Honors Summer Read, 2014: The Rules of Engagement

Welcome to the ECU Honors Program's Enduring Questions website!  If you are enrolled in an Enduring Questions class for the fall semester of 2014 at ECU (EQ1 or EQ3), this website is for you.  Read on!

"Reading a Story" (ca. 1879) by James Tissot

Responses to questions on this website are designed to generate "virtual conversation." By virtual, we do not mean something that looks like conversation but isn't. Instead, we mean REAL conversation in a virtual environment--this website.  And this fall, incoming first- and second-year Honors students will be engaged in the same discussion. Part of each student's grade in both EQ1 and EQ3 will be based on your responses to the questions raised here.

The sort of conversation we're looking for is academic in character. Thus, your responses should consist of clear, concise statements of your ideas crafted in standard English (not text-speak--some of us are old!). They should be long enough to convey your thoughts, but short enough for other readers to read and respond to fairly quickly. In short, you don't want your responses to be so long that you monopolize (or kill) the conversation by going on, and on, and on.....(we all know how irritating that can be!).

Obviously, responses should not use profanity. They should be civil and respectful. People do not always agree. Responses can be critical; however, all communication is expected to be courteous and professional. Contributor's positions may be questioned; their character should not.

The object here is to reflect on some of the issues raised by the text, to connect the reading to your personal experience, and to help first- and second-year Honors students get to know each other better.

How and why was this particular book chosen?
The Honors Faculty started by reading reviews of popular, recently published books that address the gap between the Humanities and the Sciences. We presented three of these titles to Honors Students at the 2014 Spring picnic and caucus, where Honors students planning to take EQ3 in the fall voted on the one that looked best to them.  The Storytelling Animal was the winner.

Are there any disclaimers I should be aware of before I begin reading the book?
Yes! No one who voted on this book had read the entire book before we chose it. It was only after we did so that we found out the coarse imagery the author deploys that the ideas he articulates that some may find quite offensive. Our choice of this book should not be interpreted as an endorsement of that imagery or the ideas expressed by the author. It is not the mission of ECU's Honors Program to promote the worldview of Jonathan Gottschall or any other particular author; we do, however, believe that students can benefit from engaging a variety of viewpoints, including the kind that are expressed by the author of The Storytelling Animal.

When should I begin posting my responses?
As soon as you have read the opening pages of The Storytelling Animal:  How Stories Make Us Human. Try to read the questions about each chapter before you read that chapter.

When is this assignment due?
This writing assignment is designed to be completed before classes begin.  Details about where and how to account for and submit your word count total will be provided in class when the semester starts.

How many questions should I respond to?

We do not expect you to respond to each question, but you should respond to several representing different sections of the book.

How much should I write?

Your responses should add up to a sum total of not less than 750 words.  Don't try to load up all 750 words into one or two comments.  You should also respond to comments left by other readers. And pose questions to other readers. (Check back later to see if anyone has responded to your comments-and respond to their responses.)  All of this writing will count toward your word total.  Students are responsible for keeping track of their word total (you can cut and paste your responses into a Microsoft Word document, which has a word count feature).  This is not just a writing assignment, though; it's a reading assignment, too.  Every student is responsible for reading every word of the assigned text.

Where do I post my responses?
At the bottom of each question post, you will find a "comment" link. If it has a "0" beside it, that means no one has commented yet; as more people comment, the number will go up. (Click here to see a list of all the chapters that have questions associated with them.) When you're ready to weigh in, click on the "comments" button, read any previous comments, and start writing. Please sign your posts. And use your real name--not a nickname--so we can get to know each other).

More questions?
E-mail us at sbenton@ecok.edu!

Engaging The Storytelling Animal

In this post, you will find links to about several question sets about Jonathan Gottschall's 2012 work of non-fiction, The Storytelling Animal:  How Stories Make Us Human. These question sets are organized by chapter and are listed in the order in which the issues they address are raised by the text.

There's also a sandbox where you can raise own questions about the text that are not covered elsewhere (and answer those posed by others).  There's also other good stuff that doesn't directly lead to a question but that may enrich your engagement with the material.

