Now I’m busy thinking about interpretation 3 which was originally referred to as ‘Interplay’.
– Knocking at the text – the story is asked questions of and answers are sought in the experiences documented = this is happening but it is clear that many of the answers lay outside of the story itself.
– Reviewing pertinent literature about eating disorders, masculinity, male identity and body image will begin to be utilised here = this is actually not happening here but instead is part of Interpretation 4. Interpretation 3 feels far more appropriate to have as story-only, without beginning to yet look outside the story and group of stories.
It is the knocking at the text element that is the focus of this interpretation – posing questions which then inform investigation. It is too ‘early’ in the process to branch out into things outside of the story itself – but should I be trying to offer tentative answers to the questions? I need to think on this further.
Gillian has already mentioned the impact of each interpretation upon the next and this is something that needs journalling about, although I have been looking up some of the research on empathy, thinking about being able to engage in Interpretation 1, which then moves into Interpretation 2.