Lightning in a bottle

David called what happens at Carapace “lightning in a bottle”:

and live storytelling in general is just so addictive,

especially a show like this

because it’s lightning in a bottle

depending on who gets chosen from the hat,

you never know what you are going to get.

You might, you know,

somebody who rambles and isn’t that great,

or you might get somebody telling a really

true beautiful personal story for the first time,

and it just turns into like a really amazing collective

experience

with a group of

people that you don’t even know.

And that’s just the draw that will always get me coming back.

One of the things I find so interesting about these two descriptions of a not that great story and an amazing story is that in neither case does David describe the storyteller as being a particularly adept performer. He describes the person telling the beautiful story as a first timer - so maybe I’m assuming they aren’t very polished? It just seems like the best stories and the worst stories can both include some hesitation, some awkwardness, and there is something beyond the performance that ultimately determines if the story is good or bad. Maybe the is the story itself, as in the life event the person is talking about. Or maybe it has something to do with how the story has been put together - which is very connected to how the storyteller has processed the event. I just think it’s interesting that the best and worse stories could have a lot in common. And well performed stories aren’t even mentioned here. Perhaps those are in the middle of that spectrum.