Storytelling: Activists, Frames, and Narrative PDF

Storytelling (Polletta) Activists recognize the power of storytelling to move people to action because stories are more politically effective than other forms of communication. The power of stories comes from their ambiguity and allusiveness. The ability to tell effective stories is shaped by cultur...

Storytelling (Polletta) Activists recognize the power of storytelling to move people to action because stories are more politically effective than other forms of communication. The power of stories comes from their ambiguity and allusiveness. The ability to tell effective stories is shaped by cultural norms. Thus, studying storytelling can help understand how activists are constrained in their use of culture. Narrative is a form of movement culture that can shed light on cultural constraints. Frames are sets of beliefs that assign meaning and interpret events in ways that mobilize support. They act as filters through which we perceive reality, highlighting certain aspects while obscuring others. By using different frames, storytellers can manipulate the audience's perception and influence their understanding of events. One such example is the framing of protests as either acts of patriotism or acts of dissent. Depending on how these events are framed, they can be seen as either legitimate expressions of democratic rights or disruptive actions undermining social order. The choice of frame influences public opinion and shapes how individuals perceive these protests. Another example is the framing of social issues such as poverty or inequality. By highlighting individual success stories within these broader issues, storytellers can create a frame that emphasizes personal responsibility rather than systemic factors contributing to these problems. This frame shifts blame onto individuals rather than addressing structural issues. 1. The effectiveness of framing theory is limited by a lack of understanding of how frames are shaped by their audiences. 2. Institutional demands and popular norms of cultural expression play a significant role in determining frame success. 3. Culture and personal experiences are intertwined, and activists must challenge not only formal beliefs but also common sense. Activists themselves are vulnerable to cultural constructions that pass as common sense. The analysis of narrative can help understand the rhetorical vehicles of framing, institutional norms, and common sense. 4. Effective frames tightly link diagnostic, prognostic, and motivational elements, similar to how stories do. 5. Stories depend on familiar plotlines, but if the normative message is too pronounced, they are unlikely to persuade readers. - Wolfgang Iser, a literary theorist, believes that stories gain dynamism through inevitable omissions. - Stories require interpretive participation and the resolution of ambiguities. The closure promised by stories may never be fully realized, making their meaning elusive. Stories are open to interpretation, unlike other forms of discourse. - J. Hillis Miller suggests that stories' meaning hinges on a key gap that the reader or listener must fill in. - Point of view in stories can create authority by selectively revealing and concealing perspectives. - Stories' empirical credibility and experiential commensurability may be a product of their narrative fidelity. People are likely to believe invented information presented in a story due to their absorption in the events. Stories conform to familiar plots, but there is not a single canon or coherent moral canon. Stories' power comes from the normative possibilities that are excluded from their interrelationship. Culturally resonant stories chart the relations between privileged and denigrated poles of familiar cultural oppositions. Alternative relations and meanings are actively ruled out to maintain stability in institutions. - Narrative is a folk concept that people know how to construct and respond to. - Studying narrative sociologically involves studying the form and the use, interpretation, and evaluation of stories. - The concept of narrative can shed light on various movement processes. - The text discusses the use of storytelling by activists to persuade others and achieve their goals. - Activists use personal stories to make abstract issues more relatable and to turn complex goals into moral imperatives. - Personal stories can expose bias in governmental policies and compel audiences to sympathize and take action. - However, there are concerns about the potential negative effects of telling personal stories, such as diminishing agency and reinforcing victimhood. - The way stories are told and perceived can vary, and different conceptualizations of victims can exist. - Antebellum abolitionist slave narratives sought to produce sympathetic identification rather than elicit pity, making the audience feel about slavery as the slave did. Activists in the women's movement and LGBTQ+ community have used personal stories to assert their knowledge, inspire pride, and emphasize recovery. The institutional settings in which activists operate can influence the types of stories they tell and the expectations placed on them. Survivors of child abuse may emphasize personal fortitude and recovery within movement spaces, but may be required to focus on fear and victimhood in court settings. Television talk shows in the 1980s often portrayed child abuse survivors as childlike, potentially alienating other survivors. Judges often encouraged plaintiffs to provide personal stories of discrimination, but this approach was not effective in proving patterns of disparate treatment. Plaintiffs who framed their claims in terms of individuals' experiences of discrimination were more likely to lose their cases. Judges wanted a liberal storyline to counter conservative arguments, which often relied on gender stereotypes. Plaintiffs who produced witnesses who wanted nontraditional jobs were able to present a liberal story of women who were entitled to the same jobs as men. However, by adhering to the liberal storyline, plaintiffs only challenged some discriminatory practices and left others intact. Women charging sex discrimination were forced to style themselves as generic victims, which undermined their case. The conservative narrative about gender differences and socialization processes was more detailed and persuasive than the liberal account. The text also mentions the difficulties faced by battered women who plead self-defense in homicide cases. Battered women often face skepticism and disbelief due to popular expectations about what true stories sound like. Expert testimony and the recognition of post-traumatic stress disorder could help strengthen the credibility of battered women and explain the discrepancies in their narratives. The prevailing narrative epistemology has operated to discredit women's accounts of abuse. The introduction of expert testimony has not been enough to secure equality in the legal defense of abused women. The problem lies with judges, juries, and lawyers who are unwilling to see battered women's use of deadly force as reasonable. Battered women have been encouraged to plead insanity or manslaughter instead of self-defense. Battered women face the dilemma of either asserting their agency and not being seen as victimized, or emphasizing their victimization and risking being seen as unreasonable. Activists use stories strategically, but they face obstacles in challenging prevailing narratives and beliefs. Prevailing beliefs about what makes stories and storytellers credible can hinder the credibility of activists' stories. Cultural constraints and institutional rules can make it difficult for activists to effect change. There is potential for finding solutions and making activists' stories more effective in producing practical action.