Writer vs. Storyteller

Absolutely there's a difference.

Storytellers include writers, directors, screenwriters, playwrights, artists, etc.

I think it's very possible to be a good storyteller and not necessarily a good writer. Being a good storyteller means you know where to put this scene for the best impact on the climax, how you introduce this character, why you decide to put this piece of information in chapter 2 instead of chapter 20.

Good writing, to me, comes down to structure and prose. This includes the feeling you get from the writing, whether the reader comes of thinking it's beautiful or witty.

I won't claim to say either one is ALWAYS better than the other, but great storytellers gain my respect a lot easier than great writers.

I sort of think the only way to be really good at one of these is to be at least pretty good at the other.

Many people clearly disagree with me, obviously.

And many people also think people are good storytellers who I cannot read for the clunk. (By clunk I mean superficial characterization, for example, exemplified in cliched language.) I think truly bad writing comes from lazy thinking -- not reading enough to get a feel for the language, not thinking the phrasing through beyond cliche -- and the story suffers for that.

And I think even the most beautiful prose isn't great writing unless there's a point to it, and that point has some link to the rest of the points in the story.

And I think this is true in nonfiction too -- the best way to write well is to know what the hell you're saying and why

I sort of think the only way to be really good at one of these is to be at least pretty good at the other.

Click to expand...

This is pretty true, as well. If you're a good storyteller but your writing sucks, that great story of yours is going to suffer. Sometimes it might be easier to get away with subpar story when you're a good writer than trying to push an incredible story with really, really bad writing.

I don't mean this as an exception to the "story trumps everything" rule, but it's not uncommon for me to slug through a completely readable novel and then go - "Meh. Why did I read that?" On the other hand, if you have a good story but you're an unreadable writer, no one's going to get anywhere. Luckily that's why we have agents and editors to normally screen for these things.

katiemac said:

On the other hand, if you have a good story but you're an unreadable writer, no one's going to get anywhere.

Click to expand...

See, I don't actually think this is possible unless you have language impairment of some sort. If the story is really good and you know what it is clearly enough to get it on paper, it's going to be at least readable. If it's not, I'd call that a problem with the story or with the writer's clarity of thought. I think all you really need for clear (plain) writing is to know whose head you're in, what they experience when, and which parts of that are relevant to the story.

This may be why (IMO) the best advice I got about description, at Clarion, was "Ask yourself: where is the light coming from?" If you know the setting well enough to know that, you've pretty much got it down.

But then, I think there's more to really good than just page-turning. I've read plenty of page-turners that left me entirely unsatisfied afterwards; all they were doing was pushing the adrenalin buttons, and Meh.

the best way to write well is to know what the hell you're saying and why

Click to expand...

I have NO IDEA what I am saying in my WIP, but damnit, I'm saying it with fucking pizzaz.

Shweta said:

See, I don't actually think this is possible unless you have language impairment of some sort.

Click to expand...

And this is pretty much what I'm going for -- really serious grammatical and structure mistakes. But, like you, I don't think this is a terribly common problem, hence why I find storytelling to be the bigger skill.

Agreeing with your earlier point, of course, that I think it's common for them to be done fairly equally well.

katiemac said:

And this is pretty much what I'm going for -- really serious grammatical and structure mistakes. But, like you, I don't think this is a terribly common problem, hence why I find storytelling to be the bigger skill.

Agreeing with your earlier point, of course, that I think it's common for them to be done fairly equally well.

Click to expand...

Oh right, yeah. When people have really serious problems with grammar or word meaning, then there's extra work they have to do to be readable, agreed.

I personally think storytelling is the hard part as well as the bigger skill, and find that once the story's clear enough the writing will support it -- but then, the storytelling is what I'm worse at, so I could be biased

Salis said:

I have NO IDEA what I am saying in my WIP, but damnit, I'm saying it with fucking pizzaz.

Click to expand...

I'm not talking about "Deep themes and meanings". I mean, if you know the protag comes in by the closed window, to the sound of shattering glass, you can describe that pretty clearly. If you don't know how they got in, it'll show.

That level of knowing what you're saying.

It is possible to be a great writer and horrible storyteller and vice versa.

