Aborted Transition Between Two Dichotomous Cultures as Seen Through Dialogical Self Theory

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to further advance the understanding of self-identity work amid transition from military to civilian life, with emphasis on the complexities between and within the military and civilian cultural I-positions of a dialogical self. An analysis of a longitudinal case study of an aborted transition leads to the hypothesis that a culturally dominant military I-position that sustains a cultural dichotomy may hinder dialogical advancement toward reintegration into civilian life. The insights from this article can be used to better understand self-identity issues amid transition and may also have relevance for nonmilitary persons who are exposed to cultural transitions.

INTRODUCTION

Research on transition from military to civilian life over the last two decades has gained attention as a result of the growing awareness of challenges and struggles amid transition, an awareness that is itself due in part to intensified military campaigns and efforts across the world. A shared conclusion among many researchers from a number of Western countries is that transition and reintegration into civilian life has the potential to become a daunting challenge for military personnel and may impact service members on personal, social, familial, financial, and administrative planes (Adler, Britt, Castro, McGurk, & Bliese, 2011; Adler, Zamorski, & Britt, 2011; Burkhart & Hogan, 2015; Coll, Weiss, & Yarvis, 2012; Jolly, 1996). A substantial body of the research on veterans has focused on clinical and psychological issues such as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition (DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013) to construct a concise definition with a range of criteria. This ability to diagnose spurs further research.

On the other hand, much less effort has been directed to those veterans who struggle with self-identity issues such as emotional distress and the search for meaningful identities. Many veterans experience transition as a loss of something profound, such as community, camaraderie, belonging, purpose, and identity. And while military personnel grapple with such experiences amid transition, they also need to reconnect to a civilian world. During this reunion, service members may perceive the civilian life through military lenses. Meanwhile, their family and friends most likely perceive through civilian lenses (Beder, 2012; Bragin, 2010; Moore, 2012). This may cause tension, as the parties perceive and engage life through alternate or even opposing cultural I-positions.

Such a cultural I-position is located within the self but, at the same time, is shaped through the values, meanings, and practices rooted within a specific cultural context (Grimell, 2018). For example, military communal life of service is tailored in a collectivistic way that appears to stand in sharp contrast to an individualistic, Western way of life (Franks, 2004; French, 2005; Huntington, 1957). Service members learn to suppress individual needs for collective requirements. Common features of military cultures, for example, are discipline, obedience, community, camaraderie, and a chain of command or hierarchy that may sustain a kind of kinship among service members nationwide and worldwide (Hall, 2012a, 2012b; Wertsch, 1991; Woodward & Jenkings, 2011). Military cultures also prepare their members in effective and systematic ways to break the civilian cultural taboo of killing other humans, and this implies that military cultures stand in stark contrast to civilian entities in the Western world (Goldstein, 2001; Kümmel, 2011; Strachan, 2006; Verrips, 2006; Wilson, 2008). These military lenses may also give rise to feelings of alienation and estrangement from the civilian world. Such adjustment problems introduce some self-identity challenges that military personnel may experience amid transitions: the negotiations and dialogues between who they are and who they are supposed to become in their new cultural lives.

This may prove to become a taxing process as service members strive to converse with conflicting voices or I-positions of the self, and the understanding of this process can therefore be advanced through dialogical self theory (DST; Hermans & Hermans-Konopka, 2010). Embedded within DST is the concept of the self as a dialogical narrator with I-positions that are connected to narrative characters the I can use over time (Hermans, 1996; Hermans, Kempen, & Van Loon, 1992). The I accepts and even appropriates some of these I-positions while denying or even rejecting other positions as it attempts to center and integrate the self. Many I-positions of the self are typically constructed by the culture at large, and this suggests that social dominance and power will be reflected or transferred into such cultural positions (Hermans, 2013; Hermans & Hermans-Konopka, 2010). The aggregation of these I-positions thus becomes the position repertoire of a narratively complex self (Hermans, 2001b). Unity/continuity, however, is still a central concept that is maintained by attributing I, me, or mine to positions that, even if they are contradictory, can nonetheless belong to the composite self (Hermans & Hermans-Konopka, 2010). DST will be detailed later in this article.

The purpose of this article is to further advance the understanding of self-identity work amid transition while acknowledging the complexities of military and civilian cultural characters of a dialogical self. The term self-identity is employed in this article because the process of reconstructing self-identity includes both a theoretical idea of the self (with preexisting and new I-positions) and narrative identity work (with characters) made by this self (Hermans, 1999, 2003). The empirical material underlying the article is derived from a longitudinal research project titled “Reconsidering the Uniform,” which has followed 19 veterans with annual interviews across the three years following the initiations of their transitions (Grimell, 2018).

