Positioning Self and Dialogue

In a world society that is increasingly interconnected and intensely involved in historical changes, dialogical relationships are required not only between people, groups, and cultures, but also within the self of one and the same individual. (Hermans & Hermans-Konopka, p. 1)

In Dialogical Self Theory: Positioning and Counter-Positioning in a Globalizing Society, Hermans and Hermans-Konopka are inspired by American pragmatism (e.g., James, 1890; Mead, 1934) and Russian dialogism (e.g., Bakhtin, 1973, 1981), from which they weave two concepts—self and dialogue—together into their “dialogical self theory.” They do this to advance a profound understanding of the interconnection of self and society. Usually, the concept of self refers to something internal that takes place within a person's mind, whereas dialogue is typically associated with something external, that is, a process by and between people involved in communication. The authors’ view of self is that it “is not considered as an entity in itself, but rather as emerging from social, historical, and societal processes that transcend any individual-society dichotomy or separation” (p. 1). In this book Hermans and Hermans-Konopka present their account of how to improve dialogical relationships both within the self and between individuals, groups, and cultures.

In the first chapter, the authors offer a fascinating analysis of how globalization and localization affect individual developments, such as shaping one's self and identity. They look at how different cultures—their different traditions, values, and practices—comingle in the lives of each individual.

In Chapter 2, “Self and Identity in Historical Perspective,” they present three models of self and identity that are the building blocks of their dialogical self. The first is the traditional self, in which self has been defined by a meaningful, hierarchical cosmic order, such as connectedness with the natural environment. The second is that of the modern self, which has been portrayed in terms of autonomy, individualism, and sharp boundaries between an internally united self and an external other. The third phase is the postmodern self, which is portrayed in terms of an opposition to the modern self by highlighting the importance of difference, otherness, local knowledge, and fragmentation. The authors compare these three models of understanding self with a review of each model's assets and liabilities. They explain that the dialogical self is the result of a learning process that takes into account both the assets and the shadow sides of the other three models, and they sketch their fourth model, the dialogical one.

In their third chapter, the authors further elaborate the dialogical self by considering how people are continuously involved in a process of positioning and repositioning, in relation to other people and themselves. They explain that processes of positioning and repositioning are at the core of the dialogical self theory. Their view is in agreement with Rom Harré's “positioning theory,” which focuses on people's situated uses of conventions of speech and action that are unstable, contestable, and ephemeral (Harré & Van Langenhove, 1991). But whereas positioning theory is interested in the situated processes that take place between people, dialogical self theory aims at a profound exploration of the experiential richness and emotional qualities of the self as it is actualized in such intersubjective (or dialogic) processes.

Hermans and Hermans-Konopka give special attention to a developmental view in Chapter 4, explaining how dialogues between parents and children develop into dialogues within the self, and how these within-dialogues contribute to the between-dialogues. This is an adaptation of Vygotsky's (1978) insight that our inner understandings begin in outer social interactions. In this chapter, Hermans and Hermans-Konopka give a fascinating account of how developmental origins are important to the early manifestations of the dialogical self. They elaborate on tongue protrusion, imitation and provocation, imagination, memory, and pseudodialogues in early mother–infant relationships. They also focus on the acts of giving and taking in the first year of life as preverbal manifestations of dialogue. The authors argue that in order to understand the workings of the dialogical self, it is necessary to have insights into how people's early developments also shape later developments in their lives. Intriguingly, Hermans and Hermans-Konopka focus on early nonverbal manifestations of dialogue, such as “a decisive moment in development is when joint attention (between child and parents), at the end of the first year, enables the child to perceive objects from the perspective of another person” (p. 248). The authors’ discussion here arrives at the interesting conclusion that self-reflection and self-knowledge take place from the beginning of a child's life in indirect ways (i.e., via the other), rather than directly.

