Ilya Ryvin

Ilya Ryvin
Honors Thesis Colloquium
Prof. Lee Quinby
Position Paper #2

This begs the question: What is transmedia storytelling?

Transmedia Storytelling: What Is It?

On April 6, 2010, the Producers Guild of America made an announcement that many in the media industry were waiting for: the expansion of the Guild’s Producers Code of Credits to include the category of Transmedia Producer. With this announcement came a guideline as to what constitutes a “transmedia narrative”; it states:
A Transmedia Narrative project or franchise must consist of three (or more) narrative storylines existing within the same fictional universe on any of the following platforms: Film, Television, Short Film, Broadband, Publishing, Comics, Animation, Mobile, Special Venues, DVD/Blu-ray/CD-ROM, Narrative Commercial and Marketing rollouts, and other technologies that may or may not currently exist. These narrative extensions are NOT the same as repurposing material from one platform to be cut or repurposed to different platforms. (“Code of Credits – New Media”)

Almost immediately, these guidelines sparked a healthy debate, some arguing that the definition was too narrow in scope. For example, Christy Dena, a prominent media scholar, questioned the requirement of a work having to permeate at least three different media platforms, thereby ignoring transmedia works that span only two platforms (“PGA’s Transmedia Producer!”). Likewise, the Transmedia Hollywood: S/Telling the Story conference held in March 2010 ignited a similar debate amongst a number of industry insiders who could not even agree on the newness of transmedia, with some arguing that it is ultimately a rehash of “long-standing practices” (“Hollywood Goes ‘Transmedia’”).
While this development within the PGA certainly legitimizes transmedia as an industry practice, the debates within the scholarly and creative communities reveal an interesting problem: we, as of yet, have no authoritative definition for transmedia storytelling. Henry Jenkins, a noted transmedia scholar and USC professor, offers an explanation for this omission; he argues:
From the beginning, transmedia has been a site of experimentation, innovation, and exploration at the heart of mainstream media…. As such, the transmedia discussion has always moved across registers and as a consequence, needed to be expansive, to include anyone who wants to engage with these topics and who is willing to put these ideas into practice…. This very expansiveness is what allows us to bring many different voices to the table, to map diverse kinds of experiments, and to promote new explorations and innovations. (“Hollywood Goes ‘Transmedia’”)

Although the PGA offers a perfectly adequate definition, I agree with Jenkins that we “should push back on any attempt to too quickly formalize the limits or boundaries of this practice” (“Hollywood Goes ‘Transmedia’”). However, the simple fact that the PGA was able to create a definition means that there are a number of transmedia practices that are largely agreed upon as central to the form. In fact, several key players in the field, specifically Starlite Runner’s Jeff Gomez, have been instrumental in lobbying the PGA to get the aforementioned classification approved (“Hollywood Goes ‘Transmedia’”). Therefore, I want to use the PGA’s definition for transmedia storytelling as the foundation for my definition. Building on that foundation, I can take what other scholars have said about transmedia storytelling and apply their theories to case studies, allowing me to analyze what works and what does not. By no means will my definition be authoritative. In fact, because the field is in a constant state of flux, my definition may very well be obsolete half a year from now. Nevertheless, I am but another “voice” bringing my own perspectives about what I have seen, and as you will see in section 3, my goal is to promote further “explorations and innovations,” specifically through the application of transmedia practices in television (“Hollywood Goes ‘Transmedia’”).

Transmedia Storytelling: Extensions
In his book Convergence Culture, Where Old and New Media Collide, Jenkins discusses “transmedia storytelling” at length. He describes it as the following:
A transmedia story unfolds across multiple media platforms, with each new text making a distinctive and valuable contribution to the whole. In the ideal form of transmedia storytelling, each medium does what it does best−so that a story might be introduced in a film, expanded through television, novels, and comics; its world might be explored through game play or experienced as an amusement park attraction. Each franchise entry needs to be self-contained so you don’t need to have seen the film to enjoy the game, and vice versa. Any given product is a point of entry into the franchise as a whole. Reading across the media sustains depth of experience and motivates more consumption. Redundancy burns up Fan interest and causes franchises to fail. Offering new levels of insight and experience refreshes the franchise and sustains consumer loyalty. (Convergence Culture 95-96)

