Raising the level of suspense

This morning I've been working on how storytelling may be a useful approach to resolving emotional baggage. If you've been reading this ongoing series of posts, you know I've previously explored facets of emotional baggage through the lens of storytelling in Revising your past history, Trapped inside a story, and Authoring a new story.

Baggage kills the suspense in our lives. The pain we've hung onto keeps the same things happening over and over. There's nothing to look forward to when our baggage is running the show. Our baggage is keeping us safe from danger and locked into successful routines as if there is nothing new to learn, to reconsider or to adopt as a replacement. Baggage driven lives are boring. The same old victim story (what happened to me) gets retold a thousand times.

Today I'm wondering if restoring suspense to lives via suspenseful stories might create the desired transformations in these storied lives. Here's how stories generate suspense that may potentially become infectious in the baggage-burdened lives of an audience:

• When stories take the characters into an unusual world, we are held in suspense about their eventual return. Will Alice get back safely from Wonderland? Will the Darling children accept life in London as normal after their adventures in Never Never Land?
• When stories reveal the "back stories" of the main characters, the level of suspense gets raised by not knowing how their past history will influence their current conduct. Will the characters have enough motivation from what happened to them before to see this new challenge all the way through to completion? Will the insecurities and weaknesses acquired in the dreadful past episode subside as the characters go on this new quest?
• When the protagonist gets pitted against an antagonist, we're left hanging by the evenly matched contest. Will the heroics overpower the villain in the end? If the enemy gets the upper hand, will this strengthen the resolve of the good guys?
• When the predictable chain of events gets disrupted by a twist of fate or reversal of fortune, we're left in doubt about the final outcome. Will the plot get back on track and reach it's desirable conclusion? Will the characters get back to making progress after recovering from the discouraging setback?
• When we get set-up by a story to expect a particular payoff, outcome or resolution, we're held in suspense by the promise made to us. Will the story deliver what we're expecting or leave us hanging after it ends? Will the promise prove to be sincere or just another scam to mislead us to jump to false conclusions?
• When the main character reveals a pattern of inner torment, we're left in a lurch by the uncertainties. Will the character's dark side get the better of him/her? Will the character overcome the negative emotions which have been sabotaging his/her heroics in order to save the day in the end?
• When the climax calls for traits we've not seen displayed before, we're left wondering if everything can work out for the better. Will the main character discover there is no escape but to face the challenge with increased resourcefulness and resolve? Can the central character summon enough courage, compassion, creativity or cleverness to transform the entire situation?

Each of these storytelling devices seem to have the potential for captivating and transforming anyone who wants to resolve their emotional baggage. I've got my work cut out for me to apply these to the workbook.

Beyond straightforward experiences

Most reading I've done thus far about "experience design" seems determined to provide straightforward experiences. This is a logical thing to do considering the users' proclivities for getting lost, disoriented, discouraged and overwhelmed. By making it clear: where everything is, how to move through the options smoothly and how to formulate realistic expectations, the users will likely be satisfied with their experiences.

Storytellers avoid putting their readers, viewers or gamers through straightforward experiences. Straightforward is boring, derivative, predictable and disenchanting. Experiences need mystery and surprise. Storytellers want the user to be disoriented on occasion. By getting lost, the audience gets the experience of discovering and reclaiming their control. By getting faced with unknowns, the information provided becomes an experience of relief, support, or comfort.

I wonder why most experience designers don't mess around with reversals of plot and character?  Could it be they are driven by high control needs and a low tolerance of ambiguity? Are they afraid of user confusion, disorientation and dissatisfaction? Are they confined to the linearity of consistent content delivery models that necessarily forego detours and backtracking. Do they assume no one wants timeouts to rethink their "map in mind"?

When the character in a story suddenly gets upended after being on a roll, we're enchanted. When good fortune goes awry or a string of bad luck ends with a breakthrough, we find the story captivating. When we plod along in a predictable sequence of events, only to get surprised by an unforeseen change, we want to know what happens next.

I wonder if typical experience designers will experience a turnaround when they realize they're on a path that is too straightforward?

Technorati tags: experience design, storytelling

Changing comfort zones

When we picture a personal change as "leaving our comfort zone", we feel threatened. We want to hole up in our tree, stick to our routines and justify our reliable habits. We may appear obstinate, neglectful or clueless to others. We don't care. When others are against us and forcing us to change, the safest place to hide is our very secure, comfort zone. Hmm!

When we are out of our comfort zone, we are out of our tree. Oops! We've lost our grip. We're blushing with embarrassment, stammering when we try to speak and going blank in our minds. Nothing works like it should. We're making fools of ourselves. We cannot stop making mistakes, feeling insecure, or causing problems. We get back in our tree -- ASAP.

After enough episodes of falling out of our tree, we get comfortable with what we cannot do. We accept our shortcomings, know our weaknesses and live with our limitations. Getting holed up in our tree does not feel confining, it seems realistic. We face the facts we have learned from vivid experiences of being out of our comfort zone.

