Sunday, January 25, 2015


"The world is a set of stories which must be chosen among."


Fisher’s statement rings true for me and speaks to the ways in which we construct our identities as individuals, groups, and communities. Every day in our conscious lives presents us with stories: those transmitted to us culturally through narrative arts, those transmitted to us by our communities from the proverbial water coolers to our news sources, and those transmitted to us by the accumulation of small, interrelated events throughout the day. From these, the stories we choose to emphasize, both as individuals and parts of groups and communities, define us and our values. This is a circular process, as our values go on to determine which stories we will emphasize. And it rarely begins with stories we consciously chose ourselves, but instead with stories chosen for us by our elders and other authority figures in our cultures.


So Fisher is not just stating a truth of his Narrative Paradigm, he is also pointed to an ethical imperative inherent to that paradigm. Not only must we choose from all the stories the world presents to us, we must choose, as a knight once told one my heroes, wisely. We are not simply responsible for choosing the stories that define us (though even if we were, that would not get us off the ethical hook), but for choosing those that define our fellows and our descendants. We have to strongly consider what values are being presented by the stories we choose to emphasize and whether we wish those values to be a part of what defines us and our culture. Our power to choose stories is a great power and must be exercised responsibly. It can create quite a dilemma.


One such dilemma is caused by the recent book, American Sniper, and its film adaptation. Both tell the story (we will avoid the questions regarding its veracity for now) of Chris Kyle, the most dedicated sniper in American history. I think all of us can agree that Kyle was an incredibly brave and patriotic man who made great sacrifices in service to his country. But I think all of us can also agree that the service he provided was that of an incredibly and unflinching killer. So we must ask ourselves, should we emphasize this man’s story? The values of bravery and sacrifice it presents say yes. The destructive violence it presents says no. And the patriotism it presents opens up a whole other realm of questions.


Fisher’s statement points to both a power and a difficulty we all must deal with.






3 comments:

  1. I appreciate your focus on the ethical dimension of Fisher's statement - I think it's easy to accept that we choose from among the possible stories *for ourselves* in an attempt to continuously redefine our own identity, but it may be harder to accept that we are all in some way responsible for the stories that define our (variously defined) communities.

    This makes me ask - are we implicitly co-authoring these stories by reading (or otherwise consuming) them? Or by choosing *not* to read them?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I touched on this somewhat in my post, but your writing crystalizes the role narratives play in identify formation and our relation to the larger community. We understand ourselves in relation to others.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks Tonya. I have to credit Dr. Lackey and her Qualitative Research Methods course for laying the groundwork for my thinking.
    Dr. Busl, that's a tough one that I think really comes down to how much you want to honor the "reader's" role in making meaning, and I'm still not sure how much I want to. I will, however, say this with certainty: we are implicitly co-authoring the stories about these stories.

    ReplyDelete