Before I continue, it is important to explain why two portions of Jenkins’ definition have been highlighted. When comparing the PGA’s definition to Jenkins’, a number of similarities become obvious. Both definitions agree that each text in a transmedia franchise should contribute something new to the whole, and that redundancy should be avoided. It is also the case that both definitions mention the actual dispersal of information across different media platforms, as they should. However, Jenkins’ definition deviates in two ways: he claims that each medium should do “what it does best,” and that “each franchise entry needs to be self-contained so you don’t need to have seen the film to enjoy the game, and vice versa. Any given product is a point of entry into the franchise as a whole” (Convergence Culture 96). By analyzing The Matrix franchise, it becomes evident rather quickly why both points are not absolutes.

Extensions in The Matrix
Jenkins’ argues that The Matrix franchise, developed by Andy and Larry Wachowski, is the most ambitious attempt at transmedia storytelling (“Transmedia Storytelling: Business, Aesthetics…” 14). When the The Matrix hit theaters in 1999, no one could have predicted that it would become a worldwide phenomenon. The film, which tells the story of humanity’s struggle for survival against brutal machine overlords, eventually went on to gross more than $463 million worldwide (Box Office Mojo). But the Wachowskis did not stop there; the brothers had a plan that would expand the universe of The Matrix beyond the scope of just one film. What soon followed were two sequels, a series of comics and web-comics, a number of anime films released on DVD, and two videos games.
Each text was designed to contribute new material to the narrative without rehashing the same old information. In the first film, Morpheus briefly recounts the war between man and machine. He does not divulge much about the war, but at one point states, “We don’t know who struck first, us or them. But we do know it was us that scorched the sky” (The Matrix). “The Second Renaissance,” a two-part animated film included in The Animatrix DVD, explores the entire history of the war. It even reveals what Morpheus meant in his cryptic speech to Neo by showing how humans used nano-machines to darken the sky and block out the sun (The Animatrix). In this case, the Wachowski’s managed to successfully add distinctive and valuable information to the world of The Matrix by expanding through the anime something briefly mentioned in the film.
However, not every extension was this successful; in some instances, the extensions hurt the franchise. For example, the story of Kid was first introduced in “Kid’s Story” in The Animatrix. He is next seen in the first sequel, The Matrix Reloaded, interacting with Neo. He is never properly introduced in the film, and the interaction between Kid and Neo alludes to events that occurred in the anime. By the third movie, The Matrix Revolutions, Kid plays an even larger role where he heroically defends Zion against the robot invasion. This lack of formal introduction in the films presents a problem for those who have not seen the anime, so much so that when Kid has his heroic moment at the end of the third film, it is difficult to react with anything other than indifference. However, those who saw Kid’s background story in the anime may have a different reaction when watching the same scene, having been exposed to him in a much more meaningful way.
According to Jenkins’ definition of transmedia, both the film and the anime should provide potential points of entry into the franchise “for different audience segments” (“Transmedia Storytelling 101”). For example, both film and television attract relatively large and diverse crowds; comic books, animes, and video games, however, are more tailored to a specific niche (Convergence Culture 96). In other words, an anime fan can enter the franchise through The Animatrix, a gamer can enter through Enter the Matrix, and a film buff can enter through the film. Once inducted into the franchise through one entry point, further exploration of the franchise through other media is encouraged; a gamer might want to watch the film after playing the video game and vice versa.
However, this is only possible if each point of entry is self-contained, as can be seen by the backlash the franchise encountered. A number of critics panned the films, arguing that they “were not sufficiently self-contained and bordered on incoherent,” and a number of video game critics complained that the story of Enter the Matrix “isn’t strong enough to stand on its own…making the game worth a look for hard-core fans of The Matrix films, but a buggy disappointment for just about anyone else” (Convergence Culture 65; Gerstmann). Following Jenkins’ definition, the video game should engage more than just fans of the film; it should also work as an entry point for people who have not seen the films. In this case, however, it is unlikely that a person who played the game will be engaged enough to explore the rest of the franchise if his experience with the game was disappointing.
It is here that I take issue with Jenkin’s claim that every “franchise entry needs to be self-contained” (Convergence Culture 96). I contend that only the primary text needs to be self-contained, and extensions should be used to explore the storyworld, or “diegesis,” of the primary text; these extensions can flesh out backstories, histories, and locations to create a multilayered universe (Film Art: An Introduction 76). Extensions that do this and strive to be self-contained should stay within the universe of the primary text, but focus on elements outside of its direct narrative. This claim implies several things:
1) Not all texts are created equal. There is one primary text that drives the core plot (everything that is “explicitly presented”) through which extensions develop (Film Art: An Introduction 76).
2) Extensions are optional. They should not be mandatory for understanding the narrative of the primary text.
3) Some extensions explore the storyworld by expanding on something that appeared in the primary text. Others can simply expand the storyworld without referencing material from the primary text.
4) Not all extensions need to act as entry points into a franchise.
5) Transmedia producers need to understand how to best utilize the conventions of the platforms through which they create their extensions.
These points exist to highlight the fact that producers need to be highly selective when choosing to extend their narratives across different media platforms. They need to understand and utilize the conventions of the platforms through which they create their extensions, otherwise they will repeat the mistakes the Wachowskis made with their franchise. I contend that this is what Jenkins meant when he said, “each medium does what it does best” (Convergence Culture 95). However, this too is difficult to determine What works in a ten minute animated short may not work as well in a video game.
As I mentioned already, Enter the Matrix was seen as a failure due to its lack of self-containment and uninspired gameplay, the result of the Wachowski’s lack of understanding of the video game platform. Stephen Johnson argues that video games emphasize “form” instead of “content,” and he contends that “with the occasional exception, the actual content of the game is often childish…” (Everything Bad Is Good for You 39). While I agree that some games like Pac-Man and Halo do focus more on form, an increasing number of video games today do have “complex storylines” with “memorable and endearing cast of characters” that drive player engagement (Shoemaker). Therefore, there should be a focus on not just form, but the ways form and content work together to create a compelling game. In the case of Enter the Matrix, the Wachowski’s tried too hard to intertwine the game’s narrative with the film’s narrative, jumbling the coherence of the game. At the same time, by using the game to fill in the narrative gaps between the first and second films, they ignored the form of the game, essentially turning Enter the Matrix into a mini-film. Critics noted that this problem was so pervasive that at times narrative cut scenes would interrupt actual gameplay (Gerstmann). Perhaps the game would have served the Wachowski’s better if they chose to explore some other facet of the Matrix world, one that has no mention in the film but is still clearly recognized as belonging to that universe. This way, the game does not have to rely on the film for coherence and a gamer can enjoy the game on its own merits, with a cohesive storyline and form that work together.
On the other end of the spectrum, The Animatrix highlights not only the failures of the Wachowski’s transmedia experiment, but also its successes. I have already demonstrated how “Kid’s Story” created problems for the films. I have also demonstrated how “The Second Renaissance” successfully fleshed out the history of the war between man and the machines from a conversation in the first film. It is important to emphasize that this extension is not necessary for us to understand the story of the first film; we are told that mankind fought a war against the machines and lost, and that all subsequent events are the result of that conflict. However, those who watch “The Second Renaissance” can achieve a deeper understanding of that conflict, and ultimately, the world that The Matrix inhabits. Jenkins calls this deeper understand “additive comprehension,” asserting that “each new texts adds a new piece of information which forces us to revise our understanding of the fiction as a whole” (“Transmedia Storytelling 101”). Furthermore, The Animatrix is also unique in that it can attract a niche audience to the franchise. Made up of eight films, The Animatrix is a collaboration between The Wachowskis and a number of renowned Japanese anime producers. It is arguably the best example of a stand-alone extension within the franchise, and I agree that this is true to some extent. By collaborating with a number of well-known Japanese anime producers, the Wachowskis succeeded in creating eight varied and visually exciting stories. This by itself can be a potential attractor for someone who simply likes anime and is a fan of said producers. These works offer a new interpretation of the universe within the franchise, and that interpretation may inspire further investigation.
I have already said that transmedia storytelling builds worlds, and that transmedia extensions are crucial to that process. But how can transmedia producers design transmedia narratives? What separates transmedia narratives from other grand, multi-platform stories from the past (Star Wars, The Lord of the Rings). And what happens when there are multiple authors in one franchise, as was the case in The Animatrix. The follow section will explore these issues, and offer further insight into the question: What is transmedia storytelling?

