Story shadows (and a quick Friday read)

If you fol­low my other feeds (Twit­ter, robinsloan.com), you’re going to be sooo sick of this by now—but most of you don’t, so let me point you to some fun Fri­day read­ing: a very short story inspired by a pair of pants.

Not to be grandiose (I mean, it is a very short story), but there’s actu­ally a larger idea at work here.

The meta–inspi­ra­tion was an idea that Geoff at BLDGBLOG threw out a while ago. It went some­thing like this: How about fic­tion com­mis­sioned specif­i­cally for a new build­ing? Imag­ine it: There’s a swank new apart­ment tower going up, and the devel­op­ers pay a writer to com­pose a book of short sto­ries about it. (It would be great arbi­trage: a for­tune in writer-terms is a pit­tance in developer-terms.) When you move in, there’s a crisp, limited-edition copy of that book wait­ing on your polished-concrete kitchen counter. The action is all set in and around the build­ing: char­ac­ters move in and out of spaces you rec­og­nize. They walk down your street, shop at your gro­cery store. They have the same view out their win­dow that you do!

Why do I like this? Well, one of the things writ­ers need des­per­ately, I think—especially writ­ers of short fiction—is new venues, new con­texts. General-interest mag­a­zines used to pro­vide one (I guess?); the inter­net sort of pro­vides one now, but hon­estly, a short story on the inter­net can be pretty ran­dom. The most vital venue for short fic­tion today is prob­a­bly, uh, school. Which is fine if you’re in the 7th grade, but what about the rest of us? How do you ground a story and—here’s the crux of it—give peo­ple a rea­son to read? (And, option­ally, how do you sup­port the cre­ation of new fic­tion? Where does the money come from?)

So, as one of many pos­si­ble solu­tions, I really love this idea of hook­ing a story to some­thing in the real world, whether it’s a new build­ing or (in this case) a pair of pants. Imag­ine that you took this a step fur­ther, and the story actu­ally came with the pants. You open the trade­mark blue-paisley Bono­bos box that just arrived in the mail and there, folded neatly atop your new khakis: a short story to get you started, to fire up your imagination.

What if every prod­uct shipped with a story?

Imag­ine ana­logues in other media: an album com­posed with a new car in mind, and when you buy the car, the album is loaded into the stereo, wait­ing for you. (It’s fine-tuned for the car’s acoustics, natch!) Or a movie set in that swank new apart­ment tower—filmed after con­struc­tion is com­plete but before peo­ple move in.

It’s fan­ci­ful, but I think it con­nects to the idea of a data shadow—the idea that every phys­i­cal object has tons of meta­data attached to it, cas­cad­ing away from it—and expands it. That “meta­data” can be more than, like, a stream of usage information. It can be nar­ra­tive; it can, in fact, be fan­ci­ful. Call it a story shadow.

It hap­pens nat­u­rally, of course. Think of New York City’s story shadow! It’s huge! It’s like, a fifth of all movies ever made! Most cities already have story shad­ows; some build­ings do; rel­a­tively few prod­ucts do. So really what we’re talk­ing about is prim­ing the pump: pro­duc­ing a starter story-shadow on the front-end. And I think done right—again, this is the whole point—it could give peo­ple new rea­sons to read new fiction.

Prob­a­bly the best exam­ple of story-shadow engi­neer­ing today is the super-awesome Sig­nif­i­cant Objects. I feel like you ought to be able to take what they’re doing and move it up the food chain—imagine a future for new objects, as well as a past for old ones.

Does this even make any sense? It’s one of, like, the top ten things I’m inter­ested in these days—but I’m not sure I’ve fig­ured out quite how to artic­u­late it yet.

P.S. Ha ha, now here’s a rea­son to read. Dave Eisen­berg from Bono­bos chimes in and offers a dis­count to short-story readers!

