All in the family

Abstract

In recent years, narrative analysis has experienced what can be identified as a small stories turn. Specifically, some researchers, especially Bamberg (2004, 2006), Georgakopoulou (2006, 2007), Bamberg and Georgakopoulou (2008), have argued that the analysis of small stories that have been previously overlooked in favor of large-scale autobiographical narratives presents a valuable contribution to our understanding of identity construction and display. This paper builds on and extends the discussion of small stories as sites for identity construction by demonstrating how various small stories — retellings, hypothetical narratives, near-narrative structures as well as short past-oriented narratives — all construct a coherent family identity that includes pets as members. While a number of previous studies considered narrative as a key site for exploring how family members construct social identities, they primarily focused on individual family members and centered their analyses on traditional past-oriented narratives often limiting their settings to dinner-table conversations or interviews. In contrast, this study, drawing on prior studies of discursive construction of a shared family identity (Gordon, 2007) and pets as family members (Tannen, 2004), demonstrates how a shared family identity that includes pets emerges in diverse small stories that are embedded in on-going conversations and occur in a variety of places: a car, a dining room, a living room. This paper also shows how small stories about pets simultaneously create a shared family identity that includes pets and situate this family within a larger social discourse, or Discourse (Gee, 1996, 1999), of treating pets as family members.

Lives that preach

“…While "spiritual journeys" can be understood as similar in form to larger autobiographical narratives, my main focus here is on the actual discursive practice of narrative telling in a particular context and how this constructs community -in other words, the communal or cultural function of communication as a process of "membering" (Philipsen, 1989;Carey, 1989;Carbaugh, 1996Carbaugh, , 2001Carbaugh, , 2005Hastings, 2001;Witteborn & Sprain, 2009). I am, therefore, emphasizing the interactional constructive nature of narrative discourse, similar to the approach in "small story" research (Juzwik & Ives, 2010;Tovares, 2010). A focus on narrative in this way fits well with an understanding of cultural communication as "socially situated meaning-making" that "occurs in particular forms and yields multiple outcomes" (Carbaugh, 1990), stemming in part from Kenneth Burke's understanding of form as sequential, or "a dynamic progression" (Heath, 1979, p. 392;Burke 1931Burke /1968).…”

The chronological I

“…Small stories reflect everyday interactions in which we negotiate and express our identities and acquire a sense of self (Bamberg, 2006(Bamberg, , 2011Tovares, 2010). This article departs from the small stories recounted by informants who have been exposed to bullying (Blomberg, 2010).…”

“…The importance of small stories as sites for doing identity has been emphasized in recent narrative analysis research (Bamberg, 2004(Bamberg, , 2006De Fina et al, 2006;Georgakopoulou, 2006Georgakopoulou, , 2007Tovares, 2010). Small stories reflect everyday interactions in which we negotiate and express our identities and acquire a sense of self (Bamberg, 2006(Bamberg, , 2011Tovares, 2010).…”

“…This article draws on a generic narrative about bullying based on previous research (Blomberg, 2010). Generic narratives, or different discourses, provide individuals with narrative and discursive resources to construct and negotiate different types of self-presentations in talk-interactions (Blomberg, 2010;Georgakopoulou, 2007;Potter, 1996;Taylor & Littleton, 2006;Tovares, 2010). In a bullying discourse, bullying is viewed as a chronological process, which means that the bullied self is chronological, and that in the identity construction the narrator draws on or negotiates different time-identities in order to display the identity process.…”

Don't show any sign of a chip in your armor : the communicative co-construction of mental health in correctional work

“…Narrative research is best suited for capturing detailed stories; therefore, the number of participants in a narrative study ranges from a single individual, to the lives of a small number of individuals (Creswell, 2013). Past narrative research has focused on the narratives of as few as one or two families (De Fina, 2011;Tovares, 2010), individuals (Whooley, 2006) or up to 20-30 people (Tang & Bie, 2016;Williams, 1984). Creswell (2013) noted that in a narrative study, the focus should remain on whom to study: "individuals who are accessible, willing to provide information…and shed light on a specific phenomenon or issue being explored" (p. 147).…”