At this point in our adventure, we cannot see the forest for the trees. Our narrow perspective disregards our next comfort zone. We only know about our safety and how it feels to be out of our tree. We are staying out of trouble, avoiding mistakes and succeeding as best we we know how.

Sometimes the weather changes in the forest. We get the feeling it's safe to go out on those skinny branches. It appears we can learn from our mistakes without embarrassing ourselves. We find we can take risks and learn from our awkward experiences. The situation has changed to a supportive environment that nurtures growth and experimentation. We start venturing out, exploring and discovering new territory.

We get into some trouble. Oh-oh! We back off and try again. We see how far we can go. We get good at testing our limits and discovering our new abilities. Out on one of those skinny branches, we discover another skinny branch below. We make the leap and land in another tree. Hee-Haw!

We learn our way around this new tree. We develop new routines and ways to succeed here. We find our way to a new comfort zone. We get holed up in the comfy new tree. Hmm! Some say we're transformed. We think we're just trying new things and learning as we go.

Technorati tags: change models, transformational change

Moved by motion pictures

Peter Presenter took the advice to avoid static pictures in his next few presentations. He tried lots of different transitions between slides. He built up a diagram in stages between five different slides. He even put a few animations of clipart onto a slide, using features of PowerPoint he had never tried out before.

Peter got mixed reviews from this attempt at moving pictures. His audience did not seem especially moved by the improvement in his visuals. He realized that many of his audience members look at videos on YouTube every day. They may be expecting Peter to use his camcorder to shoot some footage that illustrates the points he is making. At the next conference, his presentation included some short videos imbedded in a few slides. The quality was not great, but no worse than most of the amateurish efforts he's seen on YouTube.

Connie attended that latest presentation and met with Peter in the afternoon after his session. She mentioned that Peter appeared to be struggling with her advice to add movement to his visuals. Connie then asked him: "What's you're assessment of videos you've seen on YouTube?" Peter went on for five minutes about how boring most of them seem, how many of the productions are lacking artistry and how most indulge one simple idea that overwork the gag to death. Connie responds: "So you were not moved by those motion pictures?"

Peter realizes that she has asked a loaded question. She's implied that he taking the idea of motion literally and creating problems for himself. She's changed the subject to the audience being moved by what they see, not their seeing something moving. Peter replies: "I not only was not moved by the motion pictures, I got the impression that the creators were stuck in dreary situations, expressing their frustrations and crying for meaningful change in their lives".

Connie pulls out a copy of Made To Stick. "Chip and Dan Heath consider stories to be flight simulators. Stories take the audience where they are going to go on their own after the presentation and walk through the experience a step at a time. The presentation is sticky because it plays with the unexpected and some tantalizing unknowns. A sticky presentation breaks the audience's guessing machine that already: assumes it already knows this, expects this to be boring and has better things to think about".

Peter realizes the few videos on YouTube that are worth watching repeatedly -- have some suspense and surprise elements. They give the impression that the video's creator is far from stuck in his or her own life. They move the audience by the movement in the story, not the motion of the camera.

Connie poses a challenge: "Is a presentation with no moving visuals guaranteed to put an audience to sleep?" Peter replies: "Only if the story the slides tell goes nowhere and the static pictures say the presenter is stuck on his ideas or at a dead end in her life."

Connie asks: "how did you get so unstuck yourself, Peter?" He replies: "It's a long story".

Technorati tags: Made to Stick, storytelling, PowerPoint

Where that ends up

Jordan gets told "no" a lot. Jordan says it's a numbers game: "you win some and you lose some. You cannot win every time". That's so true for Jordan because he intends for his experience to end up that way. He expects to be told "no" a significant percentage of the time in order to be told "yes" the remainder of the times. So be it.

Jordan pays no attention to where things end up. He's all about what happens to him. Jordan does not even realize where he's coming from -- when he sees what happens to him. Jordan's mind is preoccupied with reacting, like there's no choice to create a different experience right now.

Jordan can tell you if he's been told "no" or "yes". He pays close attention to what's being said when he's asked for the order, an appointment, a date or a deal. At least he does not "space out" so badly he misses the reply to his request, question or invitation.

Jordan gets gloomy when he's been told "no" several times in a row. His friend Jane doesn't say to him: "cheer up Jordan". Jane says "See where that ends up? You're saying "yes to no" and making yourself miserable". This bewilders Jordan when he's feeling defeated, rejected and downhearted.

Jordan attended a sales seminar that told him "don't take 'no' for an answer. If the buyer makes excuses, push back until you can close the deal. Overcome the buyer's resistance with persistence". This sounded really good to Jordan. He made up his mind to say "no" to no. He would stop saying "yes" to no and end up feeling defeated.

The next time Jane saw Jordan, he told her of this change in his outlook and approach to get a "yes". She asked him: "Where does that end up?" Jordan resented Jane's question, just like he resented getting told "no" by the customers who were too stupid to buy what he's selling. "Who's side are you on Jane?" he wondered silently to himself. Jordan tries to answer Jane's question without his resentment showing: "It ends up with me being confident, determined and competitive and that's a lot better than my feeling defeated, rejected and downhearted".