25 Responses

    John Sloan says:

    A Bag of Oranges

    Plop. Thump. Thump.
    Oranges don’t really bounce. Drop one and the most you’ll get is a kind of dou­ble thud before they roll off to hide. It’s usu­ally the top one in a bag­ful who makes the first break for free­dom. Gain­ing that top spot is quite an effort for a roundish fruit, but they work at it. They really do. I’ve heard them groan­ing with the effort in the pro­duce depart­ment when I go into the 24-hour super­mar­ket late at night. Lis­ten some­time when the time is right.
    Slid­ing, Push­ing. Rolling.
    Again and again.
    They know the trip home is their last chance. And unless you’ve cap­tured them in a tied, net bag, they’ll likely bolt en masse, not know­ing that a mov­ing car offers no real free­dom, but sure cap­ture at the end of the drive.
    I know where the oranges go in my kitchen when they make their escape: Under the table where they think they can’t be reached. Usu­ally, they are mis­taken, and my hand or a handy broom is all that it takes to make them mine again.
    But some­times, only some­times, they roll softly to to the fur­thest reaches, back under the bench under the wall.
    Some­times they make it.
    Some­times they are safe.
    And grow the soft, green mold of freedom.

    echan says:

    Um, wait, this has sorta been done. BVLGARI com­mis­sioned a novel devoted to hawk­ing its jew­elry. If I remem­ber cor­rectly, I think they even spon­sored an excerpt of the story as an ad in the New Yorker (I think that’s the case, but in try­ing to fact check my mem­ory, I can’t find con­fir­ma­tion of this).

    Also, Mat­tel already pur­chased a com­pany the per­fected the art of pack­ag­ing books with prod­ucts, the Amer­i­can Girl dolls. The “back story” is a big part of the appeal of such dolls.

    With the Bul­gari case, what you call “meta­data” is sim­ply mar­ket­ing. Whereas the Amer­i­can Girl exam­ple is more in line with your story shadow.

    Robin Sloan says:

    Maybe I need to really focus it in more on places vs. products.

    Per­son­ally, I love read­ing books/stories IN the places they refer to. Read­ing a great Paris detec­tive novel in Paris; read­ing a Dashiell Ham­mett story in San Fran­cisco. There’s just this won­der­ful res­o­nance to it. So par­tially what I want is more of that: sto­ries linked to spe­cific places that you can read IN those spe­cific places.

    It would be ter­rific to com­mis­sion some­thing like this for a hotel, for instance! Ah, yes–that’s an even bet­ter idea than the apart­ment com­plex. Some new bou­tique hotel com­mis­sions an amaz­ing short story for every room. And they’re all bound up and col­lected in edi­tions that you can read down in the lobby, or at the bar.

    Jason Black says:

    Inter­est­ing. So I’m read­ing along with this post, going “Yeah, yeah!” but then the fur­ther I read the less enthu­si­as­tic my yeahs got, and I wasn’t sure why.

    Until I got to the car with the pre-loaded album.

    Then I under­stood, because I’d be all “what if I don’t like that kind of music? Then that’s just irri­tat­ing.” My snazzy new car expe­ri­ence (and let’s face it, part of the joy of a new car is the _experience_, as much as the car itself) would have been sul­lied by some over-engineered trendy hip-hop crap that I hate. For example.

    The core prob­lem is that genre pref­er­ences in the arts won’t always neatly align with a product’s intended mar­ket. If the two did some­how line up–like, say, a sleek black leather jacket being mar­keted to 14 year old goth girls with a one-off com­mis­sioned Twi­light story attached–then yeah, you’ve got some mojo there.

    But most of the time it won’t. Most of the time, the product’s tar­get mar­ket can’t be expected to have suf­fi­ciently homoge­nous artis­tic tastes for this to work, so I would gen­er­ally expect sell­ers of mass-market con­sumer goods to shy away from try­ing it.

    The apart­ment build­ing devel­oper just wants peo­ple who can reli­ably pay the rent. But what if one of your sto­ries was about the guy from 3A who falls in love with the girl from 4B, which hap­pens to mightly offend the sen­si­bil­i­ties of the lit­tle old lady who moves into 2D and doesn’t think young peo­ple should be shack­ing up like that. Or what if one of the sto­ries is a mur­der mys­tery? Not the best image to be putting forth of your new book.

    Robin Sloan says:

    Good point, well-articulated. Your last graf in par­tic­u­lar is a really nice crys­tal­liza­tion of the gulf between com­merce and art. “The apart­ment build­ing devel­oper just wants peo­ple who can reli­ably pay the rent.” It’s true!

