Abstract
One of the major themes in humanistic and social scientific thought since the mid-20th century has been the study of the things people do with talk, Discourse Analysis (DA), in order to make sense of the world. The application of elements of DA to the narrative genre is a trend in narratology. Two related approaches to the study of the structure of narratives have been dominant in the West since the 1950s and 1960s. The first approach draws from Labov’s (1972) influential work on Personal Experience Narrative in which the ‘narrative’ is viewed specifically as talk, where sequences of clauses match sequences of ‘events’. The second examines storytelling in interactional contexts (Schiffrin, 1996) and audience direct involvement in narrative constructions (Ochs et al., 1989). Thus, while some narrative accounts centre on discovering and describing universal truths on narrative structure and/or function, discourse analysts continually add details to these structural and functional analyses, examine new framing devices, question discursive representations and examine narrative functions in new contexts. Stewart and Maxwell, in Storied Conflict Talk: Narrative Construction in Mediation, examine five co-constructed narratives by participants in formal mediation sessions from a University Conflict Resolution Center. Findings confirm the prominence of the bilateral adversarial narrative pattern common within the interpersonal conflict literature and provide evidence for a unilateral adversarial narrative pattern.
The book contains six chapters, an in-depth bibliography and indexes. Chapter 1 provides an overview of theorizing in conflict talk: ‘how narratives are interactively constructed’ (p. 3). It indicates the three features of adversarial narrative patterns: ‘increasingly entrenched positions, intractability, and moral conflict’ (p. 5).
Chapter 2 provides a comprehensive literature review on the vital areas of this study: conflict talk (pp. 11–28), narrative theory and narrative analysis (pp. 28–37) and mediation and the impact of mediators (pp. 38–42). This detailed review will be very informative for conflict talk analysts and other discourse analysts.
Chapter 3 presents the ‘interdisciplinary, integrative, relativistic DA perspective’ (p. 48) used, as related to Speech Act Theory. A systematic annotation of utterances on transcripts with observations and questions about the text was followed by repeated examining and viewing of their videos. This was in order to code and map narratives and their intended discursive patterns to their ‘manifestations, transformations, and interrelationships’ (p. 49).
Chapter 4 examines each of the five cases for the criteria identifying the adversarial narrative pattern (p. 54). Focus is on the opening statements and early narrative development. A categorical table of the five cases’ conformity/non-conformity to the adversarial narrative pattern is provided.
Chapter 5 analyses the two cases that fail to conform to the bilateral adversarial narrative model and details the verbal and embodied communicative practices used by both mediators and disputants in this process. There is lack of correlation between intentions/aims (in Chapter 1, p. 10, ‘attention is paid to the manner in which disputants interactively construct theories of responsibility, self identity … interest of the parties’) and findings (in Chapters 5 and 6). In Chapter 5, the stated intentions in Chapter 1 are only gleaned through the exemplifications and explanations of ‘Case 1’ (pp. 79–90) and ‘Case 2’ (pp. 91–107). In Chapter 6, the summary of findings rather mentions ‘unilateral adversarial pattern’, ‘a number of other patterns’, ‘theories of responsibility’ (p. 111) and ‘alternative type of dispute narrative’ (p. 112) in reference to the two mediation cases that fail to conform to the bilateral adversarial narrative model. It does not allude to how well the ‘the alternative narratives meet the identified interests of the parties’ as stated in Chapter 1 (p. 10).
Apart from the inconsistency in terminology raised above, the following aspects also deserve reconsideration: In 3.2, the claim that ‘unexpected findings framed the second research question motivating this study’ (p. 6) is questionable. The role and concept of research questions is presented in 3.1 as ‘research question motivating research’ (p. 5). Generally, research questions lead to research tool selection, data collection, data analyses and eventual findings, and not the reverse. Research questions ensuing from findings engender further research.
In Chapter 6, the claims that ‘three criteria were identified . . . increasingly entrenched positions, intractability . . . moral conflict’; ‘because . . . the predominant pattern was termed the adversarial narrative pattern’ (p. 111; emphasis added) contradicts the basis of the analyses and findings. The said criteria and narrative pattern constitute the basis for research question one: ‘A reading of literature indicates . . . adversarial narrative pattern . . . three features or criteria . . .’ (p. 5). They were the starting point of the research, not an outcome of it.
Since the study aimed at verifying the degree of mediated conflict talk conformity to the bilateral adversarial narrative model, one expected, in Chapter 4, an illustration, with excerpts from the three cases, showing ‘increasingly entrenched positions, intractability and moral conflict’ (italics in original), attested features of this model. In the same vein, the identified ‘unilateral adversarial pattern’, ‘a number of other patterns’ and ‘theories of responsibility’ (p. 111) and ‘alternative types of dispute narrative’ (p. 112) needed to be clearly illustrated.
In spite of these issues, the book addresses relevant aspects of interactive narrative genre analysis using a practical approach, thus boosting developments in narratology. Specifically, this study contributes to the subfields of conflict-talk discourse analysis and the narrative, and adds to the knowledge of the adversarial model so prevalent in conflict talk. The book is certainly a major asset to Discourse Studies readers interested in communicative analyses.