Allen Ginsberg says, "First thought, best thought," but I'm not sure...
I kind of prefer the second one.
I kind of prefer the second one.
I. Digital Storytelling as a means of activating multiple schema.
Static words on a page are made more dynamic by the faculties of those who read them. Here's my (mildly empirical) evidence:
What do we do before we read each week's selection from the Houghton anthology? We activate schema. We prime the pump. We bring the texts to life.
Multimodal digital stories -- those that actively engage us visually with text and images while also stimulating us aurally with verbal text and music -- are so captivating because they involve us more completely.
Think about how wonderful it is to hear an author read aloud from their own work.
Right.
Now, consider the prvilege of hearing the author's voice while also seeing the images that inspired their words.
Profound.
(...if you ask me, which most people cleverly decide not to...)
II. Digital Storytelling as a modern analog to the Oral Tradition
Kofi and Harry may not back me completely on this one, but I mentally categorize multimodal digital storytelling (mds) as a modern analog to the the oral tradition. Oral storytelling, like mds, is incredibly personal. In both cases, the storyteller invites his or her audience deeply into a thought or experience. (I'm thinking, again, of the small difference between reading a text and hearing the author read it aloud...the same words, but a wholly different experience.)
Additionally, the experience of telling a story digitally is more akin to telling it orally, than to formally (or informally) writing it. Aside from the code-switching many do on an environmental basis, students' voices tend to ring true in conversation. In static writing, however, their voices can easily become lost. This is less the case when they are asked to explain themselves multimodally. It is more difficult to hide behind words when there are also images and sound involved.
I agree that digital storytelling can be quite profound. I am awed by the clever ways in which people match their words to images and sound. Audio especially can set the mood for a piece of writing and conveys things that words alone cannot. I liked working with you and Molly last week even though I didn't feel too helpful. You two ladies have skills!
ReplyDeleteAnd definitely the addition of a person's voice can make a story or narrative come to life. For example, if I see a television interview with someone and then later on read the transcript of the interview or see parts of the interview quoted in an article, I often think "Wow--that doesn't tell the whole story, you really have to see the interview to get the full meaning of those words."
I love that you included hearing an author telling their story. I think that's why Tumblebooks is such a great program for primary kids. Now although not all of those stories are read by the author, they are at least read with emotion that you wouldn't otherwise hear except in our own heads with our own voice.
ReplyDelete