Introduction

Introduction: What is narrative research?

Corinne Squire, Molly Andrews and Maria Tamboukou
Final draft; published version appears in Doing 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! an.wa.2, 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$ories on which to focus! as there are with content5based thematic approaches! or
with anal.ses of specific elements of lan$ua$e. Clear accounts of how to anal.se the data! as
found for instance in $rounded theor. and in Interpretive 1henomenolo$ical Anal.sis! are
rare. There are few well5defined debates on conflictin$ approaches within the field and how
6
Introduction
to balance them! as there are! for e7ample! in the hi$hl. epistemolo$icall.5contested field of
discourse anal.sis. In addition! unlie other qualitative research perspectives! narrative
research offers no overall rules about suitable materials or modes of investi$ation! or the best
level at which to stud. stories. It does not tell us whether to loo for stories in recorded
ever.da. speech! interviews! diaries! tv pro$rammes or newspaper articles; whether to aim
for ob8ectivit. or researcher and participant involvement; whether to anal.se 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. la.ers
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$ate! not
8ust how stories are structured and the wa.s in which the. wor! but also who produces them
and b. what means! the mechanisms b. which the. are consumed! and how narratives are
silenced! contested or accepted. All these areas of inquir. can help us describe! understand
and even e7plain important aspects of the world. It is our hope that this boo will contribute
to this multilevel! dialo$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
;
Introduction
and Connell.! %&&;; Elliot! %&&<; Freeman! =>>6; 0olstein and ?ubrium! =>>>;
"an$ellier and 1eterson! %&&;; Mishler! =>'@; )chs and Capps! %&&=; 1ersonal
3arratives ?roup! =>'>; 1lummer! %&&=; 1olin$horne! =>''; Aiessman! =>>6a!
%&&B; Aoberts! %&&=; Sarbin! =>'@; *en$raf! =>>>- e7emplifies its popularit.. So
does the recent burst of empiricall.5based te7ts focused on specific studies! (Andrews!
%&&B; Emerson and Frosh! %&&;; McAdams! %&&@; Mishler! =>>>; Squire! %&&B;
Tambouou! %&&6-! the rich crop of narrativel.5themed collections of essa.s
(Andrews et al.! %&&;; :amber$ and Andrews! %&&;; :rocmeier and Carbau$h!
%&&=; Chamberla.ne et al.! %&&&; Clandinin! %&&@; 1atterson! %&&%; Aosenwald and
)chber$! =>>%- 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 0urwitC! =>>'; 0all! =>>B; Mattin$le.! =>'';
1lummer! =>><; Aiessman! =>>6b-.
Aside from this current ubiquit. within social research! +narrative, is also a term
frequentl. heard in popular discourse. )ften! these popular uses of the term wor to
connote a particularl. acute understandin$. 1oliticians or polic.maers su$$est the.
are doin$ their 8obs well because the. pa. close attention to people,s ever.da.
+narratives!, or because the. themselves have a 8oined5up +narrative, of what the. are
doin$. Dournalists claim a $ood understandin$ of events b. spellin$ out for their
audiences the underl.in$ +narrative., CitiCens are ur$ed to achieve better
comprehension of difficult circumstances b. readin$ or hearin$ the +stories, of those
affected E for e7ample! the *orld 0ealth )r$anisation portra.s the 0IF pandemic to
us throu$h individual +Stories of Tra$ed. and 0ope,
<
Introduction
(http#GGwww.who.intGfeaturesG%&&6G&>GenG -. Sometimes! thou$h! public +narratives,
are treated with suspicion! as obfuscators of the +realities, the. $loss and hide.
In addition! the term +narrative, is used descriptivel. in popular discourse! as it is in
academic humanities disciplines! to indicate the line of thematic and causal
pro$ression in a cultural form such as a film or a novel. 0ere a$ain! +narrative, ma.
be a $ood thin$ E e7citin$! compellin$! insi$htful E but it ma. also be criticised 5 as
overcomple7! oversimple! too lon$! too conventional.
:oth in popular culture and in social research! then! +narrative, is striin$l. diverse in
the wa. it is understood. In popular culture! it ma. su$$est insi$ht into E or
concealment of 5 important bio$raphical patterns or social structures E 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$ation and anal.sis!
and theoretical orientations. It displa.s different definitions within different fields!
and the topics of hot debate around these definitions shift from .ear to .ear.
)n account of this proli7it.! man. accounts of narrative research be$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
@
Introduction
The antecedents of contemporar. narrative social research are commonl. located in
two parallel academic moves (Andrews et al.! %&&;; Austin! %&&&-
=
The first is the
postwar rise of humanist approaches within western sociolo$. and ps.cholo$.. 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$horne! =>''; Sarbin! =>'@-. The second
academic antecedent to contemporar. narrative social research! is Aussian
structuralist and later! French poststructuralist (:arthes! =>BB! Culler! %&&%; ?enette!
