Quantum Storytelling has a relationship to the triadic of Living Story, Narrative, and Antenarratives

What is Living Story?

David M. Boje 22 May 2012; revised 29 May 2012

ABSTRACT

In this essay I define 'storytellng' as the intra-weaving of 'living story' with 'narrative' in their more quantum relationships of 'antenarrative.' Antenarrative is a bridge between living story and narrative by four pathways: linear-antenarrative, cyclical-antenarrative, spiral-antenarrative, and rhizomatic-antenarrative. Two pathways between living story and narrative, the linear- and cyclic-antenarratives are from past predicted to recur in the future. This is known as retrospective sensemaking. The other two pathways are from the future to the past, in a radical telos causality that requires a discussion of Heisenberg, in relation to Heidegger, Bakhtin, Deleuze, Mead, and Arendt's material ontologists, and what I am calling 'quantum storytelling.' Quantum storytelling is an ontology, and a new language of quantum ways of talking about that ontology. It is a move away from the language and ways of Newtonian mechanistic ontology. It begs the question, of what is our new living story identity in the Quantum Age? My answer is it the epistemic-narrative 'self' surrendering the ontological 'Self' of living story.

Introductory Starting Definitions

Living story is connected to narrative through four kinds of antenarratives. The linear- and cyclic-antenarratives are past-->future, and past-->present recurrences of sameness. The spiral- and rhizomatic-antenarratives are future-->present and future-->past destining, directionalities futurals, drafts (up or down, in & out, left or right quantum directions), and disclosabilites of quantum materiality in a vitalistic sense of living story. Living story is ontological in its Being-in-the-world, its aliveness primordially in lived-life from birth to death. Storytelling is the inter-weave of living story, narrative retrospection, and prospective antenarratives. These various antenarratives (linear-, cyclical-, spiral-, & rhizomatic-) afford different conceptions and enactments of spacetimemattering. And it is through storytelling that narrative works out its relationship with living story Being-ness through linear- and cyclical-antenarrative emptying out of living content of living stories. And it is through storytelling that living story works out its own ontological Being of an avenir (French for future that is shaped and shaping), a future arriving through the spiral- and the rhizomatic-antenarrative to restory the narratives of the past, and resituate the living story web of relationships unfolding in the Present that is without beginning or end. And so here we have two identities, the 'self' of ordinary space-time where 'self' is antenarratively linear or cyclic recurrence from narrative past to future. And the more radical 'Self' that is ontologically a future arriving-ahead-of-itself, to restory the past-narratives via the spiral- and rhizomatic-antenarrative pathways, and even reenliven the Present. So, what is storytelling when these the 'self' and the 'Self' come into negotiation?

WHAT IS STORYTELLING?

Two amazing definitions of storytelling are by Walter Benjamin (1936) and Hannah Arendt (1958), and a recent one by Boje, Jørgensen, & Strand (expected 2013). Benjamin (1936: 83) begins by proclaiming, “The art of storytelling is coming to an end.”

All great storytellers have in common the freedom with which they move up and down the rungs of their experience as on a ladder. A ladder extending downward to the interior of the earth and disappearing into the clouds is the image for a collective experience to which even the deepest shock of every individual experience, death, constitutes no impediment or barrier (Benjamin, 1936: 83).

This I take to be an ontological standpoint on storytelling, and how it is coming to an end with the rise of narrative, and information, displacing the material social conditions where people learned not only storytelling but story-deciphering in story-listening, as well as storytelling-participation to co-create storytelling. Benjamin's ontologic storytelling is this shift in aesthetics that Gertrude Stein (1935), in her classic lecture series, also saw the way the information society increasingly celebrates narrative and information processing, yet also a loss of celebrated the storyteller, who lived in a world of storytelling competencies that changed radically with modern and now our late modern capitalism. Now only the managers sit around honing their storytelling skills, in one meeting after another, while the laborers and workers are separated, yet storytelling in their virtual connectivity on the internal and external Internets.