Jane said: "Yes that is better and there's something even better than feeling confident, determined and competitive. Have you ever heard the adage: don't take no for an answer, take no for a question?" Jordan was bewildered again. Jane explains: "when getting told 'no' gives us a question, we can wonder about our approach, our assumptions and the effect of those on the other person. We can realize where we are coming from and where that ends up. When we receive all those benefits from being told "no", we become grateful, open minded and receptive to change".

Jordan seeks clarification from Jane. "You mean I'm going to say 'thanks I needed that' when someone tells me 'no' to my face?" Jane sees the conclusion that Jordan jumped to -- that missed her point. "Gratitude rarely comes that quickly, Jordan. Appreciation occurs after the "no" ends up showing us how to change our approach, feel differently from the start and value the 'no' as a question".Jordan gets a glimmer of how to use Jane's advice. "Where do you recommend coming from -- to end up being grateful for getting told 'no'?" Jane's eyes twinkle as she realizes Jordan has changed viewpoints. "Come from a place where you're thinking 'this is going to show me something I don't know. This is mysterious story that is unfolding in a way that I don't already know where it will end up. This will be giving me better questions no matter how it turns out'".

Jordan cracks a big smile: "So when I take their 'no' as a question, that ends up where I'm taking their 'yes' as an answer.

Technorati tags: sales, selling, strategy

When one door closes

When one door closes, you're up against a wall. The saying that "another door opens" is not true. We're trapped in a corner. There's no where to turn when a door gets shut in your face. Or so Dorrie thought until everything changed in her life.

Dorrie got totally burned out at her job. She was thinking of quitting but did not have a better place to go. She put a lot of thought into her exit strategy in order to do the right thing. She knows she can get hot-headed and impulsive if she does not take the time to think things through clearly.

While Dorrie stuck it out at her old job, things went from bad to worse. She was getting shown more disrespect. She was out of the loop on information she needed to do her job. She was viewed with more suspicion instead of the previous trust, respect and understanding she had enjoyed. This deterioration in her working conditions gave her "all the more reason" to get out of there. In a way she was glad the door to continuing in her job was getting shut in her face. She wished another door would open soon.

As things got worse, so did Dorrie's attitude, outlook and stress level. She was in no mood to make a good impression, imagine better situations or recognize an opportunity if it came along. Her attention was devoted to her reasons for leaving, not her visions for achieving.

At first, Dorrie did not realize what she was doing to herself. What she resisted, persisted. What she was sure that she lacked -- she continued to lack for sure. What she had in mind -- showed up for her to mind very closely. She was creating her experience of being up against a wall.

Then it dawned on Dorrie: she was doing all this to herself. What showed up was a mirror of what she had in mind. Her attitude, outlook and stress level were the source of things going from bad to worse, as well as the result of the deterioration.

Dorrie started opening doors in her mind and walking through them. She tried walking through walls and that worked too. That changed her questions to wonder what she really wants, where she wants to be and how she wants to be valuable to others. Before she knew it, all that became clear in her mind. She saw herself in a great situation and felt how delightful it is to be there.

She realized she had acquired lots of mental practice with the adage: "when one door closes, another opens". She'd been through so many open doors she expected it as something that happens all the time, occurs naturally and shows up whenever anyone is ready. The perfect opportunity came along the next day. She went for it and smiles a lot nowadays.

Technorati tags: imagination, Law of Attraction, mental discipline, exit strategy

Time for a change

Ben was a big success. This was no time for a change. Ben had customers to serve, reputations to maintain and obligations to meet. Any misgivings he felt were getting dismissed by him. Any sense that "it didn't feel right to continue as is" -- were added to his "circular file".

Ben knows about "creative destruction" and the "innovator's dilemma". He's aware that successes fail by "trying harder" and "sticking to their guns" when circumstances change the rules. Ben knows that none of that applies to his current success because he's still succeeding.

Ben practices an "attitude of gratitude". He knows the power of positive thinking and has proven that things do increase when he appreciates them. Ben finds the "Law of Attraction" to work for him too. He thinks about succeeding until it feels real and attracts some evidence of what he's "believing in receiving". He takes responsibility for his success as if he created it.

Ben is wary of becoming over-idealistic. He has had "his bubble burst" in the past. He knows that his over-optimism will be met with cynicism and every sunny side of life has a shadow to integrate. Ben is confident that his approach is realistic. His success has its ups and downs, its good days and bad. He's dealing with "what is" when he deals with all those customers to serve, reputations to maintain and obligations to meet.

All hell broke loose one day. Two different customers morphed into monsters. A trusted ally stabbed him in the back. A long term commitment was broken by a reliable supplier. His own "attitude of gratitude" vanished. He wondered if the eruption of his fears, grudges and bitterness was attracting more misery. He knew if he did not turn his outlook around quickly, he would have more hell to pay: by his bad karma, the Law of Attraction, asking for trouble or "believing in receiving" negative experiences.

He realized he could only be grateful if it was time for a change. He could appreciate the setback if he had been turning his back on the gentler indicators of his next step. He began to see how his misgivings were telling him something he had ignored. When it did not feel right to persist without question, he had not questioned his persistence.

