O'Connor, Alzheimer's, and Narrative
Three years ago it was framing. Now it's narrative -- the new magic communications thing that, if you have it, will make your campaign succeed and guarantee that everything will be all right.
At least that's true in political circles. My private-sector friends are still going on about branding, which is another matter for another time. To the extent there's crossover, political types want to hear all about that private-sector branding mojo. The private sector hasn't yet caught on about narrative. But given the fascination in business communications for all things political, that will come. The grass, as they say, is always greener.
Now, as to narrative -- compared to framing, it's an improvement, at least to this extent: it shifts the focus from technique (how to spin things) to reception (how they're understood). That's a plus. As a mentor of mine used to say about business growth, framing is a bad goal, but it's a good result. If at the end of the day people are persuaded, that's something.
Which is not to say that narrative is the magic bullet. It's not. The current talk about narrative assumes that either you have it, or you don't. It blows past the critical question -- which narrative. And the other critical question -- is your narrative grounded in the facts? Or does it blow past them toward some generalized emotional conclusion. If the latter, it's not going to live long.
What got me thinking about this was the news about Justice O'Connor, her Alzheimer's-afflicted husband, and her willingness to sanction his affair with another patient. To say that this reflects well on her is to put it mildly. Nevertheless I had a somewhat irritable reaction to the whole thing -- well, not to the whole thing, but to the slant of some of the coverage. You can sample my ill temper here.
What I'm against is the O'Connor narrative that says, "Alzheimer's brings out the best in us, so let's all feel good about ourselves. What a wonderful spiritual experience." Sure it does. Or it can. And maybe it is. But there's also the narrative that says, "Your loved ones brains are dissolving and you live in a world of bad choices -- go ahead and make one." That's a narrative I can relate to. And I'm not going to listen to the first one until you agree with me on the second.
The point here is that a one-sided narrative that leaves out half the facts isn't any better than framing. Which is to say it's just spin. Those two narratives don't contradict each other. Maybe they complement each other. If you can hold them both in your mind at once, then you might be on your way to something better than narrative -- such as, for example, reality.
Recent Comments