+ Narrative and Conflict Transformation Building Community, Building “Better-formed” Stories + 2 Agenda Introduction to Narrative Theory A Narrative Model for Conflict Resolution “Community” from the Lens of Narrative Practice: The Role of Community Mediation Centers? Sara Cobb, Ph.D. Director, Center for the Study of Narrative and Conflict Resolution 12/19/2012 + Epistemological Consequences or How We Know What We Know We know through storytelling-in-interaction Descriptions OF the world reflect AND create the world Self, relationships, institutions, culture We cannot stand outside the social construction process: we are IN the soup The “observing system” Sara Cobb 12/19/2012 + Implications for Conflict Theory Conflicts are a function of the stories we tell Marking differences (“us/them,” “good/bad”) Creating “victims” and “victimizers” Conflicts are a function of the stories that cannot be told/heard Marginalization IS the condition of stories that cannot be circulated and elaborated by dominant groups Sara Cobb 12/19/2012 + Implications for Conflict Resolution Conflict Assessment based on a theory of the characteristics of conflict stories “bad” or problematic stories vs. “better” stories Design spaces for storytelling Voices of the marginalized included Intra and intergroup storytelling Story elaboration toward Better Stories Story “anchoring” and story “inoculation” for sustainability of “better” stories Sara Cobb 12/19/2012 + The Conflict Narrative System Delegitimized “positions” Linear Plots “Thin” and linear logic Binary Themes/values Sara Cobb 12/19/2012 + Narrative Processes in Conflict Escalation Victim narratives generate defensive counteraccusation narratives (externalizing responsibility) Thin plot lines Number of episodes described Poor causal connections Archetypal roles (good guys/bad guys) Simplistic / rigid Binary moral frameworks “Strange Loops” (as interactions that increase escalation, and can lead to silence / violence Sara Cobb 12/19/2012 + Narrative Processes in Conflict Transformation Internalizing responsibility via “better-formed” story Circular Plots (express interdependence) Characters are imperfect but human Moral systems are multi-nodal “Charmed Loops”: Interactions which lead to cooperation, community and trust Sara Cobb 12/19/2012 Sara Cobb, Ph.D. Turning Points: Development toward Narrative Pareto Frontier Party A: High Legitimacy for Self/Low Legitimacy for Other Narrative Stage 1 Pareto Frontier Stage 5 TP1 TP5 Stage 2 Stage 4 TP2 TP4 TP3 Stage 3 TP2 Stage 2 TP1 Party B: High Legitimacy for Self/Low Legitimacy Stage 1 for Other Key: (Note that Turning Points 1 & 2 follow Stages 1 & 2, while Turning Points 3-5 precede Stages 3-5.) Stage 1: High in legitimacy for Self, Low in Legitimacy for Other; Turning Point 1: Reducing Legitimacy for Self Stage 2: Moderate legitimacy for Self and Other; Turning Point 2: Increased legitimacy for Other Turning Point 3: Elaboration of circular plot; Stage 3: Reconstruction of Shared History Turning Point 4: Elaboration of multiple scenarios; Stage 4: Construction of a Share Future TurningSara Cobb Point 5: Reflection on shared values, from overlapping traditions; Stage 5: Creation of shared value systems12/19 /2012 Sar a Cob b, + Ph. Stage One: The Irony of Self D. (Speaker) Both parties are legitimate to themselves on the basis of the delegitimacy of the Others Practice: Explore “underbelly” or ironic nature of their own legitimacy What is the “inconvenience” of the dimension of the speaker’s legitimacy? 10 12/19/2012 Sar a Cob b, + Ph. Stage 2: Creating (Some) D. Legitimacy for Other Parties are able to frame themselves as less than perfect Generates a “liminal” space (destabilizes identity) Practice: Story the Other in a way that increases the Other’s legitimacy in the speaker’s own narrative 11 12/19/2012 Sar a Cob b, + Ph. Stage 3: Creating Circular Plots D. Once “we” acknowledge the possibility of the legitimacy of the Other, we are more able to create a story of interdependence, based on circular plot Practice: Facilitate the development of the “ironic story” that displays how each side inadvertently contributed to conflict escalation, even though each side was trying to solve the problem 12 12/19/2012 Sar a Cob b, + Ph. Stage 4: Elaborating a Shared D. Future Here, parties work on the development a selected scenario, via the construction of and deliberation over, multiple scenarios Practice: Via circular questions & AI explore possible scenarios, including “more of the same” as well as more positive evolutions 13 12/19/2012 Sar a Cob b, + Ph. Stage 5: “Discovering” Shared D. Values As scenarios are selected, or reviewed, the core values within each scenario are illuminated; as the scenario is selected, by the parties, (“better-formed”), the core values are illuminated and discussed in the context of each party’s ethical traditions. Practice: Using circular questions, the central values are explored and connected back to the parties’ histories/traditions. 