becomes the chain within the oral tradition that is carried through generations.
     The nature of storytelling is complex domain that can be considered as an artistic work interweaving a dynamic between the storyteller, the audience and the story itself. While the artist reshapes his or her individual identity though story, he/she creates unconsciously a social identity though the storytelling. As an artist of a given culture, the storyteller situates himself within the performative frame since the process of storytelling requires a personal dynamic and the ability to communicate with the audience. Be it within the frame of the Western perception of the performative art or the inter-generational connectedness in the process of storytelling in the First Nation culture, storytelling reflects in a way our own nature. We tell stories from different points of view emerging from various motivations but by telling a story on the conscious level, we tell unconsciously our own stories by displaying ourselves to the critical eye of the social culture. Fusing all aspects of the storytelling, we become our own stories in relation of the story we tell.