In a direct rejection of prevailing 19th Century positivist epistemology Husserl (Carel, 2011), a founder of phenomenology, argued that the social world is experienced through consciousness, and that this should be the focus of study, rather than the categorisation, measurement or recording of any positivist, ‘objective’ reality. I concur with these sentiments. ‘Disfigurement’ research findings have demonstrated that people can experience physiological and psychological suffering when they have an altered facial appearance. However, a number of the studies utilise quantitative, positivist data collection methods, which cut across people’s life narratives, resulting in fragmented accounts. Consequently, I selected methods congruent with the exploration of embodied lifeworld disruption in a participant-centred way. Utilising a narrative method of data collection and analysis, where participants recount experiences in their own way has supported the production of situated, dynamic and complex exploration of lifeworlds and embodied identities.
‘If stories express being-in-the-world, narrative reconstructs not only an individual’s biography but their relationship to their place and history’ (Williams, 2000, p.139).
Narrative approaches and social science
Social science interest in narrative methods of data collection and analysis has grown significantly over the last few decades. During the 1970s a series of US academics capitalised on the works of European theorists like Roland Barthes (1974) and focused their attention on the ability of narrative accounts to illustrate how humans made sense of and organised their immediate and wider lifeworlds (Riessman, 1993). Since the 1970s, narrative methods
of interviewing and analysis have developed across different disciplines in relation to their own research needs (Huberman and Miles, 2002). Consequently, there has been a proliferation of accounts and considerable disagreement about the definition of narrative (Huberman and Miles, 2002; Riessman, 2008). Within the social sciences, many accounts describe or refer to narratives as stories (Josselson and Leiblich, 1995; Fisher and Goodley, 2007). Story telling is a universally acknowledged, elementary form of communication, rich in index. Stories can contain a number of varying plots, for example tragedy, comedy, romance and can be narrated chronologically, or thematically (Huberman and Miles, 2002), they can subvert socially expected norms (Fisher and Goodley, 2007), or they can be inspirational. Whatever the plot, every story needs a teller and an audience.
Though different opinions have been expressed on the role of narrative methodologies within the social sciences (Atkinson, 2010; Thomas, 2010), practitioners tend to share a number of commonly held beliefs, firstly: a rejection of hypothesis-based inquiry as developed through the natural/biomedical sciences, drawing on quantitative methods to define, measure and predict human social worlds. Included in this argument are more structured types of qualitative interviews, even those with open-ended questions, as they cut across the experiences and world-views of the participant and prevent them from giving their whole account (Chase, cited in Josselson and Lieblich, 1995). It has also been argued that non-biographical forms of interviewing merely express the personal and epistemological constructions of the researcher (Mishler, 1986). Secondly, many narrative approaches share a commitment to an open case study method, as they allow for the examination of identity shift across the life course and the examination of wider lifeworld influences, unlike more structured methods, which separate experiences, situations and relationships to offer up fragmented, abstract islets of meaning. Thirdly, narrative approaches share a commitment to the principle of active listening, to facilitate the unobstructed narratives of the research participant (Wengraf, 2004). Through drawing on ethnographic approaches, the aim is to ‘unearth what we did not expect’ (Josselson and Lieblich, 1995). Finally, practitioners have used the method to explore identity, through the telling of stories and the analysis of language, body language, utterances and silences. As Williams (1984, p.197) argued after he used a narrative methodology to explore identity shift in people who had experienced a chronic illness, it allowed him to explore the participant’s ‘attempt to reconstitute and repair ruptures between body, self and world’.
Artefacts of desire: thickening description with material objects, i.e. photographs
I was aware that the interview data was being gathered on one day, and that the responses could have been influenced by the participants’ mood, memory clarity or by a host of other factors, e.g. health status. To ensure that the encounter was as rich as possible I conducted face-to-face interviews at the participants’ homes where possible and asked them to bring a personal possession, which would help to explain their experiences. There are numerous advantages to be gained from using possessions, or material objects as research tools during interviewing. People and their objects are embedded within material cultures which they use on a daily basis, for example, to make life easier or to make statements about themselves in relation to others, owning an expensive car to convey higher wealth or status. What I want to do is to explore some pragmatic merits and challenges involved with the one type of object that people brought to the interviews, photographs, using Tinkler’s (2009, pp.173-194) book chapter and Prosser’s (2006) Working paper on researching with visual images. Nine participants out of eleven brought and used photographs during the face-to- face interviews. Both participants that I interviewed over the phone described specific photographs taken at seminal moments, but did not share copies with me.
By selecting photographs ahead of the interview the person may already be reflecting on the topic, which could lead to more considered and detailed responses and the multi- sensory memories attached to them would evoke richer responses (Tinkler, 2009). Likewise, the act of selecting some photos over others could help the participants to consider which stories they wished to highlight and prioritise, making their identifications clearer to the interviewer (Tinker, 2009). As Atkinson (2010) notes all verbal narratives are partial and deliberate; consequently, the choice of an object to illustrate a narrative, such as a photograph is also partial and deliberate. Finally, Tinkler (2009) points out that when talking, it might be easier for the participant to follow or elaborate on a conversational thread using a photograph, particularly if they are not used to engaging with professional strangers. Having interviewed most participants with their photographs and analysed their use, in conjunction with the field notes, transcripts and audio recordings, I can say that the photos did facilitate richer talk, memories and data. People can think of themselves in complex and contradictory ways, which may not be conveyed by talk alone.
Whilst the use of photographs has enriched the quality of the data, there are some caveats which Prosser (2006, pp.1-4) has acknowledged. I raise them here in the spirit of research reflexivity. Images do not stand alone, they require interpretation, in the same way as other sources. In this respect images are ‘polysemic’ (have multiple meanings); as material objects
in the world they gain their meanings from humans. Photographs are no different; they are constructed images created at a specific moment, which can be used to convey a variety of dynamic meanings and embodied identifications after the event.