Simon Veksner: Will the next person to use the word ‘Storytelling’ please report for their slap
August 12 2013, 10:17 am | | 9 Comments
By Simon Veksner
Head of Ideas at
Naked Communications
What we do is increasingly being called ‘storytelling’ but actually I think that definition is completely wrong, and it’s really starting to annoy me.
Yes, ads do often have a narrative. This brilliant spot that came out last week, for Devondale Dairy Soft butter, uses many common narrative techniques – it has an ‘inciting incident’, comedic misunderstanding, and even a twist. Not bad for a film that’s only 30 seconds long and also sells a product. But it’s still not a story. READ ON….
9 Comments
Unfortunately, that’s blatantly incorrect. A story DOESN’T have to have a beginning, middle or end. That’s only traditional 3 act storytelling.
A story is defined as a recounting of a series of events.
Check you dictionary –
sto·ry 1 (stôr, str)
n. pl. sto·ries
1. An account or recital of an event or a series of events, either true or fictitious
Nothing there about a resolution.
Here’s a good story.
There once was a blogger called CD.
He was a dickhead.
The End.
CD – I guess I meant that a ‘good’ story has a beginning, middle, and an end. And a character who changes. Otherwise you’ve got a pretty dull tale…
For Sale. Baby Shoes. Never worn.
For sale. Giant dildo. Needs new batteries.
You’re right again Scampi, my little clawed crustacean. Unfortunately advertising has always generated pretentious twaddle, a sort of language of its own to give it more gravitas, and to sound more scientific – and therefore justify charging at a preposterous rate’. It has also always managed to attract magnificently pretentious and rather intense types consumed with their own self-importance, such as ‘CD’ at 11:34AM, who I think we should immediately re-badge as ‘Lord Shakespeare’.
This is a very narrow definition of what a story is and could be. To suggest that it must have a beginning, middle and end is extremely naive and implies a lack of understanding of the definition of story. Further… you’ve suggest that the brand is the only entity that can undergo a “transformation” – this ignores the fact that many ads are basically “sketches” wherein the characters undergo some sort of (sometimes minor) revelation and thus a transformation. This is a common comedic tool. The audience could also be the entity that undergoes a transformation… their understanding or perception of what they are watching can shift from start to finish.
Yes… ads don’t have to be mini-feature films, but “storytelling” techniques are quite relevant to advertising, as much as you may hate to admit it. It’s certainly an overused buzzword but I think you’re barking up the wrong tree.
You’ve got to admit, it is a hugely overused buzz word. When clients start demanding stories and rejecting work without them, you know too much Kool Ad has been had. Sure it can help but it’s not critical. Burst for example. Big Ad. Etc
Scamp, you have fallen victim to Frequency Illusion, amplified by Recency Effect. This is caused by the collapse of grand narratives and the death of meaning. Relax, dude.