Reports of record attendance
levels at storytelling festivals, strong organizational growth,
soaring member levels, and well-paid professional storytellers attest
to what some are calling a storytelling renaissance in the United
States. One gets the sense in reading the journalistic coverage
that people are literally coming out of the woodwork to take part
in this renaissance. And yet, beyond the journalistic hype of the
past two decades, there has been almost no critical research conducted
on it. In an attempt to gain a better understanding of the resurgence
of interest in the art of telling stories in the U.S., this paper
sets out to analyze the art of telling as well as the art of listening,
chronicle the structures that have grown up and around the art,
and explore the controversies that emerged over the past quarter
century as they affect the storytelling art1.
The Tellers of Stories2
Writing in the 1930s, philosopher and essayist Walter Benjamin
pronounced traditional storytelling dead, a victim of an industrialized
society obsessed with information, and the storyteller, a relic
of a forgotten way of life. Though many dispute his claim today
Benjamin’s essay, “The Storyteller”, serves not
only to incite debate but more importantly, to capture in writing
that mysterious and majestic aura surrounding the storyteller. He
writes:
The storyteller joins the ranks of the teachers and sages.
He has counsel—not for a few situations, as the proverb
does, but for many, like the sage. For it is granted to him to
reach back to a whole lifetime (a life, incidentally, that comprises
not only his own experience but no little of the experience of
others; what the storyteller knows from hearsay is added to his
own). His gift is the ability to relate his life; his distinction,
to be able to tell his entire life. The storyteller: he is the
man who could let the wick of his life be consumed completely
by the gentle flame of his story. This is the basis of the incomparable
aura about the storyteller…The storyteller is the figure
in which the righteous man encounters himself [emphasis mine].3
Current descriptions circulated by the storytelling community are
consistent with Benjamin’s vision of the storyteller; the
descriptions tend to uphold the idea that there are all kinds of
storytellers, some of whom possess that capacity or gift to “reach
back a whole lifetime”. Typical of most descriptions is the
following excerpt from a news article:
There are the cowboy poets, back-woods yarners, campus readers,
nightclub jokesters, camp-fire folklorists, barroom Bsers and
an endless variety of those who all, more or less, fit in to the
category of storyteller. Some are professionals, some aspire to
that position, some are 'folk tellers' and others are merely good
at doling out a good line of bull. But they all are storytellers.4
This broad, all-inclusive list speaks to the fact that storytellers
can, and do, specialize in a multitude of genres and fit into many
categories. Perhaps because this list is so amorphous, the process
of self identifying as a storyteller often proves to be a difficult
one. Based on interviews with storytellers, folklorist Kay Stone
posits that "self definition is central to artistic development…[and
in] the case of organized storytelling there is often a confused
sense of what it means to be called, or to call oneself, a storyteller."5
While the reason for this difficulty of self definition has not
been explicitly theorized, there are some mechanisms in place that
attempt to determine who the professional is and who the professional
is not. Therefore, once the storyteller has taken that first step
towards self-identification, he must next decide whether or not
he will assume the label of professional. At this stage there is
much less confusion but much more contention. I would argue that
the reason for the associated contention is two-fold, one is aesthetic
and the other is practical.
From the aesthetic standpoint, there is the classic version of
the storyteller that Benjamin describes, and which is readily embraced
by the storytelling community. The storyteller is the “righteous
man”, the individual who manages to be extraordinary in his
or her ordinariness. The storyteller who manages to transcend the
commonplace, to land somewhere above, is the one that has about
him the air of what Benjamin termed an “incomparable aura.”6
Folklorist and storyteller Joseph Sobol elaborates on the concept
of this aura in his 1999 book, The Storyteller’s Journey.
He states, "The art of storytelling has about it the halo and
the stigma of the ordinary."7 In
other words, by identifying oneself as a storyteller, one will automatically
assume a halo and a stigma. Once that self-identification has occurred,
the storyteller may choose to tell in organized settings thereby
distinguishing himself from the “everyday” individual
who tells stories. By doing so, the storyteller has begun to transform
into the professional storyteller. This means he will be free of
the stigma of the ordinary because he is accomplished and practiced,
and has honed his stories for audiences and for himself. By separating
himself from the stigma of the ordinary teller, however, he is potentially
alienating himself from the halo of the ordinary, or in Benjamin’s
terms, the aura of the ordinary. Thus, to declare oneself a professional,
one may jeopardize that precious balance of the ordinary.
From a practical standpoint, identifying oneself as a professional
storyteller tends to involve more basic aspects of reputation and
monetary compensation. One journalist noted that “folk tellers”
do not consider themselves professionals and will tell stories “for
fun, not profit” while a ‘storyteller’ considers
himself a professional artist and will therefore “tell for
profit”8. The Canadian Storytelling
Directory takes the distinction a step further in its directory.
Its policy states that a ‘professional storyteller’
is someone who makes a living primarily by telling stories while
the ‘amateur storyteller’ is either someone who is only
occasionally paid to tell, or who tells stories for pleasure, or
who has not yet achieved professional status9.
On the surface, it appears that storytellers may be comfortable
with these definitions.
Indeed, storytellers will often make distinctions between the professional
and the amateur, but tend to make those distinctions on aesthetic
grounds. A playful definition of the professional comes from storyteller
Jay O’Callahan: “A story is over when it ends. The difference
between the windbag and the professional storyteller is the windbag's
story has no end.”10 While this
amuses, it also demonstrates the storyteller’s willingness
to make a distinction between a professional and a non-professional.