Once you've started reading the chapters listed below (don't skip the preface!), click on the links, read the corresponding questions and comments other readers may have left (click on the "comment" button beneath each post to see them), and then join the discussion (or initiate it).

There is only one question you are required to answer.  That's the last one, referred to here as "The Takeaway." Don't answer it until you've finished reading the book.

Jonathan Gottschall

Preface
Questions:  P.1, P 1.5, P.2. P.3

Chapter One: The Witchery of Story
Questions: 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6

Chapter Two: The Riddle of Fiction
Questions: 2.1, 2.2, 2.3

Chapter Three: Hell is Story-Friendly
Questions:  3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4

Chapter Four: Night Story
Questions: 4.1

Chapter Five: The Mind is a Storyteller
Questions:  5.1, 5.2, 5.3

Chapter Six: The Moral of the Story
(This is the chapter some readers may find offensive--so prepare yourselves!)
Questions: 6.1. 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5

Chapter Seven: Ink People Change the World
Questions: 7.1, 7.2

Chapter Eight: Life Stories
Questions:  8.1, 8.2, 8.3, 8.4

Chapter Nine: The Future of Story
Questions:  9.1, 9.2, 9.3

The Sandbox
The Takeaway

Preface 1: Primate writes Hamlet?

Gottschall writes that according to literary scholar Jiro Tanaka, "although Hamlet wasn't technically written by a monkey, it was written by a primate, a great ape to be specific. Sometime in the depths of pre-history . . . 'a less than infinite assortment of bipedal hominids split off from a non-quite infinite group of chimp-like australopithecines, and then another quite finite band of less hairy primates split off from the first motley crew of biped. And in a very finite amount of time, [one of] these primates did write Hamlet.'"  (xiii)

This is not the last time the subject of evolution will come up in the book.  Is this an important issue for you?  If so and you feel like weighing in, let us know why this an important issue for you.  If not and, again, you feel like weighing in here, let us know why.

And here's a related question: what does someone's opinion on evolution tell you about that person?

Preface 1.5: Notes Towards the Complete Works of Shakespeare

Watch the video and then characterize the value the film makers saw in this experiment. After you've done that, explain why you do or do not think this project is worthwhile.

Preface 2: Magic or Electrochemical Storms?

"Oak fractured by a lightning. Allegory on the artist wife's death" (1842) by Maxim Vorbiev.

According to Gottschall, "Fictions, fantasies, dreams . . . are, to the humanistic imagination, a kind of sacred preserve. They are the last bastion of magic. They are the one place where science cannot--should not--penetrate, reducing ancient mysteries to electrochemical storms in the brain or the timeless warfare among selfish genes" (xv-xvi).

This description suggests that those who do not have a "humanistic imagination"--scientists, perhaps?--are some kind of wonderless killjoys.  How might someone with a "scientific imagination" respond to that characterization?  How would you describe the appeal of the "scientific imagination"?  Does one or the other--science or the humanities--have a much stronger appeal to you?  How do you account for that appeal?  Do you think a certain kind of personality is drawn to one or the other?  Do you think our society is prejudiced in favor of the sciences or the humanities?

Preface 3: Stealing Cinderella

This is the music video referred to in the Preface. Seen it before? Did it have the same effect on you that it had on Gottschall? Can you recommend a different music video that tells a story that you found moving?

1.1: Transported?

"The Wreck of a Transport Ship" (c. 1810) by William Turner

On page 2, Gottschall describes the experience of being "transported" by story?  Is this an experience that you have had personally? If so, can you a describe a story that did the transporting?

And whether you've found yourself transported by story or not, you may want to weigh in on this question: What personal characteristics differentiate the kind of person who is easily transported by story from the person who is not?  In other words, what else could you probably guess would be true of each kind of person?

1.2: Books vs. Movies

Gottschall writes that "Reading is often seen as a passive act: we lie back and let writers pipe joy into our brains. But this is wrong. When we experience a story, our minds are churning, working hard" (5-6). Do you think the same thing could be said of movies?  When viewers experience the kind of stories told via the medium of film, are their minds "churning, working hard"? To what extent is the activity of the mind a reflection of the media being consumed and to what extent is a reflection of the consumer?