=>B>! Todorov! =>>&- postmodern (Foucault! =>B%; ".otard! =>';-! ps.choanal.tic
("acan! =>BB- and deconstructionist (9errida! =>BB- approaches to narrative within
the humanities. These approaches had effects on social research in the En$lish5
speain$ world from the late =>B&s! initiall. throu$h the wor of Althusser! "acan
and Foucault! film and literar. critics! and feminist and socialist theorists! as it
appeared in translations! in 8ournals such as Ideology and Consciousness and mf! and
in boos lie Changing the Subject (0enrique et al.! =>';- and later! in the 4S!
?er$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 stor.tellers and hearers! and it was
preoccupied with the social formations shapin$ lan$ua$e and sub8ectivit.. In this
tradition! the stor.teller does not tell the stor.! so much as sGhe is told b. it.
B
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$raphical accounts of crime in the communit.. The.
also appl. ps.choanal.tic understandin$s of fractured sub8ects to these individual
bio$raphies! and draw on poststructural formulations of the uncertainties of lan$ua$e
6

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 pa.s 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$raphical e7pression of women,s sub8ect positions# how women write within
the conte7ts of their lives! and how other women read their te7ts within the conditions
of their own lived! sub8ective place within power relations (Stanle.! =>>%; 0.den! this
volume; Tambouou! %&&6-. It ma. stimulate a lin$uistic stud. of the stor.tellin$
sophistication of African American adolescents ("abov! =>B%-. Some narrative
researchers use e7tensive life histories! in order to understand how personal lives
traverse social chan$e (Chamberla.ne et al.! %&&%; Andrews! %&&B-. )thers deplo.
narratives to tr. to chan$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
'
Introduction
some communit. research that enables collective stor.tellin$. (Sliep! =>''-. Still other
researchers anal.se the conditions and effectiveness of communit. and +public,
narratives (1lummer! =>><! %&&=; ?read.! this volume-.
1olitics thus seems at times to brin$ the two historical trends in narrative research
to$ether (Squire! %&&<-. 3evertheless! their theoretical assumptions about sub8ectivit.!
lan$ua$e! the social! and narrative itself remain in contradiction. Current s.ntheses of
the two often involve! for instance! a maintenance of a humanist conception of a
sin$ular! unified sub8ect! at the same time as the promotion of an idea of narrative as
alwa.s multiple! sociall. constructed and constructin$! reinterpreted and
reinterpretable. These contradictions do not $o unnoticed. :ut man. researchers thin
it more important to do useful and innovative wor across the contradictions! rather
than tr.in$ to resolve conflictin$ positions which are historicall. and disciplinaril.
distinct! as well as lo$icall. incommensurable.
Theoretical divisions in narrative research
The historicall.5produced theoretical bricola$e in narrative research is lar$el.
responsible for the current wide variabilit. in how researchers conceptualise what
narrative is! how to stud. it! and wh. it is important 5as material! method! route to
understandin$ ps.cholo$ical or social phenomena! or all of these. The followin$
section of the Introduction setches some obvious and some less obvious theoretical
division in contemporar. narrative research.
)ne of the most well5rehearsed differences! is between research focused on the
spoen recountin$ of particular past events that happened to the narrator! the person
>
Introduction
tellin$ the stor. E classicall. described in "abov,s ("abov and *alets.! =>@B; see
also 1atterson! this volume- wor on event narratives E 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$s that happened to the narrator or distant matters the.,ve onl. heard
about. This second ind of narrative research encompasses var.in$ media! too# not
8ust speech! but also writin$ 5 scraps of letters! laundr. lists! e7tensive multi5volume
diaries E visual materials 5 photo albums! video diaries E and narratives inherin$ in
ob8ects and actions 5 the arran$ement of ob8ects on mantelpieces! the ever.da.
activities of shoppin$! 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$hout this second
field of wor! the life e7periences that infuse the data constitute the primar. topic! the
true +narrative, (:runer! =>>&-.
*hat is shared across both event and e7perience5centred narrative research! is that
there are assumed to be individual! internal representations of phenomena E events!
thou$hts and feelin$s E 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$es! does not
=&
Introduction
fit into either of these two initial fields of +event, and +e7perience,5oriented narrative
research. This third field may operate with the assumption that its more +social!, co5
constructed! stories are e7pressions of internal co$nitive or affective states. 0owever!
most often! it views narratives as forms of social code! addressin$ stories as
dialo$icall. constructed (:ahtin! =>'=- and not as e7pressions of internal states.
