Introduction DoingNarrativeResearch

8/12/2019 Introduction DoingNarrativeResearch

1/40

Introduction

Introduction: What is narrative research?

Corinne Squire, Molly Andrews and Maria Tamboukou

Final draft; published version appears inDoing Narrative Research, Eds M.Andrews.

C.Squire and M.Tsambouou! "ondon# Sa$e! %&&'.

I live in terror of not bein$ misunderstood ()scar *ilde! +The Critics As Artist,-

In the last two decades! narrative has acquired an increasin$l hi$h profile in social research.

It often seems as if all social researchers are doin$ narrative research in one wa or another.

/et narrative research! althou$h it is popular and en$a$in$! is difficult. 0ow to $o about it is

much discussed. 1eople worin$ in this field are frequentl approached b students and

collea$ues! in and outside academia! asin$ questions lie! +Should I request respondents to

tell stories or not2,! +*hat happens if m respondents don,t produce an narratives2,! +*hat

is a narrative! anwa2, and! most re$ularl! +*hat do I do with the stories now I,ve $ot

them2, 3arrative data can easil seem overwhelmin$# susceptible to endless interpretation!

b turns inconsequential and deepl meanin$ful.

4nlie man qualitative framewors! narrative research offers no automatic startin$ or

finishin$ points. Since the definition of +narrative, itself is in dispute! there are no self5

evident cate$ories on which to focus! as there are with content5based thematic approaches! or

with analses of specific elements of lan$ua$e. Clear accounts of how to analse the data! as

found for instance in $rounded theor and in Interpretive 1henomenolo$ical Analsis! are

rare. There are few well5defined debates on conflictin$ approaches within the field and how


2/40

Introduction

to balance them! as there are! for e7ample! in the hi$hl epistemolo$icall5contested field of

discourse analsis. In addition! unlie other qualitative research perspectives! narrative

research offers no overall rules about suitable materials or modes of investi$ation! or the best

level at which to stud stories. It does not tell us whether to loo for stories in recorded

everda speech! interviews! diaries! tv pro$rammes or newspaper articles; whether to aim

for ob8ectivit or researcher and participant involvement; whether to analse stories,

particularit or $eneralit; or what epistemolo$ical si$nificance to attach to narratives.

9espite these difficulties! man of us who wor with narratives want to continue and

develop this wor. Most often! perhaps! we frame our research in terms of narrative because

we believe that b doin$ so we are able to see different and sometimes contradictor laers

of meanin$! to brin$ them into useful dialo$ue with each other! and to understand more

about individual and social chan$e. : focusin$ on narrative! we are able to investi$ate! not

8ust how stories are structured and the was in which the wor! but also who produces them

and b what means! the mechanisms b which the are consumed! and how narratives are

silenced! contested or accepted. All these areas of inquir can help us describe! understand

and even e7plain important aspects of the world. It is our hope that this boo will contribute

to this multilevel! dialo$ic potential of narrative research.

In the rest of this Introduction! we e7plore further the popularit of narrative research!

its diverse histories and its theoretical contradictions! in an effort to describe both its

comple7it! and the possibilities for worin$ productivel within that comple7it

arrative research: !o!ularity and diversity

3arrative is a popular portmanteau term in contemporar western social research. The

crowd of much5used summar and outline te7ts about narrative research (Clandinin


3/40

Introduction

and Connell! %&&; Elliot! %&&>6; 0olstein and ?ubrium! =>>>;

"an$ellier and 1eterson! %&&; Mishler! =>'@; )chs and Capps! %&&=; 1ersonal

3arratives ?roup! =>'>; 1lummer! %&&=; 1olin$horne! =>''; iessman! =>>6a!

%&&B; oberts! %&&=; Sarbin! =>'@; *en$raf! =>>>- e7emplifies its popularit. So

does the recent burst of empiricall5based te7ts focused on specific studies! (Andrews!

%&&B; Emerson and Frosh! %&&; McAdams! %&&@; Mishler! =>>>; Squire! %&&B;

Tambouou! %&&6-! the rich crop of narrativel5themed collections of essas

(Andrews et al.! %&&; :amber$ and Andrews! %&&; :rocmeier and Carbau$h!

%&&=; Chamberlane et al.! %&&&; Clandinin! %&&@; 1atterson! %&&%; osenwald and

)chber$! =>>%- and the increasin$ number of boos addressin$ narrative in specific

domains such as development! health! se7ualit and social wor (9aiute and

"i$htfoot! %&&; ?reenhal$h and 0urwit! =>>'; 0all! =>>B; Mattin$le! =>'';

1lummer! =>>>6b-.

Aside from this current ubiquit within social research! +narrative, is also a term

frequentl heard in popular discourse. )ften! these popular uses of the term wor to

connote a particularl acute understandin$. 1oliticians or policmaers su$$est the

are doin$ their 8obs well because the pa close attention to people,s everda

+narratives!, or because the themselves have a 8oined5up +narrative, of what the are

doin$. Dournalists claim a $ood understandin$ of events b spellin$ out for their

audiences the underlin$ +narrative., Citiens are ur$ed to achieve better

comprehension of difficult circumstances b readin$ or hearin$ the +stories, of those

affected for e7ample! the *orld 0ealth )r$anisation portras the 0I pandemic to

us throu$h individual +Stories of Tra$ed and 0ope,


4/40

Introduction

(http#GGwww.who.intGfeaturesG%&&6G&>GenG -. Sometimes! thou$h! public +narratives,

are treated with suspicion! as obfuscators of the +realities, the $loss and hide.

In addition! the term +narrative, is used descriptivel in popular discourse! as it is in

academic humanities disciplines! to indicate the line of thematic and causal

pro$ression in a cultural form such as a film or a novel. 0ere a$ain! +narrative, ma

be a $ood thin$ e7citin$! compellin$! insi$htful but it ma also be criticised 5 as

overcomple7! oversimple! too lon$! too conventional.

:oth in popular culture and in social research! then! +narrative, is striin$l diverse in

the wa it is understood. In popular culture! it ma su$$est insi$ht into or

concealment of 5 important bio$raphical patterns or social structures or! simpl!

$ood or less5$ood forms of representational sequence. In social research! +narrative,

also refers to a diversit 5 of topics of stud! methods of investi$ation and analsis!

and theoretical orientations. It displas different definitions within different fields!

and the topics of hot debate around these definitions shift from ear to ear.

)n account of this proli7it! man accounts of narrative research be$in b e7plorin$

the field,s different contemporar forms. This Introduction is no e7ception! but it

approaches the tas a little differentl. It sets out two overlappin$ fields within which

narrative research,s diversit appears# those of narrative research,s histor! and its

theor. For! we shall ar$ue! narrative research,s incoherence derives partl from its

diver$ent be$innin$s! and partl from the theoretical faultlines that traverse it.

Where does narrative research come "rom? #istorical contradictions


5/40

Introduction

The antecedents of contemporar narrative social research are commonl located in

two parallel academic moves (Andrews et al.! %&&; ustin! %&&&-=The first is the

postwar rise of humanist approaches within western sociolo$ and pscholo$. These

approaches posed holistic! person5centred approaches! often includin$ attention to

individual case studies! bio$raphies and life histories! a$ainst positivist empiricism

(:ertau7! =>'=; :runer! =>>&; 1olin$horne! =>''; Sarbin! =>'@-. The second

academic antecedent to contemporar narrative social research! is ussian

structuralist and later! French poststructuralist (:arthes! =>BB! Culler! %&&%; ?enette!