Transmedia Storytelling: World-building, Additive Comprehension, Adaptation, and the Issue of Canon

In Convergence Culture, Jenkins quotes a Hollywood screenwriter:
When I first started, you would pitch a good story because without a good story, you didn’t really have a film. Later, once sequels started to take off, you pitched a character because a good character could support multiple stories. And now, you pitch a world because a world can support multiple characters and multiple stories across multiple media. (Convergence Culture 114)

The screenwriter highlights a very important point: there has been an increase in the number of films and television programs that take place in highly expansive and imaginative story worlds. With all this excitement hailing transmedia as the next big thing, it is important to note that transmedia storytelling is not an entirely novel concept. Specifically, the notion of dispersing a story or world across a number of different platforms is not unique to transmedia storytelling as it is defined today. There have been a number of media franchises in the past that did just this, perhaps the most notable example being George Lucas’ Star Wars franchise. The first trilogy started with Star Wars: A New Hope, released in 1997, and ended with Star Wars: Return of the Jedi in 1983. It sparked a number of tertiary texts aimed at expanding the universe, focusing on characters and stories that were ultimately unexplored in the films. While some of these works were produced under the watchful eye of Lucas, many were produced by outside authors who ultimately had little to no affiliation with Star Wars or Lucas.

Works Cited
Bordwell, David, and Kristin Thompson. Film Art: An Introduction. 8th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2008. Print.
“Code of Credits – New Media.” Producers Guild of America. Web. 3 Nov. 2010. .
Dena, Christy. “PGA’s Transmedia Producer!” Christy’s Corner of the Universe. 5 Apr. 2010. Web. 3 Nov. 2010. .
Gerstmann, Jeff. “Enter the Matrix Review.” GameSpot. 20 May 2003. Web. 10 Nov. 2010. .
Jenkins, Henry. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York: New York University Press, 2006. Print.
Jenkins, Henry. “Hollywood Goes “Transmedia”.” Web log post. Confessions of an Aca-Fan: The Official Weblog of Henry Jenkins. 12 Dec. 2009. Web. 18 Oct. 2010. .
Jenkins, Henry. “Transmedia Storytelling 101.” Web log post. Confessions of an Aca-Fan: The Official Weblog of Henry Jenkins. 22 Mar. 2007. Web. 10 Nov. 2010. .
Long, Geoffrey A. “Transmedia Storytelling: Business, Aesthetics, and Production at the Jim Henson Company.” Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2007. Web. 19 Oct. 2010. .
Johnson, Steven. Everything Bad Is Good for You: How Today’s Popular Culture Is Actually Making Us Smarter. New York: Riverhead Books, 2005. Print.
Shoemaker, Brad. “The Greatest Games of All Time: Chrono Trigger.” GameSpot. Web. 10 Nov. 2010. .
The Animatrix. Dir. Mahiro Maeda, Shinichirô Watanabe, Andy Jones, Yoshiaki Kawajiri, Takeshi Koike, Kôji Morimoto, and Peter Chung. Warner Home Video, 2003. DVD.
The Matrix. Dir. Larry Wachowski and Andy Wachowski. Perf. Keanu Reeves, Carrie-Anne Moss, Laurence Fishburne. Warner Bros., 1999. DVD.
“The Matrix (1999).” Box Office Mojo. Web. 10 Nov. 2010. .
Shoemaker, Brad. “The Greatest Games of All Time: Chrono Trigger.” GameSpot. Web. 10 Nov. 2010. .