1.3: Book=virtue, Screen=vice?

"Jagged Television or Anti-Cretinization" (1989) by Isidore Isou

According to Gottschall, "... it is lamentable that while more than 50 percent of Americans still read fiction, we don't read a lot of it anymore. According to a 2009 survey by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average American reads for just over twenty minutes per day, and that figure includes everything from novels to newspapers"(8). Meanwhile, "Americans spend about nineteen hundred hours per year awash in the glow of television and movie screens. That's five hours per day."

The implication here is that fiction is healthy and TV is unhealthy. Have you always found that to be the case? Can you think of any examples of ways that you have benefited from "the glow of television"? Does the daily balance of 5 hours of television vs. 20 minutes of reading sound right to you? What is the ratio in your own life? Do you think we could expect people to respond honestly to that question if they do, in fact, watch 5 hours of television for every 20 minutes they spend watching television? Do you think society might have changed some way between 2009 and today such that the balance is not the same?

1.4: Daydreams

"Daydreaming" (1890) by Eugene de Blaas

Gottschall claims that "Clever scientific studies involving beepers and diaries suggest that an average daydream is about fourteen seconds long and that we have about two thousand of them per day. In other words, we spend about half of our waking hours--one third of our lives on earth--spinning fantasies" (11).

Click here to learn more about one of those studies, which also suggests that daydreaming (defined as thinking about something other than what is going on around them) leads to unhappiness.

Do you think of yourself as someone who daydreams more than the average person or someone who daydreams less that the average person? Have you ever made a conscious effort not to daydream? To focus on the task at hand without letting your mind wander? Have you found it to be challenging?

1.5: The Story People

Why do you think "The Story People" prevail? (You won't know who "The Story People" are until you read the first chapter.)

1.6: Truth vs. Story

According to Gottschall, storytelling sometimes plays a more powerful role in court case than logic or evidence does (16).  If this is true, can you think of any ways the justice system might try to account for and counteract this phenomenon?

2.1: Play = story?

"Cousin Reginald Play Pirate" (1917) by Norman Rockwell.

According to Gottshcall's account (page 23 ), to children the "best thing in life is play." The kind of play he has in mind is the kind of imaginative, story-like play that engages children's fantasies. But plenty of people looking back on the kind of play they engaged in as children might focus on the physical aspect of play-time, the running, jumping, and dancing that kids do at recess, for example.

Looking back on your own childhood would you say that imaginative, story-like fantasies were the "best thing in life" for you or would you say that for you the best play was the physical activity/sensation kind?

Consider this:  is it useful to differentiate between the two different kinds of play when describing a particular child's personality?  Are there other character traits that might align with the children who gravitate towards one kind of play or the other?

2.2: What is story for?

"The Ancient Storyteller" (1940) by Amrita Sher-Gil

Before you read this chapter, consider these questions and make an initial attempt to formulate sn answer:

What purpose does storytelling serve?

What functions does it perform in society and in families?

After you've read the chapter, you may want to come back to this question and comment on the claims made in the chapter that you found valuable,intriguing,  insightful, or questionable.

2.3: Crusin' for a Bruisin'

According to Gottschall, story does not provide us with an escape from our everyday problems, which is the way most of us think of it.  Instead, story gives us access to simulated trauma (44).

To what extent do you think this is true of comedy as much as it is of dramas and thrillers?

Do comedies also give us access to simulated traumas?

3.1: Low-cost vicarious experiences

"What Greets the Eye When You Look Back at the Pilot" (1918) by Frank Johnston

According  to Gottschall, stories function as a kind of "flight simulator" for the mind.  As such, they help us rehearse the different ways we might respond to one kind of crisis or another.

Do you think the same thing might be said about texts that are not fictional?  In other words, when we read or listen to essays, sermons, opinion pieces, or non-fiction books like this one, are we also seeing what it might be like to think in a different way than we currently do?