Ben got to a place where the "outbreak of hell" was a lesson to learn from. He did not need to resist it, fight it or oppose it like a warrior. He needed to get it, let it in and be changed by it -- like the trusting protege of a mentor. When he really got it, he changed his story -- and that's a whole new story.

Technorati tags: crisis management, resilience, life lessons, setbacks

No more Mr. Nice Guy

Once there was a Mr. Nice Guy who said "No more!". He'd had enough of his confidences being betrayed, his generosity being exploited and his life getting over-committed. He realized he needed to set some healthy boundaries. It was time to say "No" and be Mr. Tough Guy. He could no longer please other people without pleasing himself first. He needed to feel better about himself and what he was getting accomplished.

Being "Mr. Tough Guy" worked for awhile. With more structure in his life, he got more done. With fewer distractions, he stayed more focused. With greater determination, he moved faster toward his goals. With fewer entanglements that hurt his feelings, he spent less time processing painful setbacks and questioning his people-pleasing decisions.

It wasn't long before Mr. Tough Guy started getting hassled by people that loved him, cared for him deeply and enjoyed how well he related to them. They said he had turned into a cold machine. They claimed he was putting distance into their relationships. They were convinced he was turning into a "one track mind" that sacrificed everything to get a job done. They saw him trashing his creativity and playfulness in order to not get hurt, stepped on or betrayed again.

Mr. Tough Guy took all this feedback the wrong way. All he could hear was "go back to being Mr. Nice Guy". It appeared to him that his favorite people wanted a "people-pleaser" to take as their hostage. They only pressured him to sacrifice for them, not for the things he wanted to accomplish. He felt misunderstood and falsely accused by people that he thought had cared enough about him to get where he was coming from.

It made no sense why everyone was not thrilled with his new focus, progress and results. He could not figure out why all the drama in his life appeared so inescapable. He was bewildered by the persistent attempts of people to control his life instead of giving him the freedom, trust, respect and unconditional love he deserved.

He then saw a bumper sticker on a car as he drove home last week. It said: "Remember the 4 C's". Given how he was feeling, he figured the 4 C's were captivity, cruelty, corruption and crime. He called the phone number on the bumper sticker later that evening. He got a pre-recorded message that said:

"When you're on your own, the 4 C's are Creativity, Courage, Confidence and Compassion. When you're together, the 4 C's are Communication, Coordination, Cooperation, and Commitment. Forget heroics. Forget being a doormat. Be the best you can be while getting it done together".

He realized he had gone from doormat to heroics. He had a ways to go yet. He gave himself high marks for his creativity, courage and confidence. He realized he would be a better team player if he had stopped being "Mr. Nice Guy". He knew he was on the right track to become Mr. Tough Guy.

Today he realized his goals have changed. He's becoming a solid team player and collaborator. Everything he's doing to toughen up and tighten his self discipline is valuable. Everything he's going to do communicate, coordinate, cooperate and commit will seal the deal with anyone that plays his new game. People that want to take him hostage will fall by the wayside. People that get where he's coming from will be coming from the same place. His life suddenly got a lot easier.

Peter Presenter's pickle

Peter Presenter is in a real pickle. He recently gave a presentation at the GAG Conference 2007 (Griefers and Gankers). His Powerpoint presentation has lots of slides with great illustrations, photos and clip art. He knows his material well enough to speak extemporaneously. You won't catch him reading his slides or looking down at a script. He makes eye contact with his audience and usually gets high ratings at other conferences.

During his presentation at the GAG conference, one of the griefers in the audience yelled out "BORING!". A moment after Peter's favorite slide came up on the screen, another griefer called out: "You Suck!" A ganker stole everyone's attention for a second by saying "Don't tell us, SHOW us!" Another griefer said in a loud voice at the end of Peter's talk, "I thought Peter knew his material -- but he doesn't have a clue".

Peter was devastated. He'd never endured outspoken criticism like that before. He thought of the bloggers who wrote that "digital natives are becoming digital savages". Peter could not make sense of the feedback or learn from the experience. All Peter could do is pout.

On the flight back, Peter ordered two little bottles of vodka from the flight attendant to drown his sorrows. "What's a pity party without some booze" he thought to himself. Peter was so self-absorbed he failed to notice the other passenger in his row. While he waited for his drinks, Peter lowered his tray table and grabbed the in-flight magazine to take his mind off his troubles. He was startled when he heard someone say "Hello Mr. Presenter, I saw your talk at the GAG conference and liked it".

Peter looked up and saw a distinguished woman looking right at him from the aisle seat. She was no griefer or ganker. "My name is Connie. I heard the feedback you got during your presentation. You look like you were hurt by it, not helped". For the next ten minutes they talked about Peter's anxiety, Connie's conference expertise, learning from obnoxious feedback and her own experiences with griefers.

When his drinks arrived, Peter put the little bottles in his pocket and drank the mixer on ice. His anxiety was already lowered by Connie's outlook. He realized he had a lot to learn from her. He decided to ask her point blank: "What did that ganker mean by "don't tell us, show us"? I thought my slides were helping the audience picture, visualize and relate to my presentation!" Connie appeared delighted by his question. She immediately launched into her big explanation about slides.