Ilya Ryvin
Position Paper
The Evolution of Television: The Road to Transmedia Storytelling
In his book Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide, renowned media analyst Henry Jenkins argues that we have entered a new era of media engagement. He has dubbed this the era of “convergence culture,” identifying the three key concepts that define it: “media convergence, participatory culture, and collective intelligence.” (Jenkins 2). In this age of convergence, media producers are creating stories that require a new type of audience engagement, one that forces audiences to hunt these stories down across multiple media channels. This narrative strategy, dubbed transmedia storytelling, has been implemented through a number of different media franchises, but it has been most effective in television programming. This, however, should not come as a surprise. Television has come a long way since its inception, and as I write this thesis, it is still evolving. I will argue that since its early days, television has undergone a number of changes, primarily in the areas of narrative complexity, technology, and the behaviors of both media industries and audiences, and that these changes ultimately lend themselves to the transmedia model.
In the early days of television, most television programs could be described as being episodic. Jason Mittell explains that the “dominant form of primetime television storytelling from the 1950s to the 1990s was self-contained episodic narration” that rarely “demanded knowledge from previous episodes to understand what’s going on” (Storytelling Technologies). Although there existed a “consistent setting, continuing characters, recurring themes and types of events,” there was ‘little or no long-term memory or persistence of the events and occurrences of what happens in any episode” (Storytelling Technologies). In other words, audiences were able watch a random episode without having to worry about comprehending it had they missed the episode from the prior week. The Twilight Zone, for example, is an extreme form of an episodic program, with each episode having no relation character or plot-wise to the episode that came before or after it. There were, of course, less extreme cases of episodic programming
Around the 1980s, a new type of narrative emerged. This narrative created a “storyworld [with] continuity” that depended on “consistent viewing and accurate memories” (Serial Boxes). This model borrowed many of its conventions from serialized daytime soap operas, creating a hybrid that mixed episodic and serialized norms. Jason Mittell argues that this form lent itself well to “the generic forms of cop shows, medical dramas, and sitcoms,” citing shows like Hill St. Blues and Cheers, where they typically “featur[ed] some episodic plotlines alongside multi-episode arcs and ongoing relationship dramas” with “relationship stories carry[ing] over between episodes” while the medical or police cases resolved themselves within a single episode (Narrative Complexity 33). The aforementioned hybrid model was further expanded on in the 90s through the implementation of “story arcs across episodes and seasons,” and shows like The X-Files and Buffy the Vampire Slayer best exemplify this narrative evolution through their innovative combination of “long-term arc storytelling and stand-alone episodes” (Narrative Complexity 33). For example, each of the seven seasons of Buffy features a primary villain whose storyline spans the entire season. Every episode advances that season long arc, while at the same time “offering episodic coherence and miniresolutions” (Narrative Complexity 33).
Other than the combination of lengthy story arcs and episodic conventions, narratives of the past 30 years have grown increasingly complex in the ways they’ve demanded audiences to make sense of them. In his book, Everything Bad Is Good For You: How Today’s Popular Culture Is Actually Making Us Smarter, Steven Johnson argues that this complexity “involves three primary elements: multiple threading, flashing arrows, and social networks” (Johnson 65). For the purpose of this paper, I will focus primarily on multiple threading and what this has done for modern narratives as I feel that it has more relevance to narrative complexity than the other two elements. Johnson explains that traditional narratives often had one or two narrative threads, or plots. For example, any episode of Dragnet followed the following formula: the crime, the investigation, and the resolution. Starsky and Hutch usually had two threads, one following the villain’s narrative while the other followed Starsky and Hutch’s narrative.
Johnson cites Hill St. Blues as the primary innovator of the multithreaded drama, identified by the increased number of narrative threads, an increase in the number of primary characters, and the fact that some threads crossed over from one episode to the next. Programs like Lost take these narrative complexities even further. Each episode has a number of storylines running alongside each other, with no one narrative taking precedent over another. Each episode also includes an extensive flashback sequence, exploring the extensive back-story of a specific character or characters. There is also very little episodic coherence, with the threads from one episode almost always spilling over to the next with resolution far and between.