If you let someone articulate his or her theory of the world, and you listen to them--read what they have written, are you essentially climbing into a mental flight simulator? If so, might this be a dangerous thing?

3.2: Are You the Books You Read?

"Illustration to Book of Job" by William Blake (1757-1827)

This chapter suggests that reading can exert a strong effect on a person, comparable to an actual, physical experience. To the extent that this is true, you might argue that when you choose a book to read, you are choosing an experience to have.  And to the extent that our identities are shaped by our experiences, you might argue that, to a certain extent, "we are the books we read."

Might the same claim be made bout the ideas we are exposed to?

To what extent might it be argued that if you read violent books, you are likely to become inured to the impact of violence?  If you read stories told by characters who have a dark worldview, are you likely to find your worldview darkening as well?  If you read stories in which "loose morals" are described, how likely is it that your morals will be loosened? On the other hand, if you read stories that illustrate the value of a particular set of morals, are you more likely to see the value of deploying those morals in your own life?

3.3: If you have a hammer, every problem is a nail

Literary scholar Wayne Booth described literature as "equipment for living."  From this perspective, everything you read can be seen as tool for your mental and emotional toolbox, suggesting ways that you might want to approach a challenge and cautioning you against other ways of approaching a challenge.

So if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail, might it also be true that if all you read is Superman, you are more likely to think that every problem is best solved the Superman way?

And if a culture celebrates stories that champion a hero who gets everything done through the exercise of brute force, are the people of that culture more likely to think in those terms as well?

3.4: Reading fiction and Sociability

"The Submissive Reader" (1928) by Rene Magritte

According to Gottschall, "...stereotypes of nerdy bookworms and introverted couch potatoes might lead us to expect that fiction degrades social abilities rather than improving them" (66), however, in truth, "Heavy fiction readers [have] better social skills--as measured by tests of social and empathic ability" (66).

Does the stereotype sound familiar to you? What about the theory that heavy fiction readers are more empathetic?

Do you think empathy is a "social skill" or an emotional sensibility?

Do you think heavy fiction readers tend to be more quiet and introverted than those who do not read fiction very much?

4.1: Bad Dreams

"Zhuangzi dreaming of a butterfly (or a butterfly dreaming of Zhuangzi)"

by Ike No Taiga (1747-1776)

According to Gottscahll, dreams, like the constructed stories humans read or listen to, function as a kind of "simulation machine" that allows all mammals to rehearse the various ways we might respond to challenges of one kind or another.

Do you find this theory persuasive? Why or why not?

Are you the kind of person who frequently remembers your dreams? Do you think people who have vivid dreams and remember them tend to be different from people who don't in any other ways?

Do you think someone's ability to remember his or her dreams might affect the value those dreams might have for that dreamer as "rehearsals" for challenging situations?

[The video below, which featured a dreaming dog, has been removed.]

5.1: Heider and Simmel Film (1944)

Watch the following video before you start reading chapter five and before reading any comments that have been posted below.

After you've seen the video, describe what you've seen in the comment box. Why do you think the designers of this video might have wanted to show when they made it?
After you've read the section in chapter five that comments on the Heider-Simmel demonstration, come back and comment about your experience of it. And if you'd like to see a short (4-minute) video in which Jonathan Gottschall discusses the significance of the video during an appearance on a panel before a live audience, click here.

5.2: The Kuleshov Experiment

Watch this video to see if you can understand how contextual clues might lead someone might read a particular emotion in someone's face even when it is not there.

5.3: Conspiracy Theories

Fake moon landing?

Gottschall observes that conspiracy theories "fascinate us because they are ripping good yarns, showcasing classic problem structure and sharply defined good guys and villains"  (111) and adds that "In conspiracy theories, we have the storytelling mind operating at its glorious worst" (113).

Click here to see a list of the ten most enduring conspiracy theories, compiled by TIME magazine.
Click here to see a much longer list maintained by our good friends at Wikipedia.