=>B>! Todorov! =>>&- postmodern (Foucault! =>B%; "otard! =>'-! pschoanaltic

("acan! =>BB- and deconstructionist (9errida! =>BB- approaches to narrative within

the humanities. These approaches had effects on social research in the En$lish5

speain$ world from the late =>B&s! initiall throu$h the wor of Althusser! "acan

and Foucault! film and literar critics! and feminist and socialist theorists! as it

appeared in translations! in 8ournals such asIdeology and Consciousness and mf! and

in boos lie Changing the Subject (0enrique et al.! =>'- and later! in the 4S!

?er$en,s (=>>=- and Sampson,s (=>>6- wor.%Such wor was often interested in

stor structure and content. :ut unlie the humanist narrative move within social

research! it was concerned with narrative fluidit and contradiction! with unconscious

as well as conscious meanin$s! and with the power relations within which narratives

become possible (1arer! %&&6; Tambouou! this volume- It assumed that multiple!

disunified sub8ectivities were involved in the production and understandin$ of

narratives! rather than sin$ular! a$entic stortellers and hearers! and it was

preoccupied with the social formations shapin$ lan$ua$e and sub8ectivit. In this

tradition! the storteller does not tell the stor! so much as sGhe is told b it.


6/40

Introduction

9espite the theoretical differences! there are man conver$ences between these

humanist and postructuralist traditions within current narrative research. Most

researchers are affected b both conceptual histories. For e7ample! *end 0ollwa

and Ton Defferson use what the have called +free association narrative interviewin$,

(%&&&- to map individuals, bio$raphical accounts of crime in the communit. The

also appl pschoanaltic understandin$s of fractured sub8ects to these individual

bio$raphies! and draw on poststructural formulations of the uncertainties of lan$ua$e6

Similarl! Mar Freeman (%&&- traces the life histories of individual artists! but at the

same time he positions these life histories within the modern western narratives of art

that +write, these lives! and he also pas attention to the unconscious structures of

meanin$ that traverse life stories.

More $enerall! humanist and the postructuralist traditions of narrative research are

brou$ht to$ether b their shared tendenc to treat narratives as modes of resistance to

e7istin$ structures of power. This tendenc ma involve! for instance! collectin$ the

oral histories of worin$ class communities. It ma mean investi$atin$ the

autoGbio$raphical e7pression of women,s sub8ect positions# how women write within

the conte7ts of their lives! and how other women read their te7ts within the conditions

of their own lived! sub8ective place within power relations (Stanle! =>>%; 0den! this

volume; Tambouou! %&&6-. It ma stimulate a lin$uistic stud of the stortellin$

sophistication of African American adolescents ("abov! =>B%-. Some narrative

researchers use e7tensive life histories! in order to understand how personal lives

traverse social chan$e (Chamberlane et al.! %&&%; Andrews! %&&B-. )thers deplo

narratives to tr to chan$e people,s relations to their social circumstances. This is the

terrain of narrative therap and other therapies that use storied material! as well as of


7/40

Introduction

some communit research that enables collective stortellin$. (Sliep! =>''-. Still other

researchers analse the conditions and effectiveness of communit and +public,

narratives (1lummer! =>>

1olitics thus seems at times to brin$ the two historical trends in narrative research

to$ether (Squire! %&&


8/40

Introduction

tellin$ the stor classicall described in "abov,s ("abov and *alets! =>@B; see

also 1atterson! this volume- wor on event narratives and experience5centred wor

(see Squire! this volume-! e7plorin$ stories that ran$e in len$th from se$ments of

interviews! to man hours of life histories! and that ma be about $eneral or ima$ined

phenomena! thin$s that happened to the narrator or distant matters the,ve onl heard

about. This second ind of narrative research encompasses varin$ media! too# not

8ust speech! but also writin$ 5 scraps of letters! laundr lists! e7tensive multi5volume

diaries visual materials 5 photo albums! video diaries and narratives inherin$ in

ob8ects and actions 5 the arran$ement of ob8ects on mantelpieces! the everda

activities of shoppin$! cooin$ and eatin$ (Seale! %&&-. Such e7pansion of narrative

data seems to some to $ive the term +narrative, a meanin$ so broad as to rob it of

descriptive! let alone e7planator power (Craib! %&&-. /et throu$hout this second

field of wor! the life e7periences that infuse the data constitute the primar topic! the

true +narrative, (:runer! =>>&-.

*hat is shared across both event and e7perience5centred narrative research! is that

there are assumed to be individual! internal representations of phenomena events!

thou$hts and feelin$s to which narrative $ives e7ternal expression. Event5centre

wor assumes these internal and individual representations are more or less constant.

E7perience5centred research stresses that such representations var drasticall over

time! and across the circumstances within which one lives! so that a sin$le

phenomenon ma produce ver different stories! even from the same person.

A third form of narrative research! which addresses the co5constructed narratives that

develop! for instance in conversations between people! or email e7chan$es! does not


9/40

Introduction

fit into either of these two initial fields of +event, and +e7perience,5oriented narrative

research. This third field may operate with the assumption that its more +social!, co5

constructed! stories are e7pressions of internal co$nitive or affective states. 0owever!

most often! it views narratives as forms of social code! addressin$ stories as

dialo$icall constructed (:ahtin! =>'=- and not as e7pressions of internal states.

esearchers in this field are interested! rather! in the social patterns and functionin$ of

stories! whether the +stories, are short! dis8ointed sequences of conversation or much

more e7tensive representations that e7amplif broad cultural narratives (Abell et al!

%&&; :amber$! %&&@; ?eor$aopoulou! %&&@; 1lummer! %&&=; Squire! %&&B-.

3arrative research,s diver$ences over whether stories are representin$ internal

individual states! or e7ternal social circumstances! relates to another dichotom. Are

narratives shaped b the audiences to whom the are delivered! and if so! to what

e7tent2 For some narrative researchers! the most interestin$ features of personal

narratives lie in what the tell us about individual thinin$ or feelin$! whether the

narratives themselves are about events or e7periences ("abov! =>>B; Chamberlane et

al.! %&&%; 0ollwa and Defferson! %&&&-. )ther researchers are more concerned with

the social production of narratives b their audiences# in how personal stories $et built

up throu$h the conversational sequences in people,s tal (:amber$! %&&@;

?eor$aopoulou! %&&@-! or how the are tied up with the performance and ne$otiation

of social identities in a common space of meanin$ (1hoeni7! this volume; Salmon and

iessman! this volume; iessman! =>>6a! %&&B-.Some narrative researchers are

occupied more widel with how narratives follow! are constrained b! or resist! lar$er

social patterns of social and cultural stortellin$ (?read! this volume; 1lummer!

%&&=; Malson! %&&-. 3arrative researchers ma also be interested in how researchers,


10/40

Introduction

own +stories, var! dependin$ on the social and historical places from which the

+listen, to their data (Andrews! this volume; iessman! %&&%-. These primaril social

research interests are seen in some narrative researchers who thin of stories

themselves as e7pressions of personal states! as well as in those who treat stories as

manifestations of social or cultural patterns! thou$h the are commonest amon$ the

latter.

)f course! researchers who are mainl interested in what seems lie the simplest ind

of stories! event narratives told b individuals! also acnowled$e that stories are

shaped b their listeners. :ut for them! these social factors are not the definin$ or

most interestin$ aspects of personal narratives. Similarl! most bio$raphical and life

histor researchers accept that social formations shape personal stories. Indeed! the

often wor with this interaction! tracin$ the impact of social factors on individual

stories and +readin$, the si$nificance of social chan$e in those stories. 0owever!

bio$raphical researchers often claim an irreducible personal bedroc for narratives!

based in the fundamentals of human e7perience! which are often unconscious! and

therefore not full reachable b social analsis. Such researchers are not! $enerall!

too interested in the narrative +performance, of identities in social conte7ts! the

interpersonal construction or +co5construction, of narratives at the level of sequences

of utterances or across an interview! or the shapin$ of personal narratives b lar$er

social and cultural narratives or metanarratives.