Aesearchers in this field are interested! rather! in the social patterns and functionin$ 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; Chamberla.ne 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
Aiessman! this volume; Aiessman! =>>6a! %&&B-.
;
Some narrative researchers are
occupied more widel. with how narratives follow! are constrained b.! or resist! lar$er
social patterns of social and cultural stor.tellin$ (?read.! this volume; 1lummer!
%&&=; Malson! %&&;-. 3arrative researchers ma. also be interested in how researchers,
==
Introduction
own +stories, var.! dependin$ on the social and historical places from which the.
+listen, to their data (Andrews! this volume; Aiessman! %&&%-. 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 anal.sis. 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$er
social and cultural narratives or metanarratives.
This division between sociall.5 and individuall.5oriented narrative research! relates to
.et another theoretical diver$ence# that between narrative researchers who are
interested in the agency of narratives and narrators! and those who are either
=%
Introduction
uninterested! or who ar$ue that a$enc. is not lined to narrative. Aesearchers who are
interested in narratives as individualised accounts of e7perience! tend to be the most
convinced of the si$nificance of stories as wa.s of e7pressin$ 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
ps.choanal.ticall.5inflected 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$ s.stems 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.
<
! in order to retain a potential
for a$enc. within a theoretical framewor that puts it in question. This is a $ood
=6
Introduction
e7ample of contemporar. narrative research,s finessin$ of theoretical
incommensurabilities! in this case b. i$norin$ the different concepts of the sub8ect in
pla. around +performance, or5at best E 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$ether historicall.
and theoreticall. distinct traditions of narrative wor. Certainl.! some researchers,
concern with whether narratives E and their wor on them E +mae a difference!, ma.
lead them to adopt an optimistic position on narrative a$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$ainst big! stories (:amber$! %&&@; Freeman! %&&@;
?eor$aopoulou! %&&@-. Those on the side of +small, narratives ar$ue that we need to
pa. more attention to the micro5lin$uistic and social structure of the ever.da.! small
narrative phenomena that occur +naturall., between people. These +small stories, ma.
concern unfoldin$! 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$ E te7t messa$es! for e7ample E paralan$ua$e! and
=;
Introduction
perhaps even in action. This emphasis on +small stories, brin$s to$ether the "abovian
commitment to research on +naturall.,5occurrin$ stories! and conversation5anal.tic
and some discourse5anal.tic commitments to stud.in$ +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$ated
mostl. b. conversation and discourse anal.sts (:amber$! %&&@; ?eor$aopoulou!
%&&@-. The emphasis on +small stories, tends to prioritise +event, over e7perience!
and sociall.5oriented over individuall.5oriented narrative research; but it formulates
+event, in a broadened wa.! and pa.s attention to the +social, in its most microsocial
versions! as well as in its wider! cultural variants.
A$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$ument overlaps with another contemporar. debate!
over the tyranny of the transcript. Some narrative researchers E for instance those who
=<
Introduction
wor with +small, narratives! or with visual materials Ecriticise the he$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 E mostl. speech! rarel. paralin$uistic material! other media!
interpersonal interactions or other social conte7t 5 and the content5based anal.sis that
is consequentl. prioritised. 0owever! the polarit. between transcript5based and other
forms of narrative research can be overstated. Approaches that are primaril.
concerned with narrative structure and conte7t (includin$ +small stor., ones-! also
unavoidabl. address content. Thematic approaches are! increasin$l.! e7plicitl.
interested in conte7t! and in an. case have to address structure and conte7t! at least
implicitl.! since the meanin$s in which the. deal are embedded in these. As with the
similar and lon$runnin$ debate about levels of discourse anal.sis! 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$e characterises the narrative social research field.
3arrative is alwa.s defined first of all as a ind of lan$ua$e. /et research that focuses
on narrative as an e7pression of individual e7perience! or as a mirror of social
realities! tends to b.pass the lan$ua$e of stories in order to focus on their meanin$s! or
=@
Introduction
the social positionin$s the. produce or reflect. Approaches that focus on event
narratives or narratives in conversation! tend to be interested in underl.in$ 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! =>'<; see also :runer! =>>&; Seale! %&&;; MacInt.re! =>';-.
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$ht be (9errida! =>'<-
Another theoretical division related to the place of lan$ua$e in narrative research! is
that between researchers who assume that their data will contain relativel. stable and
unified narratives of e7perience! identit. and the social world! at least in a particular
time and social conte7t; and those who are who are less convinced that such narratives
can be accessed b. them! or even that the. are produced. The de$ree to which
narrative researchers adopt this second! postmodern tae on narrative! relates stron$l.
to their en$a$ement with lan$ua$e,s comple7it. and non5transparenc..