Do you know people who believe one of the conspiracy theories listed above?
Can you think of any "conspiracy theories" that were later proved right?
To what extent would you say the tendency to believe in conspiracy theories is associated with a vulnerability to "ripping good yarns" and to what extent it is associated with education level?  What other factors play a role in determining whether someone is likely to be drawn to conspiracy theories?

6.1: Explanatory Vacuums

Will she experience an ironic amusement when she sees this sexist advertisement from the 1950s that is included here because Hoovers are vacuum cleaners and this post is about "explanatory vacuums"?

According to Gottschall, "We have religion because, by nature, we abhor explanatory vacuums. In sacred fiction, we find the master confabulations of the storytelling mind."  (121) Does that seem like a fair account of the origin of all religions to you? Would you argue that some religions are "master confabulations of the storytelling mind" and some are not?

Under what conditions is abhorring "explanatory vacuums" a bad thing? Isn't that feeling part of what drives people to learn more, to study harder and to find answers to challenging puzzles?

6.2: Persuading Non-Believers

"Dattatreya" by Raji Rava Varma (1848-1906)

According to Gottschall, "...humans conjure gods, spirits, and sprites to fill explanatory voids. This is not to deny that one culture's supernatural story can be more valid than another's). But does this mean that religion is, in evolutionary terms, useless or worse? A growing number of evolutionists think not (121)." In this passage, Gottschall appears to be attempting to make a pivot from a negative depiction of religion (as something made up) to a positive one (as something that serves a valuable purpose).

However, does it necessarily follow from Gottschall's observation that there are multiple "supernatural" stories that none of them can me more valid than another? 

How do you think someone might take up the challenge of persuading someone like Gottschall that one set of supernatural stories is more valid that another? Put another way, what is the best way for a believer do to persuade a non-believer of their worldview?

6.3: Imagining and Believing

Gottschall's account of people's "willingness to imagine almost anything" compares fundamental Christian beliefs to children's stories like "The Three Little Pigs" in a way that makes religious belief seem silly:

"...people are willing to imagine almost anything in a story: that wolves can blow down houses; that a man can become a vile cockroach in his sleep (Franz Kafka's 'The Metamorphosis'); that donkeys can fly, speak, and sing R&B songs (Shrek); that a 'dead-but-living fatherless god-man [Jesus] has the super powers to grant utopian immorality'; that a white whale might really be evil incarnate; that time travelers can visit the past, kill a butterfly, and lay the future waste (Ray Bradbury's 'A Sound of Thunder')."

However, just because something can be described in a way that makes it sound silly doesn't mean that it can't also be true.  Consider the way some technological advances like "radio" or "television" or "the internet" or "smart phones" might have sounded if someone had been describing them a generation before they were actually invented.  The same might be said of scientific accounts of the way the universe operates.

Might it be said that the scientific community also asks people to imagine things that seem to contradict common sense? Without years of study and a high degree of expertise, aren't laypersons asked to trust the scientific community's claims on faith? How is that different from believing other things "on faith"?

6.4: Fiction corrodes morality?

Gottschall points out that "The Greek philosopher Plato banished poets and storytellers from his ideal republic for, among other sins, peddling immoral fare. And Plato's was just the first in a long string of panic attacks about the way fiction corrodes morality--how penny dreadfuls, dime novels, comics, moving pictures, television, or video games are corrupting the youth, turning them slothful and aggressive and perverted" (130).

Does describing Plato's disparagement of poets and storytellers as a "panic attack" and linking this disparagement to attacks on dime novels, moving pictures, television, and video games make concerns about the prevalence of violence and other unsavoury behavior in these media seem unfounded?

In some sections of this book, Gottschall suggests that stories--fiction, film--exerts a strong influence on our worldview.  How concerned should we be about the effect fiction and film have on the worldview of those who read or watch movies?  Is it enough to say simply that if you don't like something, don't watch it?  How concerned should we be about what other people watch and read?