This division between sociall5 and individuall5oriented narrative research! relates to

et another theoretical diver$ence# that between narrative researchers who are

interested in the agency of narratives and narrators! and those who are either


11/40

Introduction

uninterested! or who ar$ue that a$enc is not lined to narrative. esearchers who are

interested in narratives as individualised accounts of e7perience! tend to be the most

convinced of the si$nificance of stories as was of e7pressin$ and buildin$ personal

identit and a$enc (:runer! =>>&; see also Squire! this volume-. *or that addresses

event narratives! or stories co5constructed in tal5in5interaction! tends to be least

interested in issues of a$enc! most aware of the varied and +troubled, sub8ect

positions occupied b narrators (see 1hoeni7! this volume; "abov! =>>B;

?eor$aopoulou! %&&@-. 3arrative research that is interested in unconscious elements

of e7perience! is also sceptical about the possibilit of individual +a$enc!, let alone

its operation in and throu$h narrative (Craib! %&&-. *hether or not such narrative

research 5 event5 focused! interested in coconstruction and positionin$! or

pschoanalticall5inflected 5 operates with a conception of an a$entic sub8ect! it does

not tie that concept to an assumption that narrative +maes sense of, and enables

action within lives . This assumption of a necessar lin between narrative and a$enc

is found most stron$l in approaches to narrative that focus on personal e7perience.

0owever! man researchers who are concerned with the social and cultural place of

narrative! are also interested in the sociall effective +a$enc, of personal stories.

Sometimes the pursue this interest b offerin$ a broadl humanist assertion of

individuals, and collectives, potential to mae chan$es! alon$side a loosel

poststructural account of shiftin$ sstems of representation and representations,

interactive relations with material realities. Alternativel! the concept of performance

is often applied in narrative wor! lifted from ?offmanian accounts of social roles!

and from :utler,s (=>>6- post5?offman performativit


12/40

Introduction

e7ample of contemporar narrative research,s finessin$ of theoretical

incommensurabilities! in this case b i$norin$ the different concepts of the sub8ect in

pla around +performance, or5at best hopin$ to resolve them b what has become

nown as +strate$ic essentialism!, that is! the assumption of a$entic sub8ects where

politicall e7pedient.@

These inds of lived5with contradictions in narrative research! refer us bac to the

wa in which narrative research,s emancipator aims often brin$ to$ether historicall

and theoreticall distinct traditions of narrative wor. Certainl! some researchers,

concern with whether narratives and their wor on them +mae a difference!, ma

lead them to adopt an optimistic position on narrative a$enc that seems at odds with

their theoretical commitments to! for instance! the sociall constructin$ powers of

lan$ua$e! and that can be too simple reall to address the involved and politicall

intractable situations within which personal narratives appear and are studied (see

?read! this volume-.

A recent articulation of the divisions within narrative research has taen the form of

posin$ small! a$ainstbig!stories (:amber$! %&&@; Freeman! %&&@;

?eor$aopoulou! %&&@-. Those on the side of +small, narratives ar$ue that we need to

pa more attention to the micro5lin$uistic and social structure of the everda! small

narrative phenomena that occur +naturall, between people. These +small stories, ma

concern unfoldin$! anticipated! ima$inar! habitual and indefinite events and states!

as well as past! sin$ular +events,; the ma also! for some! involve repeated content or

themes spread out across representations (see 1hoeni7! this volume-. The occur in

spoen lan$ua$e! but also in writin$ te7t messa$es! for e7ample paralan$ua$e! and


13/40

Introduction

perhaps even in action. This emphasis on +small stories, brin$s to$ether the "abovian

commitment to research on +naturall,5occurrin$ stories! and conversation5analtic

and some discourse5analtic commitments to studin$ +natural, lan$ua$e! and applies

them to a wider and more social ran$e of narrative phenomena than has previousl

been addressed in this wa! includin$ interactions of the ind previousl investi$ated

mostl b conversation and discourse analsts (:amber$! %&&@; ?eor$aopoulou!

%&&@-. The emphasis on +small stories, tends to prioritise +event, over e7perience!

and sociall5oriented over individuall5oriented narrative research; but it formulates

+event, in a broadened wa! and pas attention to the +social, in its most microsocial

versions! as well as in its wider! cultural variants.

A$ainst such +small stor, ar$uments! *en$raf (=>>>-! Freeman (%&&@- and other

bio$raphical and life stor researchers defend the e7periential richness! reflectiveness

and validit of +bi$ stories., 0owever! writers on the +small stor, side of the debate

do reco$nise the separate value of +bi$ stor, research! and +bi$ stor, researchers

often pa attention to the +small, aspects of their data. For man! the +bi$,G,small,

division ma not be too si$nificant. Moreover! Freeman (%&&@- points out the parallel

tendencies in some +small stor, research to claim it is the +real thin$!, and in some

+bi$ stor, research to claim an immanent validatin$ identit behind its narratives.

These claims can return proponents on both sides of the ar$ument to the

unproblematicall e7pressivist approach to narrative described earlier in this

Introduction.

The +small, versus +bi$, stor ar$ument overlaps with another contemporar debate!

over the tyranny of the transcript. Some narrative researchers for instance those who


14/40

Introduction

wor with +small, narratives! or with visual materials criticise the he$emon! in the

narrative field! of interview5obtained transcripts of people talin$! usuall one at a

time! often refle7ivel! about their life e7periences; and the lar$e! content5based!

bio$raphical and social interpretations that narrative researchers derive from such

materials. The criticisms thus address both the restricted narrative material privile$ed

b transcripts mostl speech! rarel paralin$uistic material! other media!

interpersonal interactions or other social conte7t 5 and the content5based analsis that

is consequentl prioritised. 0owever! the polarit between transcript5based and other

forms of narrative research can be overstated. Approaches that are primaril

concerned with narrative structure and conte7t (includin$ +small stor, ones-! also

unavoidabl address content. Thematic approaches are! increasin$l! e7plicitl

interested in conte7t! and in an case haveto address structure and conte7t! at least

implicitl! since the meanin$s in which the deal are embedded in these. As with the

similar and lon$runnin$ debate about levels of discourse analsis! a dialo$ic approach

that advocates doin$ both inds of research at the same time! is a conceivable and

helpful solution (*etherell! =>>'-.

A more interestin$ aspect of the alle$ed conflict between structural! content and

conte7t5based approaches! is that it draws attention to two other important! thou$h

lar$el implicit! divisions within narrative research. The first of these relates to the

status of language in contemporar narrative research. 1arado7icall! a cursor or

non5e7istent attention to lan$ua$e characterises the narrative social research field.

3arrative is alwas defined first of all as a ind of lan$ua$e. /et research that focuses

on narrative as an e7pression of individual e7perience! or as a mirror of social

realities! tends to bpass the lan$ua$e of stories in order to focus on their meanin$s! or


15/40

Introduction

the social positionin$s the produce or reflect. Approaches that focus on event

narratives or narratives in conversation! tend to be interested in underlin$ co$nitive

structures! or in the social functionin$s of narrative! +what narrative does., For man

researchers! narrative lan$ua$e is a$ain! therefore secondar. It is the transparent

window onto narrative,s universal human! possibl even biolo$ical! si$nificance in

individual and social life! its involvement in all patterns of interaction! ethics! and

+livin$ in time, (Salmon! =>'>&; Seale! %&&; MacIntre! =>'-.

