The Future: Where Books & Video Merge
I recognize how controversial the very idea may seem to book purists. And honestly, I myself dread the thought of reading Don Quixote on my iPhone with a link to a dramatization of the titular literary legend. Whose vision of the oft and uniquely conjured hero do we engage? My first thought as a dedicated literature reader is kind of negative. Okay, not kind of, VERY negative. Consider the problems we encounter when adapting literature to screen – and in the film/tv format, we accept the screen version as an interpretation of the text, rather than a part of the original. And therein lies the problem: Is the “Hybrid Book”, a combination of various media embedded into the text to create a multimedia experience actually a completely different experience than the cognitive one of reading?
I think the answer is yes. And I did some research to challenge my own assumptions.
Of course, now with the heavily rumored and anticipated i-something (maybe iTablet or iSlate) device from the happy people at Apple, it seems the transformation of reading is perhaps closer than we might have imagined. As is often the case, technology will drive the charge and likely change user behavior and only then will creative ideas for the product follow suit. Looking beyond the cool gadgetry of the new Apple toy, let’s just consider it another gateway into the world that Amazon’s Kindle has already established with e-reading. We can be sure of one thing though: it will likely be a user-friendly, very portable device that makes the crossover between text and image very appealing.
So there we are, sucked into the magical interface, switching between a Youtube video, the latest issue of Vogue magazine and pages of Anna Karenina, making leaps of imagination and information that may have been a little more difficult when those materials were tactile. And I describe a scenario in a sequence that has actually happened for me. I have the Kindle for iPhone app, and I confess, I am currently reading Anna Karenina on that tiny, tiny screen on the subway and sometimes, I switch tasks and watch a randomly unconnected video, then quickly flip through a fashion magazine all in the time it takes to get from Soho to Grand Central Station. So, essentially I contradict myself.
So I’m a media zombie, a self-proclaimed future filmmaker. But a book purist, right? Yes and no. I wonder how I would feel if there was an option to watch a dramatization of Tolstoy’s novel within my app. Would I do it? I’m not sure. But I think most people would if it made an old Russian novel accessible. And for that reason, companies like Vook and Fourth Story Media are emerging in the hybrid book space with titles ranging from how-to’s to teen novels and popular adult fiction. I downloaded and sampled the Sherlock Holmes double Vook and gave it a whirl. Frankly, launching a documentary about opium use during late 19th century London was really distracting to me when I wanted to follow the characters. But I found that I liked the interface when not actually engaged in the narrative. My conclusion is not that the Vook concept itself is flawed, it’s just that turning a classically structured narrative into a multimedia experience is a complex creative challenge. And I can’t say this particular title succeeded.
However, if a title was written by the author with the intention of creating a multimedia narrative in which the text and video where simultaneously conceived, the same way we do when writing screenplays intended for filming, then I think it would be an entirely different proposition. And I actually look forward to the birth of a new form with as much creative and intellectual rigor as good literature has traditionally had. As Bob Stein, whose Institute for the Future of Books says in an LA Times piece, “We’re going to see an explosion of experimentation before we see a dominant new format. We’re at the very beginning stages” of figuring out what narrative might look like in the future– “…the very, very beginning.”

“The very, very beginning” is the most important point in this conversation. We honestly don’t know what storytelling in a digital world will look like yet. More precisely, we *can’t* know. As technology advances and our culture continues to evolve, the way we tell stories will change. It’s a process, not an end-point.
Personally, I like approaching state changes in media like this from an “and” perspective. In other words, we need not wring our hands and worry whether all storytelling will be done in a Vook format (it won’t). There will be lots of ways to “read.”
Ideally, readers (viewers, consumers, whatever), will have the option to choose how they want to experience stories (just the story, story+video, story+audio, story with related facts, etc.).
The challenge isn’t coming up with new technological ways to tell stories – it’s coming up with ways to tell stories that better convey the narrative. And only the reader can say for themselves what “better” is. Give readers choices, not technologies.
Thanks for the comment Scott! It’s always a conundrum in the technology-before-content scenario because people’s habits change so radically based on the technologies which (for better or for worse) disrupt long established patterns (like linear narrative reading) before actually creating viable and compelling alternatives. I want to believe that at our core, humans will never stop feeling the need to connect with good characters, or story. But the question remains “how”? and often-times technology moves in to answer the question before the most elegant creative solution can be invented–because goodness knows, that stuff takes time! That’s why I always like to keep one eye on the technology and another on the content.
Agreed. It takes time to cycle through enough experimentation with new technology to find what “works” (and by then, there’s already a change in behavior or a new technology emerging).
My current discontent with all things media is that (much like what’s happening in the trans/cross-media space) the emphasis on story is getting buried beneath the necessary checklist of technologies (Facebook? Got it. Twitter? Yep. YouTube videos? Roger. ARG? Done. Well, that’s it – we’ve completed our social media implementation. Now, what was it we were trying to communicate again…?”).
Just because you *can* distribute a story across various social media platforms and technological distribution channels doesn’t mean you *should*. Sending users/fans/readers to a Facebook page should only be done if what you need to accomplish can only be done on Facebook (and by “need to accomplish” I mean “what is necessary to properly communicate the story/narrative to your audience”).
Social media engagement that supports the narrative should be done with purpose, technology should give the audience options for consumption/engagement (not just authors), and the story should always come first. In the excitement of playing with new ways of storytelling, I hope the act of storytelling remains at the forefront.
As Jeff Gomez likes to say, rule one is a quality story…