B
A
postmodern approach is commonl. ar$ued to compromise the political en$a$ement
which man. narrative researchers see. 0owever! narrative research that en$a$es
=B
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 $iven rise to an e7tensive debate
within the narrative field. This is ps.choanal.sis! particularl. those forms of it that are
inflected b. "acanian and postlacanian concerns with the ps.che as a form of
lan$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$e.
1s.choanal.tic taes on narrative research tr. to address aspects of e7perience or
sub8ectivit. such as an7iet.! or desire! that fall outside narrative E that seem difficult
or impossible to represent in narrative! or to understand from a strai$htforward
approach to stor. structure or content. (Chamberla.ne et al.! %&&%; 0ollwa. and
Defferson! %&&&; Frosh! %&&%; :urman! %&&6; Sclater! %&&6-
'
9ebate between these
='
Introduction
positions relates both to their different theoretical formulations of the unconscious!
and to the varied e7tent to which ps.choanal.ticall.5influenced narrative researchers
claim interpretive authorit.. Some ps.choanal.tic wor on narrative interprets
research materials +as if, the. were materials from an anal.tic session. More
cautiousl.! other ps.choanal.tic researchers treat narrative data as representations of
more $enerall.5found individual or social structures of feelin$. )utside this
ps.choanal.ticall.5inflected wor! questions about the interpretive authorit. of even
the more cautious ps.choanal.ticall.5inflected wor are frequent! and are often
accompanied b. queries about the e7planator. value of the +unconscious, as a
concept. Man. narrative researchers re8ect ps.choanal.tic framewors on the $round
that detailed anal.ses 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! %&&<-.
:ut the problems of what is +in, narrative that is not strai$htforwardl. said or written!
and what cannot even be brou$ht into it! remain. The. are crucial for man. narrative
researchers! worin$ in widel. diver$ent theoretical framewors. Sometimes! these
difficulties are formulated in terms of stor.tellers, and stor. hearers, co$nitivel.!
emotionall. and sociall. diver$ent narrative worlds! that ma. or ma. not be brou$ht
into a worable conver$ence (Aicoeur! =>';; Salmon and Aiessman! this volume;
0.den! this volume-. These problems have also $iven rise to considerable current
interest in how to anal.se elements of paralan$ua$e in narrative E tone of voice!
pauses! lau$hter E as well as visual elements such as e.e movements! facial
e7pression! bod. posture and $estures! and more broadl.! aspects of emotionalit. and
embodiment within narratives. Theoreticall.! these elements are difficult to
=>
Introduction
incorporate within e7istin$ 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 alwa.s said to be about time5 not 8ust succession in time! but
chan$e throu$h time (:rocmeier! =>>6; :runer! =>>&; Aicoeur! =>';-. Time!
ps.chicall. processed! is thou$ht to mae us into sub8ects throu$h its articulation in
narrative. Transformation E meanin$! not alwa.s! but frequentl.! improvement 5 is
also assumed to be inte$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.. Aepresentations of causal but not chronolo$ical or e7periential
succession! are also seen as theoretical! not +narrative!, in nature. /et from a
ps.choanal.tic perspective! temporall. separate events! and events whose relations
are not full. describable! ma. lie ne7t to each other in the archaeolo$ical narrative of
the unconscious! without an. personall. meanin$ful succession bein$ available to us.
>
%&
Introduction
And researchers tr.in$ to build social or ps.cholo$ical theor. certainl. see a lar$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 multila.ered
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! wa.s of understandin$ succession (Clar! %&&6; 0arrison! %&&;;
%=
Introduction
0ollwa. and Defferson! %&&&; Frosh! %&&%; Mishler! =>>>; Aiessman! %&&%;
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$. This
wor reco$niCes! 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 wa.s 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. 1s.choanal.ticall.5influenced narrative
researchers have been amon$ those most read. to address alternative temporalities E
those of the unconscious as well as of lived realities E 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 $aps and reinterpretations on our
approaches to narrative data (Andrews! this volume; Salmon and Aiessman! this
volume; Aiessman! %&&%-. At times! state, social, historical or spatial succession and
chan$e are taen as alternative or additional narrative criteria. "see 1atterson! this
volume! on 1olan.i! =>'<; "an$ellier and 1eterson! =>>%; Andrews! this volume;
also! Clar!%&&6; Tambouou! this volume! and %&&6-.
