Family Feuds Are Forever

Abstract

A follow-up reflection on the writing of “Family Feuds are Forever” explores how writing autoethnographically is not an innocent practice. When we write, we become vulnerable to others’ readings of our words and lived experiences. Yet, as writers of social science texts, we welcome this vulnerability, and in doing so, we discard our innocence. We create interpretations of events and a record for ourselves, and others, that are subject to outside and inside scrutiny. This reflection explores how writing autoethnographically as in “Family Feuds are Forever” challenges us to be ethical with ourselves and others.

Keywords

family conflict autoethnographic writing ethics

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Denzin

(1999). Two-stepping in the ’90s. Qualitative Inquiry, 5, 568-572.

Ellis

(2007). Telling secrets, revealing lives: Relational ethnics in research with intimate others. Qualitative Inquiry, 13, 3-29.

Giorgio

(2008). The wedding dress. Qualitative Inquiry, 15, 397-408.

Giorgio

(2010a). Gigi’s tipis. Qualitative Inquiry, 16, 616-620.

Giorgio

(2010b). The hermit and the old goat. Qualitative Inquiry, 16, 612-615.

Kumamoto

(2002). Bakhtin’s others and writing as bearing witness to the eloquent “I.” College Composition and Communication, 54, 66-87.

Lincoln

Cannella

(2014, May). Experimental writing. ICQI Qualitative Workshop 2014, Champaign–Urbana, IL.

Richardson

(1994). Writing: A method of inquiry. In Denzin

N. K.

Lincoln

Y. S.

(Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 516-529). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Richardson

(1995). Writing-stories: Co-authoring “The sea monster,” a writing-story. Qualitative Inquiry, 1, 189-203.

10.

Stohl

Schell

(1991). A communication-based model of small group dysfunction. Management Communication Quarterly, 5, 90-110.