W1A-006 Banshee narratives-0.txt
Thus far, the only gender difference that has emerged is the frequency of abstracts which is explained by virtue of differences in the size of respective repertoires. What does emerge, however is the weaknesses in the Labovian framework.

Firstly as Bennett (1986) points out, "it is difficult to decide on the boundaries of each narrative stage." Labov (1972) acknowledges this to an extent, when he says that some orientation may be found at strategic pponts in the narrative and also that some evaluation may be found in various forms throughout the narrative. However, the elements of narratives as described by Labov (1972) are considered tobe more or less, discrete units. The data colllected shows that this is not always the case as it was often diffficult to distinguish distinct boundaries between elements and embedding of eg orientation within complicating action etc was common. Perhaps this does not occur without a reason. As Bennett (1986) suggests, when the subject of narratives is controversial, the narrator wishes to appear as a reliable witness and scattering orientation throughout the whole narrative emphasises reliability. The man and woman both gave detailed orientations at the beginning of the narratives with great attention being paid to the description of circumstances and contexts. (see Results pg 34-36 and 50-52.) The subjects under discussion involved both tradition and belief with both informants, rgardless of gender wanting to demonstrate their respective accuracy in recollecting past experiences.

According to the Labovian framework (1972) narratives are organised around one central event i.e. the complicating action. However, within the data collected from the man and woman, it was frequently impossible to identify one single event that would answer Labov's (1972:370) question - "Then what happened?"." Many of the narratives can be more appropriately described as consisting of multiple events which are necessary for their coherence. (Peterson and McCabe 1983). The concept of only one central organising event simply does not work for all the narratives - it is too rigid.

Another problem arose when analysing the narratives using the Labovian framework and that is, as Bennett (1986) points out - the analysis of narratives is subjective with different people applying the labels differently to the narratives. Indeed, the same analyst may often change the labels with successive examinations of the data. The subjectivity of the analysis makes it difficult to come to definite conclusions regarding the features of a narrative.

A possible solution to, this problem would be to consider the elements of narratives as defined by Labov (1972) more flexibly in terms of where they are to be found in the narrative. The labels eg abstract, orientation etc are satisfactory but the concept of their having a set location within discrete sections of the narrative is not helpful. The proposed solution would mean, for example recognising several events as being central to the story instead of only one or for example orientation would not be restricted to the beginning of the narrative but the probability of it being found throughout the narrative would be incorporated into the analysis.

No significant gender differences emerged in terms of elements of the narratives possibly because the man and woman involved attached equal significance to the description of contexts and circumstances, evaluation, etc. However, when the manner in which the elements are combined to produce a structural pattern is examined, significant differences emerged.

STRUCTURAL PATTERNS:

The structural patterns that ensue from the Labovian framework have been described by Peterson and McCabe (1983). (See Introduction pg 11-13.) The narratives collected from the man conform to these patterns eg the classic pattern as described by Labov (1972) begins with an orientation proceeds to the complicating action is suspended at the focus of evaluation before the resolution, finishes with the resolution and brings the listener back to the present time by means of the coda-this pattern was identified frequently in the man's narratives - (see Results pg 44...) Labov's analysis of narratives is based primarily on the narratives of males so it came as no surprise that the man's narratives conformed to the Labovian framework. The question which then arose was: would the woman's narratives also fit into the structural patterns? The answer is a resounding 'NO'.

Bennett (1986) analysed narratives pertaining to matters of the supernatural and found that the structures of these narratives diverged from the Labovian framework. She claims that this is due to the fact that c ntroversial and complex ideas were the subject of discussion. However, the subjects involved in Bennett's (1986 and 1987) research were almost exclusively female. The narratives collected from the woman contain a significant number of Bennett-type features of oral narrative. If the woman's narratives were to be forced into the Labovian model then they would be classified as Impoverished or Miscellaneous - or as Chronological pattern at best. This would only serve to confirm the myth created by the Labovian model that "women cannot tell stories and that what women do tell are not real stories." (Kalcik 1975:7) What the results do confirm is the fact that women do tell stories using a different structure from that commonly studied.

The man's narratives are linear in form; ordered events progress from one to another to a high point and the consequences are successively related. Evaluation sections were identified and evaluative remarks found scattered throughout the narratives. The majority of the narratives were ended by "tying up the ends in a neat denouement" (Bennett 1986:417)

The woman's narratives, on the other hand can be described as circular in form. Instead of progressing in a Labovian fashion from one section to the next, the woman often related the key incident in the story first (See results pg 50.) Orientations in the man's narratives are lengthy and detailed but the woman devotes "a disproportionately large amount of [her] story to describing circumstances and contexts." (Bennett 1986:417.) This, according to Bennett functions as a means of providing "a network of facts that can be treated as evidence" (Bennett 1986:426.)