    Gavin says:

    I don’t think it’s really a crit­i­cism to say “this has been done before,” espe­cially since in the case of toys, pack­ag­ing a story with the toy was stan­dard oper­at­ing pro­ce­dure in the 80s. Think He-Man, which even before the car­toon was pack­aged with a small sto­ry­book, much less She-Ra, GI Joe, Trans­form­ers, Thun­der­cats, etc., etc., etc.

    If any­thing, I’d make the argu­ment, already hinted at by echan, that cre­at­ing this kind of asso­ci­ated nar­ra­tive is and always has been essen­tial to adver­tis­ing of all kinds. Bully if some fic­tion writ­ers can make some money at it, but how many already do as copy writ­ers? Or is there some­thing dif­fer­ent about this that I’m missing?

    Tim Carmody says:

    Yeah, I’ve got to go with Gavin on this one. This may be more of an inno­va­tion for adver­tis­ing than an inno­va­tion for short fic­tion. As for “hook­ing sto­ries in to some­thing in the real world” — this is of course cru­cial. But it’s hard to see what a pair of khakis has over a rela­tion­ship, a city, an expe­ri­ence, an event — all of which poten­tially have sev­eral advan­tages over pants.

    To split the dif­fer­ence between the advertising/marketing angle and that of changes in sto­ry­telling: I’m more excited about the idea that this can help cre­ate new places where we can encounter fic­tion. If you say, “yes, this divorce story is a minor mas­ter­piece of psy­cho­log­i­cal real­ism — but there is no place to read it,” then you start to see how this kind of context-dependent fic­tion makes sense.

    We have pub­lic and cor­po­rate art — why not pub­lic and cor­po­rate fiction?

    Also, go with what works: Robin got a fun story out of it, plus what I’m sure are a great pair of pants, and Bono­bos got some unusual (and I hope use­ful) pub. I don’t feel coerced to buy pants (just as well, since they don’t sell in this friend-of-Robin’s size), nor did I feel like the story was tainted. Every­body wins.

    Robin Sloan says:

    I’m more excited about the idea that this can help cre­ate new places where we can encounter fiction.”

    Yes—that’s a great way of say­ing it. That’s what I like best, too.

    Robin Sloan says:

    I.

    And yes, maybe it’s a pretty small–and debatable–nuance, but I think it mat­ters if the work sits before or after a transaction.

    Seems to me that ad copy is all about get­ting you to want to buy some­thing. By con­trast, I’m pri­mar­ily excited about fic­tion that enriches a prod­uct or expe­ri­ence once you already have it.

    So the point (for me) is not that a story might make you go “ohhhh I want to buy that!”; rather it’s to use a phys­i­cal prod­uct (or a place) as a point of deep con­nec­tion between you & a char­ac­ter in the story. As I said to echan up above: I absolutely love read­ing fic­tion about a place IN that place. I think there’s some­thing mag­i­cal about it.

    II.

    I actu­ally think action fig­ures are a great exam­ple of this; it’s just that no one ever took that prose very far, quality-wise.

    Now you’ve got me think­ing; imag­ine a new line of some­what arty action figures–fabricated with these new 3D printers–that riff on Thun­der­cats and He-Man, but are much more nuanced & art­ful than those fig­ures ever were — these new ones are designed for adults — AND they’re pack­aged with ter­rific fic­tion. Or maybe it’s a mix­ture of dif­fer­ent for­mats: fic­tion, comics, even a stop-motion short film made w/ the fig­ures. Fun!

    echan says:

    Yes, it’s not quite a crit­i­cism because it is essen­tial to almost all adver­tis­ing. But now, my mind is going on exam­ples of where a long form prod­uct nar­ra­tive was well-executed. The Clive Owen — BMW series comes to mind as one of the best, in terms of short film. In terms of clothes, I think the copy writ­ers over at J. Peter­man were pitch per­fect in bor­row­ing from Fitzger­ald.