Most slides show static pictures that say the idea is going nowhere. Some slides transition into the next slide or build up a diagram in stages. Those sequences of slides say the idea involves movement. Some slides put that movement into a context where the change will encounter pitfalls, obstacles and griefers. Some slides go as far as to tell a picture story where all I've described comes together beautifully.

When griefers say something is boring, they mean there's no suspense, movement or adversarial context. The audience has been given nothing to wonder about, care about or identify with. When griefers say a speaker is clueless, they mean there's no understanding of the talk for people who are going to use it with difficulty and deal with opponents to it.

If you think of knowledge as a network, all this may fall into place. Static slides are nodes with no connections. Sequenced slides provide links between nodes that show cause and effect, stages in a progression or advancements made possible by the new nodes. Context slides show the networked understanding interfacing with other networks beyond its boundary that may be supportive and collaborative, or incompatible and antagonistic. Story slides reveal the underlying rules of the network that generate the nodes and links. An example of a generative rule is "when the learner is ready, the teacher will come" or "when curiosity formulates a new question, the network assimilates new nodes and links".

Peter's mind suddenly spawned many new connections. "In my life story, the griefers gave me questions about my own approach, which made me ready to learn, which brought about your input, which gave me ways to change my approach". It then hit him: "Those griefers were speaking up in favor of authentic learning. Now I get it! They want pictures of movement, raw materials to form networks and stories of all these nodes, links and interfaces coming together".

Connie smiled. "All this comes down to one thing: next time tell a story".

Changing our story

We mean something different about the idea of "stories" when we've changed our story. We didn't get told a story. We've been living inside a story we tell ourselves. People call this a "life changing experience". I find it's the most valuable kind of learning experience I can create for others and myself.

Therapists describe this as a "change at a cosmological level of meaning". This is deeper than a change of habit, attitude or explanation. This revises the meaning of life. The "facts of life" are transformed. The world seems different somehow. Feelings have changed about oneself, others and past histories.

I find it helpful to see us living inside stories -- that we can step out of anytime. Parents put us inside their story, which early on gives us an identity and meaning to our lives. Their story usually feels too confining during adolescence and a rebellion ensues. A new story is discovered that defies the imposed parental narrative. When adults continue to live inside their parents' story, these adult-children act out anger, stifle their feelings, suffer from bad decisions and fail to find satisfaction in accomplishments. The parental story suffocates the lives that are meant to be lived.

Many adults I know live inside victim stories. They thrive on self-pity and live in their past. Other acquaintances live inside conquest stories. They thrive on winning at other's expense and living in the future where their goals and ambitions reside. Both are stories that are meant to be left behind.

Inside a confining story, we tell ourselves a story about life. We say "it has to be this way", "all is not possible", "change is unrealistic" or "this is my fate, destiny and luck". We argue in favor of limitations. We box ourselves in with restrictive beliefs.

When we've gone through a life-changing experience, we tell ourselves a different story about life. We say "people change", "it doesn't have to be this way", "we create our destiny" and "we can accomplish what we set our mind on". We experience leaving an old story and entering a new one.

We then see how our lives were the product of the story we told ourselves. We didn't tell a story about what happened. What happened told the story about what we had limited ourselves to endure.

Games and stories

At the Game Developer Conference this month, a study was released about the immersive quality of games. Researchers at the University of Helsinki found that "Role Engagement" had far more influence than seven other factors in game immersion. They define role engagement as:

captivated and enclosed into the role provided by the storyline or narrative

Role Engagement scored 19.65, compared to 6.69 for the next biggest factor: Attention. These findings say Brent Schlenker is right to advocate David Shaffer's approach to epistemic games. It also validates what I wrote about Shaffer's conceptual framework:

Rather than use the concept of "epistemic games", his message would come
across more clearly if he used concepts like: assuming a complete identity,
facing the interpersonal challenges of professional conduct, deploying a new
skillset within a politicized context or playing the part of a street smart
operative.

None of this comes as any surprise to Clark Quinn, Mark Oehlert, Karl Kapp or anyone adding to the thinking about Serious Games. It reinforces the use of the power of storytelling in informal learning that Ray Sims is exploring.



In A Theory of Fun, Raph Koster argues very insightfully that games are NOT stories (p.88):

• Games tend to be experiential teaching. Stories teach vicariously
• Games are good at objectification. Stories are good at empathy
• Games tend to quantize, reduce and classify. Stories tend to blur, deepen and make subtle distinctions
• Games are external - they are about people's actions. Stories (good ones anyway) are internal - they are about people's emotions and thoughts.

One way I've resolved this in my mind is to put the emphasis on role identification. Becoming the protagonist in a scenario, identifying with the avatar's role, playing the part -- finds the middle ground between story and game. Perhaps it even becomes a synthesis or convergence - the best of both vehicles.







Technorati Tags: informal learning, storytelling, GDC,

What story doctors do

Hollywood executives reject most stories that come across their desks. Screenwriters have the same problem as creators of business and instructional narratives. Their stories are boring. Screenwriters get sent away to do rewrites. Some call in story doctors to help them "fix their script". Here's a cursory look at what those story doctors do to access the power of storytelling.



