Who Drives the Story?

The Balcony View Audio Article- 16/03/23 -

Who drives the story? An essay on Storytelling, Relationship & Formula One

https://balconyview.substack.com/p/who-drives-the-story

Last weekend, I started watching the latest season of Drive to Survive, the Netflix documentary that offers a backstage pass into the lives of the people behind Formula 1, the most popular motorsport in the world. I absolutely loved season 1. In fact, it was what had me fall in love with the sport. It showcased the human stories involved in the Formula 1 circus and the complex web of systems that work to get two working- and preferably point-scoring - cars on the grid. I found it to be a fascinating exploration of high performance, inadvertently showcasing the impact of different leadership styles, decisions and strategies.  

What I loved most of all was the storytelling. 

And what do I dislike the most about the latest season? The storytelling. The difference is the way the stories are being told. In season 1, it was as if the production team sat down and watched hours upon hours of footage until the stories popped out for them. The lived experiences led to the seamless storytelling of season 1.

In season 5, it's as if the stories were predetermined, and everything was shot with a particular 'angle' in mind. Like in episode 7, which covers Sergio "Checo" Pérez's journey during the Monaco Grand Prix. I'm convinced every driver was asked the same leading question: "what do you think of the rain in Monaco?" because the episode shows 5 different drivers saying a version of "driving in the rain in Monaco is hard." It's not that what they're capturing is incorrect (as someone who hates driving in London because of the angry drivers, I can testify that driving in the rain around the Monaco track at 200mph does look hard!) But that's precisely it. It's unimaginative, unsurprising and feels somewhat contrived. Even though it’s based on reality, it's as if the whole episode has been filmed and filtered to support that one story. One narrow and limited version of reality. And whilst I'm sure this approach probably saves a lot of money and time in post-production, the results are, well, a little bit meh...

Story first. Life second.

As many of you know, I am passionate about the power of storytelling in everyday life. I believe storytelling can be a powerful tool for reimagining ourselves in the world. For example, I've spent a long time trying (and failing) to create a regular meditation habit. I found it much harder to change my reality until I shifted the story I was telling myself. So, instead of being someone "who wants to mediate," I now wake up every morning and tell myself," I am a person who meditates." This simple shift has made meditation a part of my identity. It's not something over there that feels unachievable and secondary to who I am. It's a part of me that has helped me build- and keep- a regular morning meditation habit. To use the words of James Clear, author of Atomic Habits: 

"True behaviour change is identity change. When your behaviour and your identity are aligned, you are no longer pursuing change. You are simply acting like the type of person you already believe yourself to be." 

This way of utilising storytelling offers us more agency over our lives: the stories we tell ourselves now will impact how we experience our lives. Put simply: the story comes first. I have learnt so much from this principle having replaced some unhelpful stories with life-affirming narratives. Like for example, with a gratitude attitude. Gratitude is like a muscle; the more we work it, the more we feel grateful. So every evening before going to sleep, my husband and I will