lanita jacobs-huey remembering chrissy: engendering knowledge, dif...
TRANSCRIPT
Lanita Jacobs-Huey
REMEMBERING CHRISSY: ENGENDERING KNOWLEDGE, DIF-
FERENCE, AND POWER IN WOMEN'S HAIR-CARE NARRATIVES
This paper analyzes the affiliative and disaffiliative stances adopted by European American and African Americanwomen in a discussion about "doing Black hair." In this highly charged discussion, African American women invoke anarrative about the Chrissy doll, one of the first Black dolls on which they, as children, could practice hair care. It islikewise co-narrated by them as a testament to the cultural significance of hair care practice among African Americanfemales. The Chrissy narrative is also a means through which Black women discursively coaffiliate with one another, atthe exclusion of the European American woman present, by virtue of their shared, lived experiences and knowledge.Narrative and discourse analysis shed light on how speakers may align and/or disassociate with others who may shareor lack access to cultural narratives and race- and gender-based experiences.KEYWORDS: Narrative analysis, race, identity, hair. Black
INTRODUCTIONPersonal narratives are mediums through which speakersconstitute their cultural selves, histories, and values (Briggs1996, Bruner 1991). As speakers, we tell narratives fortheir potency to explain, rationalize, and delineate past,present and possible experience (Bauman 1986, DurantiandBrennais 1986,Ochs 1994, Baquedano-Lopez 1997).In doing so, we do not merely depict events temporally,but we often display stances and dispositions towards thoseevents through verbal and nonverbal forms of talk (Labovand Waletzky 1967). In these ways, narratives emerge fromexperience, yet, at the same time, shape experience (OchsandCapps 1996).
Partha Chatterjee (1993) reminds us that narrativesmay also constitute forms of resistance to "master" or he-gemonic storylines. Such stories or countemarratives de-rive political force as oppositional responses to grand his-torical narratives. Countemarratives also debunk "official"narratives of everyday life, or what Michael Peters andColin Lankshear (1996:2) describe as "legitimating sto-ries ... which herald a national set of common cultural ide-als." Patricia Baquedano-Lopez's (1998) ethnographicstudy of a Los Angeles parish likewise demonstrates howLatina instructors teach cultural narratives in Spanish, de-spite administrative pressures to adopt a mainstream
Lanita Jacobs-Huey is an Assistant Professor in theDepartment of Anthropology and Program in AmericanStudies & Ethnicity at USC. She received her Ph.D. inLinguistic Anthropology from UCLA in 1999. Herdoctoral research explored African American linguisticand cultural practices around hair; her current researchexplores the dialogics of African American standupcomedy and the therapeutic trajectories of AfricanAmerican children recovering from traumatic braininjury.
Eurocentric curriculum and standard language in class-room instruction. These countemarratives celebrateLatino students' culture and language in the face of en-croaching English-only legislation at both the local andstate-wide level. Marcyliena Morgan (1995) uses a simi-lar concept, "camouflaged" narratives, to describe themeans through which older, southern African Americansopposed implicit rules governing language which dic-tated that they veil public and private descriptions of ra-cial oppression. Through the use of indirectness andother forms of linguistic "camouflage," these narra-tives serve to deconstruct life under hegemony. As withcountemarratives, these "camouflaged" narratives act asveiled contestations of past and present experiences. Fi-nally, Susan Gal (1995) suggests that aspects of women'severyday talk and women's voice or consciousness canbe understood as strategic responses, often resistance, todominant hegemonic cultural forms. In this sense,women's talk can reflect the political essence ofcountemarratives.
PAPER FOCUSThis paper is centrally concerned with women's hair-caretestimonies at a Black hair-care seminar. In particular, 1examine how an European American woman's professeddesire to style Black hair provokes four African Ameri-can women to collaborate in a series countemarrativesthat ultimately position her as a peripheral participant inthe discussion. What transpires in their conversation aboutdoing Black hair exemplifies how women co-constructunity, as well as underscore individual or collective dif-ferences, in everyday talk and interaction. At a larger level,their narrative exchange illuminates different forms ofknowing and speaking that may emerge from AfricanAmerican and European American women's cultural prac-tices. Lest we falsely assume that race and gender create
Transforming Anthropology, Vol 11 Issue 2, pp. 30-42, ISSN 1051055, online ISSN 1548-7466. © 2004 by the AmericanAnthropological Association. All rights reserved. Send requests for permission to reprint to- Riqhts and Permissions
30 University of California Press, Journals Division, 2000 Center Street, Suite 303, Berkeley, CA 94704-1223
homogeneous storylines for African American women,this analysis also highlights diversity within and acrossAfrican American women's hair experiences and narra-tives about lay and professional hair-care. Significantly,however, the manifestation of "difference" and relativeprivilege among Black female participants is ultimatelyreconciled within a narrative frame of race- and gender-based unity and struggle. Narrative and discourse analy-ses afford a window into past and present contexts thatafford such possibilities.
