专业化社会运动中的个人叙事*

Francesca Polletta, Tania DoCarmo, K. Ward, J. Callahan
{"title":"专业化社会运动中的个人叙事*","authors":"Francesca Polletta, Tania DoCarmo, K. Ward, J. Callahan","doi":"10.17813/1086-671X-26-1-65","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Professionalized movement organizations today rely on outside expertise in fundraising, recruitment, lobbying, management, and public messaging. We argue that the risks that accompany that development have less to do with experts’ mixed loyalties to the movement than with the tendency of expert discourse to remake political problems into technical ones, thereby obscuring the dilemmatic choices movement groups must make. We focus on expert discourse around personal storytelling, a strategy that has become popular for raising funds, advocating for policy, and building public support. Our interviews with activists and consultants and content analysis of stories they rated as successful point to an expert discourse that emphatically rejects “victim” storytelling. Instead, activists are instructed to tell stories of hope and resilience, avoid referring to the graphic details of abuse, and only hint at their emotional pain. Experts justify these strategies as the best way to avoid exploiting storytellers, and only coincidentally as also appealing to audiences. However, we argue that, rather than superseding the tension between empowering movement participants and persuading those outside the movement, storytelling as currently practiced has reproduced that tension.","PeriodicalId":151940,"journal":{"name":"Mobilization: An International Quarterly","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"PERSONAL STORYTELLING IN PROFESSIONALIZED SOCIAL MOVEMENTS*\",\"authors\":\"Francesca Polletta, Tania DoCarmo, K. Ward, J. Callahan\",\"doi\":\"10.17813/1086-671X-26-1-65\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Professionalized movement organizations today rely on outside expertise in fundraising, recruitment, lobbying, management, and public messaging. We argue that the risks that accompany that development have less to do with experts’ mixed loyalties to the movement than with the tendency of expert discourse to remake political problems into technical ones, thereby obscuring the dilemmatic choices movement groups must make. We focus on expert discourse around personal storytelling, a strategy that has become popular for raising funds, advocating for policy, and building public support. Our interviews with activists and consultants and content analysis of stories they rated as successful point to an expert discourse that emphatically rejects “victim” storytelling. Instead, activists are instructed to tell stories of hope and resilience, avoid referring to the graphic details of abuse, and only hint at their emotional pain. Experts justify these strategies as the best way to avoid exploiting storytellers, and only coincidentally as also appealing to audiences. However, we argue that, rather than superseding the tension between empowering movement participants and persuading those outside the movement, storytelling as currently practiced has reproduced that tension.\",\"PeriodicalId\":151940,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Mobilization: An International Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Mobilization: An International Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17813/1086-671X-26-1-65\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mobilization: An International Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17813/1086-671X-26-1-65","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

如今,专业化的运动组织在筹款、招募、游说、管理和公共信息方面依赖外部专家。我们认为,伴随这种发展而来的风险与其说是与专家对运动的混合忠诚有关,不如说是与专家话语将政治问题重新塑造为技术问题的倾向有关,从而模糊了运动团体必须做出的两难选择。我们的重点是围绕个人故事的专家论述,这是一种在筹集资金、倡导政策和建立公众支持方面很受欢迎的策略。我们对活动人士和顾问的采访,以及对他们认为成功的故事的内容分析,表明了一种专家话语,强烈反对“受害者”叙事。相反,活动人士被要求讲述希望和坚韧的故事,避免提及虐待的生动细节,只暗示他们的情感痛苦。专家认为,这些策略是避免利用讲故事者的最佳方式,巧合的是,它们也能吸引观众。然而,我们认为,与其说是取代赋予运动参与者权力和说服运动之外的人之间的紧张关系,不如说是目前实践的讲故事再现了这种紧张关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
PERSONAL STORYTELLING IN PROFESSIONALIZED SOCIAL MOVEMENTS*
Professionalized movement organizations today rely on outside expertise in fundraising, recruitment, lobbying, management, and public messaging. We argue that the risks that accompany that development have less to do with experts’ mixed loyalties to the movement than with the tendency of expert discourse to remake political problems into technical ones, thereby obscuring the dilemmatic choices movement groups must make. We focus on expert discourse around personal storytelling, a strategy that has become popular for raising funds, advocating for policy, and building public support. Our interviews with activists and consultants and content analysis of stories they rated as successful point to an expert discourse that emphatically rejects “victim” storytelling. Instead, activists are instructed to tell stories of hope and resilience, avoid referring to the graphic details of abuse, and only hint at their emotional pain. Experts justify these strategies as the best way to avoid exploiting storytellers, and only coincidentally as also appealing to audiences. However, we argue that, rather than superseding the tension between empowering movement participants and persuading those outside the movement, storytelling as currently practiced has reproduced that tension.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信