Within the wider project analysis the linear or full transition to civilian life has already been covered through the framework of a dialogical self, and thus it feels both important and interesting to further investigate the complexities of an aborted transition and full return to active duty using the same dialogical lens. Thus, the longitudinal case study of “Sergeant David” will be presented, as it illustrates these complexities particularly well. David’s self-identity work did not nurture new civilian cultural characters that could offer sufficient meaning to motivate his continued reintegration. Instead, he reenlisted after several psychologically and emotionally taxing years. According to David, the time prior to his transition from the military was toilsome, and this serves as an invitation for further reflection on the dialogical capacity of a military character. This case study will illustrate depth and details during the process.

The insights from this article can be used to better understand and assist military personnel and family members who struggle to understand and recognize self-identity complexities prior to or amid transitional processes. This knowledge can also widen the understanding of how transition may impact health and well-being due to the loss of identity, perceived meaning, and significant others. Additionally, it provides insight into emotional distress and the tenacity of a military I-position of the self. Although this process is understood as a movement from one cultural identity to another cultural identity, the exploration may also have relevance for self-identity work among individuals who migrate from another collectivistic to an individualistic culture: for example, immigrants with diverse cultural identities.

This article will continue with a review of transition from military to civilian life, and then further conceptualize DST with a narrative approach, method, the case study, and a discussion.

REVIEW ON TRANSITION FROM MILITARY TO CIVILIAN LIFE: IDENTITY MATTERS

Brunger, Serrato, and Ogden (2013, p. 88) suggested in their study on transition to civilian life that much of the focus has been on the investigation of military identities and the construction of gender, “rather than how one’s identity might shift in response to contextual alterations.” They claimed that little attention has been directed to explore and describe transition into civilian life that addresses self-identity work exclusively. In their study the researchers displayed that self-identity issues and the reconstruction of identity were of concern for many former service members throughout their transitions into civilian life. They suggested that transition from military to civilian life is “representative of a shift in identity,” in which veterans must accept identity loss and the inevitable need for change therein (Brunger et al., 2013, p. 95). They also described the experiences among former service members categorized within three broad themes: characteristics of a military life, loss as experienced on return to civilian life, and the attempt to bridge the gap between these two lives. Additionally, transition from military to civilian life can be viewed as a shift in sense of self from soldier to civilian.

In a study on military personnel amid transition Yanos (2004) addressed changes and challenges in the economic domain, alterations in social support, identity reconstruction, and physical and mental health issues. Identity reconstruction (e.g., a loss of self-esteem due to the loss of a prestigious position, decreased levels of responsibility, and development of a new identity) and mental health (i.e., alcohol) represented the areas of greatest challenge. Savion (2009) explored how military personnel navigated cultural changes as they returned to civilian society. Special attention was given to identity, awareness, and self-renewal. Among a number of conclusions, the most important involved navigating the transitional process by letting go of the old situation and starting anew in a civilian life that required a shift in thinking, being, and doing.

Research on transition from military to university contexts and student life has described this process as a culture shock. Former service members may experience dissimilarities with student peers that may hinder the establishment and growth of relationships (DiRamio, Ackerman, & Mitchell, 2008; Elliott, Gonzalez, & Larsen, 2011; Pellegrino & Hoggan, 2015). Veterans may be older and feel more mature then their student peers (Livingston, Havice, Cawthon, & Fleming, 2011). Veterans as students may experience loneliness and isolation in the campus context. Research also indicates that, due to stigmatization or rejection by civilian student peers, former service members may hold a low profile as veterans in the campus context (Figley & Leventman, 1980). This type of transition may pose culturally specific challenges for an identity reconstruction.

CONCEPTS OF A DIALOGICAL SELF

DST combines what Hermans and Hermans-Konopka conceptualized as traditional, modern, and postmodern understandings of the self (see Hermans & Hermans-Konopka, 2010, p. 82–119, for a full review). Everything coexists and lives side by side, as if both space and time are crucial for a dialogical self. One of the classic definitions of a dialogical self particularly emphasizes the dimension of space (Hermans et al., 1992, p. 28):

The I has possibility to move, as in a space, from one position to the other in accordance with changes in situation and time. The I fluctuates among different and even opposed positions. The I has the capacity to imaginatively endow each position with a voice so that dialogical relations between positions can be established.

I-positions of the self are potential voices or points of view the I can use through movement or positioning and counterpositioning. Cultures assist in shaping some of the I-positions (e.g., man, woman, officer, doctor, priest) within the position repertoire of a self. A collective voice of a social group may speak through a story of an individual just as a voice of an institution may speak through the mouth of an individual (Buitelaar, 2014; Hermans, 2012, 2003). This suggests, for example, that a military culture is likely represented on an individual level by a collective voice that emphasizes camaraderie, loyalty, discipline, obedience, and perseverance across the ranks. But this collective voice is not likely to speak without being influenced to some degree by other internal (otherness-in-the-self) and external (others-in-the-self) I-positions of the self (Raggatt, 2012). Therefore, the dialogical nature of the self prevents a military culture from shaping identical military positions. Yet common cultural features are shared to different degrees among the military I-positions of service members.