Storyteller Carol Birch also differentiates between the able (or
amateur) and the fine (or professional) teller when she states:
“In trying to identify what separates the finest tellers from
those who are very able, it seems to me that the most effective
storytellers do two things: they capitalize on who they are as they
tell a story and they tell the story to the people who are in front
of them.”11
However, not all storytellers readily embrace the professional
distinction. The National Storytelling Network (NSN), the largest
member-based organization in the U.S., is attempting to establish
a set of credentials for professionals based on a variety of criteria.
However, its efforts are being met with resistance by some storytellers,
and being exploited by others who “opportunistically describe
themselves as professional storytellers [but] may not have much
experience in storytelling events at all."12
By self-defining as a professional, the storyteller will be viewed
as credible in the eyes of the audience and funding sources, and
be properly differentiated from the amateur competition. But at
the same time, some storytellers resist the title of ‘professional’
in the belief that it will oblige them to adhere to the confines
of that label thereby potentially constricting the art and exposing
them to the accusations that they have disparaged the grassroots
element of the art.
Despite the implications of the term professional, people continue
to identify themselves as storytellers. Stone writes:
In a society such as ours…where formal narrative is
less prevalent, where opportunities for telling stories have to
be sought out, and where formal training is less developed than
for other arts, it is not surprising that many feel unsure of
their social identity as tellers. Yet despite the problems and
challenges, or maybe even because of them, the number of people
who identify themselves as tellers continues to rise steadily.13
True to this assertion, statistics indicate that by the late 1990s
“as many as 500 storytellers [were] making a living telling
tales"14 (up from 100 in 1981)15.
These storytellers, who represent a wide range of ethnic, cultural
and religious traditions, are building upon a U.S. tradition of
telling at libraries and schools, and are now telling at festivals,
museums, bookstores, bars, on the radio and on the Internet. Hospitals
hire storytellers to work with bereavement counselors; ministers
attend storytelling workshops to improve oratory skills; and corporations
employ storytellers to foster camaraderie and collective values16.
A number of universities now offer a variety of courses in the art
of storytelling; and while there are few advanced degrees in the
art, it is being taught at undergraduate and graduate levels appearing
under a variety of departments including folklore, theater, communications,
education, and library science to name a few. Accordingly, “as
the use of story increases, so do the numbers of tellers, festivals,
conferences, degrees and awards.”17
Despite these advances, the task of defining the storyteller and
the storytelling art remains an elusive one. Lindsay Brown, a scholar
who speaks from a cultural studies perspective, contends that "contemporary
storytellers struggle for an understanding of their art, its styles
and aesthetics, its functions, its history, its definition . . .
storytellers as a group tend to try to define storytelling at the
same time as vigorously resisting its definition."18
It is clear that storytellers represent a fine and complex art form
that demands further quantitative and qualitative analysis, as well
as a prominent and permanent position in the larger U.S. arts and
cultural community.
The Art of Listening
In his essay, “Between Teller and Listener”, Rafe
Martin posits that “the art of storytelling depends on the
combined skills of both teller and listener.” He goes on to
say: “The teller works with the imaginative, creative powers
of the listeners’ minds. And the two sets of skills—of
the teller and of the listener—must mesh for a told story
to finally ‘work.”19 Indeed,
the art of the telling depends greatly on the teller’s ability
to read an audience while the art of listening requires a special
willingness to engage the imagination.
Unlike the art of telling, the art of listening to stories does
not possess the same amount of controversy within the storytelling
community on an aesthetic level. For the storyteller, there is no
question that the audience is a key part of the performance. In
the succinct words of storyteller Carol Howe, “You can't be
a storyteller with no audience.”20
Some folklorists share a similar view of audience importance but
also explore the active, transformative role the audience will play.
Joseph Sobol writes:
Storytelling is a living art which takes place in the present
between people. It is not a solo performance. The narrative urges
listeners out of self- consciousness into the story. As the imaginative
response becomes more and more vivid, the listeners participate
in heightened awareness of the event.21
And as Kay Stone found in her research with storytellers, "listeners
play a role even when they are not at all aware of it."22
Thus, the aesthetic is generally agreed upon – the art of
listening requires the listener to succumb to and engage the imagination.
From a practical standpoint, the audience is necessary to generate
revenue for the storyteller and/or storytelling organization. Therefore
it is important to understand the changing demographics of storytelling
audiences. During the 1890s storytelling gained prominence in U.S.
libraries as educators told stories to rapt child audiences.23
Perhaps as a result, librarians, educators and children remain a
key audience segments. Recently however, another segment has grown
out of this original conglomerate—the parents of those child
attendees. Parents, it seems, no longer want to simply drop off
their kids at events, they want to listen as well. As storyteller
Adora Dupree attests, "Many times I have noticed, in settings
other than the classroom, adults bringing their children, as an
excuse to come hear the stories themselves."24
And as one journalist notes, "Though many associate storytelling
with children, an increasing number of performers and venues are
focusing on ‘grown-up’ stories, drawing crowds to hear
tales that are anything but childish."25
Despite the growth of adult audiences, storytelling continues to
bear the stigma that it for children only as evidenced in an article
focusing on the adult storytelling market for booksellers:
According to August House publicist Anne Holcomb, fans see
storytelling audiobooks as good value…So, what is holding
up commercial recognition? Public perception is a major problem.
“We're still trying hard to overcome the myth that storytelling
is just for kids, and that's it's all cornpone and hayseed,”
said Jimmy Neal Smith, president of the National Storytelling
Association [now Storytelling Foundation International]. NSA publicist
Nell Tsacrios added, “Bookstores don't know where to slot
us.” 26
Thus, librarians, educators, and children continue to comprise
the foundation of the storytelling audience though parents represent
a demographic expansion in the current storytelling market.
