A Narrative Discourse Analysis
of a Midlife Woman’s Story
of Her Return to College

Tamara Bollis-Pecci
@ The Columbus State University

Abstract

This study employs both narrative and discourse analytic perspectives as a means of closely examining one midlife woman’s story of her recent return to college. The focus of this analysis is how the narrative of the life story reveals this particular woman’s process of reconstitution of self at midlife. A preliminary analysis of two brief segments of a larger interview reveals several important themes. Included in the discussion are notions of redefining the self, confidence, autonomy and independence, changing gender roles, and perceiving opportunity.

This research was partially inspired by an introductory communication class taught by the author several years ago at a large public university in the southeastern United States. The class consisted entirely of "nontraditional" students from the university's "mini college", and most of the students were women over the age of 40. As these individuals introduced themselves, it became apparent that they were all experiencing some type of life change.  Many were recently divorced, some had been laid off from jobs, some had children in the process of leaving home or returning home, and all were returning to college either for the first time or after many years of absence. This unique group formed a bond as a class, and they referred to themselves as the "Up from the ‘PITs’ [or "Persons In Transitions] Group". One woman in the class, Stella, age 50, characterized the spirit of the group when asked what she planned to do with her degree. She answered, "Honey, I'm gonna hang it on my wall, and I'm gonna look at it.  I put a husband and two kids through school. Now it's my turn." Stella and the other women in that class opened my eyes to the experiences and realities of midlife women in life transitions. In retrospect, it became clear that these women were not simply changing their circumstances, they were changing their "selves". These women were reconstructing their realities as well as their definitions of themselves - as wives, as mothers, as students, and, perhaps most importantly, as women. These women frequently spoke about how they had experienced a sort of self-transformation via this new endeavor. The stories these women shared with me and with each other led me to question what might be discovered were I to closely examine one woman’s story of her return to college and reconstitution of herself as a result of the process.

Area of Study

In order to gain a closer perspective and understanding of this type of story telling in this particular context, the author chose to employ two complementary methodologies.  These methodologies were employed as a way of closely examining two episodes extracted from an interview conducted with one midlife woman, in which she was asked to share her story of her return to college at midlife. First, discourse analysis was used as the primary and central method of inquiry.  For a conceptual definition, this study borrowed from Tracey (1998) who states that in the communication discipline, “discourse analysis is the close study of talk (or text) in context…situated within an interpretive social science meta-theory that conceives of meanings as socially constructed” (p. 10). Second, several principles of narrative were used as grounding for conducting this analysis of storytelling. Here, the author is not referring to storytelling in the literary sense, with identifiable plots, beginnings, and endings, but rather storytelling in the sense of a telling of one’s life story. Gergen (1991) describes the life story as a type of "account you might give if musing over how you got to be where you are" (p. 161). The life story is orally exchanged between people, and the content and themes of the story depend on social and personal relationships and is most often told in adherence to existing conventions, so as to be accepted as true. The stories are often temporal, changing with new information and experiences acquired by the narrator (Linde, 1993).  For example, these accounts or descriptions may be positive or negative, encompassing both "success stories" and "failure stories" (Gergen, 1991).  The two brief episodes of the life story analyzed here also satisfy Linde’s (1993) two identified criteria: 1) the discourse is inherently a personal statement about the speaker, and 2) the discourse has "extended reportability", and has the potential to be retold multiple times (p. 21).

In terms of narrative, the approach the author draws from for this analysis stems from a conceptualization of the self-narrative.  Self-narrative can be defined as a referring “to ourselves or to the self of another person in a variety of ways that derive from the different vantage points that we occupy at different times and in different emotional contexts” (Schafer, 1992).  Self-narrative allows individuals to tell various narrative versions of more than one self, rather than being limited to the fixed telling of a set narrative.