    Matthew Battles says:

    But the inno­va­tion isn’t in tying sto­ry­telling to objects, but in the rela­tion­ships forged among teller, object, and maker/seller—relationships that start to look more like gift than com­mod­ity exchange. The adver­tiser, no mat­ter how cre­ative (and there are great nar­ra­tive cam­paigns, to be sure) is like a meme-middleman; in Robin’s exam­ple (it’s a lovely story, by the way—a vis­i­ta­tion of the divine, deftly played) the story is cur­rency. But no that’s not right either—it’s more like a medium for gift exchange (oblig­a­tory obei­sance to Lewis Hyde duly offered here). And in Sig­nif­i­cant Objects, what’s mas­querad­ing as an adver­tise­ment is actu­ally a mul­ti­plier of value. It becomes the prod­uct, while the object is almost a medium—like a touch­stone or mnemonic. These exam­ples are inno­v­a­tive pre­cisely because they look some­thing like adver­tis­ing (which is to be dep­re­cated) while accom­plish­ing another thing altogether.

    Tim Carmody says:

    But the value added by adver­tis­ing pen­e­trates beyond the sale, too. Let’s say I get a hard sell on an iPhone — I believe at the moment of pur­chase that it’s the best phone ever made, that there’s so much I can do with it, that I’ll won­der how I’ll ever live with­out it. This con­vinces me to buy the iPhone over a Black­berry. (In the oppo­site sce­nario, I’m con­vinced that a soft­ware key­board is unwork­able, that the BB is bet­ter for business/power users, etc.)

    Now after I get the phone home, in most cases, I’m going to con­tinue to believe this, unless some­thing ter­ri­bly dis­ap­points me about the expe­ri­ence. So long as it rea­son­ably con­forms to my expec­ta­tions of it — and I’m not likely to have many con­tin­ued oppor­tu­ni­ties to con­tinue to com­pare and con­trast devices — I will believe and pro­claim to oth­ers that this is true. When I use the phone, I will think, “there’s so much I can do with this device.” I’ll think, “this is the most advanced phone ever invented.” (If I bought the Black­berry and like it, I’ll think, “this key­board is amazing.)

    Adver­tis­ing in the post­mod­ern age pur­sues the cre­ation of needs, not merely the ful­fill­ment of them. And those needs must con­tinue to oper­ate through the life of the device before they can be met by them. Oth­er­wise, you’ll feel hosed. And you’ll tell your friends.

    To be sure, adver­tis­ing enchants the object, and that glamor clings to the thing, shed­ding sparks as it wends its way through your life. And there’s a very entic­ing busi­ness model in the notion of start­ing an adver­tis­ing shop that gen­er­ates ready-to-wear sto­ries for com­modi­ties (Jane McGonigal’s done this sort of thing, in a way; it can be beau­ti­ful on a sheer cre­ative level). But if you offer a story in exchange for an item—and even (and maybe espe­cially) if the hab­er­dasher or gro­cer or bike mechanic you’ve exchanged with then uses the story to pro­mote her prod­uct to others—you’re in a dif­fer­ent space alto­gether. Maybe Bronze Age economics—craftspeople trad­ing goods & ser­vices for like value.

    Tim Carmody says:

    No, story for goods is com­pletely dif­fer­ent. But that’s Robin’s indi­vid­ual trans­ac­tion. Every­one else who reads Robin’s story and buys a pair of pants because of it, or folks who buy a Sig­nif­i­cant Object, is par­tic­i­pat­ing in a kind of adver­tis­ing. It might be a really cool, socially sig­nif­i­cant kind of adver­tis­ing. (Ads can be art.) But the dis­tinc­tions are of degree rather than kind.

    Tim Carmody says:

    I mean, think about Mauss’s con­clu­sion to The Gift. The les­son of gift economies is that beyond 1) sat­is­fac­tion of bare needs, 2) the equiv­a­lence of exchange, and 3) the social ben­e­fits of a divi­sion of labor, exchange in gen­eral, and sym­bolic exchange in par­tic­u­lar, builds social bonds. Think­ing about gift economies might help us bring a sense of mutual social oblig­a­tion back to the employer/employee rela­tion­ship, and that this social oblig­a­tion can pro­vide a third-way alter­na­tive to stark free-market cap­i­tal­ism and full-bore socialism. 

