Perhaps we've all suffered as children from being told by our
parents not to "tell stories" when we were only doing our best to tell some
kind of truth. Ironically, we are also admonished not to "tell stories"
about others (which means we'd be divulging some secret/truth, breaking some
confidence). Story...narrative...storrative. I'm all for loosening up on the
semantics here. Having collected qualitative research data from illicit drug
users for over 15 years I'm a great believer in a multi-indicator approach.
Put together the jigsaw of some kind of truth from whatever pieces you can
get hold of, qualitative or quantitative. It all depends on who you are,
what you are, where you are. Pictures, narratives, poems, stories,
movies....all things bright and beautiful deserve their place, offer
insights into what we deem to be  real. As for books, I'd recommend "Contra
Jour" by Gabriel Josovepici (wonderfully insightful narrative/story account
of the life of the painter Bonard, through the eyes of his wife, his
daughter and himself...). For a contemporary insight into this current
debate try the inside back page of every edition of the "Big Issue". The
section called "City Lights" contains narratives, stories, poems and
drawings by homeless people describing their lifestyles, fears and
aspirations. (They'll also be glad of your £1.20).


> -------
> 
> From:         Tom Wengraf[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Reply To:     Researching and evaluating the use of narrative in health
> and related  fields
> Sent:         16 November 2001 18:40
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: fact vs fictional narratives
> 
> Trish wrote:
> 
> >Here's an offering from one of my students:
> >
> >
> >"Water is to chocolate like story is to qualitative
> >research" by Nancie Burns -Mccoy can be found at
> >http://www.wmc.edu/academics/library/pub/jcp/issueI-2/burns-mccoy.html
> >
> >She argues that the methodologies that are used
> >in qualitative research to "stabilise stories" (i.e. to
> >demonstrate validity) and to separate "non-fiction" from
> >"fiction" (which she considers to be a false
> >dichotomy) actually silence narrative .She feels that the
> >methodologies employed really tell their own separate story
> >and quotes someone who feels that audience approval of
> >research may reflect how the story told fits with cultural
> >myths and values.
> >
> >Trisha Greenhalgh
> 
> 
> My reaction is hostile -- based on the belief that, once we deny the
> attempt to distinguish   between non-fictional and fictional accounts of
> reality,  we instantly regress in cultural terms to pre-scientific states
> of culture.
> 
> Some examples:
> 
> There is a story that the Nazi regime killed 6 million Jews and 6 million
> non-Jews during their reign first in Germany and then in Europe. There is
> another story which asks 'Did 6 million Jews really die?" and attempts to
> doubt the reality of the Holocaust. There is another (meta) story which
> asks us not to worry which is true (since there is no distinction to be
> drawn at least in some English Departments between 'non-fiction' and
> 'fiction').
> 
> There is a story that 6,000 American citizens died in the attack on the
> Pentagon and the World trade Centre; another story that only 3,000 died.
> There is a story that over a million Afghans will die this winter from
> cold
> and starvation as a result of the US attack on Afghanistan, and that, as
> somebody said about the death of 500,000 Iraqui children from the embargo,
> "it is a price worth (them) paying"..
> 
> There is a story that a child needs to know whether they were or were not
> abused by their parent. There is another story that it doesn't matter
> whether they were or they weren't.....
> 
> Coming from history and sociology, rather than literature, the perpetual
> struggle to distinguish true stories from less truthful ones, real medical
> conditions from plausible ones, seems crucial.
> 
> It is interesting to note that in Nancie Burns-McCoy's text cited by Trish
> -- which makes for a very creative read -- she points out that direct
> quotations from the original words spoken by her interviewee, Alicia, are
> in italics to distinguish them from her own inventive play around it;
> similarly, in respect of quotes from Equivel's novel, these are also
> italicised to perform the same function.
> 
> If there really is no point in trying to distinguish 'fact' from
> 'fiction',
> then there would be no point in distinguishing 'verbatim quotes' from
> 'imaginative inventions'....... and the powerful of this world who hate
> investigative journalism and uncompromising social research, those who
> have
> a powerful control over the media and the stories they 'spin' to hide what
> a factual account would show, would be very relieved. Burns-McCoy's own
> practice shows her proper respect for  distinguishing between 'facts' and
> 'inventions'.
> 
> Those quite unconcerned for human suffering and/or determined to hide
> their
> collusion with the forces that make for unnecessary suffering can only
> gain
> from the denial that, for research as opposed to imaginative literature,
> the attempt to distinguish between the 'factual' and the 'fictional'
> components of people's stories about reality -- and the attempt to
> understand why certain factualities are omitted or denied in certain
> accounts -- is crucial.
> 
> Do we really wish to allow the 'sovereignty of some powerful participants'
> voices' to silence the participants (like dead Jews in the Holocaust, dead
> Palestinians after Sharon's massacres, dead patients after Dr Harold
> Shipman's serial killings) who are less able to speak, or to speak
> attractively for themselves?
> 
> The whole system of national and international justice -- faulty as it is
> -- is an attempt to distinguish the 'least fictional accounts' from the
> others.......
> 
> An attempt to understand the fact-based and fact-denying fictions that
> patients, clients, and we ourselves weave around our practices, an attempt
> to understand the roles of narratives in medicine, in historical
> oppression, and human suffering, depends on trying to come to a 'truer
> understanding'.... not in denying factual realities. In psychotherapy, and
> elsewhere, people can suffer from untrue stories.... and denying the
> distinction of truth and falsity is radically disempowering to individuals
> and collectives.
> 
> What disease are we REALLY suffering from?
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  Details of my long-awaited (by me, at least!) and now  recently
> published
> textbook on
> 
>          'Qualitative Research Interviewing: biographic narrative and
> semi-structured method'
>                                                        are on
>                 <http://www.sagepub.co.uk/shopping/Detail.asp?id=4813>
> 
> 
> Tom Wengraf
> 24a Princes Avenue
> Muswell Hill
> London N10 3LR
> UK
> 
> (44)/
> (0)
> 20  8883 9297
> 20  8444-4322
>