Transmedia Storytelling

Jenkins introduced me to the concept of Transmedia storytelling as an evolving form of narrative. I agree that it is a very smart marketing move that many industries could benefit from, but I don't think it is simply a good marketing tactic. Classifying it as such makes it seem like the shallow trick of corporate minions. It's relevant to me on a different level because I'm starting to see how Transmedia storytelling could affect traditional ways of presenting fiction.

What if Charles Dickens' character of Estella was not someone you met when you first read Great Expectations, but someone you knew from a social networking website such as Myspace or Facebook? In the simplest of terms, readers would be closer to the character if they have been exposed to them before. The narrative could then evolve to the point where readers felt as if they were reading about someone they know. Traditionally, readers come to know and relate to characters as the narrative unfolds. In the digital age, we want information and we want it fast. This old process may loose some readers simply because they don't relate to a character soon enough. If the reader doesn't relate to a character, then they may not care what happens to that character and lose interest.

This also involves a form of narrative that I'm anxious to experiment with and that is presenting fiction as non-fiction. In Jenkins' chapter entitled Why Heather Can Write, Hogwarts is presented as a physical school. Heather Lawver's fiction took the form of non-fiction as The Daily Prophet emerged. Her web based school newspaper, for the fictional school, was innovative and promoted a deeper connection within the Harry Potter fan base. I'm sure it also encouraged new readers for fans who discovered the web site before the books. Since Heather was home schooled, I think it also calls attention to some flaws in traditional learning. Kids were getting an education outside of their traditional education.

Although I'm intrigued by the idea of presenting a fictional character as non-fiction, I'm bound to run into the same problems as Lawver did. Warner Brothers was concerned about "potential confusion" but I'm not so convinced that I have an obligation to explicitly discern or disclose a flesh and blood person from a fictional character? Whose the authority on that issue? A carefully constructed character could easily possess human qualities. The only thing they would lack would be physical elements, which may be unimportant in our time. After all, the internet dating industry depends on a deep level of connection way before physical acts of hand holding and hugging ever come into play.

Concepts like internet dating, social networks, and Lawver's school newspaper are examples where physical aspects are treated as mundane and therefore unworthy of attention. Younger generations may watch the Disney version of Pinocchio and wait with anticipation for the character's final reward, only to feel the sting of disappointment when he is granted the opportunity to be a real boy. These viewers may be thinking one word: overrated. The importance of that gift simply isn't there anymore as it was for previous generations. It's interesting to think that this generation could probably appreciate the Disney-free version of the story, which was never intended for children. It features an irate puppet who constantly tries to stomp on that annoying cricket. This, for some reason, is far more believable than Disney's overly tolerant wooden boy. Then again, Disney rarely advocates thinking for one's self and continues to treat old stories with sterilization, detachment, and anti-septic.