About The Non Stories (TNS)
TNS emerged from a personal need to move away from predefined narratives and spend time understanding people beyond categories. Javo’s [the creator of TNS] background is in cinematography and directing, but over time he felt a growing discomfort with traditional storytelling approaches.
Most stories try to explain people and make them fit into clear and simplified narratives. The Non Stories begins by spending time with them. Instead of starting with a message, a script or a defined angle, TNS is built on presence, listening and time.
Rather than operating as a fixed project, TNS has evolved as an ongoing practice; one that adapts to each context while holding a consistent principle: to create space for stories to exist without being reduced or predefined.
In the conversation below, Javo tells us more about the TNS and the key lessons learned that have emerged throughout his work. Read more stories at https://thenonstories.org/, a platform dedicated to telling the stories of those who often remain behind the curtain. If you’d like to learn more about TNS, you can connect with Javo at javomartinezb@gmail.com
How did you define ‘narratives’ in your initiative?
In The Non Stories, narratives are not understood as something to be constructed, but as something that already exists within people and their lived experience.
Instead of creating a story, and in my personal opinion, the role of the storyteller is to recognise what is already there, and to avoid distorting it through predefined frames, expectations or external interpretations.
This shifts the work from telling stories to learning how to listen. A narrative is not what we say about someone. It is what emerges when that person is given the space, time and trust to exist beyond explanation. In this sense, narratives are not fixed messages or outputs, but living processes shaped by context, relationships and presence.
What narratives did you aim to amplify?
In The Non Stories, the intention is not to predefine which narratives should be amplified. Instead, the focus is on creating the conditions for narratives to emerge on their own terms, particularly those often overlooked.
This includes stories rooted in everyday life, cultural memory and personal experience, which do not necessarily align with dominant narratives. The aim is to bring attention to the complexity of individual lives, allowing each story to exist without being reduced to a single issue, label or narrative expectation. A simple moment can open a more tangible understanding of migration, access or displacement.
While each story remains grounded in its own context, the work often connects with broader social realities, allowing individual experiences to resonate within larger conversations without being reduced to them. Instead of explaining broader contexts directly, the work allows them to be felt through lived experience.
What approaches did you use?
The approach is grounded in listening, presence and time.
Listening is treated as an active practice, not just as a preliminary step: conversations, silences and shared moments are all considered part of the narrative process. This can happen both in person and remotely, as long as the conditions for attention and openness are present.
From there, stories are developed through writing, image-making and observation, adapting the format to what best serves each story.
While flexible, the approach often involves:
- Spending extended time within the context of the story, physically or remotely
- Conducting open, non-structured conversations instead of formal interviews
- Observing without directing or intervening
- Writing from lived experience rather than external research alone
- Developing visual and narrative pieces that remain faithful to the tone and complexity of each reality.
Who were you aiming to influence?
The stories do not begin with a clearly defined target audience, but with the intention of creating a genuine connection between the story and the person experiencing it: the reader or the person telling it. This means that individuals, regardless of their role (general audiences, but also practitioners, organisations and decision-makers who engage with social and environmental issues), can see themselves reflected in someone else’s experience.
The underlying belief is that influence does not come from delivering a message, but from creating a shift in perception. When a story moves from being abstract to being human, it becomes harder to ignore and easier to relate to. In that sense, the work aims to influence how people see, more than what they think. When a story becomes human and relatable, it creates a connection that often stays with people beyond the moment of reading.
What were the barriers or blockages to the change you aimed at?
One of the main barriers has been the lack of platforms willing to host this type of narrative work. Stories that do not follow conventional formats or clear messaging often struggle to find spaces where they can exist without being reshaped.
So far, the work has developed organically across different contexts, often without a fixed platform. This has shaped how the stories are shared, not through scale, but by finding spaces where they can exist without being reshaped.
Access, visibility and framing have therefore been as relevant as the storytelling process itself.
How did you measure change?
Change was not measured through fixed quantitative metrics, but through qualitative signals. This included the level of engagement and response from audiences, the depth of conversations generated around the stories, and the way collaborators interacted with the narrative process.
Over time, the understanding of change evolved from focusing on reach to focusing on resonance: how deeply a story connects and stays with people.
What worked well in the implementation?
The emphasis on listening allowed stories to develop with greater depth and authenticity. This resulted in a stronger connection with audiences, as the narratives felt closer and more human.
It also created a visible shift in the people sharing their stories, a sense of recognition and presence that emerges when they feel genuinely heard and represented.
The flexibility of the approach proved effective, allowing each story to find its own form instead of being constrained by a fixed format.
What would you have done differently?
Rather than focusing only on distribution, I would have been more intentional in defining how this approach could be sustained and shared without losing its essence.
This work is deeply connected to a way of observing and listening, which is not easily standardised or replicated.
Exploring how to collaborate with others while preserving that sensitivity could have strengthened both the reach and continuity of the initiative.
It also made clear that growth is not only about scale, but about maintaining the integrity of the process as new contexts and collaborators are introduced.
What are the main lessons from the initiative?
That listening is not a preliminary step, but the core of the process. Listening often leads somewhere unexpected. What begins with a clear idea or assumption can shift completely when space is given for people to speak on their own terms.
That stories gain strength when they are allowed to exist in their complexity, without being reduced to a single message.
And that meaningful narrative change does not come from producing more content, but from creating the conditions for stories to be experienced differently!
Read the story ‘Oralia’ below and embark on Maye’s journey to escape restrictions and build a life for herself.