Of course, the two are related and complimentary skill sets, but they can also be mutually exclusive skill sets.

If I were to draw an analogy. It is possible to be an incredible design engineer (story teller) and be a horrible constructionist (writer).

In terms of writing vs Storytelling, I see it all the time and many people mistakenly blur the two skill sets together thinking that one IS the other.

I feel that storytelling is the 'art' and writing is the 'science'. Of course, that skill set varies in each of us, some will be 50/50, 80/20, 25/75. Personally, I consider myself to be 65% storyteller and 35% writer. I'm working on improving my skills such that I can get to that perfect 50%/50% mix. But right now, my ability to 'design' a story is better than my ability to 'construct' it.

Mel...

dgiharris said:

I feel that storytelling is the 'art' and writing is the 'science'.

Click to expand...

Oooh, i like this analogy...

Interesting.
Agree completely up to the point of which is art and which is science.
Isn't writing the arty part? And rigging up stories and characters where the thinking and diagrams come in?

peachiemkey said:

Aaanyway, if all that made any sense at all, do you think there's a difference between these two terms?

Click to expand...

A difference? Yes. A dichotomy? No.

Ideally, you should aspire to be both, to the best of your ability. If you sacrifice one, you do damage to the other. But some writers are good enough at one that they can get away with not being so good at the other.

The best writers are excellent at both, whether they work in specific "genres", or not:

Rex Stout
John D. MacDonald
Ray Bradbury
James M. Cain
Philip K. Dick
Carson McCullers
Flannery O'Connor
John Steinbeck
H.G. Wells
Joseph Conrad
Ernest Hemingway
William Faulkner
A.E. Van Vogt
William Golding
Ursula LeGuin
Arthur C. Clarke
Edwige Danticat
C.S. Lewis
Barbara Kingsolver
Jim Harrison
John Irving
Gabriel Garcia Marquez
Pete Dexter
Junot Diaz
Isabel Allende
Stanislaw Lem
. . .

it's a long list.

caw

dgiharris said:

It is possible to be a great writer and horrible storyteller and vice versa.

Of course, the two are related and complimentary skill sets, but they can also be mutually exclusive skill sets.

If I were to draw an analogy. It is possible to be an incredible design engineer (story teller) and be a horrible constructionist (writer).

In terms of writing vs Storytelling, I see it all the time and many people mistakenly blur the two skill sets together thinking that one IS the other.

I feel that storytelling is the 'art' and writing is the 'science'. Of course, that skill set varies in each of us, some will be 50/50, 80/20, 25/75. Personally, I consider myself to be 65% storyteller and 35% writer. I'm working on improving my skills such that I can get to that perfect 50%/50% mix. But right now, my ability to 'design' a story is better than my ability to 'construct' it.

Mel...

Click to expand...

I like this analogy a lot, actually. And I definitely think I fall more towards the "writer" side than to the storyteller side. I have to work really hard to come up with complete story ideas. Most of what I get, ideas-wise, is so small that it's barely a vignette, and that's being generous. Other folks can come up with these huge, layered story arcs that leave me green with envy.

dgiharris said:

It is possible to be a great writer and horrible storyteller and vice versa.

Of course, the two are related and complimentary skill sets, but they can also be mutually exclusive skill sets.

Click to expand...

Hm. I don't think you'd be a very good designer if you didn't take into account the structural properties you were working with, for example. The writing isn't just the construction. The elements of writing are some of the design elements we're working with.

I do agree it's possible to be pretty bad at one or the other, but a) I don't think you can do it and be readable (at least to me), and b) I think serious problems with one indicate problems with the other as well.

I do think it's entirely possible to be only-barely-passable at one and still be incredible at the other. Just that the really serious dealbreaker flaws in one are really problems with both.

dgiharris said:

It is possible to be a great writer and horrible storyteller and vice versa.

Click to expand...

I think it's true. I know my ideas for my stories sound much better than my actual writing makes them out to be. And I'm sure there's people who can write beautifully, but it's all rubbish (content wise). I agree, it seems to be a set of skills mixing together.

IN the beginning, there was THE STORY.

And it was told without words. It was pantomimed, and danced, and ‘acted out’.

And then the word was spoken.

And the story was TOLD.

