It’s an overcast Friday morning and I am on my way to Rotterdam. The trees have noticeably changed in colour and they blur into a palette of autumnal hues as the train I am on charges forward. Knowing I’d be traveling for for the best part of the morning, I had printed Carolyn and Arthur’s Analysing Analytic Autoethnography which I had been meaning to read ever since it had been spoken about in class. There was something about their use of narrative and conversational style that really intrigued me, so I was excited to read it for myself, hoping to get inspiration and guidance for my project. Stuck in the corner of a four-seater, I take out my folder of printed A4 pages an awkwardly position them on the table in front of me avoiding a laptop, someone’s breakfast, and another person’s newspaper. I can see the woman sitting next to me glance over. She’s older than me, maybe in her mid-sixties. She has a friendly face, framed with blue glasses that match her thick cable knit jumper which I take extra notice of because of my recent knitting endeavours. She had been doing crosswords since we set off and as I put the pages down to take a break, I catch her eye.

‘What are you reading?’ She asks. ‘It’s a text by two people talking about auto-ethnography’ I reply, adding ‘they’re essentially responding to another academic’s paper, but rather than doing it in academic writing, it’s written in the form of a dialogue which relates to the point they are trying to argue – that auto-ethnography needs to be more personal to connect with its reader’
‘Oh right, does that makes it an easier read?’
‘In some sense yes, to make their point they frame it with people giving first-hand accounts of their experiences during a Hurricane, I guess to show that through story-telling we are able to feel and connect with other people’s experiences. They then weave in their views and responses to this other man’s article. I’m not sure if I’m explaining it well. Sounds strange but it does work somehow.’ I pause, noticing the woman nod slowly. ‘To be honest, it does get a bit theory heavy at points, but largely I think I’m enjoying it more than I would have if it had been a standard academic text.’
‘That’s interesting, are you studying ethnography?
‘You’d think so! But no, I’m not actually. I’m a lecturer in design and have been for a few years but I’m currently doing a teaching degree and as part of that we have to do research with our students to improve our teaching practice and make it more “socially just”. So, they’re getting us to engage in different types of research methods, this is one of them, and it does relate to what I’m interested in.’
‘Oh yeah?’
‘Yeah, I’ve always struggled with academic writing. I struggle to do it well, but also, I get frustrated when theory is impenetrable. What’s the point of writing big ideas if only a small number of specifically intelligent people can understand it? I find that really frustrating.’
She nods. ‘Yeah we had to read a lot of that kind of writing at school. Some of these writers really love the sound of their own voice.’
‘Exactly. This text talks about this actually. This kind of smart sounding theoretical writing was developed by a specific type of person, for a specific kind of audience. Tilly, a girl in my class called it: performing “intelligence”.’ I say gesturing inverted commas. ‘I liked that: this kind of intelligence is anchored in male-cantered systems of logic and morality (Blair, Brown, and Baxter 1994, 389). And we’ve been discussing this in class too. It’s only one way to record and share knowledge, but it can also be done in a more personalised and contextualised way. People have been using storytelling to pass down knowledge since the beginning of time, but this kind of knowledge sharing is seen as inferior than, is delegitimised and sometimes silenced (Templin, 2021). But who makes these decisions you know? People are starting to challenge that.’
‘Yes it’s true, I’d never thought of it like this. Things don’t have to be complicated to be important. Though I was a maths teacher, so our type of knowledge is quite standardised’
‘Ahhh really? I mean, yeah definitely, it makes sense that maths has stricter rules, but in humanities, if we only value one kind of knowledge, or one kind of research, then it becomes a problem because it doesn’t account for the diversity of human existence and experience, and knowledge becomes gate kept by a few (Ahmed, 2017). There are a lot of feminist writers who are starting to break down this barrier. And I guess this is what this text does too.’
She pauses and reflects on what I say. ‘But their does need to be rigour, no?’  
‘I’m not an expert, but even within this kind of more narrative-based method there is discipline. They mention in the text that authors need to be open and transparent about their position. They need to be a part of the lived experience they are referring to and they also have to include the views and opinions of others in their stories. All of this has to be properly referenced and framed. So it’s not really claimed as truth, it’s more that they are telling a story, and through those words maybe you will be able to grasp a certain concept, or understand a group of people and their needs. But it’s always told from their perspective, not as objective truth’
‘Do you mind if I have a look at the text?’ I look down at my scribbled sheets of paper ‘No, of course. I’ve outlined some parts, but you can just ignore that’
‘Oh no I like that, I guess that’s knowledge sharing too’ she says smiling
I laugh ‘yes exactly. And even the fact we are having this conversation, reflects what they are trying to say. Conversation means that there is more than one voice, and that moves away from the hero-narrative of those writers you mentioned earlier for example. Instead, it makes more space for nuance. They talk about this in this text actually let me find it.’ I flick through the pages. ‘Ah, here: “conversational style of communicating has more potential to transform and change the world for the better. As a multivoiced form, conversation offers the possibility of opening hearts and increasing understanding of difference.” I love that.
‘Yes, I like that. Thank you’ she says as she begins to read.

Bibliography:

Ahmed, S. (2017) Living a feminist life, Durham: Duke University Press.

Blair, C., Brown, J. R., & Baxter, L. A. (1994). Disciplining the feminine. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 80(4), 383-409

Ellis C. S. (2006) ‘Analyzing Analytic Autoethnography’ in Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, Volume 35 (number 4, August 2006, 429-449)

Templin, C. (2021) Why Citation matters: Ideas on a feminist approach to research, Berlin: Freie Universitat Berlin