The broadenin$ of the concept of narrative to include sequences whose orderin$
occurs in dimensions other than those of chronolo$icall.! verball. and e7perientiall.5
ordered time! could a$ain seem to some to $ive narrative research a $eneralit. that
%%
Introduction
trivialises it (Craib! %&&;-. 0owever! narrative remains defined in all this wor b.
sequences with a specific order! temporal or otherwise! which taes it be.ond
description; and b. a particularit. that distin$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 et.molo$. lies
in nowin$! 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 local nowled$e or +theor.,. 3arrative research
thus conver$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
%6
Introduction
The idea for this boo came from a series of narrative s.mposia which we have run!
and continue to run! at our Centre for 3arrative Aesearch! 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. anal.se their data! and finall.! to provide an
annotated biblio$raph. for participants. Invariabl.! the da.s were lon$! intense! and
ver. rewardin$. In this boo! we have tried as much as possible to replicate the
framewor of the s.mposia! 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 d.namism which had characterised the s.mposia. *e ased
our contributors (all of whom had participated in one or another of the s.mposia- 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.
%;
Introduction
In Chapter =! +3arratives of events# "abovian narrative anal.sis and its limitations,! *end.
1atterson introduces narrative anal.sis b. describin$ the classic and hi$hl. influential
"abovian account of the structure or +s.nta7, of the personal e7perience narrative E 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 anal.sis! 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 anal.sis! and an
e7position of the more interpretive e7periential perspective.
Chapter %! +E7perience5centred and culturall.5oriented approaches to narrative,! b. Corinne
Squire! e7amines two lar$e and interrelated narrative research perspectives. It starts b.
describin$ the assumptions underl.in$ 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 s.nta7 of narrative. The chapter
moves on to setch out that approach,s modes of material collection and anal.sis. E7aminin$
the difficulties associated with this approach,s potentiall. over5stron$ interpretive claims!
over5ps.cholo$ical framewor and simplif.in$ 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 0IF positive South Africans tell about livin$ with the virus.
%<
Introduction
In Chapter 6! +Anal.sin$ narrative conte7ts!, Ann 1hoeni7 anal.ses smaller5scale!
interpersonal aspects of +conte7t,! in particular! the interpersonal relations between
interviewer and interviewee within which narratives are produced. The chapter
anal.ses the wa.s 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 anal.sis 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 anal.sis provides a means to consider
the multi5la.ered wa.s in which research participants understand their situations.
Chapter ; is an e7chan$e between 1hillida (+1hil,- Salmon and Cath. Aiessman! two
ver. senior narrative scholars! and reflects :athtin,s sentiment# ITo 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 anal.sis! 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$ue could be completed! but we have
included it in this collection as we feel that it represents the d.namic and contested
nature of narrative inquir.. +3arratives are! in a fundamental sense! co5constructed,
%@
Introduction
1hil Salmon writes! and Cath. Aiessman develops this point further# IThe speaer,s
intent is alwa.s met with the anal.st,s interpretation! which in turn! is situated in
discourses! histor.! politics and culture. It is never endin$! alwa.s 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 alwa.s contin$ent upon our abilit. to ima$ine the
worlds the. are tr.in$ 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 alwa.s in the process of transformation! is
alwa.s a becomin$.
In Chapter <! Moll. Andrews e7plores some of the implications of this for narrative
research; in Aosaldo,s words +all interpretations are provisional, (=>'>#'-. There is no
+view from nowhere, (3a$el =>'@-! and neither is our positionin$ constant. Aather! 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
%B
Introduction
been an increasin$ tendenc. amon$st narrative researchers to revisit former research
pro8ects! and this chapter reports on some of those 8ourne.s. Central to this discussion
is a consideration of what constitutes an +adequate interpretation,. 9oes someone
have special anal.tic insi$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 anal.sis! or is it alwa.s! 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$in$ wa.s.
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
anal.sis 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 anal.sis. Tambouou ar$ues that rather than bein$ considered as representin$
realiti.Gies! 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
%'
Introduction
and professionals who draw on narrative methods alwa.s aware of the effects of what the.
do2 +J L3arrative researchersM 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 9re.fus and Aabinow =>'%! p.='B-. The importance of this question is dramaticall.
illustrated in the chapter which follows.
In Chapter B! Mar$aretta 0.dOn taes up the theme of narratin$ sensitive topics b.
problematiCin$ 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! 0.dOn focuses on
methodolo$ical strate$ies in the process of researchin$ sensitive issues in contested areas.
She ar$ues that narrative anal.sis is particularl. well5suited for this tas! since it $ives
informants the possibilit. to develop their points of view uninterrupted and the researcher
the opportunit. to anal.Ce their stories as emer$in$ in the interviews! in its entiret.. The
conte7t of the interview thus becomes a central site for the anal.sis of the chapter! which
draws on 0.dOn,s e7periences as a social worer and as an academic! particularl. focusin$
on her wor with battered women. In this li$ht 0.dOn addresses the problem of power
relations between the interviewer and the interviewee showin$ that imbalances and
hierarchies are not alwa.s well defined andGor established! Foucault,s model of power
becomin$ the theoretical underpinnin$ of such an approach. She further discusses the issue
of victimiCation of the interviewee,s e7perience and finall. points to the riss of the
circulation of narratives on sensitive points be.ond the control of the narrator and indeed
the researcher! a problem that is further developed in the final chapter which follows.
