Western University Scholarship@Western Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository 9-25-2015 12:00 AM Watching Storytelling: Visual Information in Oral Narratives James Ripley The University of Western Ontario Supervisor Dr. Lynne (E.F.) McKechnie The University of Western Ontario Graduate Program in Library & Information Science A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree in Doctor of Philosophy © James Ripley 2015 Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd Part of the Information Literacy Commons, and the Interpersonal and Small Group Communication Commons Recommended Citation Ripley, James, "Watching Storytelling: Visual Information in Oral Narratives" (2015). Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository. 3232. https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/3232 This Dissertation/Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Western. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Western. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WATCHING STORYTELLING: VISUAL INFORMATION IN ORAL NARRATIVES (Thesis format: Monograph) by James Ripley Faculty of Information and Media Studies A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy The School of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies The University of Western Ontario London, Ontario, Canada © James Ripley 2015 i Abstract & Keywords Oral narratives are increasingly being given, received, and shared via some form of electronic mediation, and yet such narratives are so prolific that they are often glossed over if not entirely overlooked in regard to the study of narrative. This study was designed to address the unique nature of oral narratives focusing on the multifaceted and multidirectional information channels utilized by tellers and listeners in their co-creation of stories, and to explore the effects of electronic mediation on said narratives. A comparative case study was undertaken of three storytelling groups who cumulatively employed a variety of means of synchronous and asynchronous electronic mediation in their sharing of oral narratives, including amplification, audio and video recordings, and via virtual world. Viewed through the lenses of Narratology and Social Presence Theory a combination of participant observation and qualitative semi-structured exploratory narrative interviews were undertaken with participants from 1001 Friday Nights of Storytelling, The Moth, and The Storyteller’s Guild of Second Life. Over the course of three years several hundred stories (via 112 tellers) were observed at 38 storytelling sessions (14 live and in-person; 14 live and virtual; and five each of fixed video and or audio) at numerous venues. During these sessions the telling and listening behaviours of 227 participants were noted (15 of which were subsequently interviewed) requiring over 52 hours of observation (fixed sessions were observed more than once). ii Multiple sources of visual information were observed and identified during the course of this study, three of which were subsequently selected for in-depth consideration, namely kinesics, reciprocity, and space. Conclusions derived from this study include that: Visual information shared during oral narratives is prolific, and can be very informative although it is rarely explicit; Listening is far from a passive experience, with narratives requiring co- creation from all participants, and with reciprocities varying depending on which if any technological mediation is utilized between teller(s) and listener(s); The spaces and places we tell, listen, and share stories influence our experiences of said stories; Even when oral narratives are experienced in a shared space the stories we co-create are unique for each participant; and Technological mediation between storytellers and storylisteners does affect the stories being shared and co-created. Keywords: Storytelling, Oral narratives, Kinesics, Reciprocity, Space, Technological mediation iii Dedication nce upon a time, two pirates, an owl, and a yellow duck set sail on a green corduroy couch, and did three impossible things before breakfast (with a nod to Mr. Jones and Mr. Smith). For seven years they sailed widdershins round the seven seas, amassing hordes of gold, diamonds, stories and socks… and not any old socks but the nice ones without any seams. Couldn’t have done it without you. Signed, Beware the Nörm iv Acknowledgements There are numerous people without which this dissertation would not have been possible, and it is my intent to thank them here. First my supervisor Dr. Lynne McKechnie who called me back to this story’s path whenever I wandered, who knew both when and where to kick whenever so required, who shared unreservedly of her time, knowledge, and experience, and who forgave me when once upon a time I called Goldilocks a juvenile delinquent. Also deserving of thanks are the other members of my dissertation committee: Dr. Carole Farber whose Virtual Worlds class in part served as the spark for my research, and who graciously agreed