Confirming the notion that storytelling has its roots in education,
a survey conducted by American Demographics in 1990 noted that "storytelling
enthusiasts tend to be educators." The survey, one of the few
demographic studies of its kind, predicted that "storytelling
is about to break out of the education market."27
Given more recent findings, it appears the prediction has come to
fruition. In 1999 Sobol noted that a wider variety of audience groups
have taken an interest in storytellers and are supporting them via
funding. He states:
These new professional [storytellers] are supported largely
by those earlier institutions—libraries, schools, and recreation
centers—but also by a national network of storytelling festivals,
modeled on the National Storytelling Festival [NSF] in Jonesborough.
In the process, they have developed a web of connections among
support personnel in established 'art worlds'—publishers,
media producers, arts councils, arts journalists, and public sector
folklorists.28
This emerging market of what Sobol terms “support personnel”
may be considered the next tier of listeners that sits atop the
solid foundation of educators, and will most likely influence the
manner in which storytelling begins to be “slotted”
by booksellers, funders, and storytelling enthusiasts.
In addition to the educators, children, and art network that support
storytelling events in various communities, there is also evidence
of an emerging, non-traditional market segment of young adults in
urban areas. An example of this urban market is evidenced at events
hosted by The Moth, a non-profit storytelling organization that
presents theme-based storytelling events, hosted by non-professional
storytellers who are professionals in their respective fields. The
Moth performs in urban settings from New York City to San Francisco,
from Brooklyn Academy of Music (BAM) to bars and caters to young
urban professionals, the "Young Literati". Commenting
on the attendance at a Moth event in San Francisco one reporter
notes, "The arty crowd was primarily in its early 30s."29
This urban effect is also occurring in Boston, where a journalist
writes, "A testament to the popularity of storytelling is the
recent demand for storytelling workshops in the most unlikely places
[i.e. in urban settings]."30
Urban and young adult audiences appear to be showing a sincere interest
in the art of listening.
What can be learned from the recent demographic expansion is that
listeners are an ever-expanding and changing group. Writing on the
aesthetics of listening, Rafe Martin posits that “knowledgeable
listeners alter the nature, depth, and sophistication of the art.”31
If his theory holds true, the demographic shifts of the past few
decades may significantly alter the art of storytelling in the U.S.
The Art of the Organization
In addition to the storytellers and story listeners that have
propelled the art forward, certain non-profit storytelling organizations
have been instrumental in advancing the art. The organization most
often cited by the storytelling community is the National Storytelling
Association (NSA), now split into Storytelling Foundation International
(SFI) and National Storytelling Network (NSN).
The history of these organizations goes back to the formation of
the National Storytelling Festival (NSF) in Jonesborough, Tennessee
in 1973. The festival began as a side event at the first annual
Historic Jonesborough Days, but due to its success, it spurred the
creation of the National Association for the Preservation and Perpetuation
of Storytelling (NAPPS) in 1975 which continued to host the Festival.
NAPPS was renamed the National Storytelling Association (NSA) in
1994. By 1996, NSF was drawing approximately 10,000 visitors (up
from 200 in its first year), and thanks in large part to the success
of NSF, NSA’s 1996 annual budget amounted to $1.7 million,
a figure that far exceeded the budgets of all other storytelling
organizations. In 1998 NSA was restructured and split into two separate
organizations - the National Storytelling Network (NSN) member organization,
and Storytelling Foundation International (SFI). SFI and NSN jointly
own and are funded by revenue from the annual National Storytelling
Festival (NSF).
Many mark the founding of the National Storytelling Festival as
the start of storytelling renaissance, and NSF is quick to encourage
this belief. In its promotional material, NSF writes that it “rekindled
American's appreciation for the art, and spurred the creation of
hundreds of other storytelling guilds, associations, and organizations
across America.”32 In
1998, founder Jimmy Neil Smith stated that “most [U.S. storytelling
festivals] were stimulated by the 'revival' sparked by the first
national fest.”33 To
presume that a single organization could affect such change may
be a bit ill-conceived.
In 1983 the Director of the National Council on Traditional Arts
acknowledged the increased activity but refuted the notion that
a ‘renaissance’ was occurring, claiming that folk festivals
have been in existence in the U.S. for years. The following is an
excerpt of an interview with the Director:
“For 45 years, the NCTA has sponsored national and
regional folk festivals, including this year's National Folklife
Festival…There's always stories going on. Storytelling always
has been a part of this organization. I don't think it has ever
stopped.” [He] goes on to say, though, that the term ‘stories’
has changed to include a wider scope of jokes, anecdotes, poems
and other literary and oral forms. Although [the Director] admits
that he doesn't really know if there are more storytellers now
than in the past, he does agree that “there's a new appreciation
for it.”34
While I agree with his stance on the questionable applicability
of the term ‘renaissance’, his statement brings up an
interesting point. Storytelling, as he said, was always part of
folklife festivals and experienced increased activity within those
festivals. But what he did not say was that storytelling, as an
art form within the folk festivals, was not given room to grow.
Thus, although folk festivals may have featured storytelling, administrators
did not to respond to the growth by expanding programming. The reasons
for this may be many, expansion may not have been viable for those
folk festivals because of mission conflicts, resources constraints,
or political agendas. Regardless, one could argue that niche arts
festivals like NSF filled the need that larger folk festivals could
not. One could also argue that NSF did not create the resurgence
of interest, it merely capitalized on it.35
In reviewing the writings on SFI and NSN, there arose certain issues
that have implications for the art: 1) NSA’s manner of institutionalizing
the art is threatening the art’s diversity, 2) NSF’s
nostalgia-based marketing style is transforming the Festival and
the art into a manufactured heritage product, and 3) NSA’s
recent restructuring into two separate organizations may be taking
storytellers and storytelling in different directions.