Hannah Arendt, another critical theorist, wrote the introduction to Benjamin's (1968) book. Ardent's (1958) book, the Human Condition, quotes Erwin Schrödinger (p. 3) as well as Werner Heisenberg (pp. 153, 261, 270, & 287). As Ardent may be less known in storytelling scholarship than Benjamin, I want to spend some quality space on her work, and point out why it is ontological, and how it differs from other ontological storytelling work.

Arendt's (1958) definition of storytelling is ontological, about the lived life of action, and how identity has changed since the ancient Greeks, to where labor and work identities trump the action identity of Self. Arendt was a student of Martin Heidegger, and some say a lover, but parted ways with his ontology, finding he was not practicing what he preached about 'care' in Being-ness.

Ardent developed her own ontology of the way in which 'action' had been overtaken by 'work' and 'labor.' These three action (contemplation and life in polis), labor (coerced necessity to survive, and not much freedom of movement) and work (chosen pursuits with more freedom of movement) are part of the Vita Activa, a vitalistic idea of Being and identity in-the-world, that over the years a hierarchy formed driving action to the margins. "Action" says Arendt (p. 8) is 'the only activity that gets on directly between men without the intermediary of things or matter" and corresponds to the "condition of plurality, to the fact that men, not Man, live on the earth and inhabit the world." You could say Heideggerian ontology forgot about 'action' and focused on the equipmentality, the technologies and process of work and labor. For Ardent, time in the world of things, in Marx's labor-time, labor-power, and work-time is not the same as a life of action, in plurality of political activities and natality of life (pp. 8-9). Nevertheless the "thing-character" of labor and work, and the "human condition" of action supplement one another (p. 9). For Heidegger (1962/1996) the thing-hood of a thing was its use, the in-order-to, for-the-sake-of, that is what I call 'deployability' in the Quantum Storytelling video.

There are certainly remnants of Heideggerian ontology in her work, such as sections on the "dwellers of the universe" (p. 3), but to her "work provides an 'artificial' world of things, distinctly different form all natural surroundings" (p. 7), and "place" (pp. 39, 70). Place that was private, where the laborers, women and slaved, dwelled, has undergone a transformation from ancient times, through early modern, and into modern and late modern capitalism. It is a transition, by storytelling, in "abolition: of the "place of one;s own: labor-power, where it is not long a place of dwelling in the private realm, and instead we "consume daily" (p. 70). It is a process of disintegration with the consequence of the dissolution of the private realm of labor, because the process of accumulation has become a permeance process in late capitalism, where the social has evaporated both the private and public realms, and changed our identity of Self into a self.

Our modern discovery of living story (explained below) is too late as Benjamin says, because we now discover our only flight from the social is into what Ardent (1958: 69) calls the "inner subjectivity of the individual, which I am designating with small 's' or 'self.' The move from public/private to social/individual is also "evaporation of the tangible" thing what our property is no linger fixed in Marx's "labor-power" or tied to "strength of this body" but in the most revolutionary move " of modern capitalism, we have a conception of property that is the very dissolution of the private realm, where there is a "transformation if immobile to mobile property" such as we have witnessed in the downward global spiral-antenarrative of home-properties turned into virtual instruments, traded between banks as commodities. Home property and their foreclosures becomes intangible, a 'fungible' sort of thing, an object of "consumption" that has lost its private use value (p. 70). And not just in economics of Western late modern capitalism.

Ardent (1958: 50) says the physical and social sciences have made the "public realm" irrelevant", not having "any tangible, worldly reality" because of "the fact that no activity can become excellent if the world does not provide a proper space for its exercise." Without the public realm of storytelling what is seen and heard by everybody is not revealed and does not gain any possible publicity" (ibid, p. 50). What is in in the "shadows of the hearts" in our "intimate life", our "delight of the senses" and our innermost "thoughts of the mind" becomes privatized, individualized, and cut off from the world of Being. "The intimacy of the heart, unlike the private household, has not objective tangible place in the world..." (ibid, p. 39). Now we get to Ardent's profound definition of storytelling:

"The most current of such transformations occurs in storytelling and generally in artistic transpositing of individual experiences" (ibid, p. 50, bold mine).

