Changing stories, changing people

I bookmarked an article from New Scientist this week about how storytelling shaped our evolution, and the ways in which narrative is connected to our brain development.

Of course, the obvious thing to point out here is that the ways in which we tell stories, the form they take, the types of stories they are and the ways in which we take them in also change over time – so not only do narratives and storytelling shape our brain, changes in which those stories are manifest alters the kinds of change that result.

Digital narrative differs from printed narrative, which is different again than oral tradition. The hypertextual, interactive nature of storytelling, and the more chronology-independent tales we now tell are characteristic of a digital mode. Digital stories also tend to be far more collaborative than the private world of books, or the rehearsed myths of the campfire storyteller.

And as the stories we tell about ourselves change – and as the myths that guide our beliefs and behaviours change – so too do we change. Humans are not only creatures of communication, we are completely hard-wired for narrative.

And so, we not only evolve in response to the stories we tell, but we also evolve in response to the ways in which we tell stories. This is going to be an interesting thread to watch.

The Sonic Museum and 4-dimensional perception

I’ve been listening to Sonic Museum today, and blogged about it at New Music Strategies.

It got me thinking about how we experience things through our senses, and the way in which (as McLuhan would have it) new media extend our senses.

Simply put, television lets us see things that are much further away than our eyes would ordinarily allow. Radio does the same for our ears. But just as we can extend our senses in terms of distance, we can also extend them in terms of our relationship to time.

Recording can extend our hearing back through time. Digital editing and, in particular, hypertext changes the relationship of our senses to time and space. In a way, digital technology allows us to perceive in 4 dimensions, travelling up and down, side to side and jumping around in the chronology as we see fit.

We can see some of these things being explored in narrative. This is, admittedly, not new – and experimental cinema has messed with sequence for some decades. However, our capacity to process multi-linear and non-sequential narrative has changed with an increasing familiarity with the 4-dimensional perception that comes with digital media.

Mental note made to explore and research this further – and I’d welcome any links to work that may have already been done in this area.

Book report

I left this book idea alone for a while, which was both necessary, and kind of a shame, because it is still very much a book I want to write – but a book that’s going to take a lot of research, writing and fact-checking.

I still think that the premise is not only an interesting one – but an important one: that we ourselves are quite literally changing and adapting in response to our technological environment. And I think it’s one that we need to think more clearly about because those responses and adaptations should be deliberately selected rather than haphazard.

But interestingly, it’s only because I’ve started work on another book – one that will take a great deal of time away from any chance I ever had of working on this one – that has spurred me to revisit Now We Are Different and pick up the story. Sometimes you just get into the right frame of mind for things – and something as simple as discovering a new Wordpress theme can galvanise you into action.

So – actually, I’m writing three books right now: this one, Deleting Music and a co-authored undergrad text book called ‘Understanding the Music Industries’.

Memory and evolution

I’ve been reading a lot about memory this past week, and one of the things that strikes me is that we don’t yet have a good enough model for equating the biochemistry of the brain with the experiential phenomenon of memory.

When I say I remember my 10th birthday or I remember what happened at the party last night, you know what I mean. But there’s an amazing array of processes that go into that – in terms of imagery, emotional connection and recall of facts and impressions.

However, although you can remember an event that took a long time to transpire, the act of rememberance happens in a very short space of time.

Read More »

Humanity lobotomy

Yes, this is definitely related.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxiE-IiXwWA&hl=en&fs=1]

I get accused from time to time of being a Technological Determinist. It’s sort of true: I believe that technology affects history. But I don’t believe that we are powerless in the face of our technologies. The whole point of evolution is that it is a creative response to an environmental change.

Computers don’t make us send emails, they allow us to. The fact that we send and receive so many of the damn things is not an inevitable consequence of digital technology, but the fact that we approach it uncritically and strategy-less.

So I guess the central purpose of the book (and this blog) is to underline the notion that it’s impossible to have a useful creative response to change unless you actually understand what’s going on. Ignorance killed the dinosaurs.

In the interests of adaptation to media shift and active resistance to unwanted technological change, please watch this video.