Still in transition, NSN has just recently formulated its mission
statement: "To bring together, nurture, develop, and celebrate
individuals and institutions who use the positive power of storytelling
in all its forms."36
Its list of organizational objectives is still in process but will
most likely focus on member driven activities such as its Storynet
Web site, special interest groups (e.g. the healing power of storytelling
group), the member magazine, state liaisons, the national directory,
and the national conference. As a membership organization, NSN receives
funding support from dues, conference revenue, sponsorships and
gifts, as well as proceeds from NSF.
As the name suggests, the Foundation, which has recently become
a Smithsonian affiliate, will extend its mission into the international
community. SFI will focus on creative applications of storytelling
in the areas of health and healing, conflict prevention and resolution,
leadership and management, and children, youth and families. SFI
is now in the process of building the National Storytelling Center,
a multi-million-dollar complex in Jonesborough. The center will
feature, in its words, “A resource center and 200-seat performance
facility where the power of story can be demonstrated for the benefit
of educators, therapists, attorneys, political leaders, and corporate
leaders.”37 As SFI has
no members, it receives its funding by providing educational and
training services, receiving grants and donations, and moneys from
NSF.
Given their new missions, SFI and NSN appear to be in step with
field-wide trends, for storytelling "promises to become even
more influential as professional tellers and others in corporate
management, business, health and social services, education and
the media explore its transformative power."38
Over the span of some 30 years SFI and NSN, under any name, have
proven themselves to be adaptable entities and distinct leaders
in the storytelling community.
Lindsay Brown writes on the development of the NSA and states:
“The [NSA] has influenced other groups and shares many of
their aims, but it has a unique power, influence and political structure.”39
The popularity and visibility of the organization is further evidenced
by the amount of journalistic coverage devoted it (78% of storytelling
articles reviewed for this paper mention the organization and/or
its related festival). However, Brown goes on to say that many find
the NSA to be a threat to the art’s diversity. She writes:
“Many who participate in the storytelling revival are deeply
wary of the NSA. In terms of the commodification, homogenization
and institutionalization of the art of storytelling, for many the
NSA represents a worst case scenario.”40
In the process of promoting itself, it seems the NSA is homogenizing
the art. The format purported by the National (now International)
Association suits the decidedly quaint, Jonesborough aesthetic,
but the NSA should not deign to represent a national storytelling
aesthetic, nor a national storytelling agenda. Nevertheless, due
to NSA’s monopolistic power in terms of funding, visibility,
and advocacy, its organizational vision is fast becoming the national
vision (it is important to note that in no other arts discipline
does a single organization holding such a influential position).
In Brown’s exploration of authenticity as it pertains to
contemporary storytelling, she asserts that the Association and
Festival aim to recreate a nostalgic experience for their visitors
based on built history and as a result, are forcibly positioning
storytelling as a manufactured heritage artifact not an art. She
compares the NSA to politicians who, with their promotional “rhetoric
of tradition, the past, and the betterment of society”, are
attempting to "build populist, consensual nationalism"41.
Arguing that by placing real heritage (like oral histories) in the
context of false heritage (like the NSF) threatens the authenticity
of the storyteller’s art and the storytelling event. The process
is akin to placing actual film footage of a trip to the moon within
the context of FutureLand at Disneyland. Brown provides the example
of storyteller James Rucker:
In his own community Rucker is a permanent fixture, telling
stories over and over in a long-standing commitment to a particular
place and time…Rucker's community work may be part of the
new interest in storytelling, but it is perhaps inaccurate to
call it 'revival storytelling' except when it appears at festivals
[at which point it is danger of becoming a heritage product].42
Thus, the Festival, with its ‘rhetoric of tradition’
may indeed be manufacturing heritage which is understandable, given
the fact that NSF grew out of a heritage tourist attraction. This
is not to say that all festivals are attempting to capitalize on
feelings of nostalgia and that all artists are willing to perform
at such events. Nevertheless, the reality is that this process of
framing storytelling in the context of built heritage is being presented
as the norm by an extremely visible and influential festival. Brown
does suggests, however, that although connections between nostalgia
and storytelling have not yet been explicitly theorized, storytelling
may be both a purveyor of nostalgia but may also have the potential
to be its remedy.
Given the recent organizational name change and restructuring of
the NSA, NSN and SFI are in a unique position to remodel themselves
and the Festival. Though both NSN and SFI are based in Jonesborough
and receive proceeds from the Festival, they are two separate organizations
with different missions. Without looking too far into the future
there are already noticeable differences regarding the presentation
of the SFI and NSN. With their respective Web sites as example,
it quickly becomes apparent that disparities exist.
Storynet.org, NSN’s Web site and the original site of the
NSA, has the look and feel of a grassroots Web site. It is weak
on design and strong on friendly appeal and information. There appears
to be no Web design team on board creating continuity within the
site (though this may be in the works, there was no indication given).