Theoretical Perspective

In order to understand the realities that these women in transition form, it is important to first understand how those realities come into being and how meanings are assigned.  The social-construction-of-reality theory suggests that meanings are derived from communication with others (Berger & Luckman, 1966).  The belief that there is not one objective reality, but various realities that individuals create has been proposed by those associated with the development of theories of social constructionism (Berger & Luckman, 1966; Von Foerster, 1984).  Gergen (1985) expanded the idea of the social construction of reality, and how social constructionism describes how individuals explain their views and life-experiences. Social constructionism also states that the realities individuals create (and may take for granted) influence their patterns of interaction and emphasizes the formation of a relational reality via conversations, actions and reactions, and sequence of events (Berger & Luckman, 1966).

By applying the social-construction-of-reality theory to women in midlife transition, one would be able to study their changing perceptions of self by focusing on their interactions with others as they tell and re-tell the story of their return to college and the everyday talk that constitutes those interactions.  Wood (1982) asserts that "it is through talk that persons define themselves and their relationships (p. 75)".  It can be concluded that the longer this process continues the more real and sustained these objectifications become for the individuals.  This reality is not only constructed through conversation, but sustained, repaired, changed, and maintained as well (Berger & Kellner, 1964).

Women in midlife have much to offer researchers in terms of understanding changes that often occurs at this stage of life.  Many individuals experience divorce, separation, a second marriage, and issues surrounding family configuration, such as aging or dying parents, teenage children or step-children.  Women’s' approach to and satisfaction with midlife is also related to the meaning that they assign to the events that occur during this life stage. As people progress through developmental stages, transitions will inevitably occur.  Psychologists such as Erik Erikson (1950) and Carl Jung (1933) agree that the quality of the midlife transition will be dramatically affected by the manner in which previous developmental stages and the related tasks have been mastered, examined, and integrated into the personality, health, family, career, and relationships.

Context

In conducting this analysis, included are notions of both context and audience, which Langellier (1989) has identified as being left out the commonly employed Labovian model of personal narrative.  Considering all aspects of context, Mishler’s (1986) warnings are heeded via an acknowledgement that there was inevitable influence by the author as interviewer on the conversation being analyzed here, as well as the effects of the interview as a process in and of itself.  While it may be difficult to lend interpretation to any possible influence effects, the author nonetheless hopes to acknowledge the possible influences whenever it seems appropriate.

The Interactants

Jane is a 36 year old woman who has, by biological definition, recently entered her midlife years.  The definition of midlife is broad, as it may begin in the early 30's for some and may end in the late 50's for others (Cardinell, 1981).  Jane’s return to college began with her Master’s degree, and at the time of the interview, she had recently begun working toward a PhD.

Jane and the author know each other well; they are friends and were in many of the same graduate courses together.  Her story is not one the author is new to, in fact, her story is one the author has heard her tell many parts of this story of self-transformation before.  This can be seen in the second episode, where in line 8, Jane answers the authors question before it is even finished.  Certainly, this same relational connectedness would not have existed would another person have conducted this interview.  It may, therefore, be more accurate to refer to this recorded discussion as a “conversational interview”, rather than an “interview” in the strictest sense.  There is no doubt that as a participant in this interaction, the author violated what some would consider to be the “proper” role of an interviewer.  For example, in both line 5 of the first episode and in line 23 of episode 2, the author interjects suppositions as to what Jane might be thinking, rather than allowing for complete objectivity.  Furthermore, in the second episode, one can easily see the author’s own laughter interjected and overlapping with Jane’s comments.  This reaction undoubtedly functioned as a confirming and encouraging response to her statements, although one cannot speculate as to whether the validity of her statements should be called into question.  The author does, however, feel a high degree of confidence in the truthfulness of her responses in that, as friends, one can assume that she is not likely to falsify her experiences to someone who is frequently a witness to her life events.

This conversational interview with Jane took place in the kitchen of her home, over tea.  The interview was audio recorded and at various times, notes were taken for the purpose of recording interactional (nonverbal or nonvocal) data and responses that would not be sufficiently recorded or interpreted via audio recording and written transcripts.