to be part of this endeavour especially considering the first time we ever met Gnutt inadvertently teleported into her classroom and proceeded to share his latest dance moves; and Dr. Grant Campbell who first suggested the possibility of my undertaking a doctorate, who since the beginning has generously offered both cups of tea and an ear to listen, and who throughout has consistently required me to clarify my motives, decisions, and actions by asking me “Why?” Together through their generosity and combined expertise in participant observation, storytelling, virtual environments, distance education, and narrative theory, these three have proven themselves invaluable. There is also a select group of peers likely unaware of the significance that they played in this study, namely Selinda Berg, Sarah Camm, Mark Debicki, Alexandre Fortier, Angela Pollack, and Meighan Wark, who at a critical time v made me aware that I seemed much more interested in storytelling than in what I had originally set out to research, and moreover in response to whether a doctorate in storytelling was even possible simply responded “Why not?” Last but not least this research would not have been possible without the storytellers and storylisteners of 1001 Friday Nights of Storytelling, The Seanchai Library, and The Moth, and I would like to thank them for their time, their insights, and most importantly for sharing their stories. vi Contents Title page i Abstract & Keywords ii Dedication iv Acknowledgements v Contents vii List of Figures x Ethics Approval xi List of Appendices xii Chapter 1: Once Upon a Time in Storytelling 1 Introduction 1 Story interlude: Origins of the idea. 4 The problem. 5 Speculation and evidence of early storytelling. 6 A brief history of storytelling in North America since 1800. 7 Literature Review 14 Storytelling. 14 Ethnographic research. 14 The process of storytelling. 18 The practice of storytelling. 20 Other narrative research. 25 Digital storytelling. 33 Virtual worlds. 35 Distance education. 43 Chapter 2: Lessons in Spinning Straw for the King 56 Theory 56 Research Questions 61 Methodology 61 Storytelling groups observed. 62 Observation. 67 Disclosure. 73 Interviews. 74 Data analysis. 77 Rigour and trustworthiness. 78 Confidentiality, privacy, and intellectual property. 79 Representational issues. 80 Limitations of the study. 83 vii Potential issues of comparison. 84 Potential issues of mediation. 85 Potential issues of genre. 86 Potential issues of saturation. 86 Chapter 3: First You Shoot the Arrow then You Draw the Circle: Observations from Storytelling Sessions 88 Preface 88 Kinesics 91 Yusuf’s story (Session θ1, July 8, 2011). 91 Yusuf’s story (Session θ5, August 13, 2011). 98 Earl’s story (Session Ψ2, recorded July 20, 2008). 100 Rita & Selma’s stories (Session Ψ3, recorded May 14 and October 29, 2008). 102 Fantine’s story (Session Ψ5, recorded July 15, 2009). 108 Scripted gestures and lip-syncing. 110 Reciprocity 115 Séamus’ session (Session β1, August 30, 2011). 115 Morag’s story (Session Δ1, March 10, 2013). 118 Marcie’s telling (Session Φ6, October 19, 2012). 125 Narrative theory in practice. 126 I chat therefore I am: Reciprocity and presence in Second Life. 131 Christine’s story (Sessions Φ6 & Ω2, 2012 & recorded in 2006). 140 Frankie’s story (Session Ω1, recoded in 1999; heard in 2013). 142 Christine’s story (Sessions Ω2, recorded in 2012; heard in 2013). 148 Edith and Frankie’s stories (Session Ω3 & Ω2, recorded in 1985 & 1999; heard in 2013). 150 Space 156 Fantine’s story (Session Ψ5, recorded July 15, 2009). 157 Frankie & Kaleo’s sessions (Session θ5, August 13, 2011 & Session Δ2, Δ3, Δ6, March 12, 19 & 24, 2013). 159 Rita & Selma’s stories (Session Ψ3, recorded May 14 and October 29, 2008). 165 Chapter 4: Listening to Storm Fools: Interviews with Storytellers 173 Kinesics 176 Reciprocity 186 Space 201 viii Chapter 5: Panning for Gold with Rumpelstiltskin: Conclusions 207 Andragogic Implications 208 Kinesic awareness. 209 Reciprocity awareness. 212 Space and place awareness. 223 Final thoughts on limitations to the study 228 Epilogue 229 Marcie’s story (Session θ1, July 8, 2011). 229 Appendix A: Participant nomenclature 234 Appendix B: First life interview schedule 235 Appendix C: Second Life interview schedule 238 Appendix D: Oral narrative kinesic gestures 242 Appendix E: Christine’s Baker’s daughter (visualizations per minute) 243 Appendix F: Mother mouse versions 244 Appendix G: The fairy shoemaker by William Allingham [modified by Edith] 246 Appendix H: Frankie’s Ali the Persian’s bag (potential images per minute) 248 Glossary A: Selected terms from Second Life 250 Glossary B: Selected terms from narratology 257 References 262 Vita 288 ix List of Figures Figures Figure 1. A virtual box that can comfortably fit a small white rabbit and a pocket watch. 41 Figure 2. The identical shapes that suggested the box at Figure 1, although the rabbit, no doubt late for tea, seems to have wandered off. 42 Figure 3. Third-person (over-the-shoulder) and first-person views of the same location.