No identification with the lead character(s): The viewers cannot take the journey through the eyes of the protagonists. The audience is left behind as bystanders until they can empathize with the hero/heroine/anti-hero, feel their pain, care about the desired outcome, fear the same dangers, and value the sporadic progress.



Empty promises: The ending fails to deliver on the expectations created from the start. The climax is a let-down or a betrayal. The audience does not feel rewarded until the plot includes a big enough twist or a sufficiently dramatic conclusion to bring closure to the issues raised.



Doors left wide open: The protagonist finds "easy outs" to avoid his/her destiny. The audience feels manipulated until the character's fate is sealed and the suspense is heightened -- by the character realizing there is "nowhere to turn but within".



See it coming: The plot is too predictable, unfolding according to plan or getting a straight shot at the goal. The audience feels over-confident until they are setup to expect one thing and faced with a surprise or they are presuming they know it all and then find there's a gap in their understanding.



The hook comes up empty: Fishing for the audience's commitment fails to catch their curiosity. The viewers stare in disbelief until they get hooked by a luring discrepancy or baited by an unsuspecting character asking for trouble.



Crap shoot of random consequences: The world the characters live in -- has no rules to live by or ways to succeed. The audience will feel hopeless until there's evidence of causal relationships between events or games to "play for keeps" in this world.



Absurd coincidences: The story seems laughable and ridiculous. The audience will scoff at the story until there is foreshadowing and payoffs or revealing clues and satisfying conclusions.



Shallow characters: The characters have no credible reasons to react the way they do. The audience will find the story incredible until characters reveal their back stories through conflicts or personal dilemmas.



When a story gets scrutinized and transformed in these ways (and many others) the audience becomes fully engaged. The boring narrative becomes a spellbinding story that sinks in deeply and changes their outlooks.

Bring in the power of storytelling

Item 20 on Ray Sims's "What to do on behalf of informal learning?" is "Bring in the power of storytelling". Ray has begun to cover the many uses of storytelling. I'll add to that with some insights into the POWER of storytelling.

Archetypal: When we approach a life challenge like a hero/heroine, we invoke a rich tradition and archetypal dimensions to our fate. We tap into the vast realms of mythology, fairy tales and dream symbolism. We bring our unique inflection to the eternal pattern of heroism, We are leaving the familiar by crossing a threshold like others before us. Our encounters with antagonists heighten our role as a protagonist. The temptations to abandon our calling remind us of characters in other stories.

Symbolic: When we become immersed in stories, we suspend our rejection of fantasy. "Once upon a time" transcends the slow march of time and practicalities of living. We enter into a timeless realm where small incidents have great significance. We feel like we are being given lessons with pictures and symbolism. Things happen for profound reasons. The conflicts between characters are larger than life.

Emotional: When a story stays with us, the plot got to us. The character tensions evoked moods and stirred our emotions. We left the realm of rational reasoning and logical constructs. Vividly portrayed scenes prove to be unforgettable. We can picture that situation over and over again. The incident in the story comes to mind in other situations. We feel guided and comforted in our own trials and tribulations.

Fateful: When a story sees every character's life as an unfolding story, it speaks to the truth of our lives. The arc of each character reflects an underlying truth of how we grow up through adversity. The tale resonates with a deep sense of why we are here and what we are doing by being alive.

When stories invoke these kinds of power, insights and changes happen without getting taught. Informal learning replaces formal instruction. Realizations dawn on the minds of the listeners or viewers. The story invokes hidden potentials for growing, changing, learning and creating.

Technorati tags: storytelling, informal learning

Playing the Contrarian Game (Part Three)

You've entered this level having been bombarded by feedback. Instead of getting shot at like happens in FPS (first person shooter) games, you're getting shot down by other points of view. Instead of learning information about the objective world from experts, you are learning about you -- subjectively through your relationships. What you are realizing are things that can be learned, but cannot be taught to you. The content is not being delivered to you, it's getting discovered by you.

In this final domain, there are four challenges that involve joining an ongoing conversation. Each conversation is created by real-life contrarians. Hanging out in this domain utilizes the seeing resources you acquired in the previous domain. If you drop out of a conversation, you drop back to the previous domain. If you cannot see things the way real contrarians do, it's time to go back and pick up the seeing resource that did not stick with you.

The first conversation is is exploring how to say things for effect. It appears to be a positively naive discussion to curmudgeons. If you can only see how you make people despise you, then you cannot join in the conversation. When it occurs to you that you can make a difference the same way you make enemies, you can join in. When you see how you effect people, you can say things for beneficial effect. When it makes sense that people can be hurt by you, you can comfort them through the same connections.

The second conversation is using a different cognitive strategy that has not been available until you reached this level: authentic positive thinking. The participants are positive about positive and negative thinking. They are practicing appreciative inquiries with an attitude of gratitude. If you can only see what bad comes from simple-minded optimism, you cannot join this conversation. When you realize what good comes from everything, you can appreciate conflicts, misunderstandings and problems. You can point out the value, purpose, and meaning of what appears senseless, useless or purely destructive.