This narrative transcendentalism is ver rarel defended; it is assumed to be a self5

evident truth. .The +small stor, ar$ument! as well as other wor that emphasises the

socialit of narrative and its separateness from a$enc! tends to undo this certaint

about narrative,s universalit and redemptiveness. :ut the rapid passin$5over of

narrative lan$ua$e to $et to narrative +meanin$, or +function!, is a broad trend in

current narrative research! affectin$ small and lar$e stor stud alie. A fetishisation

of narrative lan$ua$e in social research! would not be a happ remed. 0owever! a

slower and more attentive readin$ of narrative lan$ua$e! mi$ht be (9errida! =>'


16/40

Introduction

thorou$hl with postmodernism! does not necessaril e7hibit such compromises.

Some narrative researchers operate with an e7tended version of postmodern or

poststructuralist critiques of +narrative,! formulatin$ narrative research as a

poststructural enterprise! aware of narratives, social positionin$ as discourses and of

the problematics of sub8ectivit and stor +meanin$, (:urman! %&&6; Edle! %&&%;

1arer! %&&6! %&&; Tambouou! %&&6- Such thorou$h$oin$ poststructural taes on

narrative are relativel infrequent! but the are important reminders of where man

narrative researchers, theoretical concerns with lan$ua$e! sub8ectivit! discourse and

power relations mi$ht lead! if the followed them more thorou$hl.

)ne area of poststructuralist theoretical interest has $iven rise to an e7tensive debate

within the narrative field. This is pschoanalsis! particularl those forms of it that are

inflected b "acanian and postlacanian concerns with the psche as a form of

lan$ua$e! even a +narrative!, in itself. In these accounts! narratives represent

unconscious emotions! as well as conscious co$nitions and feelin$s. Consequentl!

narratives are rarel strai$htforward. )ften the wor as forms of dissemblin$ or

+tellin$ stories, (Craib! %&&-. Sometimes! ou won,t $et the +whole stor,. And all

stories will be incomplete! since e7perience and sub8ectivit cannot mae their wa

full into lan$ua$e.

1schoanaltic taes on narrative research tr to address aspects of e7perience or

sub8ectivit such as an7iet! or desire! that fall outside narrative that seem difficult

or impossible to represent in narrative! or to understand from a strai$htforward

approach to stor structure or content. (Chamberlane et al.! %&&%; 0ollwa and

Defferson! %&&&; Frosh! %&&%; :urman! %&&6; Sclater! %&&6-'

9ebate between these


17/40

Introduction

positions relates both to their different theoretical formulations of the unconscious!

and to the varied e7tent to which pschoanalticall5influenced narrative researchers

claim interpretive authorit. Some pschoanaltic wor on narrative interprets

research materials +as if, the were materials from an analtic session. More

cautiousl! other pschoanaltic researchers treat narrative data as representations of

more $enerall5found individual or social structures of feelin$. )utside this

pschoanalticall5inflected wor! questions about the interpretive authorit of even

the more cautious pschoanalticall5inflected wor are frequent! and are often

accompanied b queries about the e7planator value of the +unconscious, as a

concept. Man narrative researchers re8ect pschoanaltic framewors on the $round

that detailed analses of stor form and content can $enerate equall rich and nuanced

understandin$s! without needin$ to assume the e7istence of an untestable

+unconscious, entit and set of processes (*etherell! %&&'; Salmon and iessman! this volume;

0den! this volume-. These problems have also $iven rise to considerable current

interest in how to analse elements of paralan$ua$e in narrative tone of voice!

pauses! lau$hter as well as visual elements such as ee movements! facial

e7pression! bod posture and $estures! and more broadl! aspects of emotionalit and

embodiment within narratives. Theoreticall! these elements are difficult to


18/40

Introduction

incorporate within e7istin$ models of narratives. Moreover! the are hard to define

and measure! and! 8ust as much as lan$ua$e structure and content! the var across

social and cultural situations. The ma prove 8ust as contentious for narrative

research as +the unconscious., Contemporar interest in them indicates! thou$h! the

continuin$ and $rowin$ division between researchers who are prepared to settle for

relativel strai$htforward spoen! written! visual! ob8ect or action sequences as their

materials! and those who are concerned that this specificit about what constitutes the

+lan$ua$e, of narratives! is inadequate.

Finall the problem of what ma lie +outside, narrative raises another issue which

implicitl divides narrative researchers! but which is often understood as unitin$ them.

3arrative is almost alwas said to be about time5 not 8ust succession in time! but

chan$e throu$h time (:rocmeier! =>>6; :runer! =>>&; icoeur! =>'-. Time!

pschicall processed! is thou$ht to mae us into sub8ects throu$h its articulation in

narrative. Transformation meanin$! not alwas! but frequentl! improvement 5 is

also assumed to be inte$ral to narrative# in the stor itself; in the lives of those tellin$

it; even in researchers, own understandin$s of it.

Throu$h this emphasis! representations of simple contin$encies 5events that follow

each other but that have no necessar relation to each other 5 are taen +out, of the

narrative cate$or. epresentations of causal but not chronolo$ical or e7periential

succession! are also seen as theoretical! not +narrative!, in nature. /et from a

pschoanaltic perspective! temporall separate events! and events whose relations

are not full describable! ma lie ne7t to each other in the archaeolo$ical narrative of

the unconscious! without an personall meanin$ful succession bein$ available to us.>


19/40

Introduction

And researchers trin$ to build social or pscholo$ical theor certainl see a lar$e

difference between their models and theories! and the hi$hl particular +theoretical,

causal sequences that characterise personal narratives.

For researchers who are interested in non5verbal aspects of narrative! such as

paralin$uistic characteristics! movin$ and still ima$es! and ob8ects! narrative

chronolo$ also has temporal and semantic patterns that are difficult to assimilate to

the conventional view of narrative +time., Even film! which itself tells stories in time!

involves ima$e successions whose semantic relationships are more comple7 than

those in a verball told stor. Increasin$l! even narrative researchers dealin$ with

fairl +conventional, personal interview data that represent temporal succession and

that themselves unfold in time! are reappraisin$ assumptions about pro$ression and

transformation in narrative time. *hen we revisit data! for instance! it is too simple to

sa that time has sequentiall or e7perientiall +moved on., *e are different people!

and the pasts of the data! and our own present readin$ situation! are as much +another

countr, as are materials $athered in situations unfamiliar to us (Andrews! this

volume-. 9escribin$ these comple7ities temporall! as the copresence of past and

future in the present! for e7ample! does not necessaril capture their multilaered

qualit better than a spatialised or historical description! unless we assume

autobio$raphical time,s priorit for narrative research.

Thus! a focus on chronolo$ical or e7perienced +time, ma close off information about

unconscious realities and material causalities! both of which ma order stories outside

time ; about non5verbal narrative sequences; and about other! for instance! spatialised

and sociohistorical! was of understandin$ succession (Clar! %&&6; 0arrison! %&&;


20/40

Introduction

0ollwa and Defferson! %&&&; Frosh! %&&%; Mishler! =>>>; iessman! %&&%;

Tambouou! %&&6-. 3arrative social research has some catchin$ up to do here with

literar and cultural studies and social theor! particularl that developed b feminists!

which has lon$ adopted more nuanced approaches towards narrative sequencin$. This

wor reco$nies! for instance! the copresence of futurit and past in the present! the

reconstruction of the past b new +presents,! and the pro8ection of the present into

future ima$inin$s! in was that do not $ive an implicit priorit to personall

e7perienced time (Mulve! =>>=; Steedman! =>'B; Stanle! =>>%-

A number of narrative social researchers are now puttin$ into question the use of

+time, as a narrative5definin$ trope. 1schoanalticall5influenced narrative

researchers have been amon$ those most read to address alternative temporalities

those of the unconscious as well as of lived realities in their interpretations.