NARRATIVE ANALYSISDiscourse analytic perspectives on narrative contributegreatly to our understanding of how identities, ideologies,and epistemic stances are conveyed in and through talk(Ochs and Capps 1996). In making stipulations about thepragmatics of narrative, or what narratives "do," suchperspectives attend to the referential nature of narratives(e.g., what narratives convey), verbal and nonverbal lin-guistic details (e.g., the precise form of questions, rum-taking patterns), and the narrative context (e.g.. the situ-ated nature of narrative) (Bauman 1986). MarjorieGoodwin's (1990) ethnographic study of talk among ur-ban boys and girls unpacks the interplay between the ref-erential content, linguistic form, and situated nature oftheir narratives. Moreover, her analysis illuminates howgirls and boys introduce participant frameworks that or-ganize talk (and affiliative relationships) by expandingand at times constraining who can and cannot speak. Simi-larly, Adam Kendon (1992) shows how individual speak-ers use body posture and spatial orientation to organizeparticipation in conversation.
Likewise, I employ several strategies of narrativeanalysis to chart the different "footings" (Goffman 1981)or stances that are discursively enacted by women as theydiscuss a range of hair-related topics. My aim is to de-scribe the verbal and nonverbal mechanisms throughwhich speakers affiliate and disaffiliate with one another,thereby engendering unity and difference. By further lo-cating this analysis socio-culturally and historically, I sug-gest that Black women's collaborative narratives servethe pragmatic function of counternarratives. That is, Af-rican American women's hair narratives underscore theirshared marginalization as children and cosmetology stu-dents for whom there were few Black dolls and manne-quins on which to practice hair-care. At the same time,however, these counternarratives celebrate African Ameri-can women's success despite the paucity of like modelsduring their lay and professional hair-care experiences.In these ways, these counternarratives are oppositionalresponses to master ideologies and practices in the widerhair-care profession. Through their (counter) narratives,both the European American woman and African Ameri-can women implicate and critique practices that situate
European hair and hairstyles as mainstream. Interestinglyenough, though the European American woman collabo-rates in this counternarrative through an expressed desireto do Black hair and other commentary, it is against herinitial commentary that African American women'scounternarratives appear to emerge. I will hypothesize lateron how and why this happens.
CONTEXTUAL1Z1NG THE INTERACTIONI recorded the interaction depicted in Transcripts 1 through5 (below) at the first annual Natural Hair Braiding andWeaving Expo in Los Angeles, California. Approximately100 people attended the expo, including stylists, cosme-tology students, natural health promoters, and lay persons.The majority of the attendees were African American,although several were European American and Latino. Inmy capacity as an amateur videographer, I taped several"staged" events, such as hair-styling competitions. I alsovideotaped more "emergent" interactions among exhibi-tors and people who frequented their booths. The inter-action I will discuss here took place during an early-mom-ing hair weaving demonstration and involved four Afri-can American women and one European Americanwoman. The small number of participants, combined withthe relative vacancy of the conference hall at the time(things were just getting started), provided a context formore intimate one-on-one dialogue between the womenconvened.
Each of the four African American women (ficti-tiously named Linda, May, Kesha, and Joyce) and theEuropean American woman (fictitiously named Carla) areaffiliated with the beauty industry. May is a licensed styl-ist who specializes in braiding and weaving. In the inter-action [see Figure I ], she is actually using a loom to dem-onstrate how to create a weft for hair weaving. Kesha,who is standing next to Carla, markets Black hair-careseminars and publications. Both Linda and Joyce areyoung, licensed stylists, and Carla is a cosmetology stu-dent at a local community college.
The focal interaction begins when May greets thewomen and attempts to compel them to join a state-wide network of licensed braiders. She first asks Joycehow long she's been braiding. May then directs her at-
Linda
Joyce
X May X
iKesha
I Carla
Figure 1: Spatial Arrangement of Participants
JACOBS-HUEY 31
tention to Carla and asks her what is her particular niche.Carla responds by expressing a desire to learn how to"work with Black hair," which May reframes as a de-sire to become a Black-hair specialist. Carla also la-ments the fact that many White stylists lack the desireto learn how to "mess with Black folks' hair." WhenMay asks her to speculate on why this is so and offers ahypothesis (i.e., doing Black hair may be a challengefor White students), Carla responds, "1 don't know ifit's much of a challenge. I have a lot of Black friendsOkay." Carla's latter response offends many of the Af-rican American women, who 1 observed exchangepuzzled looks and orient physically away from Carla. Ilater learned that many of them perceived that her com-ment reflected the naivete of a generic White liberaldefense of the "Black cause," or one who claims to un-derstand the plight of Black people by referencing thefact that "some of my best friends are Black." ThoughCarla does not engage in such grand presumptions here,her response is deemed defensive without merit and thusworthy of an indirect reproof.
This interaction, depicted in Transcript 1, sets thestage for a series of oppositional storylines that are, inmany ways, collectively narrated by the African Ameri-can women. Significantly, Carla's initial comments, per-ceived as naive by many of her conversants, casts her asan unwittingly protagonist against whom Black womenchart their rise from children with few or no Black dollson which to practice hair to African American hair-careprofessionals skilled in styling a broad range of hair tex-tures. Carla, thus, becomes the foil for a critique ofEurocentric ideologies around hair and beauty that situ-ate European features and hair textures as mainstreamwithin the cosmetology profession and broader society.
Black women's interweaving of counternarratives, in re-sponse to Carla's expressed privilege (e.g., she doesn'tyet know how to style Black hair and may not have to inorder to become licensed), also serves to illuminate pro-fessed differences between the African Americanconversants. We learn, for example, that one of the Afri-can American women (Joyce) learned to style a broadrange of hair textures, including those of African Ameri-can patrons, while in cosmetology school. This marks herrelative privilege among the other African Americanwomen present since the majority of them attended schoolsthat prioritized European hair textures, styles, and treat-ments in their professional training. How African Ameri-can women deal with this revelation and reconcile it withtheir larger collective critique is detailed in the paragraphsthat follow.