In as much as storytelling precedes the written word, I see it as the older tradition and therefore the parent skill to writing. Storytelling involves TELLING a story. Could be on the page, could be on the stage, could be on the screen – and if truth be told – could be without words.

Writing is ONE method of telling a story.

Of course, some writing has very little storytelling in it. Technical writing and instruction manuals for example. That type of writing requires a specific skillset and discipline to do it well.. Not that it can’t be good, or even GREAT writing, but if a reference manual or a law book is going to be ‘good writing’ , then a little bit of storytelling probably crept in.

I consider myself to be a storyteller first and foremost. I enjoy spinning a yarn, telling a tale, delivering a joke. I enjoy writing stories, directing film, and performing on stage. Storytelling to me, is a way of communicating the universal truths that bind us together. My goal is to persuade, inform and entertain in an engaging fashion.

That’s my goal, no matter my ‘job’.

Raconteur

i'd def say I'm more of the storyteller than the writer. I'm not all that good with grammar or anything like that. I let all of my english major friends edit my stuff after I finish with it. Don't get me wrong, I don't think writing is terribly hard or anything either, but if you could only could spend an hour in my mind...

I'm a filmmaker by trade and was a musician before that.

I've always had a knack for being able to hold an audience with a story. I think my lack of structure is what sets me apart from most writers that i know, I get bored very quickly with most writings, I add my filmmaker lifestyle to my stories so I don't bore myself. Ha! "filmmaker lifestyle" I trip myself out.

Lets take the case of the person who can't write or read, but can tell a story. Like one of my great grandmothers or something. Some of them are excellent story tellers and to tell the truth, grammar mistakes we can't get away with in writing, we can when we're telling a story verbally and no one notices. So yes, you can be a great story teller and not a great writer.

However, when we set out to become authors, we have to be great at both because we can't get away with the same errors. My mother's a great writer, but a horrible story teller. Grammatically and structurally, she's a genius, but if I told her to come up with a workable story, it would be this unrealistic piece of crap.

So I guess it depends. It is possible to be one without the other, but in terms of a career and taking these stories and putting them to paper, we have to be great writers and good story tellers.

The SYW section proves that. Some people post things that have excellent grammar and structure, but a poor storyline. That's the sad truth. Others we can't even see the story because there are so many structural errors.

So it just depends on what angle you look at it. On one hand you can, on one hand you cant, and in another, they go hand in hand.

Shweta said:

Hm. I don't think you'd be a very good designer if you didn't take into account the structural properties you were working with, for example. The writing isn't just the construction. The elements of writing are some of the design elements we're working with.

Click to expand...

hhmmmm. you seem intent on blurring the lines

A good designer does take the 'structural' properties into account.

But there is a FUNDAMENTAL difference between designers and builders. I've worked in the scientific field and have seen this at all levels.

When I first came into the field, I was just amazed that people doing the designs would have no idea how to actually build what they designed. That seemed counter intuitive.

Similarly, you have theorists who would come up with these incredible theories but have absolutely no clue how to implement their theories and bring them into real world application.

Now, to bring this into the world of books.

I don't mean to make writing seem so cold and rigid. Yes, there is an 'artistic' skill in the craft of writing and I think this is where you may be blurring the lines. I dunno.

Not as if my definition is writing fact. Just my opinion and how I see it. Makes sense to me this way.

To each there own.

Mel...

WriteKnight said:

I consider myself to be a storyteller first and foremost. I enjoy spinning a yarn, telling a tale, delivering a joke. I enjoy writing stories, directing film, and performing on stage. Storytelling to me, is a way of communicating the universal truths that bind us together. My goal is to persuade, inform and entertain in an engaging fashion.

Click to expand...

Random comment--- Storytelling to me is one of those things that cannot be 'taught' --like telling a joke. Some people just can not tell jokes to save their lives . The best these people can hope for is to mimic other people with skill.

MDei said:

However, when we set out to become authors, we have to be great at both because we can't get away with the same errors.

Click to expand...

Not true. Read "A Million Broken Pieces" by James Frye. That book has english teachers turning over in their graves. It will knock you on your ass.

I don't think we have to be 'great' at both. Merely passable at one and good in the other.