Moreover! in a ind of translation of Freud,s idea of nachtrH$licheit (deferred action-

into social research! narrative researchers more $enerall are becomin$ increasin$l

interested in the comple7 effects of temporal $aps and reinterpretations on our

approaches to narrative data (Andrews! this volume; Salmon and iessman! this

volume; iessman! %&&%-. At times!state, social, historical orspatialsuccession and

chan$e are taen as alternative or additional narrative criteria. "see 1atterson! this

volume! on 1olani! =>'


21/40

Introduction

trivialises it (Craib! %&&-. 0owever! narrative remains defined in all this wor b

sequences with a specific order! temporal or otherwise! which taes it beond

description; and b a particularit that distin$uishes it from theoretical

representations.

This sense of +narrative, as the orderin$ of particularities! fits well with some rather

underacnowled$ed aspects of the term,s meanin$s. 3arrative,s "atin etmolo$ lies

in nowin$! not tellin$. *ithout overe7tendin$ its remit! or treatin$ personal

narratives as universal theories! research on narratives as ordered representations can

indeed claim to be mappin$ forms of localnowled$e or +theor,. 3arrative research

thus conver$es across its differences! not so much in its political interests! but in the

possibilit of havin$ microsocial and micropolitical effects throu$h the local

nowled$es which it produces. These nowled$es ma be particular! but the can

enter into dialo$ue with each other and produce! as happens across the chapters in this

volume! lar$er and more $eneral! thou$h still situated! narrative nowled$es.

3arrative research is a multi5level! interdisciplinar field and an attempt to simplif

its comple7it would not do 8ustice to the richness of approaches! theoretical

understandin$s and une7pected findin$s that it has offered. *e have thus ima$ined

this boo as a compass for navi$atin$ the rou$h seas of narrative research# a hands5on

resource that can su$$est paths to tae! but that also allows for diversions and

e7cursions.

Organisation of the book


22/40

Introduction

The idea for this boo came from a series of narrative smposia which we have run!

and continue to run! at our Centre for 3arrative esearch! based at the 4niversit of

East "ondon. In the openin$ para$raph of this Introduction! we described the inds of

questions that we have often heard from those who wish to use narrative in their

research! but are not e7actl sure how to $o about it. In response to questions lie

these! throu$h the ears we have invited narrative researchers from a wide ran$e of

fields (for instance! education! politics! health- to spend a da talin$ about the nuts

and bolts of their wor. Those who came to tal about their wor were ased to

address a problem or set of problems which the have encountered! to provide a

concrete demonstration of how the analse their data! and finall! to provide an

annotated biblio$raph for participants. Invariabl! the das were lon$! intense! and

ver rewardin$. In this boo! we have tried as much as possible to replicate the

framewor of the smposia! specificall the concrete demonstration of how to wor

with narrative methods. The e challen$e we faced in the collective creation of this

boo was to capture the dnamism which had characterised the smposia. *e ased

our contributors (all of whom had participated in one or another of the smposia- not

to present their research findin$s! but rather to $ive readers a sense of how the used

narrative methods in their scholarl pursuits.

The boo be$ins b settin$ out some of the e paradi$ms within narrative research!

moves to addressin$ issues of positionalit! refle7ivit! and power which lie at the

heart of narrative research! and closes with chapters which illustrate how narrative can

be used to investi$ate real social problems! and considers some of the ethical

dilemmas which researchers confront in their scholarl pursuits.


23/40

Introduction

In Chapter =! +3arratives of events# "abovian narrative analsis and its limitations,! *end

1atterson introduces narrative analsis b describin$ the classic and hi$hl influential

"abovian account of the structure or +snta7, of the personal e7perience narrative the stor

of a sin$le event that happened to the narrator in the past. 1atterson uses a short e7tract from

her own wor on personal narrative of the e7perience of trauma as a model for analsis! and

throu$h it some limitations of the "abovian approach are hi$hli$hted. This leads to a

consideration of event5centric versus e7periential approaches to narrative analsis! and an

e7position of the more interpretive e7periential perspective.

Chapter %! +E7perience5centred and culturall5oriented approaches to narrative,! b Corinne

Squire! e7amines two lar$e and interrelated narrative research perspectives. It starts b

describin$ the assumptions underlin$ the e7perience5centred approach with which Chapter

= leaves us! an e7tremel powerful tae on narrative as inte$ral to people,s lives and sense of

themselves! which addresses the semantics rather than the snta7 of narrative. The chapter

moves on to setch out that approach,s modes of material collection and analsis. E7aminin$

the difficulties associated with this approach,s potentiall over5stron$ interpretive claims!

over5pscholo$ical framewor and simplifin$ assumptions about sub8ects and time! it

e7plores attempts that have been made to develop such e7perience5centred models within

more conte7t5rich framewors which pa attention to social discourses and practices! and

cultural $enres. The chapter enumerates the continuin$ contradictions and continuin$

difficulties associated with these moves. The chapter returns to man of the narrative

e7amples used b 1atterson! but adds a number from Squire,s own research! involvin$

stories that 0I positive South Africans tell about livin$ with the virus.


24/40

Introduction

In Chapter 6! +Analsin$ narrative conte7ts!, Ann 1hoeni7 analses smaller5scale!

interpersonal aspects of +conte7t,! in particular! the interpersonal relations between

interviewer and interviewee within which narratives are produced. The chapter

analses the was in which narratives are co5constructed within such interpersonal

conte7ts. The aim is to demonstrate the comple7ities of understandin$ that can be

achieved throu$h different levels of analsis of narrative conte7t. The chapter

e7amines how! in interviews! people both demonstrate awareness of what +societ,

thins of them! and also 8ustif their individual positionin$! movin$ in and out of

+troubled sub8ect positions., Such social and emotional conte7ts also chan$e over

time. To demonstrate this approach! the chapter uses e7tracts from a stud of social

identities! drawn from an interview with a white mother of a child of +mi7ed5race,

parenta$e. In conte7ts such as these! narrative analsis provides a means to consider

the multi5laered was in which research participants understand their situations.

Chapter is an e7chan$e between 1hillida (+1hil,- Salmon and Cath iessman! two

ver senior narrative scholars! and reflects :athtin,s sentiment# To live means to

participate in dialo$ueJK. 0ere! the reader must confront the +messiness, which

characterises narrative practice! and some of the clarit offered b the previous

chapters be$ins to fall awa. The authors were ori$inall ased to co5write a chapter

on narrative analsis! but the responded b su$$estin$ that instead! the contribute a

written e7chan$e of ideas between them. *e accepted this! re$ardin$ it as fittin$ that

their writin$ about dialo$ic narrative would tae the form of a dialo$ue. Sadl!

however! 1hil Salmon died before the dialo$ue could be completed! but we have

included it in this collection as we feel that it represents the dnamic and contested

nature of narrative inquir. +3arratives are! in a fundamental sense! co5constructed,


25/40

Introduction

1hil Salmon writes! and Cath iessman develops this point further# The speaer,s

intent is alwas met with the analst,s interpretation! which in turn! is situated in

discourses! histor! politics and culture. It is never endin$! alwas open to re5

interpretation., The meanin$ of words is never constant! neither for speaers nor

listeners. 3arrative research which is based on conversations between people is

invariabl a process of on$oin$ ne$otiation of meanin$. 1eople answer the questions

which the thin we are asin$ them! and we respond to the answers with which we

thin the have provided us.

