Chris Crawford on Interactive Storytelling (5 page)

I can improve on this diagram by taking into account two facts: first, that some ideas hook up to more than three other ideas, and second, that often the connections between different ideas are strained (see
Figure 1.3
).

FIGURE 1.3
: A messier, more realistic mental organization.

Now consider how learning is represented in this diagram. Sometimes learning is just a matter of adding new ideas, as represented in
Figure 1.4
.

FIGURE 1.4
: Simple learning without the “Aha!”

The new triangle on the left, marked as idea L, represents a new idea tacked onto an existing mesh. It doesn’t change anything; it’s just added on.

The “Aha!” experience comes when a new idea links existing ideas in a new and cleaner arrangement. For example, an exciting moment in learning physics comes with the realization that the sky is blue for exactly the same reason the sunset is red. That realization starts with adding a new link in the mesh, but that addition triggers changes in the mesh to accomodate the new idea, resulting in a cleaner, more tightly woven web.
Figure 1.5
shows how this might happen.

FIGURE 1.5
: New idea L triggers “Aha!”

This sudden change of shape in the mesh is the source of the “Aha!” experience, often described as “everything clicking into place.” Note also that idea F is now a five-sided hub; learning idea L enriched another idea already in the mesh. As we learn, triangles turn into diamonds, pentagons, and hexagons, and the connections in our mesh grow ever denser.

See
Chapter 2
, “Interactivity,” for more on the “Aha!” experience.

Storytelling’s value arises in an attempt to convey a complex mesh containing many linkages. Stories are never told to communicate single, disconnected ideas; you’ll never hear a story ending with “And that’s why pi is equal to 3.14.”

Suppose you want to communicate a set of ideas represented by the mesh in
Figure 1.6
.

FIGURE 1.6
: A wise mesh of ideas.

Suppose further that the person to whom you want to communicate this set of ideas already has a mesh, but her version of the mesh is incomplete (it lacks ideas E and F) and messy (see
Figure 1.7
).

FIGURE 1.7
: A student’s mesh of ideas.

If you attempt to teach this new mesh in conventional fashion, you must first introduce idea E, forcing the student to make a mess of her mesh (see
Figure 1.8
).

FIGURE 1.8
: Student’s confused mesh after the first lesson.

The student can clearly see that your ideas make no sense and resists including idea E. Now you must add idea F, but there’s still a mess; idea F clashes with idea I, as shown in
Figure 1.9
.

You must explain how idea I is moved and the connections between F, G, H, and I are rearranged. Only then does the student grasp the new mesh. No wonder people have so much trouble learning complexly interconnected ideas—the intermediate steps are discombobulating craziness!

This educational process is made even clumsier by everybody having a slightly different mesh. The adjustments you advise to one student won’t work with another; in fact, they could make things worse for the second student!

Stories solve this problem. Remember, a story isn’t an isolated fact; it’s a connected system of facts. Stories are presented in linear form, but they are understood as a mesh of interrelated ideas, which is why they must be experienced in their entirety to make any sense. If you express
Figure 1.6
as a story rather than,
say, a lecture or a textbook, the student perceives it as a complete mesh and lays that mesh over her own (see
Figure 1.10
).

FIGURE 1.9
: Student’s confused mesh after the second lesson.

FIGURE 1.10
: The student overlays the meshes to see the truth in relation to her own mesh.

Because brains are so good at pattern recognition, the student instantly recognizes the changes required to fix the discrepancy. Moreover, the story is more convincing than the expository teaching because the new mesh is obviously cleaner and neater than the student’s original mesh. People love to learn, but when it’s crammed down their throats in a process that’s nonsensical most of the way, they resist. When it’s presented to them this cleanly, they embrace it.

That’s why storytelling was invented thousands of years ago and why it remains the most powerful medium for communicating complexly interrelated ideas.

So much has been written about the nature of stories that it seems cheeky for me to throw in my own two cents’ worth. Nevertheless, there are a few fundamental points I want to emphasize, if only to get you oriented toward the thinking that underlies this book.

Stories must satisfy tight structural requirements to be acceptable. Many of the definitions I have seen strike me as too academically broad. Yes, any sequence of statements can be construed to be a story, but only in the most academic of senses. I can’t specify the structure of stories, but I can point out that even a four-year-old child has a solid grasp of the concept of story. Here are two examples to run by your neighborhood four-year-old: