Suggested citation:

Kelly, T. L. (2001). "The Narrative Dance around the Maypole: a Choreographic Analysis of the Movements of A Narrator that Reveal the Locus of Control of the Narrative." (Unpublished graduate paper, Portland State University, March 2001). Portland, OR: Author.

NOTE: THIS IS AN ANALYSIS OF A TRANSCRIPT, FOUND HERE

Introduction

What interests me about this narrative is the relationship between the narrator's movements in the narrative and how these movements reveal the locus of control of the narrative. This means I will analyze where the narrator travels (or "dances") in relation to the locus of control, and by this analysis I can identify the nature of influence of the locus of control. This is a structural analysis, but more closely, it is an analysis of significant elements of setting in motion. That is why I call it an "analysis of the choreography" of a narrative. My major influence for this analysis design comes from On Time and Method by Janice R. Kelly and Joseph E. McGrath:

"On Time and Method is a systematic, detailed treatment of how temporal factors enter research methodology, how they can affect the outcomes and interpretations of those studies, and how attention to them can strengthen research practice. The authors discuss temporal factors inherent in causal inference and the assumptions researchers make about them, temporal factors involved in choosing and constructing research strategies and research designs, and finally temporal factors in measurement and manipulation of variables. Extended examples on how such factors can operate in actual research programmes are provided." (Kelly & McGrath, 1988)

In this analysis, I will focus in on the elements and transitions of time and place as they move the narrator through the narrative, and how the narrator chooses her "place" in the narrative.

This is a significant analysis because the location of the narrator tells us something about how close she will place herself to what she is telling, and how far she displaces herself from the telling by her movements through time and place. There is evidence in sociology and psychology that the physical or psychic distance we place ourselves in relation to a person, place, or thing tells us something about our emotional relationship to that person, place, or thing. (Kihlstrom, Marchese and Klein 1997) For instance, child psychologists make deductions about the emotional state of a child based on where she places herself in relation to others when asked to draw a picture of her family. In a Jungian analysis this would speak to where a child is in her process of healing from the "wound" or the locus of control in the picture. Such deductions are also made regarding the timeframe - past, present or future - a patient uses to describe a traumatic event. Furthermore, there is significance attached to the displacement of self by using "you" versus "I" when describing emotional effects (i.e. "I got angry when he hit me" versus "You get angry when someone hits you."). The significance, among other things, indicates the extent of wounding and a measure of healing.

These are effects I considered for analysis of parts of my transcript. By deconstructing these effects, I will deduce the location of the locus of control of the narrative. By "locus of control" I mean the "magnetic" center of the narrative (imagining "the narrative" as a 3-dimensional space with a shape that is dynamic according to the movements of the narrator within it, but otherwise "holds together" by power of the locus of control). The locus is "magnetic" because it has the power to anchor the narrative to itself - in effect, to keep the narrative from fragmenting and floating off into space. It tells us something about the narrator's central concern, because it continuously "pulls" the narrator back into its space of influence. This is not the same as the subject of the narrative or even the meaning of the narrative. The locus of control is often never addressed in the narrative itself but is only inferred as a result of its influence. An analogy of this phenomenon could be a Black Hole in space - it pulls everything to it, and that is how we know it is there, otherwise it cannot be seen. One way to infer its influence is where a narrator "goes" after a closure of one part of a narrative, a pause, and then an entrance into another part. If a pattern develops in the spatial relationship revealed in these transitions, it could be deduced that the locus of control is exercising its influence.

This analysis will refer to line numbers rather than repeat the lines themselves, or in the case of fragments or multiple lines, will indicate thusly in an obvious indication of reference:

(47)"your kids runnin'... that's all" (48)
or
(16) always so busy with something (16)
or
(10) .. (11)

This is so the analysis can be easily followed while providing quick reference, assuming that the narrative sets alongside the analysis.

Analysis

E. enters her narrative in a space where a television set is within earshot and perhaps an "old movie" is playing. (10)..(11) Since it is an "old" movie, the narrator has entered the narrative through a safe opening in the past ("safe" because that is usually where we chose to enter any self-referential narrative, honoring social norms as well as psychic pressure). E. then quickly moves a safe distance from this past while remaining inside the narrative by indicating that the image she is searching for is (13) a long time ago (14) and that she is moving away from it by being (16) always so busy with something (16), busy enough where she would only be within "earshot" of the subject (17) once or twice (17). These are all indications of E. finding her "spot" (a la Castaneda) in this memory, and it is significant that soon after entering this narrative space she is already moving quickly in a "busy" manner.

The first significant pause occurs here (17)..(19) and is typical of the influence of locus of control because during the pause she has stopped moving, and begins to describe what is playing in "the old movie" (figuratively and literally speaking) that indicates her perception of the subject: "The American Dream." She sees (19) a big house, lotsa kids, big family, lots of good things to eat, and lots of money (20). She continues to remain in one place - the past- while viewing this "old movie," using (19) "I see" (19) rather than "I saw" to indicate where she is. But then she quickly displaces herself to the present outside the narrative space by laughing (a natural reaction to anxiety and a good indication of psychic displacement away from that which is making one anxious). It is not so significant that she jumps into and out of the narrative space so early in the telling, because it is just as well an action performed to invite the listener into the space, as a gesture of good will (and therefore obeying a social norm). In other words, dancing in and out of the narrative (either through time or space) a few times in the beginning is a universally (unconscious) recognized way to say "You (the listener) are welcome into my 'home', the narrative space." This does not mean we invite the listener to interact in any other capacity besides listening - it is simply a gesture of good will.