Transcripts

The following two brief episodes were selected for analysis because they illustrate two similar, yet distinct approaches Jane takes in the telling of her self-transformation.  In Episode 1, Jane discusses how she was able to change her self-esteem and confidence through more internal and self-directed means.  On the other hand, in Episode 2, Jane discusses how she reconstructed herself in relation to as well as via interactions with her life partner.  While these are two very different episodes, taken together they illustrate the multiple ways in which Jane has worked to transform herself through her return to college.


Episode 1:
Interview with Jane

1          J:           …but it was pretty a×h a big thing for me and

2                        I think it was more a self esteem thing¯

3          I:            Mm

4          J:           I didn’t think (.1) I could do (well)

5          I:            Mm hm.  (.5)  And I suppose that’s changed.

6          J:           ­YEAH it has changed a lot (2.0) ah ­mm  ­this quarter is na a little

7                        different because now it’s pee h dee and I’m now I’m ba actually back at

8                        square one ahm my fir and it’s like ahm ×HHH (inhaling sharply)

9                        >> I can’t do this I can’t do this I can’t do this how did I get here an

10                      what am I doing PLE::A:SE how did ah can’t do this can’t do this

11                      no-no-no-no-no- <<

12                      So (.2) I think I’m kind of in the same place.  I have more confidence

13        I:             Um hm (.3)

14        J:            and  °I’m really proud  I did my Master’s.° (.2)

15        I:             [Mm

16        J:            It] really is a thing about being a woman an I think the whole

17                      reason I did pee h dee was because they dangled the carrot (.2)

18                      and I think I just want the letters behind my name because I’m a woman

19                      (1.0) and because I have the opportunity I don’t think I should pass it up.

20        I:            (.3)  Mm hm

21        J:          That was part of my decision (.2)

22                     ° and it had a lot to do with just being a woman¯°

Episode 2:
Interview with Jane

1          J:            Umm Elliott and I have changed a lo:t

2          I:              Really?

3          J:            ° I don’t put up with his bullshit anymore °

4          I:             Ha HA­ ha¯

5          J:            I’m cuz you know I also am taking him off the pedestal [ah

6          I:                                                                                                   [does he

7                         have an? um=

8          J:            = He’s all but dissertation

9                        …but yeah the playing field’s much more level (.2) I (.2)

10                      I stand up to him more as a woman=I (2.0)

11                      I don’t like go (swooning with her hands clasped and next to her face)

12                      ~ Wow he’s so sma::hrt~  I’m just no:thing it’s like (changing voice again)

13                      YO  that’s a dumb opinion an let me tell you why I think so

14        I:            Ha ha ha he he

15        J:          AN I don’t have as much fear as as um cuz he does pay most

16                     of the bills here

17        I:            Um hm

18        J:            and I used to feel really ba::d about that an (.2) feel like I had

19                        to do everything he said (.2) kind of you know knowing my personality not

20                        QUITE but kind of I had that issue going on and now it’s [like

21        I:                                                                                              [mm hm

22        J:            chh I’ll just ­leave

23        I:              and I CAN                [he he he he

24        J:             [ (I’ll get) my own apartment.  I’ll live on macaroni and cheese! 

25                        ­I don’t [­care!

26        I:               [ah ha ha ha

27        J:            So that’s changed. (.3) That’s probably the one that’s changed the well

28                        the one that I feel the most about (.3) and feel the best about.      

Analysis

When asked to discuss her decision to return to college and what, if anything, motivated her decision, Jane’s responses in both Episode 1 and Episode 2 included issues associated with her re-constitution of self, including self-esteem, confidence, autonomy and independence, and gender roles.  Furthermore, another overarching concept that can be seen in the discourse, is Jane’s depiction of opportunity, and more specifically the “dangling of the carrot”.  Through close inspection of the discourse, it becomes clear that it is not the transition itself that is of primary importance, but rather how the transition serves as a change agent in this particular woman’s socially constructed reality and reconstitution of self during midlife.