And it is a transpositing from action into social. It is storytelling that changes the relation of the Vitae Activa. The Vitae Activa is the relation of action, labor, and work, and it is all about the identities of ontologic 'Self' and epistemic/empiricist 'self.' With the rise of the social, the empiricism of behaviorism overshadowed the ontology of action. Something changed, in what I call the 'heart-of-care' (Boje, 2012c), and the sort of 'care' one finds in Heidegger (1962/1962) became just about environments of work, supplies, equipment, welfare, and here and there, Nature. In Marx it became labor-power and use. For Arendt, it is about 'action'.

The way that this transpositioning of public realm of what I call 'living story' (defined below) to its worldlessness identity of 'self' is through acts of narrative, and by the some connective antenarratives that move that process along (e.g. linear-, and cyclic-antenarratives; see antenarrative section of essay). Two ways 'living story' reconnects to the ontology is of living story 'Self' recovering from 'self' or as Heidegger (1962) calls it, the 'they-self' to the 'potentiality-for-Being-a-whole-Self is through other antenarrative processes (e.g. spiral-, and rhizomatic, see Boje 2011, 2012d, f). You can think of these as forces and counter-forces of antenarratives connecting living story to narrative, differently.

Like Benjamin (1936) and Stein (1935), for Ardent (1958: 39) "the rise of the novel" changes not only storytelling, but for Ardent also results in a "decline of the more public art" resulting in "conformism" in society, as the social group overtakes family and "excludes the possibility of action" (p. 39-40). In other word, the social 'self' conforms, and there is less place for an authentic Self. It is as if what is important in Ardent's storytelling ontology, in terms of the material action of life, gets rules as immaterial with the rise of sociology of groups and the behaviorism of the individual in groups. Why? Because in conformism, people "behave and do not act" out action (pp. 40-41). In storytelling, as Bakhtin (1991, 1993) stresses there are 'deeds and acts.' The small deeds and acts, in a quantum storytelling sense, make big waves, and collapse waves. But as social science statistics takes over, Ardent (1958: 42) concludes "the justification of statistics is that deeds and events are rare occurrences in everyday life and in history." It is too easy nowadays for narrative just to leave out the little things of living stories and focus on the monological (Boje, 2008). Storytelling, by contrast, can illuminate "historical time" with a few acts or deeds, what statistics of large numbers levels out (Arendt, 1958: p. 43).

And finally, our own definition of storytelling as the domain in which living story, narrative, and antenarratives intra-act in a new materiality way (Boje, Jørgensen, & Strand, expected 2013: 3):

"Storytelling, here, is defined more broadly, as something agential such as the iterative intra-active-material-storytelling domains of "living stories‟ and "antenarratives‟ in the theatre of action, which go beyond the classical narrative focus on structuralist and representationalist elements and retrospection (Boje, 2001, 2008a)."

Above is what Strand (2011, 2012) terms 'material storytelling' is put into relation with living story and antenarrative pathways. Next, something about narrative.

WHAT IS NARRATIVE?

Narrative is most often retrospective, looking backward, while walking forward (Boje, 2001, 2008a, 2011, 2012a to f; Boje & Tyler, 2009) and has been so oriented since Aristotle (350 BCE) has become the linear sense of plot required to have a beginning, middle, and end. Narrative requires living story to be a proper "imitation of an action that is complete in itself, as a whole of some magnitude... Now a whole is that
which has beginning, middle, and end" the definition of coherent narrative (Aristotle, 350 BCE: 1450b: 25, p. 233).

In 2012a I work out this chart, that can serve as an overview of the history of narrative in various disciplines and nations (Boje, 2012a, in press), which I have adapted here and there, such as including quantum storytelling.