They also give a useful analysis of an embodied self in Chapter 5, offering a dialogical view of emotions. The argument is that emotions are of a direct relevance to the functioning of the dialogical self. The authors claim that “emotions have an influence on the self, and conversely, the self is able to confirm or change emotions” (p. 254). They not only elaborate on how emotions lead to particular perceptions of the self but also on how emotions organize and shape the self, so that the self is prepared to respond to specific situations. Harré (1986) talked about how such emotions find their individual and social form inside particular discourses as “emotionologies.” For instance, when a person is listening to music in a concert hall, that person may have different feelings from those he or she experiences when chatting in a café late at night (p. 256). Each example illustrates an “emotionology” for how it finds a form appropriate to the social or discursive context. The authors explain that some emotions (e.g., persistent anger) work as obstacles to dialogical relationships whereas others, such as love, facilitate relationships. For them, dialogue has the potential to change emotions, with the authors providing neurological evidence of the relationship between self and emotions. At the end of this chapter, a stage model is proposed for articulating, clarifying, and changing emotions. This stage model is divided into seven phases: (a) identifying and entering an emotion, (b) leaving the emotion, (c) identifying and entering a counteremotion, (d) leaving the counteremotion, (e) developing dialogical relations between emotions, (f) creating a composition of emotions, and (g) developing a promoter position in the context of the emotions. The authors base their model on a belief that a person is able to go into an emotion, leave that emotion, and go into another emotion (counteremotion). In addition, a person is able to develop a dialogical relationship between the emotion and the counteremotion. This dialogical relationship between emotions is called “voiced positions” (p. 315), wherein people can talk from different emotion positions and try to add new meanings to the self and identity. The authors provide an interesting case example (p. 312–315), wherein we can follow Irene, who is plagued by anxiety in numerous contacts with other people but also, and in particular, when she is alone. We can see how a dialogic relationship between her identified emotion (anxiety) and counteremotion (freedom) helps her to develop new meanings and a broader awareness of herself and her identity, from a position as anxious to a promoter self-position as an artist.

Finally, in Chapter 6, the authors offer an account of the practical implications of their dialogical self theory. They explore three topics, the first of which is the culture of organizations, with special attention to leadership. This is about how a dialogical leader can increase his or her repertoire by flexibly moving among I-positions (e.g., I as an entrepreneur, I as a manager, I as a coach). The authors suggest that dialogical leaders act as authentic leaders in order to make their organizations work optimally. Another issue the authors explore is motivation, stressing the importance of “creating space” (p. 333) in one's own self and the selves of other people as indispensable for stimulating motivation to reach particular goals. The authors’ idea is that motivation flourishes if it is based on a larger variety of positions in the self and if the repertoires of different people fit with one another. The last topic they explore is the problem of social conflict resolution. They see the process of social conflict resolution as a challenge to dialogue, which can function as its starting point. The authors have concerns about how people put forward truth claims, and how this ends up being an obstacle to resolving conflicts. They explain that perspectives give more possibilities than finding the truth, and conversations become more dialogical when we refrain from fighting over who is right and who is wrong. They end the chapter with an interesting discussion of what they call the “dialogical paradox”: that “where dialogue is most needed, it does not take place” (p. 359). They claim that this paradox becomes visible in all those cases in which people avoid, ignore, or withdraw from conflicts or fight with each other in ways dominated by monological power.

I strongly recommend this book to students, scholars, and practitioners in a variety of disciplines. It is not only a theoretical account of dialogical self developments but has also principles that can enrich the practices of people working with interactions between individuals and groups, and within those individuals. Leaders can gain new ideas on how to become better dialogical leaders, how they can help their organizations function in a more dialogical way, and how they can motivate their employees to profit from the insights and applications of a dialogical approach. Sociologists, inspired from ethnomethodology (e.g., Garfinkel, 1967), may find this book intriguing for how a dialogical view on self and identity are both shaped by and shaping of the global world and local communities. Therapists can find alternative ideas from which to have conversations with clients experiencing emotional and social problems. They can also find ideas on conflict resolution that take the dialogical nature of the self and interactions between dialogic selves into account. From this book therapists can also acquire generative ideas about how dialogue can be stimulated and used to solve social problems in emotional situations, particularly how dialogue impacts self and identity.

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Dr. Tom Strong and the Discourse Interest Group at University of Calgary for useful feedback.