Redefining Self

Self-esteem

Especially poignant was how Jane related ways in which she believed she had changed - in some ways almost completely, and in other ways via smaller changes in both self-concept and self-esteem. Along with increased confidence, autonomy, and independence, Jane’s overt awareness of her increased self-esteem also seemed to emerge.  In Episode 1, she links this increase in her self-esteem (line 6) to something that she has achieved (line 14 “and I’m really proud I did my Master’s”).  Through statements such as these, Jane illustrates her perceptions of herself as a midlife woman in college, and the fact that she was beginning to like what she saw.

In the first episode, Jane makes statements about her present state of mind (lines 6-12), juxtaposed by statements about what the past looked like for her, or how she was in the past (lines 1,2, and 4).  She makes some of these statements in a dramatic fashion, taking on a different voice in lines 9-11 to emphasize the difference, and make the distinction between who she is now, and the person she perceives that she used to be.  In Episode 2, lines 12 and 13, we see the same dramatic bit in the episode involving voice changes.  This use of different voices in the narrative has several key functions within the narrative.  First, it draws the listener in by essentially re-enacting the typical messages of self-doubt Jane continues to experience from time to time.  By stepping out of the role of the storyteller, and into a “highly dramatic episode”, Jane may also be making “an active alliance with the woman interviewer” (Riessman, 1992, p. 237).  It can be seen how these voice changes “strike a responsive chord with the interviewer … (and) suggests a solidarity between the women” has developed (Riessman, 1992, p. 238), as can be seen in the interviewer’s frequent laughter in Episode 2, as well as her interjection of the statement “and I CAN” in line 23 of Episode 2.

Besides the acknowledgment that she had changed, Jane also pointed out very specific ways in which she believed she had changed.  For example, in Episode 1, line 12, she mentions her increased confidence, and in Episode 2, she tells of how she has changed herself by changing how she interacts with her life partner.

Confidence

Jane’s use of the dramatic scenes in Episode 1, lines 9-11, and in Episode 2, lines 11-13, also create what Schafer (1992) calls a “storyline” (p. 29).  This storyline allows Jane to construct multiple versions or stories.  In these bits of dialogue, Jane is enacting a self-representation, and thereby, announcing her realization of herself in many different roles, both past and present.  Regarding lines 9-11 of discourse from Episode 1, it seems that Jane is representing to the interviewer her recurring sense of self-doubt or panic, in a dramatic sense.  This may be an external display of an internal dialogue that is quite common for many midlife women.  In fact, for many there is a certain amount of self-questioning about what they are doing with their lives, and a look at the fulfillment of their ambitions (Stevens, 1991). In contrast, a few seconds later, Jane states in line 12 of the first episode that she now has more confidence.  From the progression of the discourse, we can see that she states how she is more sure of herself, as she contrasts a dramatic display of self-doubt with statements of self-confidence (i.e. “I have more confidence” and “I’m really proud I did my Master’s”) and even vocal displays of confidence in Epispode 2.  Indeed, Jane’s statements may be quite typical of many women experiencing similar midlife transitions as they return to college.  Success in navigating through these midlife transitions frequently depends on the progression from having no freedom and control to asserting control and creating new scenarios.  Planning, a rebuilding of a positive identity, a renewed sense of purpose, and an establishing of an internal locus of control are considered to be the most important attributes for those experiencing midlife transitions (Crow, 1987).  In light of some of the uncertainty Jane demonstrates in the discourse, it is interesting to see where some of this confidence might come from.  In lines 7 and 12 of Episode 1, we see two related statements - being “back at square one” and “in the same place”.  These statements, when viewed in light of the surrounding statements of doubt and uncertainty, reveal a sort of confidence that stems from familiarity, recognition, and acceptance.  This confidence draws from a knowing of having been in this place before, that survival and success can be accomplished, and an acceptance that this mental “place” is safe for the time.