14 12/19/2012 + 15 The Mediation Process: The Initial Public Session Framing: Here the story of the mediation itself is framed tentatively, as a process of making sense of things together. This sense-making involves talking about the problems and issues, the history of their emergence, toward a more complicated understanding of what has been, and what could be. Additionally the mediator forecasts their role as facilitating this sense-making and forewarns their active participation through questioning. The Mediation Process #6 Sara Cobb + 16 Public or Private Session: Destabilizing Turning Point 1 & 2 The Mediator works to destabilize both legitimate and delegitimate subject positions for both parties by interacting to favor shifts in the value systems, ensuring that both parties are BOTH legitimate, as well as imperfect (delegitimate) in that system The Mediation Process #6 Sara Cobb + 17 Private Session: Integrating Turning Point #3 The interdependent or circular narrative is constructed by which parties knit together the story of a past where they both contributed to the problem, and the problem is, therein, redefined. The Mediation Process #6 Sara Cobb + 18 Public Session Futuring Turning Point #4 Using circular questions, (“feed-forward”) and/or scenario- building, develop possible futures which address the newly defined problem statement that has been anchored in an “integrated” history The Mediation Process #6 Sara Cobb + 19 Public Session Agreement and Anchoring Turning Point #5 The new scenario is anchored in an agreement that contains a meta-agreement, or the agreements about the agreement. Parties reflect on the “solution” as it may circulate in their social networks, identifying “destabilizers” and strategizing their inclusion. The Mediation Process #6 Sara Cobb Practical Narrative Skills Reframing Positive connotation Externalization Circular questions Sara Cobb, Ph.D. + 21 Implications for Community Mediation? Addressing/Redressing Marginalization Re-Inventing Culture Growing Social Networks Sara Cobb, Ph.D. Director, Center for the Study of Narrative and Conflict Resolution 12/19/2012 + 22 Addressing/Re-dressing Marginalization Narrative practice in conflict resolution is more than just “hearing” stories, i.e. “creating” (new) social realities “Representational” view of narrative vs. “constitutive view” of narrative Requires destabilization of existing stories, for “better” stories More complex narratives (less brittle) Legitimizing “positions” (identity) for all characters Reducing marginalization Increasing “uncertainty” Building “relational intelligence” in the community Sara Cobb, Ph.D. Director, Center for the Study of Narrative and Conflict Resolution 12/19/2012 + 23 Master/Counternarratives • Narrative marginalization damages identity (Nelson, 2001) – Marginalization is the absence of positive elaboration • Infiltrated consciousness • Deprivation of opportunity • Counternarratives (good ones) – Construct the Other as a moral agent, capable of choice, planning, and moral evaluation – Implicate self, as speaker, in contributing to the problem, reframing the problem – Thicken/complicate the core narrative • Complex plots, value systems, characters Sara Cobb, Ph.D. + 24 Narrative Compression Dominant stories learn to incorporate/harness elements from counternarratives, disconnecting these elements from the logic of the counternarrative, via reframing and frame blending Storylines are shortened, simplified in conflict dynamics Interaction between dominant and counternarratives strengthens the dominant narrative as it learns how to delegitimize those narratives, or ignore them Sara Cobb, Ph.D. Director, Center for the Study of Narrative and Conflict Resolution 12/19/2012 + 25 Thickening Stories: Landscapes of Identity Landscapes of Action (White, 2007) Landscape of Identity: Feelings, values, commitments, D B C A E Landscape of Action: Events, episodes, past, present, future Sara Cobb, Ph.D. Director, Center for the Study of Narrative and Conflict Resolution 12/19/2012 + 26 Culture and Narrative: Identity Politics Culture in community is both resource for new narrative and the force that restricts/governs against new narratives, within groups (“bonding narratives”) and between groups (bridging narratives) Narrative mediation can increase bridging narratives, and “thicken” bonding narratives Storytelling as a critical expression/production of culture Storylines as cultural frameworks for moral judgment,