However, it is strong on content and as a member organization it
is currently promoting the extensive member services, soliciting
ideas for NSN’s new vision statement, and linking to its affiliate
organization--SFI’s Web site. Going to StorytellingFoundation.net
(SFI’s Web site) is like stepping into a different world,
a world with a Web development company. SFI’s Web site is
brand new, with no visual ties to the NSA past, and possesses a
look and feel of polished professionalism. SFI has no links back
to Storynet.org nor does SFI mention NSN in its text. Unlike Storynet.org,
which simply has a link to the NSF site, SFI prominently features
the NSF thereby visually linking themselves better to the Festival
than NSN. SFI though weak on content, perhaps because of its newness,
is the superior Web site in terms of design and presentation. If
the Web sites are any indication of the future of these organizations,
then NSN will remain a grassroots member organization representing
the face of the storyteller, while SFI will emerge as the glossy
spokesperson for storytelling.
Issues: Copyright, Overuse, Commericialization
The resurgence of interest in the storytelling art has brought
with it a number of issues. The more poignant and pervasive issues
involve the complexities of copyright, the perceived threat of overuse,
and the commericialization or homogenization process as it pertains
to the story, the story event and the storyteller.
Copyright
Perhaps the most intriguing issue of late is copyright. As it
stands today, there exists an unwritten ethical code that storytellers
have a responsibility for the stories they tell. However, this unwritten
code may need to be more clearly outlined as the storytelling art
continues to grow. As Lindsay Brown writes:
Such explosive growth has brought to light the issues surrounding
storytelling rights and permissions. Many tellers do not realize
they infringe on copyright if they tell a published story that
is not in the public domain without obtaining permission from
the copyright holder. Tellers also infringe on copyright if they
perform someone else's unpublished story if it exists in a tangible
form. If no tangible form (such as a written or recorded copy)
exists, the issue becomes an ethical one, for which the original
teller has no legal recourse.43
It can be said that storytellers and organizations are careful
when it comes to questions of copyright infringement. However, without
written laws, the storytelling community is reliant upon the mores
of individuals. This approach may function well on a grassroots
level but as the art becomes more institutionalized those in the
storytelling community may find themselves needing the protective
structures of copyright law.44
Overuse
Related to the issue of copyright, is the notion of overuse. This
involves the belief that a story told again and again by a single
storyteller reveals the layers of a story, but that same story,
if told by multiple storytellers, albeit in a different styles,
can become exhausted. With the plethora of stories to choose from,
one would presume the likelihood of overlap occurring, and therefore
overuse, to be minimal; however, this is not the case. As an anecdote
reveals, overlap can even happen at the same event. At the 2000
National Storytelling Festival’s ghost stories series, two
storytellers had unknowingly planned to tell the same story on the
same evening. A last minute reshuffling prevented the repetition
of the story but it demonstrates that stories do circulate. In this
case, a simple act of planning on the part of the organization would
have avoided the situation.
What may lie at the heart of this issue is the sense of ownership.
Interviews with North American storytellers concerning the creative
process of storytelling reveal their personal connection to the
stories they select and tell. As storyteller Waddie Mitchell attests:
“Storytelling is personal . . . And though I’ve heard
a lot of stories, I only tell the ones that are important to me,
those that touch me personally. And when I tell a story…I
want my listeners to know how special that story is to me.”45
And as veteran storyteller Laura Simms states: “I rarely go
in search of a story…It’s almost like we meet each other—like
you find a friend.”46
Perhaps, then, storytellers become so connected to their stories
that they begin to feel like they own them, and in order to protect
what they own, they justify the argument of overuse. However, the
very idea that a story can become exhausted runs counter to Benjamin’s
argument that a story, unlike information, can expend itself. To
reiterate Benjamin’s theory, “A story preserves and
concentrates its strength and is capable of releasing it even after
a long time,”47 and
after many retellings. Interestingly, Lindsay Brown discovered that
the idea of overuse is held primarily by tellers in the United States
(as opposed to Canadian and British tellers). However, whether the
issue of overuse is unique to the U.S. has not been explicitly theorized.
Therefore, although a story in the public domain cannot be owned
by any one person, certain provisions in U.S. copyright statutes
related to unfair competition may protect the distinctive style
of a storyteller’s telling.
Commodification and Commercialization
The Commodified Story
The reductive process of commodifying story occurs when a story
is ‘discovered’ by corporate entities who remove its
natural but possibly subversive cultural connotations and diversity
in order to create homogenized, salable products. As folklorist
Jack Zipes matter-of-factly remarks, “Stories are marketable
commodities. Ad agencies use cleverly written stories to ‘move
product.”48 A classic
example is the handiwork of Disney:
[Stories are exploited by] Disney just as they were once
bent to bourgeois purposes by Hans Christian Andersen, but with
the distinction that Disney’s corporate reach is global,
its access to the means of communication infinitely greater, its
silencing of other stories or other versions of stories all the
more complete.49
Commodification, then, is not a new issue; however, its extended
reach has new implications for the art. With its new found reach,
the act of commodifying a story not only tepefies it, but fragments
communal structures and makes the storytelling art appear “primitive”.
Joseph Sobol argues:
As technologies multiply, each seems to perform a more culturally
subdivided role. They are all touched by a ray of the archaic
storyteller's light in that they provide a momentarily coherent
narrative of the world, yet their narratives break down immediately
outside the enclosed space of performance into a multitude of
mutually incomprehensible stories: not whole culture but artificially
inflated mass culture or reactionary subcultures. With this ever-increasing
technological extension and corresponding cultural fragmentation,
storytelling has come to appear childish to many. The technology
it embodies is primitive.50
As more storytellers exhibit a tendency towards subversion, then
the art will begin to serve a more recognizable social and political
conscious and as a consequence, subvert the notion that storytelling
is the stuff of childish fancy. “Storytellers [are able to]
enter the culture industry to subvert it, or at the very least to
question and challenge its machinations.”51
The Commercialized Storytelling Event
Just as a story can become commodified, storytelling events can
become commercialized. Commercialization, in this context, is equated
with the lack of intimacy of the event’s environment as well
as the exclusionary or offending practices of pricing and sponsorship.