The dialogical process between I-positions experiences varying degrees of friction over time, and conflicting positions may eventually clash amid divergent desires and needs. Such conflict may threaten or even disconnect the dialogical process itself. For example, the content within culturally constructed positions may lead to a perception that they are too divergent to see eye to eye and move forward together. The dialogical self has several potential routes, conceptualized within DST, of finding a fruitful resolution to such tension and conflict. Among these, and of specific relevance for this article, are metapositions, cooperation, and promoter positions.

An individual may have the capacity to assume a metaposition (or metacognitive activity), which enables the self to transcend specific I-positions and the current self. The self can rise to a bird’s-eye perspective to consider different positions simultaneously (Hermans & Gieser, 2012; Hermans & Hermans-Konopka, 2010). From a metaposition one can “take a broader array of specific I-positions into account and have an important executive function in the process of decision making” (Hermans, 2013, p. 86). The ability to take a metaposition or bird’s-eye view facilitates the continuity, coherence, and organization of the self from a spatial view point. The progression of metacognitive activities resonates in particular with dialogical research that has focused on narrative processes of innovation within a dialogical self (Gonçalves & Ribeiro, 2012). This research has found a connection or linkage between transforming self-narratives and metapositioning and suggested that a reconceptualization of a self-narrative involves a metaposition that articulates a past position(s) while focusing on emerging ones.

A dialogical self also holds the potential to engage a coalition of positions, which may work together to assist and support one another due to the shared desires, motives, and interests of these I-positions (Nir, 2012). Such a coalition may become dominant and could potentially decrease the capacity for dialogue, or it could promote innovation of the self amid recognition of a need to address change.

A promoter position is another way to assist coherence and organization of the self from a temporal outlook. The self may require reorganization or innovation as new situations in life are encountered, and promoter positions are innovators of the self par excellence. Promoter positions produce and organize different I-positions on a temporal level in order to allow innovation of the self as a whole. Real, remembered, anticipated, or imaginary significant others may function as promoters, and promoters may be located within the internal and/or external domain (Hermans & Hermans-Konopka, 2010). Promoter positions such as significant others may exert long-lasting influence as promoters of an individual’s development. As a result, a new I-position may develop on a temporal level and thus support reorganization and innovation of the self as a whole by bringing a new empowering character to a person.

Valsiner (2004, 2005) suggested that promoter positions can be recognized by a number of characteristics, such as openness toward the future and a potential to produce specialized and qualitatively different positions in the future self. Through this openness, they host the capacity to integrate new and already existing positions. Promoter positions have a central place in the position repertoire, which includes the capacity to reorganize the self toward a higher level of development. Promoter positions also function in the service of continuity of the self but, at the same time, give room for discontinuity. Continuity is served by their capacity to link the past, present, and future of the self, and discontinuity to a certain degree results from the fact that they serve as a source of innovation and new positions.

TRANSITION: A SEARCH FOR MEANINGFUL IDENTITY RECONSTRUCTION

The many stories of tension, opposition, conflict, disagreement, negotiation, cooperation, and dialogue that may make up the structure of a narratively complex self may be understood as storied characters, voices, or I-positions that populate a narrative self. Therefore, narrative approaches lend themselves well to exploration through a DST framework (Dimaggio, Salvatore, Azzara, & Catania, 2003; Gonçalves & Ribeiro, 2012; Hermans, 1999, 2003; Neimeyer, 2012; Nir, 2012; Raggatt, 2012; Rowan, 2012). As new situations in life are encountered, the self will likely need to adjust its organization of positions. “In the case of a transition, the self is confronted with a new, unfamiliar, or even threatening situation that requires an adaption or reorganization of the self” (Hermans & Hermans-Konopka, 2010, p. 239). From a narrative perspective, the stories of who I am still exist but need to be reorganized and retold. Thus, an internal reorganization of positions equates to an empirical reorganization of stories.

When military personnel leave active duty and begin the transition to civilian life, each must reconstruct the story of “who I am” and develop new types of civilian characters. The characters of the narrative identity must change in some central aspects, as individuals must develop new stories to address both who they are and where they are going (Haynie & Shepherd, 2011; McAdams, Josselson, & Lieblich, 2002, 2006). But a deeply rooted military I-position of the self may or may not willingly change its voice and degree of actualization within the self amid the development of a new narrative identity. Additionally, this process introduces new cultural characters into the personal narrative the self must deal with, and this too can lead to narrative tension (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000; Mishler, 2004). Conflict and emotional distress can arise during narrative identity reconstruction, acceptance, and reorganization of characters when opposing voices or positions struggle for terrain in the self (Hermans, 1996, 2001a, 2001b, 2003).