For instance. Take Anne Rice. Her prose is incredible and her storytelling is off the charts.

Compare her to the Hack James Patterson. His storytelling is o.k. and his writing skill (technically) is decent.

Anne Rice is great at both IMHO
James Patterson is passable at one and decent in the other

Don't be too flippant with the word 'great'.

There is o.k. decent, good, great...

and if I looked at all the books out there, very few are 'great' in both categories.

Mel...

In my journalism days, we had some folks in the newsroom who were primarily writers. They were the worst to work with. They could write beautiful prose, but ... you know ... the whole point of newspapers is to TELL THE STORY!

It was so much work for them to get around to it. They often had to be paired up with someone if they stumbled upon a hot story and they rarely stayed around the newsroom for long.

A good storyteller, on the other hand, could survive and thrive in journalism easily. If that reporter stumbled upon a controversial or unique story, you could be sure that he or she would get the facts and the interviews and put them together in a coherent way. If it needed a bit of fluffing up, an editor or another reporter could help out to the extent that readers cared.


With novels, however, I think folks have to be strong in both, but that authors who are particularly strong storytellers and, maybe, just average writers tend to succeed most in category or catalogue fiction. In those genres, you have to be able to tell a darned good story and, often, the story overrides the average writing. The strength of those authors (I know one who just signed a 7-figure deal for her next series) is in knowing the psychology of their readers.

Literary writers sometimes are weaker in the storytelling department, but the artistry of the prose overrides the average story. Their words are beautiful, but never cliche. They are both soothing and disturbing. They are vivid and exciting in a personal sort of way. They can tell old stories in new ways.

Some folks have an amazing balance of both, but those are rare individuals.

Each type of author satisfies a different need from the reading public, so one type cannot really be valued by society as a whole over another.
We need the whole sheh-bang!
(Except in the newsrooms!)

Although being a storyteller may not pay,
like being an 'Author' I'd rather be a great
storyteller.

You can learn how to write, the stories
are gifts, that are your responsibility to
enrich the world with.

dgiharris said:

Random comment--- Storytelling to me is one of those things that cannot be 'taught' --like telling a joke. Some people just can not tell jokes to save their lives . The best these people can hope for is to mimic other people with skill.

Click to expand...

Hmm--i think storytelling can be taught, but the learning process is far more subliminal and reactive and perceptive than the nuts and bolts of writing prose. Whereas the mechanics of grammar and how to make sentences sound pretty can be learned by rote (write, write, write) and fairly quickly, the art of storytelling is far more subconscious and gradual.

We start telling stories almost from the moment we can talk. Telling Mom about the pretty cat we just saw, and trying to explain why it was so pretty, to pointing at baby brother and saying 'He did it' when Dad walks in to find Mom's lipstick all over the walls and both your faces. Then it moves on to telling the other kids at school how far you crushed that baseball at the little league game, to acting out the roles of favorite cartoon characters. And so forth.

And how people react to those stories shapes how we tell the next story. We keep what works; we adjust what doesn't (usually). Rinse and repeat.

True, some people seem to have a 'knack' for telling stories, but i would contend that those people are perhaps more sensitive at a subconscious level to the cues from their audience, and thus able to adapt a whole lot quicker.

dgiharris said:

hhmmmm. you seem intent on blurring the lines

Click to expand...

I'd say I'm intent on seeing both where the lines are and where they do actually blur, whether or not that is convenient for our categorization. You seem to be intent on "never the twain shall meet", which I think is, when you get to details, false.

Language has both form and meaning. The two go together. You can only focus on one or the other to an extent. Beyond that, screwing one up means you're screwing the other one up too.

Ditto writing (roughly, form) and storytelling (roughly, meaning).

But then, I also majorly disagree with some of your author judgments, so it isn't surprising that we see things differently

Well I will say there is something intuitive, whether or not it's learned (some will disagree on this point), about storytelling. Perhaps how whacking a home run is intuitive. The motions of the body, etc. Whereas, writing seems to be more of a practiced, technical skill. It's the methodology of taking the "art" as some were calling it, storytelling, and utilizing one's technical prowess to express it.

A very strange combo move of the brain, if you think about it.

As for which I consider myself?

Well I can't write for a lick so...why not. Storyteller it is