A Reflexive Pragmatist Reading of Alvesson's Interpreting Interviews

The Qualitative Report has a Facebook page? Oh, and they're looking for a scholar to review Interpreting Interviews by Mats Alvesson (2010). I have no idea who he is or his work, but it looks interesting enough. Sure, I'll do that review. I'm still very much interested in qualitative research since completing 18 credit hours in qualitative research in graduate school and completing an existential-phenomenological dissertation two years ago. Reviewing this book may help expand my horizons a bit, plus I get a free book! The timing is good since I'm going to a seminar on grounded theory and I also plan on sitting in on an ethnography course here at Southern Miss next summer. But who am I to review a senior scholar? I guess I'm qualified enough to review this book.. .I did review my mentor's book (Gearity, in press-a) and I've published work from my qualitative dissertation (Gearity, in press-b; Gearity & Murray, in press). (A few days pass.) Grades are turned in and now I'm free ... to do that book review. This is more like it ... sitting at home at my kitchen table, wearing sweat pants, drinking hot tea on a chilly winter morning engaged in a good book. Having read Chenail's (2010) advice on how to read and review a book, I can dive right in. Front cover--nice picture of a sunrise or sunset and the colors glowing off a horizon of water. Back cover--what kind of boat is that? What do the covers say about the book? Back cover description--"Reflexive methodology," "postmodernism and social research," "critical research." This is going to be some heavy stuff, which is great; I'm really looking for something deep. "Essential reading for postgraduate students"--hey, that's me. Starting with the End in Mind, or, the Whole and Then the Parts (Shaking my head.) My head hurts from reading this whole book today. Interpreting Interviews wasn't a difficult read, but it sure wasn't easy. Indeed, as the back cover page suggests, I would recommend this book to postgraduates and experienced scholars. Since Alvesson (2010) does not review, or even provide a quick overview, of paradigms or research foundations, the casual reader may be a bit lost in the constant mixing of language and references related to constructivism, critical theory, and post-structuralism/post-modernism. I think this is what he did in his previous work (Alvesson & Skoldberg, 2009). Yet, I feel this book would be strengthened with at least a basic summary of these positions. What a (devilish) treat it would be to smack this book down on the table at a doctoral student's defense and say, "How did you deal with the issues Alvesson raises?!" I must not waste time ... start the review ... (cursor blinking) ... how do I write an interesting review while covering what I think to be essential? What would it mean to take an Alvessonian approach to a book review? Theme (or, My Interpretation): Purpose of the Book "The purpose is partly to encourage critical consciousness of the problems of interviewing ..." (2010, p. 7). Alvesson has a lot going on in this text; and while I can follow along with his argument, at times he is less than sequential in the development of the material. He uses the words purpose, aim, and argument synonymously, but his focus is to deconstruct, de-center, and cast doubt on the grand narrative or dominant discourse that portrays interviews as simplistic, rational, apolitical bits of data. He clearly does not want this book to be about interviewing techniques or methods such as snowball sampling, interview protocols, or how to elicit rich responses from participants. His argument calls for us to shift our thinking about interviews from procedure and technique to theory and consequence. What Alvesson (2010) seeks reminds me of what Maxine Greene (1973) says about developing consciousness or being wide awake. Alvesson puts forth a "reflexive" consciousness that is wide awake to the interview at all stages of the research act. …