This interpretive study of testimony will follow a multi-layered process which first analyzes the narrative elements of the testimony to uncover what is being communicated and
61 how, looks at the social, political, and cultural contexts, and then applies communication ethics theory to address the issues related to social justice.
Narrative, as a form of life sense making, has evolved through many eras and is seen as a pervasive, fundamental human trait for thematically organizing human experience (White 1987; Gubrium and Holstein 2009; Stone-Mediatore 2003; Abbott 2008; Pradl 1984). As the 15,000- year-old Lascaux cave drawings in Dordogne, France, and other ancient forms of storytelling illustrate, humankind has an enduring need to communicate experience in a relevant way
resulting in stories being communicated in diverse forms. Although the use of narrative has long endured a second class relation to positivist, scientifically-oriented texts and research, a
―narrative turn‖ in recent years has emphasized the important contributions of narrative to understanding both individual and universal experience and also has spurred critical discussion and development of more rigorous forms of narrative analysis (White 1987; Sikes and Gale 2006; Stone-Mediatore 2003; Herman and Vervaeck 2005). These methodological
developments have been taken into consideration for this research which utilizes a multi-modal approach that considers structural testimony elements such as units of information, voice of the testimony, omitted details, repetition of terms and words, and quantity and quality of facts. The analysis also scrutinizes the testimony through a poststructuralist approach which considers the particular time period and societal and political factors that might affect the meaning and impact of the testimony.
While testimony is commonly regarded as a verbal narrative that is put into words for an official document, a broader view of testimony reveals oral traditions, such as stories being handed down to successive generations or in recordings; visual traditions, through artistic and craft manifestations; performance traditions, as in plays and music interpretations; alternative
62 communication systems, signing and Braille, for example; and literary and print traditions, as in reporting and publishing the life story, biography, and/or autobiography. Importantly, although human rights testimony is closely associated with sanctioned, published texts, those who give testimony are victims who typically do not have access to mediated communication and, as such, their testimony may flow into and from alternative testimonial forms as identified within this broader view of testimony.
Ross (2003), who has extensively researched the South African post-apartheid period, notes that much scholarly discussion is occurring around the idea of storytelling and the ability of this process to initiate and cement elemental social bonds. Due to the fundamental nature of narrative, its acceptance as a method of scholarly inquiry, and its potential communicative power, narrative analysis is an apt methodology for testimonial research.
This study will begin with specific examples of testimony and proceed through three levels culled from communication theory, research and practice. Testimonial forms from human rights violations in Chile during the 17-year military coup of Augusto Pinochet of 1973 – 1980 will be evaluated in relation to existing studies about South Africa testimony in the post- apartheid period beginning in 1995. The testimonial forms to be analyzed include truth and reconciliation reports, circulated, ―unofficial‖ testimony in publications, performances, and visual testimony, specifically visual communication creations disguised as art forms.
The elements of structuralist narratology will be used to evaluate the testimonial forms themselves. Luc Herman and Bart Vervaeck provide a composite, three-level analysis that encompasses methods developed by Gerard Genette, Shlomith Rimmon-Kenon and Mieke Bal (2005, 42-45). Step one looks at the way the testimony ―is told‖ (narration); step two evaluates testimony as it ―plays out‖ as text and is ―offered to the reader‖ (narrative); step three identifies
63 the ―chronological sequence‖ of narrative elements related to testimony (the story). This ―deep structures‖ approach is appropriate to testimonial form analysis because it produces good results, uncovering what might not otherwise be seen through analysis of word choice or patterns, for example, that may show a focus on particular types of information while leaving unanswered questions. Such structures also allow the evaluation of a variety of texts which can then be synthesized into categories. Analysis will also address the primarily players, audiences,
messages, and key moral demands. However, criticisms of this form have lead to post-classical narratology, a form explored by poststructuralists such as Jacques Derrida and Paul de Man (110). And because this type of narrative procedure yields a ―meta-level‖ view across time periods by uncovering abstractions, disjunctures, multiple perspectives and linkages to social reality (111), it is fitting for the second step of this research which will evaluate the changing context of the testimonial cases over time and their actual usage and circulation in both official and unofficial ways. This bi-level approach will yield a deep understanding of the testimonial form itself, as well as its potentially iconic and ritualistic symbolism within societies as an idealized and definitive form of truth for societies transitioning from oppressive rule to more inclusive democracies. The visual testimony will be analyzed via an in-depth visual taxonomy yielding a composite narrative (Lester 2011). Lester‘s process mirrors the bi-level textual process described above in that he identifies seven structural visual elements (inventory, composition, visual cues, semiotic signs and codes, cognitive elements, image purpose, and image aesthetics) and six contextual perspectives (personal, historical, technical, ethical, cultural, and critical). Using this method will yield deep details similar to that which will emerge from the written textual analysis.
64 The third level of analysis will examine the narrative results from the perspective of justice theories in an effort to explore how testimony contributes to social justice. The cases will be evaluated through the applied ethical lenses of John Rawls‘ theory of justice (1958) and Michael Sandel‘s politics of a common good (2009) within the context of how testimony
addresses and/or contributes to the justice theory criteria. The impact on the people who give the testimony will be further scrutinized by applying Michael Warner‘s criteria for publics and counterpublics (2005) to attempt to identify any shifts in power structures and gains in agency for people who previously were silenced in multiple ways through military juntas and oppressive governments. This multi-pronged approach will yield a deep understanding of testimony at its core as well as the forces and ideologies that operate overtly and covertly to influence this process.