For the purposes of this analysis, I have excerptedthe aforementioned exchange in five transcripts. The firsttranscript [Transcript 1] recounts Carla's remark about"having a lot of Black friends" as an initial catalyst for aseries of co-constructed countemarratives in subsequentexchanges between the women. In these collaborativelyconstructed counternarratives, African American womenrebuke professional hair-care pedagogies and policies thatoften privilege European hair texture, intermittently ad-dressing their comments to Carla in particular [see Tran-scripts 2-4]. Several Black women also reconcile the rela-tive privilege of one African American woman who re-veals her exposure to a broad range of hair textures andstyles in cosmetology school [see Transcript 5]. The be-ginning of the broader exchange is recounted in Tran-script 1:
TRANSCRIPT 1 (See Note 1, page 41 for a description of symbols used throughout the transcripts)
I May: ((to Carla)) U:h what is your niche?What do you like doing since you you you'll be finish- you'll be graduating soon?No, I have halfway to go yetYou got half way?YeahSo what do you feel you want to do uhI want to learn how to braidand 1 want to learn how to weaveI want I want to learn how to work with Black hairOkay, so you would like to be a Black hair specialist on that (market)/(model)'Cause so many White u:m people are scaredto to mess with Black people's hairGo ahead now talk to us<talk to us[((©voice)) I don(h)'t un(h)derstand it because[((shakes her head horizontally))
23456789
10111213141516
Carla:May:Carla:May:Carla:
May:Carla:
May:
Carla:
32 TRANSFORMING ANTHROPOLOGY
1718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142
May:
CarlaMay:Carla
May:Carla
May:
Carla
May:
CarlaMay:
(1.0)Yeah (.) and so what do you feel is behind it?Is it challenge?What do you feel about it'?Is it a challenge?I don't know if it's much of a challenge ha ha ha
Yeah
<1 have a lot of Black friends Okay((Kesha, Joyce, and Linda exchange puzzled looks, orient awav from conversation))<How about a child? You have a bi-racial child?No, but uh I've always just felt really comfortable around Black peopleso I mean <and I'm in cosmetology (.)
There's no reason for me to be scared to work with Black people's hair>You're absolutely right<
Now at x college are they, are the students (.) the White students or whateverstill shying away from working on Black hair like they used to?<Oh yeahOh yeah
It's always been that way in cosmetology school[((looks at Lanita))[See you don't know this ...
<There's only a handful of us that are really interested... So what she's saying<Yeah (.) that she'd like to learn moreand so I guess it's a challenge you knowwants to learn more about it
DISCUSSIONAs evident above. Carla's controversial proclamation atline 24 does not deter May's line of inquiry, or her con-versational fervor. While the other African Americanwomen temporarily orient their attention to passerbys,magazines, or one another, Carla and May problematizethe phenomena of White students who shy away from in-struction and practice on Black patrons. Perhaps consciousof the other women's momentary disregard for the con-versation. May re-voices Carla's preceding responses inlines 39-42 to the entire group. In doing so. May favor-ably characterizes Carla's desire to learn more about Blackhair-care. She also reinserts her implicit candidate expla-nation at line 19 that learning to do Black hair may in factbe considered a challenge by Carla and other White cos-metology students.
When we examine African American women's ensu-ing narratives, particularly how they invoke participantframeworks that engender unity and difference among the
women, 1 believe we see evidence of counternarratives atwork. African American women share a series of narra-tives which 1) generally broaden the critique of Whitestylists who are accused of being afraid to develop skillsin Black hair-care and 2) celebrate the versatility of Blackhair. As indicated in Transcript 1, Carla has already cor-roborated (with May) in the critique against White styl-ists who are allegedly "scared" and "shying away" fromworking on Black hair. However, Carla's positionality asa collaborator in this stance is marginalized, and at timeseven ignored, since the African American women'scounternarratives are co-constructed around experiencesand physical attributes (i.e., Black hair) to which Carlahas little or no access. This, along with the invocation ofcultural speaking styles, serve to limit the extent to whichCarla can speak on these topics, thus relegating her to themargins of the discussion. We see this happening in Tran-script 2 when, after several uncomfortable moments, Joycedecides to speak.:
TRANSCRIPT 2434445464748
Joyce:May:Joyce:
It's a it's a myth that um=Go ahead= that there be hhh that people just get caught in sometimes you knowWe know as as <now that I hear you say the wordI can say that I'm a Black (.) hair (.) specialistbecause I don't do naturally straight hair
JACOBS-HUEY 33
495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081
May:Joyce:May:Joyce:May:
Joyce:May:Joyce:May:Joyce:
Kesha:May:
but what I findis that by going to other companies (.) hair color companiesbecause I learn how to do all thatso 1 can color that hair right for weavingand 1 end up being the only Black stylist thereso I do understand thatbut what I try to do is urn is just let them knowthat 1 have the same uh inhibitions sometimesso we can get togetherwe can trade informationthey can call me1 can talk to themyou know and go back and forthand that'll help eliminate some of that fearbecause the fear just come from not knowingwithout the truthI know the truth<we know that our hair is very easy to work withand uh [very nice to work with
[It's so it's so versatileYesBlack hair is so versatileyesthat's what it isWe can do so much with itYeahWe can make it look like cotton in one weekThat's rightAnd the next week, turn around, it's silkylBone straightthat's rightmm hmm (.) mm hmmha ha so our hair is interesting
Joyce constructs both a sympa-thetic and critical stance towardWhile stylists who arc ambivalentabout styling Black hair.