%>
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 wa.s
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$nant questions of what happens to our wor after it is
6&
Introduction
released it into the public world. *e are of course aware that readers ma. choose to
dip in and out of the collection in a different sequence! dependin$ upon their interests
and preoccupations! and thus we would also lie to su$$est a few alternative wa.s of
clusterin$ the chapters.
A number of chapters deal with what is referred to as +sensitive issues., Althou$h
?read. and 0.den deal with this topic most e7plicitl.! there are a number of other
chapters which also e7plore some of the difficulties which come with this territor..
Sometimes sensitive topics reveal themselves not in what is said! but in what cannot
be said! or cannot be e7pressed coherentl.. 1hil Salmon,s piece opens with an
attempted suicide! and immediatel. conve.s the cost of tellin$ 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$ht into this! and
how issues of power and positionalit. enter into the interview situation. In Squire,s
chapter on South African 0IF stories we see how individuals meet the challen$e to
narrate e7periences which are both ever.da. and life5threatenin$.
6=
Introduction
Issues of power and narratabilit. run throu$hout man. of the chapters. Maria Tambouou
adopts a Foucauldian anal.sis to her wor with autobio$raphical narratives of women
artists! hi$hli$htin$ the potential of $enealo$ical wor to uncover Inew 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$e between 1hil Salmon and Cath. Aiessman! both in terms of
the issues which the. raise! and also in 1hil Salmon,s unforeseen death! which renders the
communication with a different la.er of meanin$ than it would have otherwise contained.
Moll. Andrews also e7plores the theme of the chan$in$ questions which $uide our
research! and the d.namic nature not onl. of our interpretations! but of our data themselves.
*end. 1atterson,s openin$ 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
6%
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 e.$. those whose lives lie at the centre of our
research; our intended audience E on our scholarship. All of the contributors to this volume
stand somewhere in relation to the topics which we are e7plorin$! and refle7ivit. upon this
positionin$ is a part of each of the chapters.
There are .et man. other pathwa.s 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$e 4niversit. 1ress.
Andrews! M.! 9a. Sclater! S.! Austin! M.! Squire! C. and Treacher! A. (%&&;- +Introduction,!
in M. Andrews! S. 9a. Sclater! C. Squire and A. Treacher (eds- Doing Narrative
Research. 3ew :runswic! 3D# Transition.
66
Introduction
:ahtin! M. (=>'=- %he dialogic Imagination ed. b. M. 0olquist! Austin#4niversit.
of Te7as 1ress.
:amber$! M. (%&&@- +Stories# :i$ or small. *h. do we care2, Narrative In&uiry
'((=-! =6>5=;B.
:amber$! M. and Andrews! M. (%&&;- Considering Counter)Narratives. Amsterdam# Dohn
:en8amins
:arthes! A. (=>BB- Image *usic %ext! 3ew /or# 0ill and *an$.
:ertau7! 9. (=>'=- +iography and Society. CA# Sa$e 1ublications
:rocmeier! D. (=>>6- Translatin$ temporalit.2 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 *eaning Cambrid$e! MA# 0arvard 4niversit. 1ress.
:urman! E. (%&&6- +3arratives of Ie7perienceK and peda$o$ical practices. Narrative In&uiry
=6! %.
:utler! D. =>>6. +odies %hat *atter. "ondon# Aoutled$e
Chamberla.ne! 1.! :ornat! D. and *en$raf! T. (%&&&- (eds- %he %urn to +iographical
*ethods in Social Science. "ondon# Aoutled$e.
Chamberla.ne! 1.! Austin! M and *en$raf! T (eds- (%&&%- +iography and Social .xclusion
in .urope, experiences and life journeys! 1olic. 1ress.
Clar! D. (%&&6- +4rban culture# Aepresentation and e7periences inGof urban space and
culture., -genda <B.
Craib! I. (%&&;- 3arratives as bad faith. In M.Andrews! S.9.Sclater! C.Squire and A.Treacher
(eds- #ses of Narrative. 3ew Derse.# Transition
6;
Introduction
9aiute! C. and "i$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# Dosse.5:ass
Culler! D. (%&&%- %he 1ursuit of Signs. Ithaca! 3/# Cornell 4niversit. 1ress.
9eleuCe and ?uattari (=>'&- *ille 1lateaux. 1aris# Minuit
9errida! D. (=>BB- 2f 3rammatology. :altimore# Dohns 0opins 4niversit. 1ress.
