We all know what narration is, and so it seems that we could certainly begin to deal with it, in the relative certainty of a demarcation of the field of investigation, sufficiently precise, at least to avoid misunderstanding about the object of our observations and reflections.
We all constantly have to deal with narrations, with someone telling us something, sometimes interesting at times just not: it is part of our daily lives, and certainly has many forms and places of manifestation.
We all are "producers" of narrations, more or less short, more or less long, we all have felt the desire to speak with someone, to say something to someone, we all have felt the satisfaction to have succeeded or the frustration for not having succeeded.
Many of us know that there are people who have made the narration an object of sophisticated studies, not to say scientific: linguists, semiologists, narratologists, masters of the art of narrating.
We will follow a path in great part different and divergent from this illustrious tradition, while welcoming their effort and their cognitive results, and simultaneously stating that these results have helped us very little, not to say anything, in improving not only our skills as storytellers but also our understanding and knowledge of the substance, which consists of any narration.
Of all the things, the distinctive aspects of human behavior, why should we deal with storytelling, with narration?
All right, it is a relevant ganglion of the daily interaction between humans, it is also of our daily work, in multiple and well-known forms, from the so-called inner discourse, the stream of consciousness of joycian memory, to reading, certainly it is relevant with respect to the themes and purposes of the pages collected on this website, to develop knowledge and awareness of how we function by using systemic knowledge, but are we sure that there are no more significant paths, arenas, problems in short, of greater importance?
Are we sure that there are no better alternatives to putting systemic knowledge at work (and benefiting from it), for a better quality of working life and daily life?
In fact, dealing with the narration may seem a little frivolous, considering the relevance, and perhaps, the seriousness of other aspects that everyone has before them, from the difficult and much criticized planetary management of the pandemic, to the incessant progress of the gap between rich and non-rich, the environmental pollution and global warming, the painful issue of gender inequality and the increase in feminicides , just to name a few, in short, issues that, apparently, at least according to journalists and reporters, interest people.
The headings dealing with the narration are certainly considered, the press and the media deal with them, but certainly not giving it particular importance: therefore, why kick us out, voluntarily exil us in the territory of the little relevant, if not the totally irrelevant?
For the Systemic of Human Behavior it’s all the same, since in any expression of human behavior we constantly find at work our systems and neural codes, of course we could boldly welcome the cimento with any of the relevant themes or problems of our (and ancient, I daresay) time.
In part, certainly to a very modest and certainly incomplete extent, we ventured in that direction, the section of the site dedicated to anger is proof of this: of those annotations and reflections I am happy enough, they are good and bearer of truth, but ... but?
The "but" is the characteristics of the inevitable conclusions to which our knowledge leads us, the first being the "insolubility" of the problem in the short term, in the short term calculated, for example, as mandatory to cease CO2 emissions, a few years ... but even if we had longer terms, they would still be too short.
The problem could be solved, even in a short time, thanks to coordinated intervention supported by the governments of all the countries of our planet, analogous to the lockdown action, admirable in more than one sense, given the results ... temporary sure, but they got them.
In other and much more incisive words, the rapid and effective solution to all the thousand-year-old problems that the media still talk about and discuss with commitment is possible provided that it is exerted, on a planetary level, the strength, to force every human being to the desired behavior, just as during the lockdown.
Impossible? If we can conceive this solution, identifying every single implementing hub (and this is possible, even if, to my knowledge, it has not yet been done ... so far I am convinced that I myself, with the help of some other scholars, would be able to draw up a proper plan), we are not dealing with impossibility, but with enormous difficulties and with calculating the chances of success.
Exciting, but the result, for us, is to land on the shores of Utopia, a well-known island, among the best places of production and consumption of pleasant entertainment: I have nothing against entertainment, also for having developed an accurate (as far as I can) systemic analysis and having grasped and identified the elements that "oblige" to recognize its enormous importance for the proper functioning of the human subject , far from being able to consider it vacuous, exiential, ephemeral and useless.
The fact remains, trying these knots "obliges" each of us not to be able to do, in concrete terms, anything different from what is already done, namely weak and not incisive opposition, or create and enjoy a playground.
So let's fall back on the ephemeral and "light" narrative?
Like the one who, noticing that a gentleman is desperately looking for something in a bush under a lamppost, at night, asks him what he is looking for, and if he can help, getting in response "I lost the keys to the car, damn it..." at which, he asks if he is sure that he has lost them right there, and not elsewhere, getting the answer "ah no, I am sure I lost them over there, where there are those bushes",so, always candid candid, asks but please, if you are sure you lost them over there, why then you look for them here, and getting flashed by the impeccable answer: "because down there it is dark and I see nothing"
I'm pretty sure it's not the same operation at all, and that this story, which I found funny many years ago, doesn't concern us: each of us is a storyteller, for ourselves and for others, acquiring knowledge and systemic awareness of our own narration is of considerable help in obtaining a better quality of our professional life and daily life.
On this website, the section dedicated to stress management presents clear evidence of this: even that is a chosen theme, basically, for the same reasons, there we can do something more and different from what we have done to date.
Let’s say it straightful: something more, something different, and above all better, more effective.
And we could stop there, leaving it to each one to guess the profound connections between how and what we narrate, to ourselves and to our fellow humans, and the plausible effects of our narrative action on interaction with our fellow humans , as well as, in more than one sense, in interaction with ourselves, inseparable companions of ourselves.
Intuitively we can connect a greater and better mastery of narration, of dealing with narrations, with a better, so to speak, quality of our interaction with our fellow humans, with this being able to imagine of achieving more easily what we need.
Fellow Humans who populate our professional environment no less than the other environments with which we deal on a daily basis, similar on whose action, or non-action, depends a good part of our well-being, our chances of success.
To know exactly how to achieve a greater and better mastery in dealing with narration it is necessary to study, reflect, test, observe the results, correct, refine knowledge and skills, all operations that, to a large extent, we all know.
It is possible that, as we develop this specific knowledge, we realize that it would not be bad to be able to confront someone, perhaps an expert, or a study partner: the interaction with another, experienced or not, often proves to help in, so to speak, stabilizing the new knowledge that we are acquiring.
This aspect, accepted and widely recognized even by non-systemic scientists, has its own explanation, for us systemic it does not remain a simple statement, but is correlated with some specific properties of our systems, properties that it is good to know, to some extent, to facilitate our task, and also to be able to possibly intervene appropriately, of course to those who are interested, in the context of learning processes ... yes, human learning, a huge theme, which we're going to look at more deeply elsewhere, not here and not now.
Alone or in company, it's time to get on the road, starting with the fundamentals.