In order for this identity reconstruction to fully evolve, potential loss of meaning must be replaced with new meaning amid the development of a new character. This is in resonance with Frankl (2006), who suggested that man’s quest in life was the search for meaning. Military personnel in transition need to create meaning in a changed life situation and to attribute and integrate meaning into emerging narrative characters in order to safeguard their health and well-being in the aftermath of service (Bragin, 2010; Schok, 2009). The self and the cultures in which it navigates are highly involved in this process. Identity reconstruction is a meaning-making process that continues throughout life and in which the self plays a key role in collaboration with significant others and cultural influences (Hermans & Hermans-Jansen, 1995; Neimeyer, 2012). In recognition of the self’s authorship, Koole, Greenberg, and Pyszczynski (2006) suggested that the self should be added to Yalom’s (1980) concept of death, freedom, isolation, and meaninglessness as a fifth cornerstone to the existential quests of life. Koole and colleagues suggested that the identity question implicates a potential lifelong existential driver for a person as he or she addresses “who I am,” “who I am supposed to be,” and “how I may fit in the world and life.” Such questions of life may be of profound concern for a person, especially amid a transitional process with an emphasis on identity reconstruction (Scherer-Rath, 2014).

METHOD

The case study material for this article was derived from a longitudinal and qualitative research project titled, “Reconsidering the Uniform” (Grimell, 2018). The study followed 19 voluntarily released Swedish service members as they were about to enter or recently had begun transition from military to civilian life. The purpose of the study was to describe existential and religious dimensions in identity reconstruction among military personnel during the process of becoming civilians. The qualitative method was built on the interview data, and annual interviews were conducted from 2013 to 2016 in order to observe and follow the narrative evolution of characters within the interviews (Times 1–3) amid the transitional process.

A research project with a qualitative interview design such as this aspires to describe self-identity processes amid transition from a narrative point of view. Mishler (1991) and Ganzevoort (1998) have suggested that narrative research may score higher on validity (i.e., to measure what is intended to measure), depending on the quality of the data collection. This implicates posing interview questions that address the topic of investigation in relevant ways. However, reliability in terms of replication may be more difficult to capture within a narrative study (Grimell, 2018).

A perceived successful transition from military to civilian life has already been highlighted within the wider project, and thus it seemed fair to focus here on attempting to better understand an aborted transition that resulted, instead, in a return, and to delve into the complexities of military and civilian positions within the self. The case study of Sergeant David was selected for this purpose as it presents such a counterexample that recognizes long-term cultural complexities and struggles. A single case study presentation is suitable in order to fully illustrate the depth and detail of a longitudinal process such as this. Some of the presented details have been slightly altered or omitted to safeguard the anonymity of the participant; David is not his legal name, but the rank is correct.

Interview Sample

Information letters about the study were distributed prior to the empirical phase via the postal service and email to service members who were to be voluntarily released from active duty or had recently begun to transition to civilian life. In order to accumulate a purposive sample selection (Merriam, 2002) a snowball sampling method (Noy, 2008; Polkinghorne, 2005) was applied in collaboration with a Swedish military regiment. The participants, David included, were required to fill in and return a response letter and, among other things, suggest a time and place for the interview. This also served as the informed consent agreement.

Twenty participants (17 males, three females), who varied in terms of age, rank, branches, mission experiences, and total years of service, volunteered for the study (one male participant dropped out after the first year; 19 participants concluded the study). The participants had voluntarily terminated their employment due to disappointment in the employer, stagnation of professional/personal development, curiosity to explore new avenues in life, retirement opportunities, and/or completion of employment contracts. More than half of the sample had been deployed to Afghanistan or elsewhere, and none had been diagnosed with PTSD.

Interview Methodology

A semistructured interview protocol was used throughout the three interview cycles in order to cover topics relevant to the research purpose of the project (Kvale, 2007; Kvale & Brinkmann, 2009). The open interview questions were designed to allow participants to construct answers in ways they found meaningful (Clandinin, 2013; Crossley, 2000; McAdams et al., 2002, 2006; Riessman, 1993). The interviews started with the question, “If you think for a while, in what way would you describe your life or service as a service member?” The semistructured design also allowed for individual follow-up questions throughout the interview. The interview topics included military story, transition, relationships, identity, and existential concerns, and each interview stretched 60 to 90 minutes. Every interview was transcribed into a complete transcript.

In addition to the fact that I conducted the interviews as a researcher with a stated research purpose, the participants also knew from the onset that I was a former military officer. Thereby the participants and I shared a common military background (Mishler, 1986, 2004). Such a shared cultural background was acknowledged by Brunger and colleagues (2013, p. 97) as researcher acceptance in their research on British ex-military personnel, and this acceptance was “of principle importance when attempting to facilitate dialogue and insightful research.” This had a positive effect on the participants who generously shared their experiences, which supports the validity of the research. Reliability in terms of replication may be more difficult to capture for a nonmilitary researcher, who, on the other hand, may detect other useful insights and details in the coproduction of knowledge between interviewee(s) and interviewer.