Table 1 – Brief Genealogy of Storytelling Approaches

  1. Greece Narrative Poetics - Aristotle – (350 BCE) Poetics – duality of hierarchic-narrative-form and epic story; Aristotle’s Physics (Physis).
  2. Germany Historical Materialism – Karl Marx’s  (1818-1883) revision of Hegelian dialectic, then Horkheimer & Adorno Critical Theory sorts of storytelling of culture industry
  3. Russia Formalism (1910-1930s) – began as duality of narrative (suzjet) & story (fabula), then to an organic sort of poetics
  4. US –Structuralism & New Criticism (1930s and 1940s) - Brooks,  Ransom,  Warren & Wimsatt
  5. France Structuralism  (1950s & 60s)– the anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss (influenced Barthes
  6. France - Poststructuralism – (1970s & 1980s) its precursors, its theorists, and repercussions. Derrida, Foucault (middle), Barthes (late), Lyotard (sometimes) … 
  7. Bulgaria Approaches to Literary Genre  (1980s & 1990s)– Tzvetan Todorov - Equilibrium is opposed to disequilibrium; Julia Kristeva – intertextuality and feminist studies
  8. Swiss à German à French Hermeneutics – Hans-Georg Gadamer, Wolfgang to Heidegger to Ricoeur & Sartre 
  9. Russia Heteroglossia (1980s 1990s)– Mikhail Bakhtin’s work translated late into English
  10. Denmark & Scotland (2000-2010s) – Quantum Storytelling- David Boje (1/2 Danish & ½ Scottish).

Narratology has studied narrative Poetics, Marxian historical materialism, Russian Formalism, various Structuralisms, and Poststructuralism, Literary Genre, various Hermeneutics, the Russian Heteroglossia of Bakhtin, and now there is what I call quantum storytelling, which since I am Danish and Scottish on dad and mother's side, I list those nations. And what would a quantum storytellling make of narrative? That is a topic for another essay. I will say that Ardent (1958), late-Heidegger writing, Mead (1932), among others write about the ways quantum physics is changing our understanding, interpretation, and according to Heisenberg (1968) the language is also changing, moving away from classic physics concepts (Boje, 2012d ,f). Mead (1932/1980: 61, 153) cited Bohr, but not Heisenberg, developed quantum implications in his Philosophy of the Present. Mead (1932: 36) “thus the future is continually qualifying the past in the present.” Heidegger's (1962/1996) ontology is about the future-ahead-of-itself, e.g. “The primordial phenomenon of the future as coming towards”; (Heidegger, 1996 #325. P. 373). Hannah Arendt (1958: 153, 261, 279, 287), on the other hand cites Heisenberg, but not Bohr.

So to the extent narrative is retrospective, and heteroglossic language of discourse, it will change its representations, its language, its themes of materiality will be represented differently.

Next, I give some background on antenarrative, and get on to the main topic of this essay, living story.

WHAT IS ANTENARRATIVE?

Antenarrative has a double-meaning of ‘ante.’ First, ‘ante’ as Being before narrative cohesion sets in, and second as a bet on shaping the future that is prospective-sensemaking (Boje, 2001).Used as an adverb, “‘ante’ combined with ‘narrative’ means earlier than narrative.” The antenarrative paradigm privileges living story emergence over a more coherent retrospective-narrative and emplotment.  Four types of antenarratives connect narratives of the past, and living stories of the present. Linear- and cyclic-antenarratives assume the past patter will recur in the future, whereas spiral- and rhizomatic-antenarratives work from future to present and future to past (Boje, 2007, 2008a). Finally the 2011 Handbook on Antenarratives (Boje, 2011), Boje and colleagues, extends antenarrative work to a wide range of topics.  There has been other important work with  his colleagues (Boje & Rosile, 2002, 2003; Boje, Rosile, Durant, & Luhman, 2004; Boje, Rosile & Gardner, 2007; Smith, Boje & , 2010). And by academics applying antenarrative in organization studies (Barge 2004; Collins & Rainwater, 2005; Durant, Gardner, Taylor, 2006; Vickers, 2005; Yolles, 2007) and most recently, Grow (2009); Vaara and Tienari (2012). For more on Antenarrative see main link to 'What is Antenarrative.'

Next, I give historical background to the theory and material-, ontological-, and quantum-practice of 'living story.'