Joyce's narrative becomes acollaborative celebration of theversatility of Black hair; anarrative to which Carla haslimited access.
Joyce's narrative is multilayered, invoking shirtingparticipant frameworks throughout its course. Joyce ini-tially debunks what she calls a "myth," itself a politicallyladen framing of the belief that Black hair is a difficultmedium. May both anticipates and ratifies Joyce's descrip-tion, offering the agreement expletive, "Go ahead," inline 44. Then, using the first- person narrative, Joyce af-firms herself as a "Black-hair specialist," a term first in-troduced by May in Transcript 1 in response to Carla'sprofessed interest in Black hair-care. Here, Joyce and Mayare in explicit dialogue. Joyce then sets up an affiliativeframe with White stylists who are allegedly ambivalentabout Black hair. She invokes her own experience as theonly Black stylist in hair coloring seminars and expressesher understanding of the inhibitions facing White stylists.While Joyce understands these inhibitions, however, shedoes not excuse them. Rather, in lines 55-63, she pro-poses a strategy for sharing information to debunk the"myth," alleviate the "fear," and eventually uncover the"truth" about Black hair.
Disclosing the "truth" about Black hair is actually acollaborative undertaking by May and Joyce. Beginningin line 66, Joyce constructs a framework for participationthat, by the referential nature of her commentary, restrictsparticipation in the sequence to the African Americanwomen present. This restriction of participant frameworksis indexically realized through her use of the pronouns"we" and "our" to describe those present who have Blackhair (i.e., African American women) and those who haveskills in Black hair-care. Significantly, May not only cor-roborates Joyce's positive description of Black hair, shealso assumes the role of primary narrator in line 68. Intheir reversal of roles, Joyce now collaborates in May'sdescription of Black hair through agreement expletivesand call-and-response ("that's right," "bone straight, that'sright"). Kesha also participates in the co-construction ofBlack hair as versatile and interesting. At line 80, she en-dorses the narrative in progress with "mm hmm (.) mmhmm." Despite Carla's previous alignment with AfricanAmerican women's stance toward Black hair-care, she
34 TRANSFORMING ANTHROPOLOGY
has fewer "rights to speak' in this sequence given that sheis not a part of the "we" group who knows that "our hair"(i.e.. Black hair) is an easy medium with which to work.
In setting up a contrastive frame between "truth" ver-sus '"myth," Joyce disrupts official narratives thatmarginalize Black hair, problematizes White stylists whoare fearful of Black hair-care, and ignites a narrative cel-ebration of the versatility of Black hair. Joyce's narrative
thus conveys the illocutionary and pragmatic force of acounternarrative. While Carla is a marginal participant inTranscript 2, she resurfaces in the dialogue's progression.In the next sequence of talk, depicted in Transcript 3, Carlare-enters the conversation and attempts to insert the beliefthat race is not so much a factor in White stylists' inhibi-tions, as much as is their lack of familiarity with curly hairtextures.
TRANSCRIPT 3828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105105107108109110111
Carla:Kesha:Carla:
Kesha:
Carla:
Kesha:
Carla:
Kesha:
Carla:Kesha:
There are some white people with overly kinky you know curly hairOh ;Yea:h
And the white students don't want to work on them eitherbecause they're scaredI don't know what they're scared of<But see our culture is changing so much
you have all these interracial couples and all (.(things like thatYou (.) Don't (.) Know what is coming up you knowand so you have to be able to be versatile as a hair stylistto work with all kind of hair textures (.) you know[((looks pointedly at Carla))[>black white< (.) that's not even an issue[((points toward Carla))[It's ha::ir°Well I've heard about (.) uh (.) black people come into a salon0
you know like at Santa Monica on Wilshire or something and =[((looks at Carla))[=<And they' re 1 ike (.)>'Whatdo you want'V<(1.0)[Eh hmmph[((turns gaze to African American women present))(0.2)Ye::[(hh)ah[>'You sneed the directions some where?'< =[((Nods head vertically and emphatically))Eh he='Because certainly >you're not getting your hair done! '<(0.2)Because we dorf! (•) know(.) how (.) to do that
Carla's second verbal contribution at line 82 broad-ens her initial description of the inhibitions of White cos-metology students. White students are not only hesitantto service Black patrons, but also White clients who have"overly kinky" or "curly" hair textures. While Carla isrepresentative of the generic group of White cosmetol-ogy students she critiques, she distances herself from thosewho are "scared" to style naturally curly hair by stating,"/ don't know what they 're scared o f (my emphasis).Through this stance, Carla ideologically aligns with Kesha,May, and Joyce who have thus far critiqued cosmetologystudents who are "fearful" of doing Black hair and the
"myths" that ground their perspectives.Implicit in Carla's comments, though, are several
potentially offensive characterizations that may compelKesha to reprove Carla. Carla initially describes curly hairas "overly kinky" which carries with it the controversialinsinuation that hair can actually be too kinky. WithinAfrican American communities, the term "kinky" is alsoan in-group characterization of a particular type of Blackhair (Smitherman 1994). Since this term often carries anegative connotation, its use by Carla could be deemedoffensive. Carla's commentary thus far presumes that someWhites, but all Blacks have "overly kinky hair." Kesha
JACOBS-HUEY 35
takes issue with this implicit assumption in lines 87-95.Because there are biracial couples who presumably bearchildren with an even broader range of hair textures, Keshasuggests that all hair stylists must be versatile enough toservice whomever enters into their salon. It is striking toobserve the way Kesha ends her commentary. She lookspointedly at Carla and states, ">Black White< (.) that'snot even an issue." Then, while pointing toward Carla,she adds, "It's hair!" This epistemic stance problematizessemantic distinctions between hair textures, particularlythose which are value-laden (e.g., "overly kinky") and race-specific. As a modestly veiled reproof of Carla's narra-tive, Kesha's rebuttal acts in the pragmatic sense ofcounternarrative. Her counternarrative also continues thework of co-constructing an ideology that is celebratory ofBlack hair and critical of Eurocentric practices in the hair-care field.