The third conversation is exploring everything in-between the extremes. Curmudgeons can only see this as lightweight, non-committal, fence-sitting. When you can see how every idea needs another connection, you can join this conversation. You will see ways to take exception in order to formulate an clever combination of ideas. You will disagree with antagonisms in order to validate an emergent consensus. You will give respect to alienated constituents to extend the boundaries of the community.

The fourth conversation explores the practice of informal leadership. When you can see how you've failed to provide leadership, you can serve your followers more effectively. You will earn respect by showing respect. Your vision of a better future will come about as you validate others' contributions to the evolving conversations. It will occur to how to be the go-to person and how to go to bat for others. You will lend a hand and protect the fragile advances others make on your behalf. You will see the common ground and shared interests to nurture.

When you find yourself in all four conversations with people in your life, you've won this game. Everyone else wins to because of the differences you are making. Your mind is transformed into a real Contrarian. If you inventory your seeing resources, you can expect to find the following:

• seeing how your reacting to others goes nowhere endlessly


• seeing how you can effect others for better or for worse


• seeing how your superiority lacks humility, respect, or empathy


• seeing how you make problems stick around or disappear


• seeing how you point fingers to avoid responsibility for your issues


• seeing how you can provide leadership informally


• seeing how you'll know what to do when you first let go

Congratulations Contrarian! Game over - play again?

In keeping with last night's Academy Awards (and the practice of contrarian conversations) I'd like to thank the following people who made "Playing the Contrarian game" possible:

Marc Oehlert for bringing his anthropological expertise to eLearning issues and conveying the value of contrarians.

Harold Jarche for sharing the link on Coyote Teaching and raising his own question about the tension between coyotes and free range chickens -- which led to my brainstorming every kind of trouble that coyotes get into.

Roger von Oech for his comment on my Four Coyotes post which reminded me of my use of curmudgeon and contrarian puppets in the 80's (when we met).

Brent Schlenker and Wendy Wickham for extolling the virtues of my own appreciative inquiries into their wonderful blogs and viewpoints.

Karl Kapp for quoting Brent and myself like a true Coyote Contrarian and getting an extremely valuable discussion going on his blog.

Kevin and Timothy Johnson for their encouraging comments on Part One of this three part series.

Playing the Contrarian Game (Part Two)

You've entered this level having selected the oppositional cognitive strategy in Part One. You have taken it for a test drive and found this strategy works for you. You can routinely dismiss positive comments and validate negative remarks with ease. You see this cognitive strategy offers many advantages over thinking like those numb skulls who claim to be devoted to positive thinking while reacting negatively to anything negative. You know that getting to the truth of a situation calls for something more than naivete, simple minded explanations and wishful thinking. When you've developed a strong sense that your oppositional strategy is the way to go - you may advance to the next domain which includes seven new levels/challenges.

The previous domain dwelled upon choosing and deciding. This new domain is about seeing. The first challenge in this new "seeing" domain begins with seeing how it appears that you're making progress and doing good when thinking like a curmudgeon. There is always someone to shoot down and something to contradict. There is never a dull moment with no stupidity or clueless ambitions to set straight. With so much to do, it appears you're on the right track. In this level you find out you're blind to what's going on here. When you can see that all your interactions are going nowhere, (really boring, more of the same-old-same-old, chasing your own tail), you may advance to the next level.

In this level you now see that what you say is highly repetitive. But it appears its necessary because there is a continuous supply of over-simplistic thinking to be corrected. It's a job that somebody has to do and it might as well be you. You learn in this level that your reliable use of the oppositional cognitive strategy is making enemies. You appear mean-spirited to others. You're coming across as malicious, wicked and vindictive to people that have to deal with what you see and say. All you need to do to move on to the next level -- is see how you can have that alarming effect on others and make those consistent impressions unintentionally.

You're seeing resources now include seeing how repetitively all curmudgeons act and how your conduct has a side effect of making enemies. It still appears that you are seeing eye to eye when you help others wise up. You assume your on the same level and sharing an interest in the truth. In this next level, you learn you are looking down on people. You appear conceited, arrogant and self righteous with the stances you take. You may advance to the next level when you see how you are lacking in humility, respect, empathy and rapport.

The next challenge is to sort out who's the problem. It appears you are solving the problem by taking initiative, speaking up and addressing the situation better than the others involved. It's obvious the "clueless wonders" are the real problem. In this level you find out you are part of the problem. If it weren't for you, the problem with work itself out or evaporate on its own. When you can see that you are escalating, feeding and enabling the problems you address, you may advance to the next level.

After seeing that you are part of the problem, the next challenge explores how you are feeding the problem. It appears you are objectively identifying what is wrong, mistaken or ignorant. You get feedback in this level that you are pointing you finger, blaming others and shooting the messengers who bring word of what you are not seeing. When you can see that you are failing to take responsibility for your part in this (pointing three fingers back at yourself, reclaiming your own baggage, stopping the projection of your own issues onto others), the next level will accept you.