Narrative Analysis

Steps 1–2: Global Reading

In the prephase of the analysis, complete transcripts were made of all three interview cycles (Times 1–3) and then used in close relistening and rereading to summarize the content and abstract plot(s) or story line(s), theme(s), and tone(s) of the interviews ( Clandinin, 2013; Clandinin & Connelly, 2000; McAdams, 1997, 2013). This is in correspondence to what Ganzevoort (1998, p. 28) described as global reading, which serves as the first step “to get a general picture of the text.”

Step 3: Data Analysis

All of the transcripts were then downloaded into a qualitative software program called Atlas.ti (version 7.5.16). This program was used to organize the extensive material and thereby develop themes of the transitional experiences and identity development by coding over time. Over time, the interview narratives were populated by different characters of the participants and coded accordingly (e.g., military, student, partner, employee, and other civilian identities). Such different characters vocalized contrasting I-positions in the self that created tension and conflict, but also potentials for cooperation and dialog and growth. This allowed for comparison between characters constructed in military cultures (with specific values, meanings, and practices) and characters constructed in civilian cultures (with specific values, meanings, and practices). Self-identity work refers to this process of how preexisting and new I-positions shaped the characters over time. An additional step in the analysis was to investigate relational positioning, which implied how Sergeant David’s characters related to audiences over time in the interview narratives ( Ganzevoort, 2011). Relational positioning toward an audience or distancing from an audience (e.g., military and civilian ones) was particularly helpful in order to identify specific claims to a certain audience or group.

Seven explicit characters that equated I-positions in David’s self were identified during the analysis of the three interviews conducted from 2014 to 2016. These characters were shaped in different settings and thus represented shifting point of views and meaning to David. Some were more vociferous and significant throughout the study, whereas others disappeared in the shadowland of the self over the time.

• I as a sergeant

• I as an outdoor person

• I as a part-time employee

• I as a full-time hockey trainer

• I as a son

• I as a brother

• I as a friend

CASE STUDY EXAMPLE OF SERGEANT DAVID

When Sergeant David joined the study he was around 23 years old and had left his battle buddies only days before the first interview was conducted (the initial contact was made prior to his transition but, because of David’s assignments and location with the unit, the first interview had to be conducted shortly after he had left). David had an army background and had served for approximately 3.5 years prior to his decision to leave active service, which was motivated by an injury in his back. He had not been deployed for a war zone mission prior to his leave. David served on a unit with high standards and demands in regard to the physical and mental performance of the individual soldiers and the troops as a whole. Once David felt that he no longer could meet this standard, he decided to voluntarily conclude his employment. This was a long and toilsome process for David, because he was living his dream as a sergeant and squad commander and had pushed himself as long as he possibly could because of commitment, loyalty, pride, and this dream.

First Interview (T1, 2014): A Failed, Worthless Sergeant

David’s position of sergeant dominated the first interview, which was conducted only several days after his conclusion of service, and his situation revolved around his most recent years in the military. He was struggling with life and wrestling with this new situation, and when he was encouraged to describe an episode he had experienced that involved meaning of life or issues in regard to life and death, he focused on the injury that gradually worsened prior to his release from active service:

It mostly involves the injury in my back and when I began to feel that it maybe won’t work to continue to serve. I had pretty gloomy thoughts during the evenings, and I had a very difficult time to sleep after the working day because I had such bad anxiety over the injury in the back and not being able to serve properly. So it was a lot of those thoughts that I had, and what to do instead; I cannot do anything after this; I am worthless once I am out in the civilian life, and I had to try to remain somehow in the military, and it was such a terrible anxiety and depression over that then.

The struggle to perform to the expected standards and to keep himself together during the work days had been burdensome, and David testified in the first interview:

This has actually been very consuming, both psychologically but also physically too. I have been so tired and haven’t really had the energy to do anything more than that which is required by the ranks, so I go to the job and then home, and then I haven’t done anything more. It has consumed me so much.

In regard to the sense of meaning David had experienced in the line of duty, he declared:

To me it has been damn meaningful, I know precisely what is expected and my attitude to this is that I will defend my country, no one should be able to violate the Swedish borders, and that is the basic thought to me anyway. I put damn much pride in being just that person who defends Sweden. To be a soldier among the finest, then you know that you will make a difference if something happens, and that means damn much, it has great value to me, yes it has.