Carla re-enters the conversation again at line 96with what may be considered a new strategy for align-ing with Kesha and others; she reports cases whereinBlack patrons have been excluded from (presumably)White salons. Interestingly, Kesha co-constructs Carla'snarrative through a mock response that functions, in sen-timent and tone, as an anticipatory completion (see lines99-111). Though Carla ratifies Kesha's voicing of Whitestylists who exclude Black patrons because they are un-familiar with their hair textures, Kesha has now turnedher gaze to the African American women present. Thus,even in the brief moment when Carla is allowed to bepart of the in-group via her collaboration in generic nar-ration, Kesha's nonverbal cues invoke participant frame-works that are designed to elicit involvement fromwomen other than Carla.
Another narrative shift occurs when Linda, who hasthus far been largely silent, begins a personal narrativeabout dolls. Her narrative is nostalgic, recalling a time
during her childhood when the Barbie (read as "White")doll was all she had. Her narrative, depicted in Tran-script 4, also celebrates the advent of the Black Chrissydoll [see Figure 1].
Figure 1: Beautiful Chrissy Doll, ©1969 Ideal ToyCorporation
TRANSCRIPT 4112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126
Linda:
Kesha:May:Linda:
Kesha:Linda:May:Linda:
'It's not that they don't know how to do that.0
<It's just that [they're not familiar[<They don't know how
Okay= 1 would say that(1.0)ever since I urn grew upI've always had to work with Barbie((looks toward Carla and Kesha))(1.0)So I kind of like had a wider range [because working with her:
[°Go ahead0
= <that was basically the texture of a Caucasian person's hair<°Yes [Yes>°
[However
Linda constructs apersonal narrative ofovercoming aproblematic event. Asa child for whomthere were few Blackdolls, she learnedhow to style herBarbie (read as"white") doll's hair.
36 TRANSFORMING ANTHROPOLOGY
Kesha:
127128129130131132133134135136137
138 Carla:139 Kesha:14) Joyce:141 Linda:142143144145146147148149150151152153154 Kesha:155 Linda:156157158 Kesha:159160161 Joyce:162163164 Kesha:165165167
Joyce:Kesha:May:Kesha:
168169ID171 May172 Kesha:
1 learned how to work with that hairand style it with water and greaseAnd make it pretty hewhich I wanted my doll TO BEBecause that's all I ha:d(1.0)However, once my mom (.) <got me a Chrissy doll>I was able to get [Basically=
[All right Chrissy
Linda initially frames her narrative to refute Kesha'sprior claim that White stylists simply do not know how todo Black hair. She suggests that White stylists' allegedignorance is instead a result of their limited exposure toBlack hair, both as children and, as we will later see, pro-fessionals. To contextualize this argument, Linda disclosesher early impressionable experiences with Chrissy, oneof the first Black dolls on which she practiced hair groom-ing. While her narrative is launched as a personal narra-tive (i.e., "I would say that ever since I grew up...), it even-tually becomes a narrative event, indeed a co-remember-ing, between Linda and her African American peers. May,Joyce, and Kesha employ the cultural discourse style ofcall and response (Smitherman 1977, Morgan 1998), in-group terminology (e.g.. Girl, we're going back!), vari-ous continuers (e.g., mm hmm, Go ahead), as well as morelengthy emphatic turns, to co-construct Linda's narrative-in-progress. Reciprocally, Linda uses eye gaze to orga-nize their orientation and participation in her narrative.The Chrissy narrative thus emerges as a collective andnostalgic account of their initial hair grooming practice.It is also a means through which Black women discur-sively coaffiliate with one another by virtue of their sharedchildhood grooming experiences and discourse practices.