To foster an intimate relationship between storyteller and listener,
stir the imagination, and create a storytelling event requires the
proper environment. Founder of NSF, Jimmy Neil Smith, captures the
sentiment when he writes:
Stories can be told anywhere—at home, school, community
library, club meeting, community festival, or wherever people
are gathered. But whether it's a public performance before a large
audience or a quiet evening at home with friends, successful storytelling
depends significantly upon the quality of the performance space—that
strategic but subtle blend of acoustics, lighting, staging, audience
arrangement, and other elements that contribute to the mood surrounding
a performance.52
Indeed, Smith’s Jonesborough-based Festival has proven to
be an ideal environment for storytelling and some might argue that
it is on its way to becoming the Broadway of storytelling. In homage
to Jonesborough and in a bout of nostalgia, Joseph Sobol argues
that the resurgence of interest in storytelling had to begin in
a small spot, a "pinprick" of a place. He writes of Jonesborough:
The festival adventure must begin with a journey, not to
New York, Paris, London, or any comparable center of modernist
faith but to a small-town simulation of an ideal past, far from
the main roads, where local Davids face the Goliath of progress
armed only with cobblestones and antique bricks in a sling of
homespun yarns.53
However, now 25 years later, the festival adventure is not at its
beginning, the authenticity of nostalgia-induced storytelling events
has been called into question, and although Jonesborough is still
a “pinprick” of a place it no longer hosts a ‘pinprick’
of a festival. Like other large scale festivals, NSF is grappling
with the issue of intimacy as audience levels continue to increase.
In order accommodate more listeners but bound by its two or three-day
time frame, the festival can either increase the size of the event
or turn people (and revenue) away. NSF opted to expand its event
by increasing the number and size of the performance tents. As a
result, it lost some storytellers and listeners who were unable
to cope with the resultant microphones and stadium feeling.54
In her interviews with storytellers, Kay Stone’s research
reinforces the notion that such events, typical of the larger festivals,
can produce alienating effects:
Some storytellers worry that the art is becoming too popular
for its own good. “It's changed with all the microphones
and lights,” [storyteller] Kathryn Windham told [Stone].
“Storytelling should be the most personal of all arts.”55
To circumvent this, some festivals have chosen to limit their attendance
levels. As early as 1988 Gay Ducey of the Bay Area Storytelling
Festival began limiting audience size:
“We're a little fussy about our attendance…We
try to limit it to about 500, with only six or seven storytellers,
but we're pressed to do so. We want everyone to be able to see
and hear a real human up there telling a story, not some dot on
a distant stage, because this one-to-one communion between the
teller and the audience is vital to the art form.”56
It is clear that “intimacy between audience and teller, particularly
in the less-than-intimate settings of theaters, tents, and auditoriums,
can be an elusive, though essential trait.”57
It is also clear that increasing audience levels strain the balance
between aesthetics and profit. To rectify this imbalance, the storytelling
festival as it exists today will need to make changes to its current
format.
Storytelling organizations like most non-profit arts organizations
require a diversity of revenues sources to ensure sustainability.
These sources tend to include grants, donations, sponsorships, and
earned income. However, there is general fear in the community that
what happened to folk music in the 1950s will happen to storytelling,
that it will be eaten up by commercialism.58
Commercialism in this case being corporate sponsors. In response,
some in the storytelling community express a desire to keep the
art ‘pure’ in the face of ostentatious sponsorship at
festivals. Reporting on storytelling festivals, one journalist notes:
[Storytelling's success is] beginning to trouble some people,
including a few storytellers, who wonder if the craft is selling
its soul. Corporate logos and advertisements are starting to appear
at storytelling festivals amidst haystacks, wagons, and bonfires.
This year [1991], for the first time, [NSF] will allow a sponsor,
Mott's U.S.A. to advertise at its annual festival in Jonesborough,
Tenn. Mott's is also carting a 125-seat mobile theater shaped
like an apple to malls across America where storytellers spin
30-minute yarns…the Hoosier Storytelling Festival last month
featured banners touting Coca-Cola, American Airlines, Target
Stores and others.59
While sponsorship is standard with more established art organizations,
for the new breed of storytelling organizations and associated festivals
it is still being infused into the community.
In addition to issue of sponsorship, some festivals have suffered
from a backlash associated with increased ticket prices. The NSF
is one such festival. As the NSF became more popular, the market
was able to bear higher ticket prices. However, the repercussions
came from the storytellers and the audience. One storyteller lamented:
“And if John Q. Public can't come [to the festival] because
they [sic] can't afford to pay…then I figured that what [the
NSF] had basically done is…cut themselves off from the man
in the street, the man for whom this single art form is probably
the most accessible art form. And they'd just sort of elevated it
to something that was more and more for the white-collar establishment.”60
Accessibility is an issue for any arts organization, but because
storytelling is conceived as the people's art form, storytelling
organizations, perhaps more than other arts organizations that do
not share that history, are required to walk a fine line with sponsorship
and pricing so that they do not alienate audiences and tellers.