Autonomy & Independence

In addition to self-esteem, in Episode 2 we can see that becoming increasingly self-sufficient and independent is also important to Jane.  Starting in Episode 2, line 15, she states "AN I don't have as much fear…” followed once again by several statements referring to how she used to be, and finally completed with a demonstrative, and strong series of statements about her confidence in her ability to be on her own and self-sufficient.    Beginning in line 22 and continuing to line 25, she firmly asserts, “I’ll just leave….  I'll get my own apartment.  I’ll live on macaroni and cheese - I don't care!”.  She then ends this particular episode by changing her tone once again, and making a rather serious reflection on the changes that she has just finished speaking of.  We can gain a sense of just how important these changes are to Jane when she states in the final line of Episode 2, that this change is “the one that I feel the most about, and feel the best about”.

Gender Roles

A frequent point Jane brings up in these two episodes, is the reference she makes to herself as a woman.  The first mention of this is in Episode 1, line 16, and is continued in line 18 with the statement “because I’m a woman”, and put together in line 22 when she very quietly states, “and it had a lot to do with just being a woman”.  The fact that this last statement was made so quietly made it stand out all that much more in the analysis.  In telling stories, or proving accounts, individuals often use dramatic changes in volume as a way of adding emphasis or importance to what is said.  One can consider Jane’s final statement of Episode 1 to have been said with similar intent (i.e. “this is important”).

In talking about her life partner in Episode 2, Jane makes a series of statements about him no longer being on a pedestal (line 5), about the newly level playing field (line 9), and about standing up to him as a woman (line 10).  It may be that she is not simply referring to her life partner here, but rather to men in the general, societal sense.  It is also important to note here, that not only does she refer to him coming down, but to her coming up as well (“standing up to him more as a woman”).  Also important in these several lines, is how Jane states “I’m also taking him off the pedestal”.  Her life partner didn’t simply step down to her level, it was Jane who states that she was the one who took him down, again emphasizing the changes in her self-confidence.

Line 3 of Episode 2 also makes a pretty important statement as Jane quietly states “I don’t put up with his bullshit anymore” in response to a previous question of how her relationships have changed since returning to college.  Her emphatic response here implies a firm stance, and a lack of acceptance or toleration of how they related in the past.  She later (once again in a different dramatic voice) mocks how she used to relate to him, in Episode 2, line 12 (“Wow, he’s so smart.”).  This statement is immediately followed by a strong statement demonstrating how she now relates to him with more authority and voice (“Yo, that’s a dumb opinion, an let me tell you why I think so”).  Jane seems to be comfortable with the decisions she’s made, even though they are counter to the cultural norms.  She states how she used to buy into the societal attitude, and accepts that she did this, but now rejects those attitudes in light of her new found identity.

Opportunity

Jane’s response in Episode 1 also mentions a sense of  "opportunity” (line 19).  This statement of opportunity may be in reference to several different things.  “Opportunity” may refer to learning, personal growth, or simply being able to go to school and gain the enrichment from it, or perhaps recognition of the "timing" of her decision.

“Dangling the Carrot”

In Episode 1, line 17, Jane states that she believes the reason she went on to do PhD work was “because they dangled the carrot”.  I believe this metaphorical depiction to be a central component of this episode, and because this singular statement has several interwoven elements, it warrants closer inspection.  In fact, the metaphorical entailments of this statement may function in very much the same way as the aforementioned storyline, enabling Jane to provide yet another variation of her story.