LIVING STORY

Living stories are ontological. Living stories are not whole, often without beginning or end, and just unfolding in the middle. Much of the narrative analysis work, objectifies or subjectifies living story in ways that hides its ontology in once-occurrent Being.

I first became aware of living story when I heard Kaylynn Twotrees (1997) conference presentation of how Lakota stories had a place, a time, and a mind, that was so important to survival of the tribe, that the penalty for getting it wrong was death. Twotrees (2000) have be more insight into how living stories are situated in the seven directions. This directionality is not compass headings, as much as they are life paths. Different tribes ascribe different meanings to directions of east, south, west, north, up, down, and in. Twotrees in October 2006 co-facilitated a Storytelling and Complexity Circle Conference in Las Cruces, New Mexico with Ken Baskin and myself (Boje & Baskin, 2010).

My work on living stories (Boje, 2001, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008a, 2008b, 2009, 2011, 2012a, 2012d, 2012f) continued to apply Twotrees ideas of place, time, and mind. And I have delved more widely into Native American scholar's writing, in particular to ways in which living story is a materiality of survivance (Boje, Jørgensen, & Strand, expected 2013, citing from our article next):

Stories connote a special sense of materiality, what Vizenor (1998: 15) calls "transmotion' defined as "that sense of native motion and an active presence, [that] is sui generis sovereignty" and "a reciprocal use of nature, not a monotheistic, territorial sovereignty." The transmotion of ledger art is a creative connection to the motion of horses depicted in winter counts and heraldic hide paintings" (p. 179).

Storied transmotion is a material "presence in stories, an actual presence in the memories of others, and an obviate presence as semantic evidence" and in a Bakhtinian sense "a dialogical circle" (p. 169) and "in a "dialogical context,‟ the conversions of [ethical] answerability" (p. 27, bracketed addition, ours).

I will now situate Gregory Cajete's work. He is working with Grace Ann Rosile, Ed Breeding, Joe Meier and others on a Native Wisdom and Ethics for Business film project. Cajete's (2000) Native Science book develops the idea that Western Narrative gets privileged over what I am calling 'living story. because living story's "material-agentive force" gets marginalized. "Native science is an echo of a pre-modern participation with the non-human world" (Cajete, p. 23). "Storytelling is a way of participation in and is interdependent with material conditions of a living life-world" (Jørgensen, & Strand, expected 2013); Living story therefore has material agency: "in this sense, community itself becomes a story a collection of individual stories that unfold through the lives of the people in that community" (Cajete, 2000: 95). This material agency of living story gives what I call disclosability in the Quantum Storytelling video.

Jo Tyler (2010: 62) participated in this same 2006 conference that Twotrees, Baskin, and I facilitated, and she wrote about living stories as having "story aliveness." Tyler cautions against functionalist"reductionist simplicity of the templates and algorithms" storytelling practitioners and consultants often use (p. 63). During the conference Tyler says she "arrived at the the threshold of the idea that stories are alive" and "alive whether or not we tell them" (p. 64). "Stories then are not lifeless tools" (p. 65), yet living stories, alive as they are "are not, however, completely in charge of their destiny" (p. 65). That destiny gets negotiated energetically, as a sort of energy of aliveness, and includes the living story rights and Bakhtinian answerability. This destining for Tyler and Twotree's directionality are part of the eleven D's in the video, Quantum Storytelling (Boje, 2012). We (Boje & Tyler, 2009) did a piece on living story in relation to workaholism for Journal of Business Ethics: "Living story recognizes the plurality of selves that constitute our
identity, and our reflexivity that is out of time, more upon what lies below and above" (p. 173). Rather than out of time itself, we mean out of the ordinary clock and calendar time, and instead in a quantum time.