As a thinly veiled description of African Americanwomen's marginalization, the Chrissy narrative is imbuedwith the subversive force of "camouflaged narratives"(Morgan 1995). These African Americans'testimoniescritique and explain their past as children for whom therewere very few Black dolls on which to practice hair care.Note, for example, the pragmatic force of several narra-tive tropes of marginalization and triumph that aresprinkled throughout Linda's narrative:
(Lines 116-119) "I would say that (1.0) ever since Ium grew up, I've always had to work with Barbie" -denotes Linda s marginalization as a child for whomthere were few Black dolls(Lines 126-130) "However 1 lear.nedhow to workwith that hair and style it with water and grease andmake it pretty hhh which I wanted my doll TO BE"- inscribes a tale of overcoming despite limitationsposed bv the lack of Black dolls(Line 131) "Because that's all 1 ha:d" - reinvokesLinda s marginalized status while, at the same time,rationalizes her the need to "make do " with Barbie
• (Line 151) "so I did get a range to deal in (.) kind otlike (.) "different styles0" - recounts a triumphant
tale of surmounting exposure-related limitations that
could have rendered her solely proficient in styling
European American hair textures
The Chrissy narrative also functions as acounternarrative by exposing the privilege of White styl-ists who, like Carla, often have had the option to choosewhether or not they even wish to develop proficiency inBlack hair-care. For the African American women, thedecision to become proficient in styling European Ameri-can hair textures was never much of an option, as much asa prerequisite. (Thus, while Joyce does not "do naturallystraight hair," she is nevertheless trained to do it.) More-over, this counternarrative appears to be explicitly directedat Carla, in particular, when in lines 152-157, Linda tellsCarla, "<but I don't think tha::t (.) for one reason that ourhair is any different other than the fact that it is of just adifferent texture and that is all." While Carla lacks directculpability for the stance of which she is reproved, shenevertheless appears to be the central target of thiscounternarrative. After Linda concludes, Kesha expandsher initial counternarrative in Transcript 3. She again un-derscores the diversity of Black hair textures and the im-portance of stylists knowing how to deal with a range oftextures. In doing so, she references Carla with a detachedthird-person pronominal (i.e., "You have some Blacks thathave straight hair like hers") and a wave of the hand,though her gaze remains intently fixed on May and Linda.Carla's statas as a peripheral participant, even a potentialrecipient, of these counternarratives is all the more pro-nounced here.
In the final sequence, depicted in Transcript 5, Joycesuggests additional factors that might color the currentstate of affairs within the beauty profession. Her personalnarrative exposes her position of relative privilege amongher African American peers. Linda, for example, respondsto Joyce with a counternarrative that is a literal and sym-bolic extension of the Chrissy narrative. May follows bysoliciting each of the women's support for African Ameri-can braiders who find state board requirements to be ir-relevant to their professional interests. Carla's verbal con-tribution remains notably absent during this latter part ofthe exchange.
TRANSCRIPT 5173 Joyce: 1 came from174 I went to a community college cosmetology school175 and so my instructors were versed in all of it176 and so I was the one who got to pick177 I mean I couldn't get everything within that short amount of time178 so I was the one who made the decision
38 TRANSFORMING ANTHROPOLOGY
179 on what I wanted to excel in180 while I was there181 but urn and and a lot of the Whi te students that got a chance to chot182 if they wanted to excel in Black hair183 if they wanted to excel in naturally straight hair (.) whatever184 because we had clients185 our clients were the college students on campus and other clients186 so we got a chance to choose what we want(ed)187 but the teachers tried to expose us to everything188 And we went from there189 Linda: See you were blessed190 because most instructors191 and usually when you go192 1 know for a long t ime193 it was hard to find a doll with even kinky hair194 <the ones that you worked with195 so if it wasn ' t out there for you to work196 and learn197 and be educated on198 then how were you supposed to learn in these schools?199 So now if they would put = ,200 May: Yes!201 Linda: = different textures202 <A:LL different textures203 and make every student learn from all different textures204 Joyce: That ' s (right)305 Linda: then they those students as well can learn on all different textures305 they won ' t be intimidated by it307 because if you just only get one side (.) type of model306 then that 's all they ' re gonna work want to work on209 May: m m h m m N o w like I said210 all of you girls need to join up with the braiders ' association211 We would like to send state board a letter letting them know that212 hey, why, especially for home-based braiders213 why should we (.)214 <home based braiders are saying215 'Why should I go and get my license?216 They ' r e not teaching me anything about braiding217 and all of that218 what I really want to leam219 so why should I g o ? '230 So they ' re gonna have to put all of this on on uh221 put it in the curriculum222 in schools now...223 So uh we hope you' l l contact them about this224 May: That 's why we have the braiders ' association225 Joyce: All right!226 May: Okay so that 's why we ' r e getting together227 and you need numbers like this228 so we can talk229 we can do it very nicely
Joyce's narrative describesher relative privilege as anAfrican Americancosmetology student whohad the opportunity tochoose the area in whichshe wanted lo excel.
Linda's second narrative aboutcontinued difficulties with findinga doll with kinky hair accentuatesdifferences between herself andJoyce; segues into an explicitcountcrnarrativc that proposes astrategy for promoting equalexposure to Black and Whitepatrons for White students.
May's representation ofbraiders who are criticalof state boardrequirements perpetu-ates the thematic threadof counter-narrativesthus far; she, too.critiques liuroeenlicstandards andrequirements in thecosmetology profession.
JACOBS-HUEY 39
Narratives not only serve to engender unity amongparticipants, but as Ochs and Capps (1996) note, theyalso organize diversity within a collective. This point isunderscored in the last excerpt, where Joyce's personalnarrative serves to differentiate her experiences from thatof her African American peers. Following Linda's ac-count of her belated exposure to Black dolls as a child,Joyce describes her own experiences as a cosmetologystudent. Her narrative implicates the curriculum and in-structors in cosmetology schools in fostering an appre-hensive or welcoming disposition toward Black hair-care.Joyce's narrative also exposes her relative privilege as astudent who was able to decide which hair texftires shewas exposed to in cosmetology school.