)ur understandin$ of their words is alwas contin$ent upon our abilit to ima$ine the

worlds the are trin$ to conve. This capacit to see other than what we now

chan$es in time! appearin$ both to diminish and to $row# sometimes we can no lon$er

find the feelin$s and dreams which were once ours! and at other times! havin$ seen

more of our own life appears to $ive us $reater access to understandin$ parts of the

lives of others which had once evaded us. And so the meanin$ we discern in the

narratives we collect and help to create is alwas in the process of transformation! is

alwas a becomin$.

In Chapter

research; in osaldo,s words +all interpretations are provisional, (=>'>#'-. There is no

+view from nowhere, (3a$el =>'@-! and neither is our positionin$ constant. ather! in

the course of our lives passions shift! those thin$s which we thou$ht we new well

become stran$e to us! the ob8ects of our affection $row closer to us! or further awa.

All of this affects us as people! and as researchers. And when we return to our data!

our new and altered selves often see thin$s differentl than we did before. There has


26/40

Introduction

been an increasin$ tendenc amon$st narrative researchers to revisit former research

pro8ects! and this chapter reports on some of those 8ournes. Central to this discussion

is a consideration of what constitutes an +adequate interpretation,. 9oes someone

have special analtic insi$hts simpl because the $athered the ori$inal data2 *hat

ri$ht! if an! do we have to challen$e the interpretations which researchers mae

about their wor2 Is there ever an end5point to narrative analsis! or is it alwas! and

onl! +provisional,2 The chapter considers the on$oin$ relationship between power!

histor and bio$raph! and how shiftin$ circumstances both of the individual and of

societ! cause us to understand ourselves and the world which surrounds us in forever

chan$in$ was.

In Chapter @! Maria Tambouou pics up the treads of the relationship between power!

discourse and histor! and offers a Foucauldian approach for usin$ narratives to re5ima$ine

histor! investi$atin$ the interrelationships between narrative! sub8ectivit and power. The

chapter is divided in three sub5sections! namel! a- $enealo$ical problematics! a section

discussin$ the particular problems that Foucault,s theories raise in narrative research; b-

questions of method! a section where the +how, of a Foucauldian approach to narrative

analsis is under scrutin; c- emer$in$ themes! a section where the author draws on her

own research to demonstrate some of the research effects of a Foucauldian approach to

narrative analsis. Tambouou ar$ues that rather than bein$ considered as representin$

realitiGies! narratives should be seen as productive# narratives do thin$s! the constitute

realities! shapin$ the social rather than bein$ determined b it. Indeed narrative research

informed b Foucauldian insi$hts is particularl concerned with the processes! procedures

and apparatuses! whereb truth! power nowled$e and desire are interrelated in the

production of narratives and in their effects. :ut are narrative researchers or practitioners


27/40

Introduction

and professionals who draw on narrative methods alwas aware of the effects of what the

do2 +J L3arrative researchers J now what the do. The frequentl now wh the do

what the do; but what the donNt now is what what the do does, (paraphrasin$ Foucault!

cited in 9refus and abinow =>'%! p.='B-. The importance of this question is dramaticall

illustrated in the chapter which follows.

In Chapter B! Mar$aretta 0dOn taes up the theme of narratin$ sensitive topics b

problematiin$ the ver concept of the sensitive topic itself and showin$ how it is

relationall and culturall defined! as well as embedded in powerGnowled$e relations.

Main$ a useful distinction between sensitive events and sensitive topics! 0dOn focuses on

methodolo$ical strate$ies in the process of researchin$ sensitive issues in contested areas.

She ar$ues that narrative analsis is particularl well5suited for this tas! since it $ives

informants the possibilit to develop their points of view uninterrupted and the researcher

the opportunit to anale their stories as emer$in$ in the interviews! in its entiret. The

conte7t of the interview thus becomes a central site for the analsis of the chapter! which

draws on 0dOn,s e7periences as a social worer and as an academic! particularl focusin$

on her wor with battered women. In this li$ht 0dOn addresses the problem of power

relations between the interviewer and the interviewee showin$ that imbalances and

hierarchies are not alwas well defined andGor established! Foucault,s model of power

becomin$ the theoretical underpinnin$ of such an approach. She further discusses the issue

of victimiation of the interviewee,s e7perience and finall points to the riss of the

circulation of narratives on sensitive points beond the control of the narrator and indeed

the researcher! a problem that is further developed in the final chapter which follows.


28/40

Introduction

In Chapter '! 1aul ?read reflects on the public life of narratives! considerin$ the

effects of narrative research once its results reach the public realm! and how the

possibilit of such effects must be factored into the research. ?read particularl

deals with the methodolo$ical problem of whether researchers need to anticipate the

public life of narratives! and if so in what conte7ts! wh and how. In particular! the

chapter focuses on oral testimon narratives! which are an increasin$l common focus

of interest and research. Evidence from a ran$e of sourcesPadvocac networs! truth

and reconciliation processes! 0olocaust testimonial video archivesPsu$$ests both the

arbitrariness of testimonial uptae and circulation in the public sphere! and challen$es

to testifiers, sense of control and ownership when their testimon taes on an

unanticipated public life. The main ar$ument made here is that research on public

narratives! without an understandin$ of the public sphere! of the unsafe spaces

surroundin$ the (sometimes- safe spaces of deliver! can become a violation of trust.

*ith voice comes power; the lac of control over representation in human ri$hts

reports! the courtroom! the media or elsewhere! mars a return to powerlessness. In

this conte7t! to spea is not a one5off event! but a process! spannin$ various narrations

and interpretations. 4sin$ case studies! the chapter outlines the methodolo$ical

challen$es posed b the increasin$l public life of personal narratives! su$$ests was

of addressin$ these problems methodolo$icall! and details how individuals and

or$anisations are reclaimin$ control and ownership over their own life stories5 thus

outlinin$ a methodolo$ical ethics and politics for contemporar testimonial research.

*e have ordered the chapters in this wa because for us this sequencin$ was most

compellin$! developin$ as it does from basic models of narrative practice to the less

concrete and ethicall pre$nant questions of what happens to our wor after it is


29/40

Introduction

released it into the public world. *e are of course aware that readers ma choose to

dip in and out of the collection in a different sequence! dependin$ upon their interests

and preoccupations! and thus we would also lie to su$$est a few alternative was of

clusterin$ the chapters.

A number of chapters deal with what is referred to as +sensitive issues., Althou$h

?read and 0den deal with this topic most e7plicitl! there are a number of other

chapters which also e7plore some of the difficulties which come with this territor.

Sometimes sensitive topics reveal themselves not in what is said! but in what cannot

be said! or cannot be e7pressed coherentl. 1hil Salmon,s piece opens with an

attempted suicide! and immediatel conves the cost of tellin$ stories which are

missin$ their connective tissue. 1erc,s suicide attempt maes no sense to us because

it does not appear to be endowed with meanin$ b 1erc. 0is stor doesn,t +wor,

because he does not offer his listener an account of his actions which can render them

+sociall and culturall comprehensible,. It is perhaps this ver aspect of narrative

deficienc which has contributed to his attempt to end his life. Ann 1hoeni7! in her

chapter on +mi7ed5race, children! discusses how individuals establish +an entitlement

to tal about racism., Clare! who is white! describes herself as one who has

e7perienced racism! and indeed feels that in some situations she has e7perienced more

+pre8udice, than her blac husband. Qe to this discussion are issues relatin$ to what

is considered is considered +sensitive,! who can claim to have insi$ht into this! and

how issues of power and positionalit enter into the interview situation. In Squire,s

chapter on South African 0I stories we see how individuals meet the challen$e to

narrate e7periences which are both everda and life5threatenin$.