Finally, Ardent's (1958) work puts "storytelling" (p. 50) in relation to what we call living story (e.g. p. 19) or what she terms "a recognizable life-story from birth to death." This is the primordial definition of life-story, that is Heideggerian, but for Ardent, it is distinguished from the environment of things and is more about "movement of biological life" (ibid, p. 19). Ardent wants to recover 'action' identity of Self from the work and labor identities. Ardent (ibid, p. 20) looks at the interplay of eternity (as epistemic), mortality (the rectilinear course of things & biological life), and potential immorality (more an ontological life story). One could read between the lines of Ardent, a critique of Heidegger (1962/1996), as a striving for immortality way of life, without attending to answerability (in Bakhtinian sense) of responsibilities of citizen of the world. In Bakhtin (1991, 1993) answerability in once-occurrent Being-as-event-ness is an ethical compellent action, i.e. an ethics of living story.

What is Quantum Storytellng?

Quantum storytelling involves the disclosability of different materialities inta-weaving with storytelling. For Baradians, its a matter of Bohr's apparatus of observation as the effect. For Heisenbergians its the potentiality distribution of future pathways.

Arendt and late-Heidegger essays refer to Heisenberg’s quantum interpretation. I am reading his book, again and again, on Physics and Philosophy (1958).  She cites Heisenberg several times.  Her ontology, never cites Heidegger, yet one can read between-the-lines an intriguing critique of Heideggerian ontology. That is, that is his mania for work and labor instead of the action activities of Being human, and how in modern capitalism work and labor activities now overshadow the action activities of the Vitae Activa. Further, she puts eternity, immortality, and mortality into relationship, which between-the-lines is a critique of Heidegger’s stress on the primordial birth-to-death mortality, and trying to do something monumental (Nietzsche) to achieve immortality.

The unconcealedness I see in quantum storytelling is there is much more going on than the common interpretation of observer effect, i.e. that you cannot accurately measure wave and particle effect (motion & position) at the same time.  Rather more intriguing is how Heisenberg (1958) has what Northrop in the introduction to the book calls a weak teleology, which is tied somewhat to Aristotelian potentia. An acorn does not grow up to be a maple tree or an elephant. The more I delve into the differences in Bohr and Heisenberg quantum interpretations, the more I am finding that the common interpretation of ‘observer effect’ (i.e. observer apparatus) is rivaled by Bohr’s ‘complementarity principle’ (i.e. the universe would come apart if an electron wave could eat its own tail in its orbit around an atom) and Heisenberg’s ‘indeterminacy principle’ (that electron can be both wave and particle at the same spacetime). Einstein counter-argument to the Copenhagen interpretation, was 'God does not play dice with the universe.' Heisenberg's (1958, see Northrop introduction) response, 'God does play dice.' Our living story is ontological, our material-agential aliveness, our pathway of Being-in-the-world.

CONCLUSIONS

Living Story is a material-agency of aliveness, in the once-occurrent Being-ness of the life-world, and has to contend with Western Narrative inclinations to empty living story of that aliveness. Living story has spacetimemattering in its quantumness, as there is a place, a time, and a material-mattering. It is not geometric or geographic place, not clock or calendar time, and not the mattering of classical physics. Rather it is a quantum aliveness that interconnects all life, even the live of metals like iron, and cooper, and carbon atoms, in the quantumness of life in a posthumanist ontology of living story.

 

References

Arendt, Hannah. (1958). The Human Condition. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.

Aristotle (written 350 BCE). English (1954) translation Aristotle: Rhetoric and Poetics. Introduction by Friedrich Solmsen; Rhetoric translated by W. Rhys Roberts; Poetics translated by Ingram Bywater. NY: The Modern Library (Random House). Poetics was written 350 BCE.

Bakhtin, M. M. (1990). Art and Answerability. Edited by Michael Holquist & Vadim Liapunov. Translation and Notes by Vadim Liapunov; supplement translated by Kenneth Brostrom. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.  From Bakhtin’s first published article and his early 1920s notebooks.

Bakhtin, M. M. (1993). Toward a Philosophy of the Act. Translation and Notes by Vadim Liapunov. Edited by Michael Holquist & Vadim Liapunov. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. From Bakhtin’s early 1920s notebooks. 1993 is First English printing.

Barge, J.K. (2004) `Antenarrative and Managerial Practice' , Communication Studies 55(1): 106-27.

