About narrative – (this in from playwright C Denby Swanson)
Some additional thoughts –
Brain science keeps coming up around performance; there’s a lot of energy here – and dialogue between the science and art is to the good, as long as art isn’t seen as a function of science (which can lead to specific metrics of educational outcomes, etc.). Parity needs to be maintained between languages (esthetic, spiritual) – the latter languages, lingering sometimes in that which is vast and unnamable, can stall out – but apophatic language needs to be as aggressive in its refinements towards relevance (keeping pace with shifts in understanding) as denotative language. I don’t have the vocabulary, but I have the inclination (the habit but not the makings, as O’Neil would say).
About narrative – it may be more in the idea of shape than in story per se. All experience has an arc… Like the occurrence of a sound – attack, sustain, decay, or more gently – jo-ha-kyu, but still this sense of coming into being and passing out of being. Something isn’t (or isn’t quite yet) something is, and then something isn’t. The more “is” the witness is in the middle of the experience, the more surplus existence will be left over to share when the experience itself isn’t anymore… The more we practice simply being, the more readily we can be for others?
Story is the line of the wave; the power is in the wave itself.