6.5: A Just World

Gottschall reports that "In Appel's study, people who mainly watched drama and comedy on TV--as opposed to heavy viewers of news programs and documentaries--had substantially stronger 'just-world' beliefs. Appel concludes that fiction, by constantly marinating our brains in the theme of poetic justice, may be partly responsible for the overly optimistic sense that the world is, on the whole a just place. And yet the fact that we take this lesson to heart may be an important part of what makes human societies work" (136).

Consider the case of the 2013 film The Wolf of Wall Street, a three-hour film directed by Martin Scorsese. Here's a description of the film from imdb.com: "Based on the true story of Jordan Belfort, from his rise to a wealthy stock-broker living the high life to his fall involving crime, corruption and the federal government."

For much of the film, before "poetic justice" sets in, Belfort has a blast engaging in "bad behavior." Some defenders of the film's moral agenda have argued that the film demonstrates that eventually those who misbehave are brought to justice. But some critics of the film have argued that the film's ending exerts a less powerful impact on viewers than the film's length "middle" in which bad behavior is "fun."

Do you think a story's ending is its most impactful element from a moral point of view?  Give examples to support your claim.

7.1: Immune to Fantasy?

"Fantasy" by Sergey Solomko (1867-1928)

According to Gottschall, people overestimate their immunity to fiction. As he puts it, "Most of us believe that we know how to separate fantasy and reality--that we keep information from fiction safely quarantined from our stores of general knowledge. But studies show that this is not always the case." (149)

So do you think Gottschall's claim is largely true or is it overestimated? Can you think of examples that demonstrate the vulnerability of our culture--or of someone you know (maybe you?)--to fantasy and fiction?  It is easy to think of examples that demonstrate that we do not believe the fictional fantasies we read, watch or hear (who believes that Batman is an actual person?), but can you think of other ways that fictional fantasies shape the worldview of ordinary, everyday people?

7.2: Fiction more persuasive than non-fiction?

Gottschall writes that "The emotions of fiction are highly contagious, and so are the ideas. . . In fact, fiction seems to be more effective at changing beliefs than nonfiction, which is designed to persuade through argument and evidence" (150).  Consider the case of television commercials that tell very short stories--some funny, some sentimental, some inspiring.  How do you account for the way corporations to spend vast sums of money on commercial advertisements that say so little that can be characterized as "non-fiction" about their product? Consider the examples below:

What reasoning can explain why commercials like these would convince potential customers to buy the products or the services offered by these companies?

Also: post links to YouTube videos of your favorite "story-telling" commercials.

8.1: Colonizing Memories

According to Gottscahll, memory is shockingly vulnerable to contamination by suggestion (167).

Can you think of any ways that this information might be used by medical professionals, educators or mass media outlets for diabolical--or beneficent--ends?

The video below discusses the science of false memory implants.

8.2: Better off Forgetful?

"Forget it! Forget me!" (1962) by Roy Lichtenstein

Gottschall suggests that "... if the purpose of memory is to allow us to live better lives, then the plasticity of memory may actually be useful. Memory may be faulty by design"  (170).

Can you think of examples that demonstrate how sometimes it can be beneficial for an individual to forget an experience?

What about an example that demonstrates how sometimes it can be beneficial for a group of people--a nation, say--to forget part of its history?

What is the most persuasive example you can give to support the claim that forgetting a trauma, say, is not a good idea?

Interested in this theme.  Check out the film The Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.

8.3: Self-aggrandizement, anyone?

"Pride" (1556) by Pieter Bruegel the Elder

Gottschall reports that, according to the psychologist Shelley Taylor, a healthy mind tells itself flattering lies . . . Because, as William Hirstein puts it, positive illusions keep us from yielding to despair" (174).

And yet, some studies suggest that Americans in particular tend to overestimate the value of high self-confidence and self-esteem (click here to read more about such study).

What do you think?  Do Americans tend to flatter themselves more than they should? Or is building someone's self-esteem a necessary element to igniting ambitions and inspiring hard work?


The video below, an interview with Yale Law School professor Amy Chua, author of Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mom, offers some insight into the perspective of a mother who asks questions about the best way to boosting a child's "real" self-esteem.