To begin, what is this carrot Jane speaks of here?  At first glance, we might assume the carrot to simply be the PhD, however, closer inspection reveals a multitude of possible alternatives.  This metaphorical carrot is more than what it represents at face value.  The carrot might also includes the status, respect, confidence, independence, and autonomy that Jane speaks of so strongly (or alludes to) in other parts of the discourse. Perhaps she can see the carrot, or perhaps her statement “my Masters”, and her sense of owning the degree (“my”) represents that she has taken a bite of that “carrot”, but now wants the entire carrot.  Perhaps even now she can smell it and taste it - the first bite having whetted her appetite even more. Secondly, what significance, or entailments might there be of the notion of the carrot “dangling”?  Perhaps Jane sees the carrot, in a sense, and notes that it’s just out of reach, that it looks good, and is tempting.   Perhaps the dangling carrot is the “opportunity” she says she couldn’t “pass up”.  Furthermore, the fact that the carrot is dangling could represent a belief that the carrot might not be there later (I might be too old, have children at a critical stage, or a family emergency). Lastly, who is the “they” Jane speaks regarding those who are dangling this carrot?  And of what significance might they be?  Again, at first thought, the “they” Jane speaks of may refer to the university, her department, or even her professors.  However, in light of the context of the discourse, we can point up additional possibilities.  “They” might in this case refer to society as a whole, or the social community of which she sees herself as being a part.  Another possibility is that “they” here is referring to a different social community that she wants to be a part of.  In this case, “they” may represent something Jane sees as something she is not quite yet a part of, yet wishes to be (perhaps she would like to dangle a carrot herself one day).

Conclusion

Through the telling of Jane’s story in these two related episodes or a narrative, we gain a clear sense of her process of self-transformation, of her growing autonomy and confidence, her understanding of her own womanhood, and of how she views opportunity.  She was able to reconstitute herself as a woman, by first changing the way she say herself via her life transition and returning to college, and later by changing how she interacted with significant others.  Through the telling of the narrative, she is able to strengthen her constructed reality, as well as her transformed perception of self as a confident and independent woman (a “success story”).

References

Berger, P. L., & Kellner, H. (1964).  Marriage and the construction of reality: An exercise in the microsociology of knowledge.  Diogenes, 46, 1-23.

Berger, P. L., & Luckman, T. (1966).  The social construction of reality.  Garden City, NY: Doubleday.

Cardinell, C. F. (1981).  Mid-Life professional crisis: Two hypothesis.  Bethesda, MD: EDRS Reproduction service (ED 208 491).

Crow, M. L. (1987).  Midlife crisis.  The Clearing House, 60, 413-415.

Erikson, E. H. (1950).  Childhood and society.  New York: Norton.

Gergen, K. J. (1985).  The social constructionist movement in modern psychology.  American Psychologist, 40, 266-275.

Gergen, K. J. (1991).  The saturated self.  New York: Harper Collins, Basic Books.

Jung, C. G. (1933).  Modern men in search of a soul. (Ch. 5, the stages of life, pp. 95-114).  New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.

Langellier, K. M. (1989).  Personal narratives: Perspectives on theory and research.  Text and Performance Quarterly, 9(4), 243-276.

Linde, C. (1993).  Life stories: the creation of coherence.  New York: Oxford University Press.

Mishler, E. G. (1986).  Research interviewing: Context and narrative.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Reissman, C. K. (1992).  Making sense of marital violence: one woman’s narrative.  In  Rosenwald, G.C., & Ochberg, R. L. (Eds.), Storied Lives (p. 231-249).  New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Schafer, R. (1992).  Retelling a life: Narrative and dialogue in psychoanalysis.  New York: Harper Collins, Basic Books.

Stevens, P. (1991).  Stop postponing the rest of your life. Sydney, Australia: Paul Stevens Personnel Services.

Tracey, K. (1998, February).  Discourse analysis in communication.  Paper presented at the meeting of the Western States Communication Association, Denver.

Von Foerster, H. (1984).  On construction reality.  In P. Watzlawick (Ed.), The invented reality (pp. 41-61). New York: Norton.

Wood, J. T. (1982).  Communication and relational culture: Bases for the study of human relationships. Communication Quarterly, 30, 75-83.