The Commercialized Storyteller
Within the field of storytelling there exists an inverse relationship
between fee structures and artistic integrity. That is, the higher
the storyteller’s fee, it is believed, the more commercialized
the telling. Both storytellers and those outside the profession
appear willing to perpetuate this falsity. In his portrait of the
contemporary storyteller, folklorist Jack Zipes believes:
The new breed of professional storytellers…charge high fees
for their services in schools and community centers, and perform
in a highly stylized manner that has more in common with Hollywood
than the talking circles of the Amazon rainforest. Though many of
them are gifted, their primary mission is not to shape wisdom but
to amuse, distract, entertain.61
Zipes may be justifiably distressed by storytellers who opt to
simply entertain audiences, but equating “high fees”
with “stylized” tellings is a disservice to the artists.
In addition, to assume that every contemporary storyteller is going
to emulate the “authentic” style of the “talking
circles of the Amazon”, or carry out “their primary
mission” to “share wisdom” is confining the evolution
of the art. There is room for those tellers who simply wish to entertain
as well as those who wish to evoke something of greater depth from
their listeners. This range can be found in any art form, and leads
to the tricky notion of ‘good art’, or in this case
‘good telling’.
Storytellers themselves subscribe to this theory, and this is having
an impact on the tellers’ concept of self. As storyteller
Kathryn Windham tells researcher Kay Stone: “It distresses
me when I see storytellers becoming performers.” At Jonesborough,
many tellers have tapes, books and videos for sale.62
Stone observed in her conversations with storytellers that the growth
of storytelling as a "money-making profession" has caused
full-time tellers to reexamine their social identities. Mary-Eileen
McClear another storyteller states, “Am I fooling myself,
cheating the people who came to hear 'a real storyteller'?”63
Stone interviewed other storytellers who, she believes, were fearful
of losing their, "initial exuberance for storytelling in order
to become self-supporting professional performers."64
Some storytellers react to this sense of commercialism by refusing
to be listed in the National Storytelling Network’s directory
because they do not wish to "translate their art into economic
terms."65 Perhaps as
storytelling fee structures become more standardized and as storytellers
gain respect as professional artists, this belief will no longer
be such a divisive issue for the storytelling community.
Conclusion
Given the resurgence of interest in storytelling as an art form
and growing number of storytellers, the expansion of the art in
traditional and non-traditional settings, and the pressing issues
of copyright and overuse, a comprehensive, quantifiable study of
the professional storyteller in contemporary society is recommended.
Thus, as storytelling becomes a more recognizable art form, as the
old stereotypes fall away, as the backwoods festival outgrows its
own nostalgia, as new technologies allow for improved communication
in the storytelling community, as the new generation of tellers
enters the field, and as organizations and storytellers bend to
the forces of commercialism the highly adaptable people’s
art, changes. For better or worse, the contemporary storytelling
art is on its way to becoming institutionalized in America. And
yet, storytelling will always possess an ordinary place in our communities
because it is everyone’s to possess. |
Notes
1Due in part to the lack of research
I will be leaning heavily upon: 1) the journalistic coverage of
the art as it has played a significant role in connecting the public
to storytelling events and organizations, 2) the voices of storytellers
as they define themselves and the art of contemporary storytelling,
and 3) the writings of essayists, folklorists, and scholars as they
conceptualize a storyteller’s and storytelling’s larger
role in society. These three voices are representative and enable
an interpretation of the dynamics of contemporary storytelling and
will, for the purposes of this paper, be referred to as the storytelling
community. Some accounts are speculative at best but reflect the
many issues surrounding the art of telling stories in the U.S.
2The storytelling community
currently employs various concepts to understand the art of telling
stories. The concepts are not necessarily embraced by all, nor are
they necessarily in frequent usage, yet they provide structure for
analysis. In her cultural studies research on storytelling, Lindsay
Brown identifies four major concepts of storytelling. For the purposes
of this paper I wish to distinguish between two types. Traditional
storytelling is "a foundational [concept] that conditions
our understanding of the term storytelling itself, with all its
connotations of ancient forms and the past." It is the form
most likely to evoke feelings of nostalgia and romanticism, and
refers to both "storytelling performed in the oral traditions
of the past, and storytelling still practiced today in the 'pockets'
of other oral traditions that survive today…these traditions
are viewed as somehow isolated from 'mainstream' or 'modern' culture,
either by time, geography, language, or other factors."(Lindsay
M. Brown, "Storytelling: A Cultural Studies Approach."
(M.A. thesis, Simon Frasier University, 1997), 29). Revival
or "revivalist" storytelling is "a new set of
practices and discourses of which individuals and groups deliberately
attempt to revive, promote, preserve, and understand storytelling
and oral traditions. Its ideas and practices are often determined
by perceptions of traditional storytelling; it is either traditional
stories, or traditional storytelling practices, or both, that 'revival'
storytelling aims to resuscitate. While 'revival' storytelling is
not a well known term, it refers to a set of practices and ideas
that are quickly becoming more visible in western countries in the
form of public storytelling performances and events.” (Ibid,
24.). For the purposes of this paper, ‘storytelling’
is synonymous with the tenets of ‘revival storytelling’
unless otherwise noted.
3Walter Benjamin, Illuminations,
ed. Hannah Arendt. trans. Harry Zohn, (New York: Harcourt, Brace
& World, 1968; Schocken Books, 1969), 108-109.
4Wayne Lee, "American Folklore
Lives on in Growing Storyteller Art," The Washington Times
Magazine, 19 August 1983, 3D.
5Kay Stone, "Social Identity
in Organized Storytelling," Western Folklore 56 (Summer
1997):234.
6Benjamin, Illuminations,
109.
7Joseph Daniel Sobol, The
Storytellers' Journey: An American Revival, (Chicago: University
of Illinois Press, 1999), 1.
