The question of whether it is possible to 鈥榯ell the
same story twice鈥 has been explored in work on conversational
narratives, which has set out to understand the existence
of some kind of 鈥榰nderlying semantic structure鈥 and
鈥榮cript (Polanyi, 1981). In this speech event, 鈥榣ocal
occasioning鈥 and 鈥榬ecipient design鈥 (Sacks, Schegloff
and Jefferson, 1974) are factors that determine the
form and function of the story as ongoing talk frames
the narrative while other participants provide a ready
made audience, all of which, form part of the storytelling
process.
What happens, however, when a survivor of 7/7*, whose
personal narrative was reported globally on the day
of the event, is again interviewed two and a half years
later for their experience of that morning? Is the 鈥渟ame
story鈥 retold? Specifically, how far does the latest
story replicate the experience of the first and which
of the prototypical features of a personal narrative –
at the level of both the macrostructure and microstructure –
remain constant? By comparing both interviews and using
Labov and Waletzky鈥檚 (1967) narrative framework as the
central model for analysis, it is possible to see whether
events within the complicating action or features of
evaluation remain the most memorable and are the core
narrative categories. While findings show that both
narratives are comparable in form, a closer investigation
finds compelling differences as well as unexpected linguistic
choices. Not only has the second narrative become informed
by other, external narratives to become part of a broader,
mediated narrative but various discourse strategies
of 鈥榙issociation鈥 in both interviews have resulted in
a retelling of a traumatic experience that appears to
be closer to an eye witness report than a personal narrative.
Moreover, this blurring of two distinct genres of storytelling
provides a true insight of how the narrator positions
himself inside this terrible experience.
*On July 7, 2005 there were a series of co-ordinated
terrorist bomb attacks on the London transport system
in the morning rush hour. Three bombs exploded on London
underground trains (just outside Liverpool Street, Edgware
Rd and Russell Square stations) and one on a double-decker
bus in Tavistock Square, in central London. The bombings
killed 52 commuters, the four suicide bombers and injured
many hundreds of people.
|
|
|