Whose story is it? An autoethnography concerning narrative identity

Alec Grant, Laetitia Zeeman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Whose story is it? An autoethnography concerning narrative identity Alec J. Grant and Laetitia Zeeman University of Brighton, Brighton, Sussex, UK This paper is divided into three parts, each separated by centrally spaced asterisks. The first part, co-written on the basis of the standpoint interests of both authors, outlines the historical, philosophical, theoretical and methodological contexts for the use of autoethnographic short stories in the social and human sciences. The functions and representational practices of this genre are reviewed and discussed, and the main criticisms levelled by its detractors responded to. This sets the scene for the second part of the paper, an autoethnographic short story. Effectively a story of stories, it was constructed directly from the first author’s memories of his early life in relation to textual material and was written exclusively by him. In part three, some of the significant issues raised in the story are discussed in relation to larger co-evolving social, cultural and therapeutic frameworks from a reflexive and narrative identity perspective. It is written as, and represents, an extended, unfinished dialogue between the first and second author.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-12
Number of pages12
JournalQualitative Report
Volume17
Issue number36
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2012

Fingerprint

Narrative Identity
Autoethnography
Brighton
Short Story
Early Life
Social Sciences
Therapeutics
Human Sciences
Sussex
Criticism

Bibliographical note

© 2012: Alec Grant, Laetitia Zeeman, and Nova Southeastern University

Cite this

@article{9410b862af2b49659069e40773b711a3,
title = "Whose story is it? An autoethnography concerning narrative identity",
abstract = "Whose story is it? An autoethnography concerning narrative identity Alec J. Grant and Laetitia Zeeman University of Brighton, Brighton, Sussex, UK This paper is divided into three parts, each separated by centrally spaced asterisks. The first part, co-written on the basis of the standpoint interests of both authors, outlines the historical, philosophical, theoretical and methodological contexts for the use of autoethnographic short stories in the social and human sciences. The functions and representational practices of this genre are reviewed and discussed, and the main criticisms levelled by its detractors responded to. This sets the scene for the second part of the paper, an autoethnographic short story. Effectively a story of stories, it was constructed directly from the first author’s memories of his early life in relation to textual material and was written exclusively by him. In part three, some of the significant issues raised in the story are discussed in relation to larger co-evolving social, cultural and therapeutic frameworks from a reflexive and narrative identity perspective. It is written as, and represents, an extended, unfinished dialogue between the first and second author.",
author = "Alec Grant and Laetitia Zeeman",
note = "{\circledC} 2012: Alec Grant, Laetitia Zeeman, and Nova Southeastern University",
year = "2012",
month = "1",
day = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "17",
pages = "1--12",
journal = "The Qualitative Report",
issn = "1052-0147",
number = "36",

}

Whose story is it? An autoethnography concerning narrative identity. / Grant, Alec; Zeeman, Laetitia.

In: Qualitative Report, Vol. 17, No. 36, 01.01.2012, p. 1-12.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Whose story is it? An autoethnography concerning narrative identity

AU - Grant, Alec

AU - Zeeman, Laetitia

N1 - © 2012: Alec Grant, Laetitia Zeeman, and Nova Southeastern University

PY - 2012/1/1

Y1 - 2012/1/1

N2 - Whose story is it? An autoethnography concerning narrative identity Alec J. Grant and Laetitia Zeeman University of Brighton, Brighton, Sussex, UK This paper is divided into three parts, each separated by centrally spaced asterisks. The first part, co-written on the basis of the standpoint interests of both authors, outlines the historical, philosophical, theoretical and methodological contexts for the use of autoethnographic short stories in the social and human sciences. The functions and representational practices of this genre are reviewed and discussed, and the main criticisms levelled by its detractors responded to. This sets the scene for the second part of the paper, an autoethnographic short story. Effectively a story of stories, it was constructed directly from the first author’s memories of his early life in relation to textual material and was written exclusively by him. In part three, some of the significant issues raised in the story are discussed in relation to larger co-evolving social, cultural and therapeutic frameworks from a reflexive and narrative identity perspective. It is written as, and represents, an extended, unfinished dialogue between the first and second author.

AB - Whose story is it? An autoethnography concerning narrative identity Alec J. Grant and Laetitia Zeeman University of Brighton, Brighton, Sussex, UK This paper is divided into three parts, each separated by centrally spaced asterisks. The first part, co-written on the basis of the standpoint interests of both authors, outlines the historical, philosophical, theoretical and methodological contexts for the use of autoethnographic short stories in the social and human sciences. The functions and representational practices of this genre are reviewed and discussed, and the main criticisms levelled by its detractors responded to. This sets the scene for the second part of the paper, an autoethnographic short story. Effectively a story of stories, it was constructed directly from the first author’s memories of his early life in relation to textual material and was written exclusively by him. In part three, some of the significant issues raised in the story are discussed in relation to larger co-evolving social, cultural and therapeutic frameworks from a reflexive and narrative identity perspective. It is written as, and represents, an extended, unfinished dialogue between the first and second author.

M3 - Article

VL - 17

SP - 1

EP - 12

JO - The Qualitative Report

JF - The Qualitative Report

SN - 1052-0147

IS - 36

ER -