8.4: A Legend in His Own Mind

"The Sixth Day of Creation" (1926) by M.C. Escher

According to Gottschall, "...we are great masterworks of our own storytelling minds--figments of our own imagination. We think of ourselves as very stable and real. But our memories constrain our self-creation less than we think, and they are constantly being distorted by our hopes and dreams" (175).

Try this experiment:
Write two separate, free-standing biographies about yourself in the past tense, third person. Use no more than 150 words in each biography.

Make both biographies true, but let one biography be a story of great successes; let the other be a story of repeated failures. Share one or both in the comment box below.  Then, if you wish, comment on the experience of writing the two posts in a separate comment.

9.1: Reality TV?

According to Gottscahll "Together with teams of editors, reality show writers (yes, writers) take raw footage and twist it into classic story lines. Extreme Makover, Queer Eye, The Osbournes, The Real Housewives of New Jersey, Whale Wars, Jon and Kate Plus 8--these and scores of other reality shows have hewn closely to the universal grammar of storytelling"  (183).

So its true confession time:  what reality shows have captivated your interest?  On a scale from 1 (pure documentary) to 10 (transparently scripted), how would you rate the "reality quotient" of your favorite reality TV show?

9.2: Gamer?

Gottschall writes: "Pick up a copy of PC Gamer magazine, and you will find that--with the exception of sports simulators--most video games are organized around the familiar grammar of problem structure and poetic justice. Marketed mainly to testosterone-drunk young males, the games are usually narratives of lurid by heroic violence."  (182)

Are you a gamer? MMOPRG? WoW? What kind of video games have you played and enjoyed? Can you confirm Gottschall's claim that most video games are "organized around the familiar grammar of problem structure and poetic justice"? In your experience, what kind of person is drawn to video games? What assumptions do people make about gamers? Which of these assumptions are accurate and which are not?

Below: Pong, one of the first video arcade games, released in 1972. The Director of the Honors Program may remember getting the home version Pong for Christmas one year. It may have been considered riveting.

9.3: Exodus to a Virtual Future

"The People of Israel Leaving Egypt" (1956) by Marc Chagall.

Gottschall reports that "In his book Exodus to the Virtual World, economist Edward Castronova argues that we have begun the greatest mass migration in the history of humanity. People are moving en masse from the real to the virtual world. Bodies will always be marooned here on earth, but human attention is gradually 'draining' into the virtual world'" (195).

Can you see signs of this exodus in your own life? Have you ever developed a friendship with someone online? Have you observed cases in which you or people you know have paid more attention to the virtual world than to the world in front of you? Do you think the threat of this exodus is overrated?

Here's a nine-minute video in which Edward Castronova comments on the value of game play.

The Storytelling Animal's Sandbox

Have a question or comment about The Storytelling Animal that had not been addressed elsewhere on this website?  Bring it to the comment box below.

The Storytelling Animal Takeaway

So you've read The Storytelling Animal now. In 100 words or less, identify the part of the book the is most likely to stick with you the longest.

What's your take away?

Don't answer this question until you've finished reading the entire book.

Welcome aboard, Honors Entering Class of 2014!

"On board of a sailing ship" by Caspar David Friedrich (1774-1840)

So you're officially a college student.  And not just that, you joining the ECU Honors Program. Congratulations and welcome aboard!  You've officially arrived.  It's a brave new world.   But fear not: signs of your success are already apparent.  If you're reading this, then you made it to ECU's Honors Enduring Questions website.  That's step #1.  And better yet (step #2), you already have the book for the summer reading (You do, right?  If not, stop reading this right now, yes now, go get your book--Jonathan Gottschall's The Storytelling Animal--and then start reading this again.  Seriously.).  After taking a peek at the questions on this website (click here;  yes there ARE a lot.  Don't panic!), you may be thinking to yourself (that's called reflection, and good, too, by the way)--"What exactly am I supposed to do here?"  These questions  have a simple purpose.  They are designed to help you engage with the text (and the rest of us).  And since we certainly don't want you to feel uncertain or to approach the questions "willy-nilly" (a fun way to say without structure or system), click here to see the rules.  See you on the next post!