You are nearing the exit of this domain. Your seeing resources include five new ways to see yourself and situations. The next challenge questions the leadership in these situations. It appears you are taking the lead when you avoid collusion with those simple-minded idiots. You discover in this level that you are failing to provide leadership. You are merely taking an extreme, one-sided, adversarial stance. You are unconsciously asking for trouble, battles or conflicts with those who feel attacked, dismissed and devalued by your outlook. When you can see your lack of an envisioned future, validation of others and earned respect, the gates to the next level will open.

Up until now, it seemed right to be confident in your outlook. You trusted what you saw to be accurate, objective and valuable. Each level of this domain has given you disorienting information. Your basis for trusting your own judgment has been questioned. You now see how to question your perceptions, challenge your conclusions and discern the effects of your conduct. The final challenge of this domain is to see the advantages of letting go (not knowing, returning to innocence, practicing emptiness, hanging out in limbo, suspending your need for certainty, moving forward with no ground under your feet). When the advantages of "not knowing how to proceed" become clear to your own mind, you may proceed to the next domain.

(to be continued and completed in Part Three)

Playing the Contrarian Game (Part One)

Welcome to the Contrarian Game (free ranger edition). The objective of this game is to become a contrarian. The game requires no software, web services or physical devices. You can play this game with people in your life or in your blog reader. You can stop the game anytime or change your strategy whenever you desire. The game begins with you in the role of a curmudgeon. The character on the right is your brain thinking curmudgeon thoughts. The characters on the left are your brain after you win this game. Get the picture?

The first challenge is easy -- to get you oriented and confident in your ability to play this game. Look around your life for some people who are acting naive, simple minded, unrealistic or wishful. Get provoked by their ignorance. Become opinionated, preachy and self righteous as you set the people straight, show them the error of their ways or deliver some expert content that makes them better informed. When you've completed this step, you can advance to the next level.

The next challenge is to think about what just happened. You need to be careful not to take responsibility, accept blame or consider the effects of what you've done. You need to think about those simpletons who provoked you in a way that justifies your outburst and outlook. When you've thought a lot about their simple mindedness, naivete and lack of realism, you can advance to the next level.

You are now ready to commit to a cognitive strategy to ensure your continued success. By locking into a routine way of thinking, you will free up your mind for more alarming, threatening and unfamiliar entries into your world. All you need to do at this level to move on -- is accept the obvious advantages of adopting a consistent cognitive strategy.

The cognitive strategy available at this next level of the game is called: oppositional thinking. Check it out and see if it works for you. When you see someone thinking positively, react with your own negativity about disadvantages, dangers and expected disappointments . When you see someone thinking negatively, react with positive thinking about advantages, opportunities and likely progress. When you've completed your test drive of this strategy, you can advance to the next level.

You now have a choice (it's a slightly branched story). You can elect to adopt oppositional thinking as your success strategy or choose another strategy that is available at this level. When you've made your choice, you can move to the next level.

If you selected another strategy, you become simple-minded. You rely on a reactive positive cognitive strategy. You think positive thoughts about people's positive thinking. You think negatively about people's negativity. You are hounded by curmudgeons who oppose your naivete. The game is over - play again?

If you selected the oppositional cognitive strategy, you advance to the next level. (to be continued)

Four coyotes

Harold Jarche got me thinking about coyotes and free range chickens with his post and link to Coyote teaching. That calls for a story.

Coyote Appetite lives near a barnyard filled with stupid chickens. Coyote thinks there are signs everywhere that say: "Free Lunch". Coyote Appetite is extremely hungry. She knows she is doing the right thing to take advantage of the situation. The Rancher thinks differently. He shoots at Coyote every chance he gets. The Rancher appears to be one of the chickens himself. The chickens think "stupid Rancher -- stupid Coyote".

Coyote Curmudgeon is extremely clever, but he is too smart for his own good. Coyote thinks his size is an advantage wherever he roams. The more he knows, the more he can dominate, intimidate and over-power the free rangers and wild gamers. Coyote thinks his short tail is an advantage over long tail wild gamers like pheasants and road runners. Coyote Curmudgeon is his own worst enemy. Instead of getting shot at by a rancher for being hungry, he shoots himself in the foot by being clever. Coyote Curmudgeon gets beat by the little critters who take advantage of his determination and self righteousness. Meep Meep!

Coyote Contrarian is in between everything. In between over-simplifications and simplicity, Coyote complicates everything. Between today and tomorrow, Coyote travels in dreamtime's symbolism. Between struggling and quitting, Coyote gets it done with ease. Between convictions and clarity, Coyote is confusion. Between all or nothing, Coyote is a little of both and none of the above. Coyote Contrarian shows Coyote Appetite and Coyote Curmudgeon what is missing, mistaken, cyclical and wise.

Coyote Mind sees like a hawk and flies like an eagle. Coyote Mind can see what will happen next when being hungry or too smart for his/her own good. Coyote Mind sees the good he does and the difference she makes in between this and that. S/he gets the biggest picture and the smallest detail. Coyote Mind tells a medicine story of four coyotes.