At the time of the first interview the I-position of a sergeant dominated David’s self, and this position did not illustrate an interest in engaging in dialogue with other positions. David had experienced a dichotomy between military and civilian contexts during his military service. He had experienced hostility from civilians as he walked in uniform within civilian contexts. He wished that civilians would better value the soldiers for the vital role they have for their society. At this point, David had resigned and seldom told any civilian that he had been a sergeant, as the majority (according to David) have negative feelings for Armed Forces anyway. Even with his parents and civilian friends he felt that it was difficult to talk and express what he had done during military service, because they would not really understand and value his work. This implicated that David’s sergeant kept silent when in a civilian context. So all these external positions of civilians (others-in-the-self) acted to widen the incapacity to engage in dialogue and interact with the civilian life. Although his civilian family and friends were important to David, dialogue was difficult. In contrast, he articulated that he felt a specific kinship with his deceased grandpa, who had fought in World War II as a volunteer in Finland. The transition was very emotional for David.

Second Interview (T2, 2015): New Characters on the Surface; Same Character Underneath

One year later we conducted a second interview. David had experienced a turbulent year centered on his job search in civilian society. He felt his military background was something that was not so well appreciated among potential employers, and it was still difficult to seek dialogue with external civilian positions. He had held minor, temporary jobs, but eventually he found a full-time job as a youth ice hockey trainer for 6 months, which together shaped new characters in David’s evolving life-story. On the surface, the trainer position showed potential to promote the development of a new character, as it had similarities with leading the troops as a squad commander. But a great deal of David’s thoughts, emotions, and dreams continued to revolve around the Armed Forces, and his I-position of a sergeant, although often silent, did not seem to rest at all. New and additional information was shared during the second interview about the complexities of the process that eventually prompted David to leave military service. He testified that he had endured the worsening injury for a year and a half prior to the decision to leave. One response to his anxiety and depression over time, as he gradually realized the potential threat of the injury, was to turn to alcohol. He recounted:

I started to drink a lot during the weekdays, and on the evenings too, although nothing which interfered with my working during the daytime, because I only drank during the evenings, and I was grappling with the meaning with life; I was so good at something, and suddenly I felt that I was not able to fully continue it. … I think that that question will be unanswered until I return to the Armed Forces somehow. That is how I perceive it, or until I find something which can fill that emptiness. Until then it remains unanswered.

During this second interview, David still suffered from the injury in his back. He also continued to experience emptiness and the loss of battle buddies and the uniform. His solution to this situation was to shut down the dialogical attempts:

Important right now is to try to avoid all thoughts about the Armed Forces; that is how I feel: only thoughts of the Armed Forces or none of the Armed Forces. It is just to try to disconnect these thoughts and not to think about it and to do as much fun stuff as possible so that I simply don’t think about it. Especially when I am supposed to go to bed and sleep or when I am alone and it is silent, because then the thoughts immediately come up to the surface again. … This goes up and down, one moment I don’t think about it and then the second moment it comes to my mind directly, so it is very much up and down. Awful much up and down.

Although David had reconnected with old civilian friends and had support from his family, there was still a void between military and civilians mindsets, in part illustrated by the fact that civilian employers (although not everyone) did not acknowledge the value of military training and experience, or the respect and pride David felt for the Armed Forces. He testified that there was nothing at this point that could fill the emptiness he experienced. But instead of further committing to explore external civilian positions David continued to have frequent contact with a battle buddy at the unit so as to keep himself updated on the developments and matters of his old platoon and company. Even through he tried to silence the sergeant I-position when alone, David sought frequent dialogue with his battle buddy. This illustrated a complex psychological and emotional approach to his current life situation.

Third Interview (T3, 2016): The Temporal and Spatial Return of the Sergeant

At the third and final interview, two years after his exit from the military, David’s back had healed, and he had, just weeks prior to the interview, reenlisted as a sergeant. His interview revelations reaffirmed the special bond and trust among battle brothers and the sense of belonging he had rekindled in military community life. In addition to this, he further positioned himself relationally toward military community when he was encouraged to describe the military camaraderie as he testified:

I have spent pretty much time with my civilian friends, and those are close friends too, but it simply does not become the same thing, it is a very rare friendship [the military one], which is hard to explain if you have not experienced it yourself. … It is one of the strongest bonds that I know about. I had never before I enlisted in the Armed Forces nor till today experienced the same powerful bond which I have to my battle buddies today”

The complexity of David’s situation during the previous years was even more generously shared during this interview. He described the phase prior to his release from active duty two years earlier as a dark period of his life that included mood swings, depression, alcohol, and voluntarily chosen isolation. The two years that had passed had mostly been a struggle, 70% to 80% of the time, according to David.

The domination of his I-position as a sergeant was explicitly described for the first time as David told that he constantly thought of getting back to the armed forces and could not really let go of his battle buddies in the platoon and the company. He harbored an old and often-exercised character of an outdoor person. Before, during, and after military service, he often took his tent and went out in the forest to fish or just spend time there. This position and the context of nature had been David’s rescue during this struggling phase, and he testified: “Just to get outdoors into the nature and to be all by myself without talking to anyone else, that has been my rescue I can tell.” David felt some type of freedom in the natural world, where he felt that he was not judged by anyone: “It has felt good in some way; it is difficult to explain why actually.” He continued, “It is mostly from there that I found the energy to continue to try to get a hold of myself.”