Bennett (1986) also claims that when narratives are used to explain something which is controversial that narrators relate typical happenings as opposed to the unique event of the Labovian model - this is confirmed by the woman's narratives. The events related concern usual happenings thereby enhancing credibility, by Bennett's standards. A similar device described by Bennett (1986) is the addition of a second story to the first - this feature is also found in the woman's narratives.

Aspects of Bennett's framework were also found in the man's narratives eg some of his narratives contain disproportionately long orientations, the description of a typical happening and the addition of a second story - in fact at times it was difficult ti decide where one of the man's stories ended and another began. One feature of Bennett's analysis found exclusively in the man's narratives is a maneouvre used by the narrator to prevent loss of face by committing him/herself to belief in something controversial. (see Results pg 54.) However, for the most part the man's narratives conform to the Labovian framework. The presence of some of Bennett's framework in the man's narratives can be understood by the nature of the subject under discussion. Bennett (1986) demonstrated that when complex ideas or controversial issues are the subject of discussion, narratives diverge from the traditional model. However, despite the fact that the topics discussed by the narrators may have influenced their respective styles, an undeniable gender difference emerged - the man's narratives differed from those of the woman significantly. A question for further research would be: do the features of Bennett's analysis appear in women's narratives of subjects other than the supernatural - where belief is not an issue?

Where do the Bean Sidhe narratives fit in? Irrespective of gender differences of narrative structure and repertoire size, the narratives pertaining tothe Bean Sidhe occupy a relatively marginal position in the entire corpus collected from each informant. Of the man's thirty-eight narratives, four are about the Bean Sidhe. Of the woman's ten narratives, two are devoted to the Bean Sidhe. This reflects the marginal position of the Bean Sidhe in Irish folklore as described by Buckley (1987).

Perhaps the Bean Sidhe is a marginal figure because the events she is associated with are in themselves transitory. The moment between the end of life in the human world and the entry of the spirit, the soul or the energy described by the male informant, is a brief one and phenomena associated with this moment are accordingly brief. Even though the Bean Sidhe narratives occupy a marginal position in the corpus of material and even though they are much briefer than the other narratives, they are no less effective as recapitulations of past experience. Minami and McCabe (1991) demonstrated that brevity of narratives does not detract from "elegance of form." (Minami and McCabe 1991:595)

A prominent feature of the Bean Sidhe narratives (see Appendix 2) is their disproportionately lengthy and detailed orientations eg in the first Bean Sidhe narrative related by the man (see results pg 53) great attention is given to the setting of the time and persons involved. This attention to detail is also found in the woman's narratives. (see Results pg 36) The differences in narrative structure found in the other narratives and previously discussed, persist in the Bean Sidhe narratives.

According to Buckley (1987:103) the topic of the Bean Sidhe is a "narrow and limited" one. The material collected for this paper refutes this claim. A wealth of stories, opinions and beliefs were discovered pertaining to the Bean Sidhe but, unfortunately, given the scope of this pap, only a superficial analysis of the data collected was possible. Compressing features of the Bean Sidhe that emerged into distinctive feature matrices is valuable to an extent but compression implies loss of detail and unfortunately, the features that could not be included in a distinctive feature matrix were examined all too briefly. Further research into gender differences in perceptions of the Bean Sidhe would benefit from a more detailed analysis of responses received.

Similarly, the narratives collected received a superficial analysis due to limitations of time and project length. The marginality of the Bean Sidhe was established and further research into Bean Sidhe narratives exclusively would provide greater insight into the role and function of the Supernatural Death Messenger in Irish society.

A gender difference in the genre of personal narrative has long been recognised and is confirmed by the results of this paper. A suggestion for further research would be to study women's personal narratives to identify patterns that exist as opposed to comparative studies which highlight the gender difference but do little to balance a "one-sided view of story-telling that results from collecting data chiefly from one half of the members of a society." (Kalcik 1975:11).

CONCLUSION:

The two questions posed at the beginning of this paper: 1: Do gender differences exist in perceptions of the Bean Sidhe? 2: Do gender differences exist in the narrative structure pertaining to the subjects under discussion by the informants? have been answered in the affirmative. Gender differences do exist in a number of beliefs about the Bean Sidhe and are explicable in the light of therespective roles of women and men in the society of the time.

Gender differences also exist in narrative structures thereby confirming the finding that women tell stories in a way that differs from the traditional models of narrative structure that were based primarily on the narratives of men.