Not surprisingly, Joyce's experience captures the at-tention of Linda, who characterizes Joyce's experienceas a blessing (line 189). Joyce's story is a catalyst for asecond tale that, strikingly enough, invokes the referen-tial and pragmatic detail of the Barbie/Chrissy narrative.Like Black girls who straggled to find dolls with featuressimilar to their own, Linda asserts that many AfricanAmerican students face the challenge of "finding a dollwith kinky hair" in cosmetology school (lines 192-198).To remedy this problem, Linda suggests that both curly-and straight-hair models be introduced in cosmetologyschools to promote more equitable exposure to Blackhair within the wider beauty profession. May's ensuingnarrative enlists the women's support in a campaign tomake cosmetology board requirements for African Ameri-can braiders more relevant to their craft. May's commen-tary extends the political subtext of Linda's narrative; sheindicts the larger beauty industry that marginalizesAfrocentric hair-care practices and hair styles.
Linda and May's respective narratives are similarlycharged with the oppositional undercurrent of thecounternarratives previously discussed in Transcripts 1-4. It is thus telling to examine how the other women,particularly Carla and Joyce, participate in this exchange.As noted earlier, Carla remains a silent peripheral par-ticipant. However, whereas during prior sequences, hergaze was directed at the women speaking in prior se-quences, Carla's gaze is directed toward the floor through-out most of this exchange. And Joyce, whose recentlyexposed privilege might seem to align her more closelywith Carla (and a generalized category of "White styl-ists"), nevertheless maintains an affinity with May andLinda by conveying a supportive stance for the strategiesthey propose. Joyce's affiliative stance is conveyedthrough such comments as (i.e., "that's (right)" line 204,"all right!" line 225) and an attentive gaze. (K.esha, thoughsilent, also signals her participation in ongoing discoursethrough eye contact.) The differences between the Afri-can American women thus appear to be minimized asthey coalesce around strategies to debunk "myths" and
allay stylists' "fears" toward Black hair-care within thewider hair-care profession.
CONCLUSIONNarratives, what they say, how they are conveyed, andsituated in particular socio-historical and cultural contexts,are insightful texts. Through them, speakers constitutetheir identities, make subtle and overt distinctions amongthemselves, and organize themselves into a collective. Inthe episodes analyzed above, women use verbal and non-verbal speech, including gaze, body orientation, prosody,and other linguistic cues to convey stances that align orexclude other speakers. Narratives also speak to other (andoften) preceding stories, sometimes functioning as politi-cal meta-commentaries, or counternarratives, which dis-rupt hegemonic ideologies conveyed in prior talk. Narra-tives act pragmatically in this sense, serving to co-con-struct and shape speakers' identities, experiences, andpositionalities. This paper has attempted to elucidate thesediscursive dynamics of narrative.
The preceding analysis specifically emphasizes howwomen co-construct unity, and underscore individual orcollective differences, in everyday talk and interaction.To the extent that Black women invoke shared historicalexperiences that are largely predicated on their race andgender (e.g., they were all Black girls who yearned for adoll that looked like them with which they could practicehair sty 1 ing), this paper highlights different forms of know-ing and speaking that may emerge from African Ameri-can and European American women's cultural experienceand practices. The preceding analysis also sheds light onhow dilemmas of difference and privilege are manifestedand resolved in exchanges between European Americanand African American women.
Notably, Carla's expressed desire to leam how to styleBlack hair may potentially serve to align her with the Af-rican American women present at the hair-styling dem-onstration. However, her controversial reference to "hav-ing a lot of Black friends" and, presumably, her privilegeas a cosmetology student who does not have to learn howto style Black hair in order to become officially licensed,hinder her subsequent attempts to align with the AfricanAmerican women present. Though different degrees ofprivilege also become manifest among the African Ameri-can female conversants, the revelation of difference isdiscursively resolved in a manner that preserves Blackwomen's collective stance and affiliation. Namely, Joyce'sdisclosure that she was exposed to "multicultural" hairstyling and treatment in cosmetology school does notserve to reposition her as a peripheral participant inthe narrative's progression. Rather, she marks her align-ment with May's strategy for contesting Eurocentric dic-tums and practices at work in wider cosmetology profes-sion. Additionally, Joyce's prior engagement in Black
40 TRANSFORMING ANTHROPOLOGY
women's collective Chrissy narrative revealed that she,too, experienced a dearth of Black dolls, likewise mark-ing her privilege as indeed relative.
Discourse and narrative analysis affords a deeperunderstanding of how macro-level forms of privilege andpower play out in everyday interactions - including anearly morning discussion about "doing Black hair." Inparticular, these modes of analyses illuminate the distanc-ing and affiliative stances women adopt in and throughtalk and cultural practice, as well as the broader socio-historical and political realities that situate women's cross-cultural engagements in the present.
NOTESI would like to thank Patricia Baquedano-Lopez andthe UCLA Discourse, Identity, and REpresentationCollective (DIRE) for providing insightful analyticalmodels that inspire this paper. I also thank Elinor Ochsand Stan Huey for their comments on an earlier draft ofthis paper. An excerpted version of this analysis is pre-sented in Jacobs-Huey (2001), which examines addi-tional exchanges between African American and Euro-pean American women concerning professional train-ing in Black hair-care.
1. Transcript notations largely follow those noted byOchs and Taylor (1995):[ a left-hand bracket indicates the onset of overlapping,
simultaneous utterances.(0.1) indicates a length of pause within and between ut-
terances, timed in tenths of a second.(()) double parentheses enclose nonverbal and other de-
scriptive information.() single parenthesis enclose words that are not clearly
audible (i.e., best guesses).underlining indicates stress on a syllable or word(s).