    And maybe there’s some truth to it. Ide­o­log­i­cally, most of us have kind of bought into it; beyond statu­tory ties like health care, fam­ily and med­ical leave, and unem­ploy­ment insur­ance, employ­ers and employ­ees have an eth­i­cal rela­tion­ship to each other that tran­scends the sheer exchange of goods, a loy­alty that binds the two of them together so long as that eth­i­cal rela­tion­ship is pre­served. The employee ide­ally doesn’t just work for a wage, but finds ful­fill­ment in work, and works altru­is­ti­cally to ben­e­fit his employer; the employer cares for the employee and his future beyond sim­ply pay­ing a wage, con­tin­u­ing his edu­ca­tion and pro­fes­sional devel­op­ment to ben­e­fit his employee. 

    This is arguably sim­i­lar. Yes, the sto­ries are adver­tis­ing, and its intent is to sell the prod­uct. But they cre­ate value beyond the equiv­a­lence of the exchange, a value that is above all social, a bond both to the seller, the sold, and an absent past. 

    Heir­looms also do this; so do garage sales. It’s why some­one would spend $250K for Cor­mac McCarthy’s worn-out type­writer. But we have to grant that it’s also why the copy in a Restora­tion Hard­ware cat­a­log is so appeal­ing. A table made from reclaimed wood beams from a French monastery? Sold!

    James Bent says:

    A closed black box. 

    It inher­ently sucks every­thing to it through a strange com­bi­na­tions of mag­netisims. It is two inher­ent mys­ter­ies in one object — it is black, which is of course noth­ing; and it is a box, a closed box, and we all want to know what’s in the box. 

    It is also unfor­tu­nately evil, being both black and a box, which is very unfair. I think the black box became a scape­goat for the white box, which is out there attack­ing old ladies and caus­ing global warming. 

    Like oranges, above, there is a sound attrib­uted to a black box. 

    Grrrr.

    Grrrr.

    Grrrr.

    A sound which really doesn’t assist play­ing down claims that it is evil.

    Per­son­ally, I adore the black box. I am mag­ne­tised to it.

    ****

    I keep a daily 1000+ word off­beat fic­tion short blog at http://jamesbent.com/blog.

    Regards,

    James Bent

    tanushri says:

    love the idea of a story about the very space you’re in. you’re right, that’s the real idea here, and it’s awe­some. more than just a novel set in paris but set in the very room of the very hotel you’re in. maybe even a guide book in dis­guise. sto­ries change the envi­ron­ments they’re in and are changed by them in return. 

    on a slightly extreme tan­gent here but what about a story that inter­acts with the very object it’s shad­ow­ing? so say, for instance, i’m a fur­ni­ture maker and i sell you a table. and on its sur­face is writ­ten the begin­ning of a story about that table, maybe about the things kept on it or where the wood came from or about the room it’s in. and as the owner you get to fin­ish writ­ing that table’s story on it, per­haps jump to its chairs or the floor it’s on. or per­haps it’s a dress or a shoe or a yoga mat. am reminded of miranda july’s “the thing” project that does this to an extent. it’s like the back-of-pack copy on your sham­poo bot­tle times a hun­dred. it’s adver­tis­ing and art and lit­er­a­ture and dec­o­ra­tion all at the same time…

    Tim, you’re right about the sub­se­quent transactions—the story, traded for goods, has become an ad. But I still think that touches the sys­tem as a whole—in degree, as you say, and not in kind. But in worth­while degree. It’s not a utopian promise, only sort of fer­ally ame­lio­ra­tive (the ugli­est com­bi­na­tion of words for 2009!).

    It’s the black bal­loons that worry me. Noth­ing shakes me to the roots like the sight of a black bal­loon. Except maybe the sight of a white one.

    Tim says:

    Let me just be clear — I’m not try­ing to den­i­grate Sig­nif­i­cant Objects or Robin’s Bono­bos deal, but try­ing to ele­vate and eval­u­ate adver­tis­ing. Adver­tis­ing DOES add value beyond the pur­chase, and at its best, it’s not merely instru­men­tal, but oper­ates on our mythic con­scious­ness, exist­ing some­where on a con­tin­uum with film and literature. 

    So, what we can do in this rar­efied mar­ket is to drift even closer to that mythic/literary pole, cap­i­tal­iz­ing on that pos­si­bil­ity for con­sumers, writ­ers, and busi­nesses for whom the instrumental/informative poles of adver­tis­ing have lost their charms. 