Benjamin, Walter. (1936/1955/1968). "The Storyteller: Reflections on the Works of Nikolai Leskov." Pp. 83-109 in Walter Benjamin Illuminations, Hannah Arendt (ed.) was first published in 1936 (Orien Und Okzident); again in 1955 in German, and 1968 is the first English translation. NY: Harcourt, Brace, and World, Inc.

Boje, D. M. (2001). Narrative Methods for Organizational & Communications Research. London: Sage.

Boje, D. M. (2005). Wilda. Journal of Management Spirituality & Religion, Vol 2 (3): Article: 342-364, Epilogue: 399-405. (with accompanying commentaries by Eduardo Barrera, Heather Höpfl, Hans Hansen, David Barry, Gerald Biberman, Robin Matthews & John W. Bakke).

Boje, D. M. (2006).Breaking out of Narrative's Prison: Improper Story in Storytelling Organization. Storytelling, Self, Society: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Storytelling Studies. Vol 2 (2): 28-49.

Boje, D. M. (2007). Chapter 13 Living Story: From Wilda to Disney, pp.330-354. Handbook of Narrative Inquiry: Mapping a New Methodology. Edited by Jean Clandinin, London: Sage.

Boje, D. M. (2008a). Storytelling Organizations. London: Sage.

Boje, D. M. (2008b, Ed). Critical Theory Ethics For Business and Public Administration (Charlotte, NC: Information Age Press

Boje, D. M. (2009). Excess of history and dance of narrative with living story noticing. Tamara Journal of Critical Organization Inquiry. Vol 8 (1): 80-94

Boje, D. M. (2011, Ed). Storytelling the Future of Organizations: An Antenarrative Handbook. NY/London: Routledge.

Boje, D. M. (in press, expected 2012a). Reflections: What does Quantum Physics of Storytelling Mean for Change Management? Journal of Change Management, accepted 7/22/2011

Boje, D. M. (2012c). "The ♥-of-Care of the Life-Path of Organizations through Landscapes of Quantum Fields", working paper on http://peaceaware.com

Boje, D. M. (2012d). , Quantum Storytelling: Blacksmithing Art in the Quantum Age, Video accessed May 25, 2012 at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7pm_mRwL-0


Boje, D. M. (2012f). Quantum Storytelling. Free online book (until it gets finished with its revisions, and a publisher calls)

Boje, D. M.; & Baskin, K. (2010). Dance to the Music of Story: Understanding Human Behavior through Intervention of Storytelling and Complexity Thinking. Litchfield Park, AZ: Emergence Publications.

Boje, D. M.; Durant, Ivy; Coppedge, Krisha; Marcillo-Gomez, Marilu; & Chambers, Ted. (2011). Social Materiality: A New Direction in Change Management and Action Research. Pp.580-587 in The Routledge Companion to Organizational Change, Edited by David Boje, Bernard Burnes, John Hassard.

Boje, D. M.; Jørgensen, Kenneth Mølbjerg; & Strand, Anete M. Camille. (expected 2013) Towards a postcolonialist Storytelling Theory of management and organization," accepted 9/27/2011 for publication in Journal of Management Philosophy. Click here fore pre-press PDF.

Boje, D. M. & Rosile, G. A. (2002). Enron Whodunit? Ephemera. Vol 2(4), pp. 315-327.

Boje, D. M. & Rosile, G.A. (2003). Life Imitates Art: Enron’s Epic and Tragic Narration. Management Communication Quarterly. Vol. 17 (1): 85-125. See pre-press PDF.

Boje, D. M., Rosile, G.A., Durant, R.A. & Luhman, J.T. (2004) "Enron Spectacles: A Critical Dramaturgical Analysis". Special Issue on Theatre and Organizations edited by Georg Schreyögg and Heather Höpfl, Organization Studies, 25(5):751-774.

Boje, D. M.; Rosile, G. A.; & Gardner, C. L. (2007). "Antenarratives, Narratives and Anaemic Stories" Chapter 4, pp. 30-45, Storytelling in Management, Editors: Ms. Nasreen Taher and Ms. Swapna Gopalan, Publisher: The Icfai University Press, India, First Edition: 2007 (Note: was based upon Paper presented in Showcase Symposium, Academy of Management,. Mon. Aug 9 2004 in New Orleans). See conference version.