8Lee, "American Folklore
Lives," 3D.
9Brown, “Storytelling,”
39.
10Elizabeth Karagianis, "The
Story Behind the Storytellers," The Boston Globe,
14 August 1984, 6E.
11Who Says? Essays on
Pivotal Issues in Contemporary Storytelling, eds. and with
introduction by Carol L. Birch and Melissa A. Heckler (Little Rock:
August House Publishers, Inc., 1996), 111.
12Kay Stone, “Social
Identity,” 237.
13Ibid., 238.
14Bruce Watson, "'The
Storyteller is the Soybean…the Audience is the Sun,'"
Smithsonian, March 1997, Vol 27, Number 12, 60.
15Ted Stone, "The Yarn
Spinners: At the National Storytelling Festival, the Object is to
Grab You by the Tale." Republic Scene, September 1981,
50.
16Jack Zipes, "Worth
Telling: Searching for Stories that Challenge our Poisonous Myths,"
Utne Reader, September/October 1997, 40.
17Evy Herr Anderson, "The
Spell of the Storyteller," Publisher's Weekly, 15 Feb 1993,
30.
18Brown, “Storytelling,”
39.
19Rafe Martin, “Between
Teller and Listener,” ed. Birch and Heckler Who Says?,
143.
20Stone, “Social Identity,”
236.
21Laura Simms, "The Lamplighter:
The Storyteller in the Modern World," National Storytelling
Journal, (no. 1 1984): 9, quoted in Sobol, 37.
22Kay Stone, “Social
Identity,” 236.
23For further study of the
storytelling renaissance in turn of the century libraries refer
to Barbara Lehfeldt Baker, “Storytelling: Past and Present,”
(M.A. thesis, Texas Woman’s University, 1979). Interesting
to note, Texas Woman’s University is the host of Storytell,
a prominent listserv for storytelling.
24Adora L. Dupree, "We
Gotta Talk! The Rise of the Modern Storyteller," High Performance,
Fall 1993, excerpted by Utne Reader, March/April 1994, 118.
25Ibid.
26Matt Kopka, "Adult
Storytelling Seeks Bookseller Support," Publishers Weekly,
6 November 1995, 52.
27American Demographics,
Oct 1990, quoted in Jeremiah Creedon, "The Storytelling Renaissance,"
Utne Reader, March/April 1991, 46.
28Sobol, Storyteller’s
Journey, 14.
29Sylvia Rubin, "Storytellers
Drawn to the Light," San Francisco Chronicle, 21 July
1999, sec. B1.
30Karyn Miller-Medzon, "Once
Upon a Time," The Boston Herald, 3 Oct 1999, Arts
& Life, 55.
31Martin, “Between Teller
and Listener,” ed. Birch and Heckler Who Says?, 149.
32See Storytelling Foundation
International promotional material "Our History" on the
Web at www.nsa.org.
33Linnet Myers, "A Very
Old Tradition Left for Dead," Chicago Tribune Magazine,
29 November 1998, Sec 10.
34Lee, "American Folklore
Lives," 6D.
35In reviewing the journalistic
coverage for the thesis on which this paper is based, it seemed
that everyone in the storytelling community had a theory as to why
storytelling saw a resurgence of interest. In the course of research,
certain themes began to emerge, four themes in particular, namely:
the reaction against an information-driven, TV-based society (cited
in 37% of articles), the institutionalization of storytelling as
art by organizations and prominent storytellers (25%), the larger
folk revival (22%), and the return to community after a post-modern,
isolationist lifestyle (16%).
36Excerpted from www.storynet.org
Web site.
37Excerpted from storytellingfoundation.net
Web site.
38Anderson, “The Spell,”
28.
391Brown, “Storytelling,”
121.
40Ibid., 121. For a complete
investigation of the homogenization process see: Brown, “Storytelling”
120-150.
41Ibid., 130.
42Ibid., 145.
43Anderson, "The Spell,"
30.
44Though no definitive work
on the subject of copyright yet exists, Vicky Dworkin, Ph. D. candidate
in American Studies, University of Hawaii at Manoa is currently
working on her dissertation that deals with issues of copyright
and ethics in contemporary storytelling.
45Homespun: Tales from
America's Favorite Storytellers, ed. Jimmy Neil Smith, (New
York: Crown Publishers, Inc., 1988), 337.
46Ibid., 306.
47Benjamin, Illuminations,
90.
48Zipes, “Worth Telling,”
39.
49Brown, “Storytelling,”
166.
50Sobol, Storyteller’s
Journey, 2.
51Zipes, “Worth Telling,”
42.
52Smith, Homespun,
333.
53Sobol, Storyteller’s
Journey, 85.
54Kay Stone, “Social
Identity,” 238.
55Bruce Watson, "'The
Storyteller is the Soybean, the Audience is the Sun,'" Smithsonian,
March 1997, Vol 27, Number 12, 68.
56Bernie Ward, "Tell
Us A Story," SKY Magazine, September 1988, 123.
57Birch and Heckler, Who
Says?, 129.
58Melvin Maddocks, "In
Maine: Storytellers Cast Their Ancient Spell," Time,
3 August
1981, 11.
59Wall Street Journal,
"Tale Tellers Go Big Time and Live Happily Ever After,"
29
August 1991, 1.
60Sobol, Storyteller’s
Journey, 152.
61Zipes, “Worth Telling,”
39-40.
62Watson, “The Storyteller,”
68.
63Kay Stone, “Social
Identity,” 237.
64Ibid., 237.
65Sobol, Storyteller’s
Journey, 3.
|