    What’s more — unlike paint­ing or archi­tec­ture or music, we never really had a pop art rev­o­lu­tion in lit­er­a­ture. This is what I think Kenny Gold­smith argues for in his advo­cacy of “uncre­ative writ­ing” — this could be another way to get there. Not detatched and fame-driven like Warhol, but bespoke, human­ist, local, as befits our times.

    Jacob O says:

    Really fas­ci­nat­ing idea! In my under­stand­ing, the story becomes an instant myth that, just like other myths, gives us hints about how to act in rela­tion to the world; I do this myself all the time, find­ing inspi­ra­tion by how peo­ple relate to each other and the world around them in fic­tion and adopt­ing sim­i­lar view­points in my life. The story becomes a user’s guide, writ­ten in a more acces­si­ble form (“this is how these spaces have been used by oth­ers, this is how they’ve met here, this is what they made of this place”, although noone has been liv­ing there before).

    If we do con­sider these texts adver­tis­ing, I think that they can add to reg­u­lar adver­tis­ing by invit­ing audi­ences that are not part of the tar­get audi­ence. While reg­u­lar adver­tis­ing uses the estab­lished under­stand­ing of the tar­get audi­ence to evoke cer­tain emo­tions and, most of all, make them open their pock­ets, the abil­ity of writ­ten sto­ries to place you inside the head of some­one that does not nec­es­sar­ily think or value the same way you do makes it pos­si­ble for them to place some­one out­side the tar­get audi­ence in the mind of some­one who would be part of it. Ok, that wouldn’t always be effi­cient mar­ket­ing, but I’d like to see it hap­pen, life is too bor­ing when you just buy on val­ues that you already know that you embrace.

    …and when think­ing about it, writ­ten sto­ries could be one of the best tools avail­able to com­mu­ni­cate com­pletely new prod­ucts to peo­ple. If I buy an apart­ment in a devel­op­ment with an ambi­tion beyond the purely phys­i­cal and aes­thet­i­cal (well, per­haps that doesn’t hap­pen very often but again, I wish it did :-) ), with ambi­tions that stretch into the remak­ing of how peo­ple relate with neigh­bors, for exam­ple, I’d need *sto­ries*, not pho­tos and sound­bites, to under­stand if I want to fit into that context.

    I guess my impres­sion is that while tra­di­tional adver­tis­ing can be good at com­mu­ni­cat­ing that a prod­uct fits into sto­ries that you already know (such as sto­ries of fit­ness (Nike, for exam­ple), social respon­si­bil­ity (Bodyshop, I guess) and so on), writ­ten sto­ries can more pow­er­fully com­mu­ni­cate entirely new sets of val­ues and ways of liv­ing, and how the prod­ucts in ques­tion can fit into that life. In a world where val­ues have diverged to cre­ate numer­ous evolv­ing sub­cul­tures, I believe that short-story adver­tis­ing has a much bet­ter chance at par­tic­i­pat­ing in the ongo­ing con­ver­sa­tions in which these sub­cul­tures rede­fine them­selves than tra­di­tional advertising.

    Robin Sloan says:

    Jacob: Awe­some com­ment! Mostly just wanted to say “thanks”—but also, I really like this phrase/idea in par­tic­u­lar: “The story becomes a user’s guide.” Seems like there’s a lot you could do with that.

    Tim Carmody says:

    Reminds me of Georges Perec’s famous (and mar­velous) novel Life: A User’s Man­ual. (The French title, La vie mode d’emploi, is even better.)

    […] a Snark­Mar­ket post, Robin Sloan writes about “story shad­ows,” and observes: “Prob­a­bly the best exam­ple of story-shadow engi­neer­ing today […]

    anderson says:

    Some­where along the road in this dis­cus­sion the premise of the short story changed.
    I think it’s impor­tant to con­sider exactly what the pur­pose of the story; no the nature of the story is. If the story is a prod­uct in itself, for peo­ple to read and enjoy more because of the famil­iar­ity of its set­ting, this is very dif­fer­ent than adding a story to add value to a pur­chased prod­uct. At least in my mind there’s a big difference.

    […] this reply to it), this Chicago Tri­bune arti­cle, this assess­ment by Grant McCrackin’, this essay by Robin Sloan (who later wrote a story for us) this writeup on Jawbone.TV, and this post on How To […]

The Snarkmatrix awaits your reply