I was happy to revisit the idea of story mapping and even happier to have so many examples of different ways to do it! Coming right after the chapter discussing the importance of the struggle to change and how it is needed to propel a story and make it interesting, Aristotle’s design seemed simplistic to the point of useless. Not Ohler’s best planning if you ask me. But then I started thinking about the levels of storytelling and where DO you start to learn how to do it? You do have to start from the basic structure – a simple rise and fall – to have something to build on. (hmmmm, maybe he had a reason to put this here…). It was here I could find support for my belief that when teaching ANYTHING you need more than one way to do it.
Campbell’s Diagram suited my personal esthetics the best. I too believe in the cyclical nature of most things so approaching storytelling with the idea of return to the start (transformed, yes, but we tend to return none the less) makes sense to me.
I also liked the Treasure Map approach “The treasure map allows flexible customization of a story map.” (Ohler, 2008. pg. 116). Some stories need more time to develop-more places to go- and mapping in this free form way would really open possibilities.
McKee’s Story Schematic took that too far for me. I see the value for some types of stories, but they just aren’t the kind that interest me. That push-pull-back-and-forth-come-here-go-away story arc usually just irritates me.
I am very familiar with Kieran Egan’s work and loved that it was represented here. While Ohler provided a wonderful thumbnail, the idea that children could and in fact should achieve complex emotional development through storytelling and imagination is based in numerous philosophies (Piaget, Vygotsky, Gerber…) and is outlined more fully here:
No comments:
Post a Comment