David experienced joy being back in the uniform, and when he was encouraged during the third interview to describe what was important in his life both here and now and looking forward prospectively, he recounted: “My job [as a sergeant and instructor], and it may sound wrong to say it this way, but it really is my life, this is who I am. This is the only thing that matters, it is my first priority, end of discussion. This is a fact.”

In addition, David declared a patriotic responsibility for Sweden as a driver to the dedication to his military profession, as he wished to contribute to something larger than himself—that is, Sweden and other countries in need of military support to defend their freedom.

DISCUSSION

This case study illustrates long-term complexities between and within military and civilian cultural positions of a dialogical self in an aborted transition and disconnected reintegration into civilian life. David’s self did not complete the expected adaptation and reorganization, and there are a number of cultural and personal reasons for this.

First, his culturally constructed military I-position of a sergeant was not shaped and trained to make dialogue, to retreat, or to explore other cultural options and positions. On the contrary, this position was cultivated to be dominant and to endure all in the interest of seeing the mission through. This enormous strength of David’s military identity became a huge potential weakness in a transition that required openness and dialogue. The military I-position only had one mind-set, which was colored in dark green camouflage. He said that this struggle was brewing for a long time prior to his decision to leave full-time service. As he looked upon himself through the eyes of the sergeant, he judged himself to be worthless outside of the military context. This unleashed a lot of anxiety, which David felt compelled to address with alcohol (cf. Yanos, 2004). Over the time of the study, he recounted that he had tried to disconnect the conversation from the I-position of a sergeant, partly because it was painful, partly as an attempt to focus on fun things instead of wrestling with what was lost.

Second, there was a preconstructed dichotomy between military and civilian worlds, which may be necessary amid service but was problematic when David’s military character entered the civilian context (see Bragin, 2010; French, 2005; Goldstein, 2001; Strachan, 2006; Verrips, 2006; Wilson, 2008). This dichotomy may be more or less pronounced and differ from individual to individual, but in David’s case the contrast was an often-articulated experience. This dichotomy was also continuously affirmed when civilians displayed negative attitudes toward both the armed forces in general and David’s military background in particular. Over the interviews he tended to position himself relationally closer to the military community than the civilian community, broadly speaking. Although family and friends were important, there was still a distinct gap, and interestingly, David told of feeling a special type of kinship with his deceased, combat-experienced grandfather (Woodward & Jenkings, 2011).

Third, because of the dichotomy David illustrated difficulties in experiencing commitment and trust amid interactions with civilian external positions. He had encountered hostility from civilians and employers who did not appreciate his military background. Even those family and friends who did not share a military background did not (according to David) truly understand and value it. There were powerful dissimilarities, and civilians tended to dislike and distance themselves from war and the armed forces (DiRamio, Ackerman, & Mitchell, 2008; Elliott, Gonzalez, & Larsen, 2011; Pellegrino & Hoggan, 2015). So David often remained silent in a civilian context when military matters were discussed (cf. Figley & Leventman, 1980). Explicit promoters or significant others who could have assisted David in the exploration and development of a promoter position were not identified in the interview narratives. His employment as a hockey trainer could have served as a potential promoter position, but this was only a temporary position.

Fourth, instead of civilian promoters, David continued frequent contact with significant military others, such as his battle buddy, and he was regularly updated about the life of the platoon and company. The battle buddy and the connection with the unit worked as promoters of his I-position as a sergeant.

Fifth, throughout the interview narratives David did not display a capacity to assume a metaposition that enabled transcendence above his military I-position to a bird’s-eye perspective from which he could seriously consider different positions simultaneously. From a metaposition David could have taken “a broader array of specific I-positions into account and have an important executive function in the process of decision making” (Hermans, 2013, p. 86). The ability to assume a metaposition facilitates the continuity, coherence, and organization of the self from a spatial view point. The development of metacognitive activities resonates in particular with dialogical research on narrative processes of self-innovation. This research has found a connection between transforming self-narratives (new characters) and metapositioning, and suggests that a reconceptualization of a self-narrative involves a metaposition that articulates simultaneously a past position and emerging ones (Gonçalves & Ribeiro, 2012).

Sixth, David experienced the military service as extremely meaningful and significant personally, socially, and societally ( Frankl, 2006). This was powerfully captured on a personal level in his declaration in regard to the return to military service in the third and final interview: “This is the only thing that matters, it is my first priority, end of discussion.”

