---

My 5 Min Story

Dave and I – 20 years later

---

How does the text differentiate from the conventions of written English? 

The most obvious difference to me between this text and conventional written English is the lack of paragraphs. Right off the bat, this text is intimidating to read because it’s essentially one solid page of words. The punctuation is either completely incorrect or missing, which I find to be significant because it makes the pace and flow of the story hard to gauge. The grammar is incomplete in some places. This is partly because the language used was very informal, but also because, unlike written text, there is no editing to ensure a logical sequence of sentences and sentence structure.  

What is wrong in the text? What is right? 

I think what the text got “right” is transcription of the actual the words spoken. For the most part, what I said has been transcribed verbatim (for better or worse – apparently, I say a lot of “so” and “um” when I speak naturally!). My entire story is there, and in that respect, this was a successful exercise. 

What is “wrong” here is any form of what I might like to consider personality or flavor for the text. There is no indication of pacing, tone or the gestures I used while speaking. These elements are important for conveying the essence of what I was trying to get across to my audience. The “fun” is missing here.  

What if you had scripted the story? What difference might that have made? 

I read this question 2 two ways. If this story was scripted, it would have been more cohesive and planned out. Here, I was just speaking about my memories of a certain time and things were coming to me as I was speaking. If this had been scripted, I would have had a better idea of the major plot points I was trying to deliver and how I was going to go about it. It also would have been more polished. For example, I’d probably lose the tangents to the story like telling the reader Saskatoon is worth a visit.  

If this had been written like an actual script, I could have incorporated more emotional moments by specifying how certain lines should be delivered. The same goes for pacing and gestures. While scripts can sometimes make for awkward reading, they do capture elements that are often missed in transcriptions.  

What are the most common “mistakes” and why do you consider them “mistakes”. 

This is a good question! Many of the mistakes I noticed were of my own making and already been mentioned. Non-sequiturs, filler words like ‘um’ and ‘so’, and a meandering narrative rather than a focused storyline are all errors I identified in reviewing what I said. To be completely honest, I consider them mistakes because how I tell this story reflects who I am, and I want that reflection to be more polished. 

Additionally, I see mistakes in the text itself. The most glaring one, in my opinion, is the punctuation and grammar. There are many periods where they shouldn’t be, which I believe are indications of where I paused. I consider these mistakes because they don’t adhere to the conventions of written English, and I find them distracting in reading the text.

In what ways does oral storytelling differ from written storytelling? 

Most obviously, oral storytelling and written storytelling are different mediums which means they have different requirements. As per Hass (2013), “writing is language made material” (p.3). It takes space.  It requires a technology. This in turn impacts its accessibility. Written storytelling requires the ability to read a specific language, imposing stricter requirements on its audience. In contrast, oral storytelling is more inclusive. While language comprehension is helpful, much of a story can be conveyed in non-verbal ways – gestures, intonation, facial expressions, and movement. I might add, these are also elements that enhance the storytelling experience and are absent from the written word. 

This also underscores how stories are passed on. While text can be distributed widely and remain consistent, oral versions of the same story will change with each retelling, based on the storyteller’s interpretation and audience feedback. Additionally, oral stories are only repeated if considered worthy of retelling. As per Gnandesikan (2011), speech lacks a tangible record, it doesn’t exist unless someone can remember it.

Another difference I want to touch on is the interaction with the audience.  Oral storytelling allows the speaker to gauge the audience’s reactions and adjust the story accordingly. For example, I would probably tell this story much differently if in person to my own kids. There is an in-the-moment flexibility with oral storytelling that is not present with text. 

On a personal note, I find oral storytelling harder than written. This is because much of it is unplanned. It’s a brain to mouth moment which means you can’t edit it or polish it up. In some ways this is wonderful, as it feels much more real. However, this also makes it a bit scarier because once something is said, it can’t be unsaid. It is an uncontrolled process. 

References: 

Gnanadesikan, A.E. (2011). The first IT revolution. In The writing revolution: Cuneiform to the Internet (pp. 1-12). John Wiley & Sons. 

Haas, C. (2013). The technology question. In Writing technology: Studies on the materiality of literacy (pp. 3-23). Routledge.