9errida! D. (=>'<- %he .ar of the 2ther. 3ew /or# Schocen :oos
Dreyfus, R. and , P. (1982) Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and
Hermeneutics . Chicago: Chicago University Press
Edle.! 3. (%&&%- +The loner! the wal and the beast within# 3arrative fra$ments in the
construction of masculinit.!N in *. 1atterson (ed.- Strategic Narrative, ne4 perspectives
on the po4er of stories. )7ford# "e7in$ton.
Elliot! D. (%&&<- #sing Narrative in Social Research, 0ualitative and 0uantitative
-pproaches! "ondon! Sa$e.
Emerson! 1. and Frosh! S. %&&;. Critical Narrative -nalysis in 1sychology. "ondon#
1al$rave
Foucault! M. (=>B%- %he -rchaeology of 5no4ledge. "ondon# Aoutled$e
Freeman! M. (=>>6-. Re4riting the self. $istory, memory, narrative "ondon#
Aoutled$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$rave.
6<
Introduction
?enette! ?. (=>B>- Narrative Discourse, -n .ssay in *ethod. Ithaca! 3/# Cornell
4niversit. 1ress.
?eor$aopolou! A. (%&&@a- +Thinin$ bi$ with small stories in narrative and identit.
anal.sis,. Narrative In&uiry '("=-! =%%5=6&.
?er$en! Q. (=>>=- %he Saturated Self. 3ew /or# :asic :oos
?reenhal$h! T. and 0urwitC! :. (=>>'- 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. Fenn! C. and *alerdine! F. (=>';- Changing
%he Subject. "ondon# Methuen
0ollwa.! *. and Defferson! T. (%&&&- Doing 0ualitative Research Differently, 7ree
-ssociation, Narrative and the Intervie4 *ethod! "ondon! Sa$e.
0olstein! D. and ?ubrium! D. (=>>>- 8%he Self 6e 9ive +y, Narrative Identity in a
1ostmodern 6orld. 3ew /or# )7ford 4niversit. 1ress
0.varinen.M. (%&&@- Towards a conceptual histor. of narrative. In In M. Hyvrinen, A
Korhonen & J. Mykknen (Eds.): The Travelling Cone!" o# Narrative, Helsinki: Collegi$%
"abov! *. (=>B%-. 9anguage in the Inner City, Studies in the +lac/ .nglish
:ernacular )7ford# :asil :lacwell.
"abov! *. +Some Further Steps in 3arrative Anal.sis, ! %ournal of 3arrative and &i"e #istory B(=5
;-# 6><5;=<
6@
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
Storytelling in 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.
MacInt.re! A. (=>';- -fter :irtue. :loomin$ton! I3# 4niversit. of 3otre 9ame 1ress.
Malson! 0 (%&&;- Fictional(isin$- identit.2 )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#
Aoutled$e
Mattin$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=<&
6B
Introduction
&agel, T. ('()*) The View From Nowhere. +,#ord: +,#ord -niversi"y .ress.
)chs! Elinor S "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- 1s.choanal.tic narratives# *ritin$ the self into contemporar. cultural
phenomena. Narrative In&uiry =6 (%-.
1arer! I. (%&&;- 0ualitative 1sychology. Milton Qe.nes# )pen 4niversit. 1ress
1ersonal 3arrative ?roup =>'>. Interpreting 6omen!s 9ives, 7eminist %heory and
1ersonal Narratives. :loomin$ton S Indianapolis# Indiana 4niversit. 1ress.
1lummer! Q. (=>><- %elling Sexual Stories. "ondon# Aoutled$e.
1lummer! Q. (%&&=- Documents of 9ife ;. "ondon# Sa$e.
1olan.i! ". (=>'<-. Conversational Stor.tellin$. In T.A. van 9i8 (Ed.-! Discourse and
Dialogue, volume < of $andboo/ of Discourse -nalysis =. "ondon# Academic 1ress.
1olin$horne! 9onald E. =>''. Narrative 5no4ing and the $uman Sciences. Alban.#
State 4niversit. of 3ew /or 1ress.
Aicoeur! 1. (=>';-. %ime and Narrative. Chica$o# 4niversit. of Chica$o 1ress.
Aiessman! C. (=>>6a-. Narrative -nalysis. 0ualitative Research *ethods. Fol 6&. 3ewbur.
1ar! CA# Sa$e.
Aiessman! C. (=>>6b- 0ualitative Studies in Social 6or/ Research. 3ewbur. 1ar! CA# Sa$e.