On a social and relational level, he described the unique and unchallenged bond between battle buddies throughout the interview narratives. This was reaffirmed and restrengthened amid the return to full-time service. On a societal level, David pronounced his military and patriotic responsibility to fight for freedom and his dedication through military service to something larger than himself. The patriotic responsibility to fight for freedom is understood as a collective military voice, an institutional and cultural narrative that speaks through David’s personal military story.

Even so, military personnel are not passive recipients who simply absorb institutional messages throughout socialization and cultivation of military identities. They are active agents who may appropriate and interpret military cultures to fit or resonate with their own selves and preexisting I-positions in various unique ways and who may position themselves differently within military institutions. As active agents, they uniquely interpret the institutional contexts and construct a variety or multiplicity of perspectives according to their personal aspirations. This implies that each individual’s psychological processes of internalizing the institutional ideas may be much more complex and heterogeneous than is often initially assumed. The psychological impact of military socialization may therefore be more nuanced, and this suggests that military I-positions may be divergent and thus influence their selves to varying degrees (Grimell, 2018).

To contrast David’s taxing and aborted process of transition and reintegration into civilian life, the process of a full transition is retold via several informants within the wider project titled, “Reconsidering the Uniform.” The participants who embarked on this path experienced similar types of struggles as David, but their self-identity work developed differently.

The first interviews (Time 1), which were relatively close to the exit time, similarly illustrated emptiness, sadness, and loss of meaning, purpose, and community. But in the second (Time 2) and third (Time 3) interview cycles, emotional turmoil and losses were gradually mitigated and accepted as new meaning, purpose, and characters in civilian life emerged. This process allowed participants to develop characters and grow promoter positions that hosted, among a number of things, the capacity for integration and development of the self. To find and cultivate new meaning in emerging characters, with corresponding I-positions, during the present life situation was crucial so as to establish emotional balance and dialogue, and to gain meaningful answers to the question of, “who I am as a civilian.” This did not mean the old meaning was no longer relevant but, rather, involved acceptance of the loss so that the new meaning could be discovered and developed ( Brunger et al., 2013; Savion, 2009).

David failed to find and accept new toeholds he found meaningful in civilian life, yet he did find feelings of serenity, freedom, and peace when immersed alone in nature. This outdoor I-position of David was important and highly “developed” and “integrated” into his self (Hermans & Hermans-Konopka, 2010, p. 245). David enjoyed solitude with his thoughts in this setting, in which he perceived that he was not judged by others; when he was in nature he could tap into its energy so as to keep himself together (cf. James, 1902). Yet this is not interpreted as a type of cooperation between I-positions (Nir, 2012) but as a way for David to endure a psychologically and emotionally taxing life situation. To leave society behind and instead envelope himself outdoors in the natural world reinvigorated his emotional life. This relation to nature underscores its emotional impact and significance of meaning for David, and this relationship to nature may be understood as a “life-affirming” I-position (Heelas, 2008, p. 5).

An additional perspective that can widen this approach for secular contexts was introduced by sociologist van den Brink (2012a, 2012b) as he identified three sets of existential values that could, at least by some, be seen as replacements for religiousness in a secular context. The three sets are the sacral, the social, and the vital. The sacral dimension involves religion, state, and abstracts, whereas the social dimension includes family, friends, and networks. The vital dimension involves nature, health, and the body. Taking van den Brink’s perspective into consideration could imply that David’s commitment to the military world demonstrated the sacral dimension, whereas his need to leave society behind to envelope himself in the natural world illustrated the vital dimension.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The movement from one cultural character to another may be a particularly challenging task for a dialogical self when there is cultural divergence between the contexts. The wider the cultural gap, the longer the bridge must be in order to promote dialogue so as to integrate and center the self. This article highlights this complex and taxing self-identity process; and, if a person fails to find a constructive path forward, he or she risks developing a silent “sick-soul” position (James, 1902, p. 72b). This position is understood here as a temporary emotional I-position that over time may grow into a more permanent character. The sick-soul position is sensitive to life’s discords and grapples with existence, meaning, suffering, darkness of life, and the self from cultural perspectives. In David’s case, instead of continuing the development of new cultural characters and dialogue, he returned to the military community and life in order to integrate and center his self.

Persons who are exposed to movement from one cultural character to an alternate one—for example, immigrants or refugees—may experience similar self-identity struggles as David’s (cf. Bhatia, 2012; Buitelaar, 2014; Surgan & Abbey, 2012). The longitudinal design of this study, with repeated interviews, created the possibility of a triangulation between the interviewee’s narrative accounts so that the evolution of preexisting and new characters could be compared over time. Within this design, the perceived rearrangement, movement, conflict, and/or dialogue between narrative characters was the actual self-identity work. A narrative analysis such as this is especially suitable to tracking the self-identity development of meaningful cultural characters. Application of DST may prove to be useful in order to conceptualize, understand, and recognize such processes. Future research is encouraged to explore this topic further.