30/40

Introduction

Issues of power and narratabilit run throu$hout man of the chapters. Maria Tambouou

adopts a Foucauldian analsis to her wor with autobio$raphical narratives of women

artists! hi$hli$htin$ the potential of $enealo$ical wor to uncover new questions to

interro$atin$ truths of our world.K )ne of the benefits of adoptin$ such a lens is that it

reco$nises the forever chan$in$ circumstances of our lives! and of our world. This theme is

demonstrated in the e7chan$e between 1hil Salmon and Cath iessman! both in terms of

the issues which the raise! and also in 1hil Salmon,s unforeseen death! which renders the

communication with a different laer of meanin$ than it would have otherwise contained.

Moll Andrews also e7plores the theme of the chan$in$ questions which $uide our

research! and the dnamic nature not onl of our interpretations! but of our data themselves.

*end 1atterson,s openin$ chapter of the boo helps us to thin carefull about what

constitutes a narrative! and she demonstrates what can be lost if one focuses e7clusivel on

a linear model of narrative structure. The stor of 1erc! refereed to above! demonstrates

the importance we attach to apparent coherence and meanin$ of narratives. 0is tale doesn,t

wor because it is not offered in a cultural framewor which is reco$nisable! and hence he

is abandoned b others! and even b us! his potential audience. Conte7t cannot be stripped

awa! nor can be separated from questions of meanin$. Squire,s chapter draws our attention

to need for sensitivit towards cultural $enres! and ?read,s chapter points to the

importance of conte7t! not onl in terms of understandin$ the narrative! but also in terms of

the interpretive communit. *hen we are conductin$ our research! what is the conte7t in

which it will be read! and how should this feed into decisions about what to write! and what

to leave out2


31/40

Introduction

The question of how we hear! and often fail to hear! aspects of the narratives we encounter!

and how we decipher their meanin$! is an issue which is addressed from a number of

different an$les throu$hout the boo. *e as narrative researchers are cruciall a part of the

data we collect; our presence is imprinted upon all that we do. It is left to us then to

determine how we account for ourselves in the wor that we do! to consider the impact of

our own positionin$ and that of others e.$. those whose lives lie at the centre of our

research; our intended audience on our scholarship. All of the contributors to this volume

stand somewhere in relation to the topics which we are e7plorin$! and refle7ivit upon this

positionin$ is a part of each of the chapters.

There are et man other pathwas throu$h these chapters; we have attempted to outline

but a few. It is our hope that the chapters in this boo will provide the readers with much

food for thou$ht! and that in the tradition of $ood narrative research! that the will raise at

least as man questions as the answer.

$e"erences

Abell! D.! Stooe! E. and :illi$! M. (%&&- +3arrative and the discursive (re-construction of

events,! in M.Andrews! S.9.Sclater! C.Squire and A.Treacher (eds- #ses of Narrative.

3ew Derse# Transition

Andrews! M. (%&&B- Shaping $istory. Cambrid$e# Cambrid$e 4niversit 1ress.

Andrews! M.! 9a Sclater! S.! ustin! M.! Squire! C. and Treacher! A. (%&&- +Introduction,!

in M. Andrews! S. 9a Sclater! C. Squire and A. Treacher (eds-Doing Narrative

Research.3ew :runswic! 3D# Transition.


32/40

Introduction

:ahtin! M. (=>'=- %he dialogic Imagination ed. b M. 0olquist! Austin#4niversit

of Te7as 1ress.

:amber$! M. (%&&@- +Stories# :i$ or small. *h do we care2,Narrative In&uiry

'((=-! =6>5=B.

:amber$! M. and Andrews! M. (%&&- Considering Counter)Narratives. Amsterdam# Dohn

:en8amins

:arthes! . (=>BB-Image *usic %ext! 3ew /or# 0ill and *an$.

:ertau7! 9. (=>'=-+iography and Society. CA# Sa$e 1ublications

:rocmeier! D. (=>>6- Translatin$ temporalit2 Colle$ium :udapest 9iscussion 1aper Series

3o. ! 9ecember. http#GGwww.colbud.huGmainRoldG1ubArchiveG91G91&5

:rocmeier.pdf. Accessed =@.=%.&B

:rocmeier! D. and Carbau$h! 9. (%&&=-Narrative and Identity Studies in -utobiography,

Self and Culture. Amsterdam# Dohn :en8amins.

:runer! D. (=>>&--cts of *eaningCambrid$e! MA# 0arvard 4niversit 1ress.

:urman! E. (%&&6- +3arratives of e7perienceK and peda$o$ical practices.Narrative In&uiry

=6! %.

:utler! D. =>>6.+odies %hat *atter. "ondon# outled$e

Chamberlane! 1.! :ornat! D. and *en$raf! T. (%&&&- (eds- %he %urn to +iographical

*ethods in Social Science. "ondon# outled$e.

Chamberlane! 1.! ustin! M and *en$raf! T (eds- (%&&%-+iography and Social xclusion

in urope experiences and life journeys! 1olic 1ress.

Clar! D. (%&&6- +4rban culture# epresentation and e7periences inGof urban space and

culture.,-genda


33/40

Introduction

9aiute! C. and "i$htfoot! C. (%&&-Narrative -nalysis Studying the Development of

Individuals in Society. )7ford# )7ford 4niversit 1ress

Clandinin! 9. (%&&@-$andboo/ of Narrative In&uiry.3ewber! CA# Sa$e.

Clandinin! 9. and Connell! F. (%&&-. Narrative In&uiry xperience and Story in

0ualitative Research.3ew /or# Dosse5:ass

Culler! D. (%&&%- %he 1ursuit of Signs. Ithaca! 3/# Cornell 4niversit 1ress.

9eleue and ?uattari (=>'&-*ille 1lateaux. 1aris# Minuit

9errida! D. (=>BB- 2f 3rammatology. :altimore# Dohns 0opins 4niversit 1ress.

9errida! D. (=>'>6-.Re4riting the self. $istory, memory, narrative"ondon#

outled$e.

Freeman! M. (%&&- *hen the stor,s over# 3arrative foreclosure and the possibilit

of renewal. In M.Andrews! S.9.Sclater! C.Squire and A.Treacher (eds- #ses of

Narrative.3ew Derse# Transition

Freeman! M. (%&&@- "ife on +holida,2 In defense of bi$ stories.Narrative In&uiry=@

Frosh! S. (%&&%--fter 6ords. "ondon# 1al$rave.


34/40

Introduction

?enette! ?. (=>B>-Narrative Discourse -n ssay in *ethod. Ithaca! 3/# Cornell

4niversit 1ress.

?eor$aopolou! A. (%&&@a- +Thinin$ bi$ with small stories in narrative and identit

analsis,.Narrative In&uiry '("=-! =%%5=6&.

?er$en! Q. (=>>=- %he Saturated Self.3ew /or# :asic :oos

?reenhal$h! T. and 0urwit! :. (=>>'-Narrative +ased *edicine. "ondon# :MD

:oos

0all C (=>>B- Social 6or/ as Narrative Storytelling and persuasion in professional

texts.Aldershot! Ash$ate .