Italics italicized words or phrases indicates talk that is insome way animated or performed (i.e. sarcasm).
CAPS upper case indicates louder or shouted talk.: a colon indicates a lengthening of a sound, the more
colons, the longer the sound©voice indicates smile-voice intonation; marks talk that
is delivered as though speaker was smiling.° this symbol is placed before and after words or phrases
that are delivered in a soft pitch.j this arrow marks words or phrases delivered with a
downward intonational contour.> < The combination of "greater than" and "less than"
symbols enclose words and/or talk that is compressedor aished.
< > The combination of "less than" and "greater than"symbols enclose words and/or talk that is markedlyslowed or drawn out.
< The "less than" symbol by itself indicates that the im-mediately following talk is "jump-started," i.e.,
sounds like starts of with a rush.hh, (hh) The letter /; marks hearable aspiration, the more
h's, the more aspiration. Aspiration may representbreathing, laughter, etc. If it occurs inside the bound-aries of a word, it may be enclosed in parentheses inorder to set it apart from the sounds of the word.
Heh heh, I la ha marks laughter(try I )/(try 2) this arrangement of words/phrases encircled
by parentheses and separated by a single oblique orslash represent two alternate hearings.2. African American women's counternarratives
are echoed by Black cosmetologists in London, En-gland and Charleston, South Carolina, suggesting Blackstylists' wider concerns about Eurocentrism in beautyschool schools and the cosmetology industry (Jacobs-Huey 1999).
REFERENCESBaquedano-Lopez, Patricia
1997 Creating Social Identity through Doctrina Nar-ratives. Issues in Applied Linguistics 8( 1): 27-45.
1998 Language Socialization of Mexican ImmigrantChildren in a Los Angeles Catholic Parish. Ph.D.Dissertation, Department of Applied Linguistics.UCLA.
Bauman, Richard1986 Story, Performance, and Event. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.Briggs, Charles
1996 Disorderly Discourse: Narrative, Conflict, andInequality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bruner, Jerome1991 The Narrative Constaiction of Reality. Critical
Inquiry 18(1):I-21.Chatterjee, Partha
1993 The Nation and Its Fragments: Colonial andPostcolonial Histories. Princeton, NJ: PrincetonUniversity Press.
Duranti, Alessandro and Donald Brennais1986 The Audience as Co-Author. Text 6(3):239-347.
Gal. Susan1995 Language, Gender, and Power: An Anthropo-
logical Review. In Gender Articulated: Lan-guage and the Socially Constructed Self. KiraHall and Mary Bucholtz, eds. pp. 169-182. NewYork: Routledge.
Goffman, Erving1981 Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Penn-
sylvania Press.Goodwin, Marjorie
1990 He-Said-She-Said: Talk as Social OrganizationAmong Black Children. Bloomington: IndianaUniversity Press.
JACOBS-HUEY 41
Jacobs-Huey, Lanita1999 Becoming Cosmetologists: Language Socializa-
tion in an African American Beauty College.Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropol-ogy, UCLA.
2001 Epistemological Deliberations: Constructing andContesting Knowledge in Women's Cross-Cul-tural Hair Testimonies. In EnGendering Ratio-nalities. Nancy Tuana and Sandi Morgen, eds.pp. 335-359. Albany: SUNY Press.
Kendon, Adam1992 The Negotiation of Context in Face-to-Face In-
teraction. In Rethinking Context: Language asInteractive Phenomenon. Alessandro Durantiand Charles Goodwin, eds. pp. 323-334. Cam-bridge: Cambridge University Press.
Labov, William and Joshua Waletzky1967 Narrative Analysis: Oral versions of Personal
Experience. In Essays on the Verbal and VisualArts. June Helm, ed. pp. 12-44. Seattle: Uni-versity of Washington Press.
Morgan, Marcyliena1995 Just to Have Something: Camouflaged Narra-
tives of African American Life. UnpublishedManuscript. UCLA.
1998 More Than A Mood or An Attitude: Discourseand Verbal Genres in African American Culture.In African American English: Structure, His-tory and Use. Salikoko. Mufwene, JohnRickford, Guy Bailey, John Baugh, eds. pp.251-181. London: Routledge.
Ochs, Elinor1994 Stories that Step into the Future. In Perspec-
tives of Register: Situating Register Variationwithin Sociolinguistics. Douglas Biberand Ed-ward Finegan, eds. pp. 106-135. Oxford: Ox-ford University Press.
Ochs, Elinor and Carolyn Taylor.1995 The "Father Knows Best Dynamic" in
Dinnertime Narratives. In K. Hall and M.Bucholtz (eds.) Gender Articulated: Languageand the Socially Constructed Self (97-120).New York: Routledge.
Ochs, Elinor and Lisa Capps1996 Narrating the Self. Annual Review of Anthro-
pology 25:19-43.Peters, Michael and Colin Lankshear
1996 Postmodern Counternarratives. In Counternar-ratives: Cultural Studies and Critical Pedagogiesin Postmodern Spaces. Henry Giroux, ColinLankshear, Peter McLaren and Michael Peters,eds. pp. 1-39. New York: Routledge.
Smitherman, Geneva1977 Talkin' and Testifying The Language of Black
America. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
1994 Black Talk: Words and Phrases from the Hoodto the Amen Corner. New York: Houghton
Mifflin.
42 TRANSFORMING ANTHROPOLOGY