Boje, D. M.; & Tyler, J. (2009). Story and Narrative Noticing: Workaholism Autoethnographies. Journal of Business Ethics,* special issue on workaholism, Vol 82 (2): 173-194. Click here for pre-press PDF version Actual printed version form Springer if you have that access

Cajete, Gregory. (2000). Native Science; Natural Laws of Interdependence. Santa Fe, NM: Clear Light Publishers.

Collins, D. & Rainwater, K. (2005). "Managing change at Sears: a sideways look at a tale of corporate transformation". Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 18, No. 1: 16-30.

Durant, R.; Gardner, K.; & Taylor, K. (2006). Indexical antenarratives as invitational rhetoric. Tamara Journal of Critical Organization Inquiry, Vol. 5 (3/4): 17-182.

Grow, Jean M. (2009), “The Gender of Branding: Antenarrative Resistance in Early Nike Women’s Advertising,” Women’s Studies in Communication, 31/3, 310-343.

Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and Time. Translated by J. Macquarrie and E. Robinson. San Francisco, CA: Harper Collins.   

Heidegger (1996). Being and Time. Translated by Joan Stambaugh. State University of New York Press, Albany NY.

Heisenberg, Werner. (1958). Physics and Philosophy: The Revolution in Modern Science. Introduction by F. S. C. Northrop. NY: Harper & Brothers Publications.

Mead, G. H. (1932/1980). The Philosophy of the Present. Edited by Arthur E. Murphy with Prefatory Remarks by John Dewey. London/Chicago: University of Chicago Press. First Phoenix Printing, 1980.

Smith, William L.; Boje, David M.; & Melendrez, Kevin D, (2010) "The financial crisis and mark-to-market accounting: An analysis of cascading media rhetoric and storytelling", Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Vol. 7 Issue: 3, pp.281 – 303.

Stein, G. 1935. Narration: four lectures. Introduction by Thornton Wilder. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Strand, Anete Mikkala Camille. (2011). Presentation on ‘material storytelling’ to 20th anniversary meeting of sc’MOI, meeting in Philadelphia, April.


Strand, Anete Mikkala Camille. (2012). The Between: ON Dis/continuous intra-active Becoming of/through an Apparatus of Material Storytelling. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Aalborg University, Denmark.

Twotrees, K. (1997). Presentation at the Organizational Behavior Teaching conference, meeting at Case Western Reserve, Ohio.

Twotrees, Kaylynn. (2000). Seven Directions practice: A Practice for the Crossroads, The Fourth R (Vol. 92, August, Sept, October) published by CRENet (Conflict Resolution in Education Network).

Tyler, J. (2010). Story Aliveness. Chapter 3, Pp. 61-81 in D. M. Boje and Ken Baskin (Eds.) Dance to the Music of Story: Understanding Human Behavior through Intervention of Storytelling and Complexity Thinking. Litchfield Park, AZ: Emergence Publications.

Tyler, J. (2011). Living story and antenarrative in organizational accidents. Pp. 137-147 in Boje (ed) Storytelling and the Future of Organizations: An Antenarrative Handbook. NY/London: Routledge.

Vaara, E., & Tienari, J. (2011). On the narrative construction of multinational corporations: An antenarrative analysis of legitimation and resistance in a cross-border merger. Organization Science, Vol. 22 (2): 370-390. Tienari,_Vaara.pdf

Vizenor, Gerald. (1998). Fugitive Poses: Native American Indian Scenes of Absence and Presence. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Vickers, M. H. (2005). Illness, work and organization: Postmodern perspectives, antenarratives and chaos narratives for the reinstatement of voice. Tamara: Journal of Critical Postmodern Organization Science, 3(2), pp. 1-15.

Yolles, M. (2007). The dynamics of narrative and antenarrative and their relation to story. Journal of Organizational Change Management. Vol. 20, No. 1: 74 – 94.