It is important to note that these more complex narratives have not replaced episodic ones. There are a number of popular programs on television today that follow the episodic model, including the CSI and the Law and Order franchises. It is also important to note that I am not placing a value judgment on any particular narrative form.
The Twilight Zone was, and still is, regarded as a wonderfully creative program that delivered some of the most memorable science-fiction narratives. Likewise, not every complex narrative is effective, sometimes making it a season or two before the narrative became too muddled to follow. What I am trying to get across is that overall, narratives have gotten more complex, forcing audiences to follow, attain and ultimately retain more information.
These narrative changes, however, would not be possible if it were not for a number of technological advances. The conventional wisdom in the early days of television was that narratives needed to be simple; otherwise, producers feared they would lose audiences. For example, if and episode is not self contained and relies on information revealed from a prior episode, someone who missed that episode would have a much harder time piecing together the narrative. This fear had more to do with the model of television broadcasting than it did with the nature of earlier audiences. Audiences had no real access to missed episodes, and syndication at the time “favored interchangeable episodes of conventional sitcoms and procedural dramas” (Narrative omplexity 31). With the advent of the VCR in the 70s, this became less of an issue. VCRs gave audiences the ability to record their favorite programs, meaning that if a person was going to miss an episode of their favorite series, they could simply record it and watch it at a later time. Recording technologies have made their way to the digital age, with the likes of TiVo and other digital video recorders making the entire process much easier and more organic. This makes producers more confident about creating programs that are narratively complex. Jason Mittell puts it best when he says that “time-shifting technologies like VCRs and digital video recorders enable viewers to choose when they want to watch a program, but, more important for narrative construction, viewers can rewatch episodes or segments to purse out complex moments” (Narrative Complexity 31). Likewise, DVDs have allowed consumers to purchase entire season of their favorite programs. DVDs give consumers the option to “rewatch for depth of references, impressive displays of craft and continuities, and appreciate details that require the liberal use of pause and rewind” (Serial Boxes). Of course, this idea of rewatchability will only work if the show has elements that make it worthy of rewatching. In other words, the narrative needs to have a number of analyzable complexities and intricacies that would inspire fans to scrutinize the program.
Lastly, the behavior of both audience and media industries cannot be ignored when looking at the evolution of television narrative. The Internet has widely changed the consumer/producer relationship, offering interactivity unlike any that came before it. Mittell explains that the “internet has become more central to the television medium, with both official and illicit downloadable shows, transmedia narrative extensions, and the rise of sites like Hulu and YouTube as alternative ways to view a wide range of programming” (Serial Boxes). However, I argue that the Internet plays another important role. Ivan Askwith argues that “we are now operating in an attention economy, where media producers and advertisers view attention itself as the most valuable of commodities, and it is the pursuit of viewer attention that has led the media and advertising industries to their newest point of obsession: audience engagement” (Askwith 17). His notion of audience engagement is not dissimilar to Jenkins’ ideas behind his theories regarding convergence culture. Audiences can watch their favorite programs online, legally and illegally, interact with fans, interact with producers, and even shape content. In many ways, audiences can now shape what degree of engagement they can have with their television programs, whereas before it was the sole right of the studio to decide when and what audiences would watch. If the narrative is intriguing and at the same time complex, the Internet opens up a myriad of possibilities for engagement. Jason Mittell most aptly described this when he said that the Internet “has enabled fans to embrace a “collective intelligence” for information, interpretations, and discussions of complex narratives that invite participatory engagement-and in instances such as Babylon 5 or Veronica Mars, creators join in the discussions and use these forums and feedback mechanisms to test for comprehension and pleasures” (Askwith 31-32).

