3 ms·
This is the current fad in magazine-style journalism. You essentially take two narratives: * A personal anecdotal account to provide human interest and color.
by munificent 7y ago
This is the current fad in magazine-style journalism. You essentially take two narratives:
* A personal anecdotal account to provide human interest and color.
* A relatively dry scientific narrative that explains the larger context.
And then you weave the two together. The human interest side keeps readers engaged enough to wade through the otherwise tedious sciency part. The sciency part makes readers feel they are learning something more practical than just one person's story. The jumps between the two narratives can be done well but often it's pretty arbitrary.
- stared 7y agoI have an affinity towards the second one. I cannot bear ones, which start as novels... and you need to go through a few sections to understand what it is about, if it is a true or fake story, etc. In this case, the problem is not with the balance between facts and narration (for my taste, it is fine) but with stories being shattered. I read a paragraph and need to guess if it is a new story, if it relates to the previous one, did it happen before or after, etc. BTW: I did enjoy Memento the movie. But in this one the order was designed carefully.
- klondike_klive 7y agoSometimes adding a Breaking Bad-style flashforward of extreme peril at the beginning to draw you in, followed by the journalistic equivalent of a "two hours earlier" caption.