Now E. reshapes the narrative space, through unconscious interaction with the "pull" of the locus of control, by including a "future" in relation to the past (not a future in relation to her present). She begins with (22) "there'd be the idea" (22), as opposed to "there is the idea" or "there was the idea" so that "the idea" is a safe distance from her as she wanders back into the narrative through the established gateway into the past. Then, perhaps, an influence is revealed that would account for her displacing herself in this manner: in the very same sentence with no natural breaks (i.e. .hhh or hhh) she displaces to the immediate present by revealing (23) "it's not always like that for black folk" (24). What these movements and abrupt transitions (choreography!) do for the narrative as a whole is to reshape the narrative to now include the immediate present. Think of the movie The Blob, and the blob suddenly moves to engulf a building. That's what this "choreography" looks like. The "blob" (the narrative) moves to engulf where E. has displaced herself to - previously the comfort zone outside the boundaries of the narrative - so that now E. is back inside the narrative though it is the narrative that has come to her rather than E. dancing back into the former boundaries of the narrative. What "force" accounts for the sudden expansion of "the blob," allowing it to engulf the present? That force is the locus of control, which has not yet been revealed enough to name it, but which is there nonetheless. Another indication towards defining the locus is what the narrator is saying when the "engulfing" takes place - in this case, E. is referring to the status of "black folk" in relation to the subject matter, "The American Dream." This would be a place in the narrative to earmark a "sighting" of the locus and, after marking all sightings, analyze the relationship between what prompts the sighting (or, what causes the locus to reveal itself - an unnatural act because it renders the locus vulnerable).

Now, directly after this revelation, there is a natural pause (24) .hhh (24) which may indicate a "settling in" of the narrator (and perhaps - if we accept the reality of collective conscious - the settling in of the listener as well) into the newly expanded space. Now it is necessary to locate the past, present, and future in relation to this expansion, locate the narrator in relation to these changes, and so on.

This is how a "choreographic analysis" goes. The rendering above is repeated with only slight deviation in examples throughout the narrative, showing a "movement" characteristic of choreography. (For the sake of brevity while not betraying the intention of this paper - to show how a choreographic analysis is rendered, with emphasis on revealing locus of control - I will not deconstruct the entire interview lest this paper be 100 pages long!) An important characteristic of the locus of control is that it is usually a paradox of some sort - just as the rebirth of the star in a black hole relies on the collapse - or death - of that same star. In short, the locus of control in a black hole is the point at which life and death is taking place at the same moment of time, in the same pinpoint of space. The continuous life of the force depends on the continuous death of the force - thus the paradox - and the same can be said of the locus of control of a narrative analyzed for its choreography. What is fueling it is also what is causing it to seek its own "death" - the closure of the narrative, the end of the story.

Conclusion

I have scanned over a few more parts of this narrative in order to draw a few conclusions about what a choreographic analysis of this narrative might reveal about the locus of control. Basically, the area of influence appears to go through its evolutionary changes as a result of E.'s displacement from what she perceives as The American Dream. There are many examples of abrupt transition of space and time whenever E. attempts to sift the subject matter through the sieve of her experience of racial identity and poverty. It is as if every time she gets close enough to "the dream" to search for her own reflection, "the dream," like a bubble, floats away from her and disappears, only to pop again in another location in the space of the narrative. She continues to pursue this "bubble" in order to describe it clearly to the listener, but her very movements seem to contribute to its wandering away from her. When she does get close enough to see her reflection in the soapy film of the bubble, the bubble bursts. The interaction between her and the bubble continuously shapes and reshapes the space of the narrative, until something of a center around which all this movement is taking place can be cautiously inferred.

I think the locus of control in this narrative rises up to reveal itself most clearly when E. suddenly draws the past, present and future into one united force when she says (59) ...and just look at 'em! Look at 'em there... (60). This is a significant place in the narrative, because E. is everywhere at the same time - she becomes the space - for just a few seconds. In these few seconds she also becomes the force of cohesion of the space. And when you look at her in that moment of revelation, she is pointing (figuratively) at the white people on the TV, pointing at "The American Dream," disgusted with their values, amazed at their audacity, solid in her conviction that her core values are superior.

But only for a moment. Then, as the paradox becomes clear, in order for her core values to live, the dream must die. The American Dream cannot be for her, because it has no place in her hierarchy of core values. While it is The American Dream she must embrace in order to rise above poverty and oppression in the culture she lives in, that very dream betrays her core values of what makes up a good life. Although E. displaces this value system to all "black folk," in the context of this narrative the paradox is hers alone. Because not only is The American Dream rarely available to "black folk" as a matter of social hierarchy but, as an extension of E.'s core value system, it should not be available to them if they wish to uphold the delicate structure of their pride and dignity.

The locus of control is the paradox of what we talk about when we talk about "values," and is therefore a member of a universal paradox, which will naturally manifest itself in narratives of all kinds.

References

Kelly, Janice R & Joseph E. McGrath. On Time and Method. Applied Social Research Methods Series, Vol. 13. London, UK: Sage, 1988

Kihlstrom, J.F., L.A. Marchese and S.B. Klein. Situating the self in interpersonal space. The Conceptual Self in Context: Culture, experience, self-understanding. U. Neisser & D.A. Jopling, eds. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997. 154-175.