Works Cited
Askwith, Ivan D. “Television 2.0: Reconceptualizing TV as an Engagement Medium.” Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2007. Web. 19 Oct. 2010.
Jenkins, Henry. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York: New York University Press, 2006. Print.
Johnson, Steven. Everything Bad Is Good for You: How Today’s Popular Culture Is Actually Making Us Smarter. New York: Riverhead Books, 2005. Print. Johnson
Mittell, Jason. “Narrative Complexity in Contemporary American Television.” The Velvet Light Trap Fall.58 (2006): 29-40. Web. 19 Oct. 2010. .
Mittell, Jason. “Serial Boxes.” Just TV. 20 Jan. 2010. Web. 27 Oct. 2010. .
Mittell, Jason. “Storytelling Technologies.” Just TV. 13 May 2007. Web. 27 Oct. 2010. .

Askwith, Ivan D. “Television 2.0: Reconceptualizing TV as an Engagement Medium.” Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2007. Web. 19 Oct. 2010. . Askwith argues that television is at a crucial point, one where the medium is moving away from passive audience engagement towards more interactive audience engagement. With this change, he believes that television needs a new conceptual model where audiences are invited, in a variety of ways, to interact with the television programs they watch. He uses Lost as a case study to show what can be done through this new expanded multi-platform model and how this model draws out audience participation. Askwith concludes that Lost was ahead of its time, and while an almost ideal example of audience engagement, Lost failed to explore all the possibilities of a true engagement medium.

Dena, Christy. “Transmedia Practice: Theorising the Practice of Expressing a Fictional World across Distinct Media and Environments.” Diss. University of Sydney, 2009. Christy’s Corner of the Universe. Web. 19 Oct. 2010. . Christy Dena’s PhD dissertation explores the nature of transmedia practice in general terms, focusing on how transmedia developers design fictional worlds and express those worlds across different medium. She uses the semiotic theories of multimodality and domains of practice to explore the skills employed in the design stages of transmedia works. The goal of the paper is to show that transmedia is unique in its own right and that it needs its own methodologies for study and evaluation.

Jenkins, Henry. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York: New York University Press, 2006. Print. Media Analyst Henry Jenkins argues against traditional ideas of convergence, that a “black box” will unite all methods of media delivery. Jenkins contends that the digital age is instead a combination of media convergence, participatory culture, and collective intelligence. The work is highly qualitative, drawing on a number of case studies and examples throughout the text. Of particular importance is the chapter, “Searching for the Origami Unicorn: The Matrix and Transmedia Storytelling.” It explores The Matrix franchise through the lens of transmedia storytelling to show how the Wachowski brothers built a universe across a variety of platforms. It is an excellent introduction to the ideas of convergence and media in the digital age.

Jenkins, Henry. “Getting Lost.” Web log post. Confessions of an Aca-Fan: The Official Weblog of Henry Jenkins. 25 Aug. 2006. Web. 18 Oct. 2010. . Jenkins replies to comments posted by Ian Bogost, Jane McGonigal, and Jason Mittel to Jenkins’ blogpost, “A Response to Ian Bogost.” He discusses both Twin Peaks and Lost, but focuses primarily on breaking down Lost. He concludes that Lost functions like a narrative puzzle and that producers actively invite fan engagement to solve that puzzle. Jenkins mentions the similarities between fan engagement in Lost and the reality program, Survivor.

Jenkins, Henry. “Hollywood Goes “Transmedia”.” Web log post. Confessions of an Aca-Fan: The Official Weblog of Henry Jenkins. 12 Dec. 2009. Web. 18 Oct. 2010. . Jenkins discusses the ratification of “Transmedia Producer” by the Producers Guild of America. He notes that there is already disagreement over the guidelines identified by the PGA, namely the requirement to spread a transmedia narrative across a minimum of three platforms, thereby ignoring transmedia works that operate on only two platforms. He concludes that the definition is still very much in flux, and what constitutes a transmedia project will continue to evolve.

Jenkins, Henry. “Revenge of the Origami Unicorn: The Remaining Four Principles of Transmedia Storytelling.” Web log post. Confessions of an Aca-Fan: The Official Weblog of Henry Jenkins. 12 Dec. 2009. Web. 18 Oct. 2010. . Jenkins continues the ideas he posed in “Revenge of the Origami Unicorn: The Remaining Four Principles of Transmedia Storytelling.” He focuses on immersion vs. extractability, worldbuilding, seriality, subjectivity, and performance. He offers a number of examples for each principle, concluding that these principles do not represent a conclusive list and that there is room for future development. Video links to the conference are also available.

Jenkins, Henry. “The Revenge of the Origami Unicorn: Seven Principles of Transmedia Storytelling (Well, Two Actually. Five More on Friday).” Web log post. Confessions of an Aca-Fan: The Official Weblog of Henry Jenkins. 12 Dec. 2009. Web. 18 Oct. 2010. . Jenkin’s updates his thinking about transmedia storytelling as described in his book, Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. The points made in this post are a summation of a lecture Jenkins held at the Futures of Entertainment 4 conference held at MIT. He focuses on two principles, spreadability vs. drillability and continuity vs. multiplicity. Jenkins also mentions opposing theories of transmedia storytelling posed by Christy Dena and Frank Rose. Video links to the conference are also available.

