Dry Heat

Story Telling Experience

an essay

by Spencer Litman

          Story telling is one of our oldest, and most common, forms of entertainment. Its’ universal nature appeals to people from every background and culture. Books have been, historically, its most popular form. Stories have been put into written words since the advent of written language. Now, it seems cinematic story telling has become increasingly popular, taking preexisting books and adapting them to fit the silver screen. I am a fan of both. They each serve their purpose as two entirely different genres of artistic expression. However, obtaining a more complete experience of a specific story is best achieved by reading it in book form, followed by seeing the movie.

          Reading the story prior to seeing a movie gives you the advantage of details. They are such an important aspect of being told a story; books achieve this in spades while movies can be limited. Words are so diverse that it becomes easy to paint an elaborate picture in the readers mind, with even a menial understanding of vocabulary and composition. The lack of restraint on length of a novel opens up endless opportunities for exploration of detail. Movies, on the other hand, can enhance a preexisting mental picture. Maybe there was something you didn’t understand; while writing descriptions of settings and objects, details are often lost on an inexperienced reader. Being able to see the movie lends its hand to clarify and give physical shape to these things. But to see the movie first, all of the details become static. This destroys the experience of letting the details manifest in our own imaginations. The time restraints on movies can also take away from details that offer major contributions to the story line. In The Hunger Games book, the main character’s driving motivation is her father’s untimely death, and how that impacts her character. In the movie, there is almost no mention of this important event; one metaphoric reference is made throughout the movie, depriving us of important details and character development. Having read the book first, you would have had an added element to an already great story.

                Seeing a movie before you read the book can ruin your imagination. When you do read it, you already have a picture in your head as to what the characters and settings look like; it takes away from the experience. You don’t get to develop your own understanding. Often times the actors are even on the cover of the book—Sometimes even in direct contrast to the description given of that character. I watched the movie 1408, an adapted Steven King novel, not knowing it was a book. Once I realized it was written by one of my favorite authors, I started to read it. I was ruined from the start. Regardless of my efforts, The main character Mike Enslin, will always look like John Cusack. The face was given to me before I had a chance to develop the description in my imagination, and once again, my experience would have been much more well rounded had I read the story first. The same can also be true after reading a book, and creating an image of the character for yourself. The actor that was cast in the role can be a questionable, even flat out comical, decision. Keanu Reeves was cast as Dracula in one of the many remakes of Bram Stoker’s classic, Dracula. Given Keanu’s history in acting—Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure and Point Break—He was certainly not a favorable choice to portray a character with such depth and complexities as Dracula.

          There is something to be said about the enjoyment of seeing a book you read, and loved, as a movie. It adds an element of intrigue. A portion of the fun involved is the internal comparison between the two. The same is not true having seen the movie before reading the book. Once your imagination has bias, it can take the fun out of the book and nullify how much enjoyment can come from a movie. The Shawshank Redemption is a perfect example. In the movie; Red, is played by a Black man, Morgan Freeman. His nickname explained in jest using dialogue “I don't know, maybe its because I'm Irish”. In the book he’s described as a red-haired, White man. It would be next to impossible for the stories to jive having seen the movie first. Morgan Freeman is ingrained in the role. There is nothing inherently wrong with the director’s choice in actor. Mr. Freeman portrayed the character perfectly. The point is, reading the book first and understanding the character can aid in appreciation of the contrast. You immediately know why they chose him to play Red, it makes sense after understanding his personality. Seeing the movie first would have made it difficult to get into the story after deciding to read it.

          The experience we gain from being able to create our own image of a story based on words is unparalleled. It offers us a chance to gain a personal understanding and develop a relationship, of sorts, with the characters and places. Reading is not an intrinsic talent, rather a skill—something that takes practice to become better. I hear people say my imagination just isn’t good enough to really enjoy a book. Practice. Mastering this skill will open endless imaginative possibilities and make the reading experience undeniably more rich. Complete entertainment is the ultimate goal of story-telling. Seeing a movie prior to reading the story, inhibits your imagination. It puts limits on an otherwise limitless universe, and the opportunity for a more thorough entertainment experience can be missed entirely.

Table of Contents