Aiessman! C. (%&&%- Anal.sis of personal narratives. 1p@><5B=& in D.?ubrium and D.0olstein
(eds- $andboo/ of Intervie4 Research. Thousand )as# Sa$e
Aiessman! C. (%&&B- Narrative *ethods in the $uman Sciences. 3ew /or! Sa$e.
Aoberts! :. (%&&=- +iographical Research. Milton Qe.nes# )pen 4niversit. 1ress
Aosaldo! A. (=>'>- Culture and truth, %he Rema/ing of Social -nalysis "ondon#
6'
Introduction
Aoutled$e.

Aosenwald ?.and )chber$ A (=>>%-. Storied 9ives. %he Cultural 1olitics of Self)
#nderstanding 3ew 0aven# /ale 4niversit. 1ress.
Austin! M. (%&&&- +Aeflections on the bio$raphical turn in the social sciences,! in
1.Chamberla.ne! D.:ornat and T.*en$raf (eds- %he %urn to +iographical *ethods in
Social Science. "ondon# Aoutled$e.
Salmon! 1. (=>'<- 9iving in %ime, - Ne4 9oo/ at 1ersonal Development. "ondon# 9ent
Sampson! E. (=>>6- Celebrating the 2ther. 3ew /or# )7ford 4niversit. 1ress
Sarbin! T. (=>'@-. Narrative 1sychology. %he Storied Nature of $uman Conduct. 3ew /or#
1rae$er.
Sclater! 9a. S. (%&&6- +*hat is the sub8ect2, Narrative In&uiry! '<( %-! 6=B566&.
Seale! C. (%&&;- +Aesurrective practice and narrative,! in M.Andrews! S.9.Sclater! C.Squire
and A.Treacher (eds- Doing Narrative Research. 3ew :runswic! 3D# Transition.
Sliep! /! (=>''- 3arrative Theatre as an interactive communit. approach to
mobiliCin$ collective action in 3orthern 4$anda. 7amilies, Systems and $ealth
September.
Squire! C. (%&&<- +Aeadin$ narratives, in ?roup Anal.sis! Fol. 6'! 3o. =! >=5=&B
(%&&<-
Squire! C %&&B $I: in South -frica, %al/ing about the +ig %hing. "ondon# Aoutled$e
Spiva! ?. Interview Sara 9anius and Stefan Donsson. :oundar. % %&#% (=>>6-# %;5<&
Stanle.! ". %he -uto>+iographical I, %heory and 1ractice of 7eminist -uto>+iography
(Manchester 4niversit. 1ress =>>%-
Steedman! C =>'B 9andscape for a 3ood 6oman. 3ew :runswic! 3D# Aut$ers 4niversit.
1ress
6>
Introduction
Tambouou! M.! (%&&6- 6omen, .ducation, the Self, a 7oucauldian perspective,
:asin$stoe! 1al$rave! Macmillan.
Todorov! T. (=>>&- 3enres in Discourse. Cambrid$e# Cambrid$e 4niversit. 1ress.
*en$raf! T. (=>>>- +iographical *ethods in Social Sciences."ondon# Aoutled$e
*etherell! M. (=>>'- 1ositionin$ and interpretative repertoires# Conversation anal.sis
and post5structuralism in dialo$ue. Discourse ? Society! @! 6'BE;=%.
*etherell! M. (%&&<- +4nconscious conflict or ever.da. accountabilit.2, +ritish
Aournal of Social 1sychology, ==(%-!=@> E =B6.
;&
Introduction

;=
=
For a tae on the interactions of these traditions throu$h some specific te7ts! see 0.varinen (%&&@-
%
I am not considerin$ here the much lar$er field of 8ournals and boos within the humanities and
philosoph. that were +cross5read, b. social researchers E 8ournals such as Radical 1hilosophy, Screen
and Signs and boos b. Coward! 0eath! Dameson! Ea$leton! Aose.
6
This form of ar$ument is apparent in for instance 0ollwa.,s earlier wor in Changing %he Subject
(0enriques et al.! =>';-.
;
Aicoeur,s (=>';- wor has had perhaps the $reatest effect in promotin$ this understandin$ of narrative
<
the more a$entic versions and interpretations of
@
Spiva (=>>6- has famousl. ob8ected to this overuse of strate$ic essentialism in situations of
theoretical and political difficult.
B
Some +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$er place of discourses! to support it. The +small stories, position does not! then! seem to be
necessaril. a poststructural or postmodern one.
'
To a limited e7tent! ps.choanal.tic understandin$s of such emotionalit. allows that si$ns of it appear
within narratives! as do other contemporar. but determinedl. non5ps.choanal.tic framewors for
understandin$ desire (9eleuCe and ?uattari! =>'&B
>
The chronolo$ical and semantic spaces which such unconscious pro7imities span! depends on the
ps.choanal.tic framewor with which .ou wor