Johnson, Steven. Everything Bad Is Good for You: How Today’s Popular Culture Is Actually Making Us Smarter. New York: Riverhead Books, 2005. Print. Johnson argues that today’s popular culture has actually grown more complex, and that complexity is in turn making us smarter. He examines how his theory plays across several mediums, primarily focusing on video games, films, and television. He notes that television programming has evolved through the implementation of the “multiple threading” and the disappearance of “flashing arrows, ” resulting in television shows that demand more from their audiences. Although not a scholarly work, this book can be enjoyed by both academics and general readers.

Long, Geoffrey A. “Transmedia Storytelling: Business, Aesthetics, and Production at the Jim Henson Company.” Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2007. Web. 19 Oct. 2010.
. Long explores Barthesian hermeneutic codes, negative capability, and migratory cues to see how transmedia stories guide audiences across multiple platforms. He presents a number of case studies, but his main focus is Jim Henson’s Labyrinth and The Dark Crystal. He proposes a number of principles transmedia producers can follow based around the framework analyzed in these two case studies.

Mittell, Jason. “Narrative Complexity in Contemporary American Television.” The Velvet Light Trap Fall.58 (2006): 29-40. Web. 19 Oct. 2010. . Mittell argues that over the last two decades, American television programming has grown in narrative complexity. He explores the history of television, and analyzes the impact technology had on programming. Citing a number of programs, including The X-Files, Buffy, 24, Seinfeld, etc., Mittell shows how they created complex narratives while making distinctions between episodic and serial narratives. The Velvet Light Trap is a film and media studies journal edited by graduate students at the University of Wisconsin at Madison and The University of Texas at Austin.

Ilya Ryvin

Proposal Paper

LOST represents a moment of narrative transition in television, one where show runners are starting to understand that they are not restricted to one medium. In fact, Executive producers like Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse understand that by spreading their narratives across a number of different platforms, they are creating a new brand of television narrative. Perhaps the most significant change is that transmedia narratives like LOST are putting new demands on their audiences, where show runners are encouraging their audiences to actively engage and explore the media they consume

I will explore the evolution of popular narratives on television, and the factors that ultimately contributed to that evolution. I will look at the complexity of stories being told, how new and emerging technologies affected these stories, and how all of this ultimately put a new level of demand on mass audiences to be more engaged and active with their media. Nevertheless, due to the nature of transmedia storytelling, I will obviously have to mention movies, videogames, comics, etc, but my focus will remain in television.

Of course, I also plan to explore what transmedia storytelling is. Using Jenkins’ definition as a starting point, I plan to show that the definition is still in flux and that a number of different academics have a number of different views. The idea is to give my audience a better understanding of transmedia storytelling, but also to create my own working definition of what transmedia storytelling truly is.

That definition, however, will not be complete without examples. Using LOST as my case study, I plan to show how the show runners created an effective transmedia text. Specifically, I plan to emphasize how the producers of LOST encouraged audiences to be active and participate. My main reason for using LOST as a case study is that LOST was a mega hit, both critically and commercially. It was not a small fringe program, but a show embraced by a mass audience, all of whom were not hardcore fans. This distinction is important to analyze because the show managed to have a broad enough appeal while offering an experience that promoted active engagement.

The purpose of this study is to ultimately present a model that will guide transmedia producers in creating successful transmedia narratives in the future. Drawing examples from LOST, I plan to offer a number of suggestions that producers can consider when developing their narratives that perhaps were lacking in past transmedia works.

Methodologically, I will first need to tap into the available literature on transmedia storytelling. I will look at the works of Henry Jenkins, Christy Dena, Geoffrey Long and other noted academics and practitioners of transmedia to get an idea of what similarities, but more importantly differences, exist when defining transmedia. Because I want to explore the level of active engagement that fans had with LOST, and how show runners encouraged and nourished that engagement; I will look for interviews, articles, and instances within the show itself that show that encouragement. Doing this, I hope to develop my model for an effective transmedia framework, by looking what worked within the LOST franchise that past media producers perhaps failed to realize.