0arrison! :. (%&&- +1hoto$raphic visions and narrative inquir., in M. :amber$ and

M. Andrews (eds- Considering Counter)Narratives. Amsterdam# Dohn

:en8amins.

0enriques! D.! 0ollwa! *.! 4rwin! C. enn! C. and *alerdine! . (=>'- Changing

%he Subject. "ondon# Methuen

0ollwa! *. and Defferson! T. (%&&&-Doing 0ualitative Research Differently 7ree

-ssociation, Narrative and the Intervie4 *ethod! "ondon! Sa$e.

0olstein! D. and ?ubrium! D. (=>>>- 8%he Self 6e 9ive +y Narrative Identity in a

1ostmodern 6orld.3ew /or# )7ford 4niversit 1ress

0varinen.M. (%&&@- Towards a conceptual histor of narrative. In In M. Hyvrinen, A

Korhonen & J. Mykknen (Eds.): The Travelling Cone!" o# Narrative, Helsinki: Collegi$%

"abov! *. (=>B%-.9anguage in the Inner City Studies in the +lac/ nglish

:ernacular )7ford# :asil :lacwell.

"abov! *. +Some Further Steps in 3arrative Analsis, ! %ournalof 3arrative and &i"e #istoryB(=5

-# 6>


35/40

Introduction

"abov! *. and *alets! D. (=>@B-.Narrative -nalysis 2ral :ersions of 1ersonal

xperience in D. 0elms (ed-ssays in the :erbal and :isual -rts Seattle#

4niversit of *ashin$ton.

"acan! D. (=>BB-crits. 3ew /or# 3orton

"an$ellier! Q. and 1eterson! E. (=>>%-. Spinstorying -n -nalysis of 6omen

Storytellingin E.C. Fine and D.0. Speer (Eds.-1erformance, Culture and

Identity *estport CT# 1rae$er.

"an$ellier! Q. and 1eterson! E. (%&&- Storytelling in veryday 9ife. 1hiladelphia! 1A#

Temple 4niversit 1ress.

"otard! D5F. (=>'- %he 1ostmodern Condition. Manchester# Manchester 4niversit

1ress

McAdams! 9. 1. (%&&@- %he Redemptive Self Stories -mericans live by. )7ford 4niversit 1ress.

MacIntre! A. (=>'--fter :irtue. :loomin$ton! I3# 4niversit of 3otre 9ame 1ress.

Malson! 0 (%&&- Fictional(isin$- identit2 )ntolo$ical assumptions and

methodolo$ical productions of (+anore7ic,- sub8ectivities. in M.Andrews!

S.9.Sclater! C.Squire and A.Treacher (eds- 9ines of Narrative. "ondon#

outled$e

Mattin$le! C. (=>>'- $ealing Dramas and Clinical 1lots. Cambrid$e# Cambrid$e

4niversit 1ress

Mishler! E. (=>'@- Research Intervie4ing Context and Narrative. Cambrid$e! MA# 0arvard

4niversit 1ress.

Mishler! E. (=>>>- Storylines Craftartists! narratives of identity. Cambrid$e!

Massachusetts! 0arvard 4niversit 1ress.

Mulve! ". (=>>=- +A 1hantasma$oria of the Female :od# The *or of Cind

Sherman,!Ne4 9eft Revie4! =''# =6@5=


36/40

Introduction

agel, T. ('*) The View From Nowhere. +#ord: +#ord -niversi"y ress.

)chs! Elinor "isa Capps %&&=.9iving Narrative Creating 9ives in veryday

Storytelling. Cambrid$e! MA# 0arvard 4niversit 1ress.

1atterson!*. (%&&%- (ed.- Strategic Narrative ne4 perspectives on the po4er of stories .

)7ford# "e7in$ton.

1arer! I. (%&&6- 1schoanaltic narratives# *ritin$ the self into contemporar cultural

phenomena.Narrative In&uiry =6 (%-.

1arer! I. (%&&- 0ualitative 1sychology. Milton Qenes# )pen 4niversit 1ress

1ersonal 3arrative ?roup =>'>.Interpreting 6omen!s 9ives 7eminist %heory and

1ersonal Narratives. :loomin$ton Indianapolis# Indiana 4niversit 1ress.

1lummer! Q. (=>>''.Narrative 5no4ing and the $uman Sciences. Alban#

State 4niversit of 3ew /or 1ress.

icoeur! 1. (=>'-. %ime and Narrative. Chica$o# 4niversit of Chica$o 1ress.

iessman! C. (=>>6a-.Narrative -nalysis. 0ualitative Research *ethods. ol 6&. 3ewbur

1ar! CA# Sa$e.

iessman! C. (=>>6b- 0ualitative Studies in Social 6or/ Research.3ewbur 1ar! CA# Sa$e.

iessman! C. (%&&%- Analsis of personal narratives. 1p@>'>- Culture and truth %he Rema/ing of Social -nalysis"ondon#


37/40

Introduction

outled$e.

osenwald ?.and )chber$ (=>>%-. Storied 9ives. %he Cultural 1olitics ofSelf)

#nderstanding 3ew 0aven# /ale 4niversit 1ress.

ustin! M. (%&&&- +eflections on the bio$raphical turn in the social sciences,! in

1.Chamberlane! D.:ornat and T.*en$raf (eds- %he %urn to +iographical *ethods in

Social Science. "ondon# outled$e.

Salmon! 1. (=>'>6-# %5


38/40

Introduction

Tambouou! M.! (%&&6- 6omen, ducation, the Self a 7oucauldian perspective,

:asin$stoe! 1al$rave! Macmillan.

Todorov! T. (=>>&- 3enres in Discourse. Cambrid$e# Cambrid$e 4niversit 1ress.

*en$raf! T. (=>>>-+iographical *ethods in Social Sciences."ondon# outled$e

*etherell! M. (=>>'- 1ositionin$ and interpretative repertoires# Conversation analsis

and post5structuralism in dialo$ue.Discourse ? Society! @! 6'B=%.

*etherell! M. (%&& =B6.


39/40

Introduction


40/40

=For a tae on the interactions of these traditions throu$h some specific te7ts! see 0varinen (%&&@-

%I am not considerin$ here the much lar$er field of 8ournals and boos within the humanities and

philosoph that were +cross5read, b social researchers 8ournals such asRadical 1hilosophy, Screen

and Signsand boos b Coward! 0eath! Dameson! Ea$leton! ose.6This form of ar$ument is apparent in for instance 0ollwa,s earlier wor in Changing %he Subject

(0enriques et al.! =>'-.

icoeur,s (=>'- wor has had perhaps the $reatest effect in promotin$ this understandin$ of narrative

>6- has famousl ob8ected to this overuse of strate$ic essentialism in situations of

theoretical and political difficult

BSome +small stor, researchers associate themselves with this postmodern perspective. 0owever! the

association is not $enerall accompanied b an theorisation of lin$uistic or sub8ect indeterminac! or

of the lar$er place of discourses! to support it. The +small stories, position does not! then! seem to be

necessaril a poststructural or postmodern one.

'To a limited e7tent! pschoanaltic understandin$s of such emotionalit allows that si$ns of it appear

within narratives! as do other contemporar but determinedl non5pschoanaltic framewors for

understandin$ desire (9eleue and ?uattari! =>'&B

>The chronolo$ical and semantic spaces which such unconscious pro7imities span! depends on the

pschoanaltic framewor with which ou wor

Introduction DoingNarrativeResearch

Documents

Transcript of Introduction DoingNarrativeResearch