Search results

Researchers play an essential, and indeed powerful, role in honouring and empowering the voices of people from marginalised communities. This chapter seeks to step beyond the already comprehensive ethical and methodological literature on ‘doing’ research by offering a reflection on the less articulated, but no less substantiative, aspects of conducting qualitative research with those for whom that which is most important, as the writer Audrey Lorde suggests, must be spoken. The delicate dance of interest and objectivity, a tolerance of not knowing and uncertainty and the willingness to hold competing truths with equal reverence are discussed and illuminated with examples from my own research with young people with experiences of mental health difficulties. This chapter is offered with the intention of foregrounding some of the more tacit, but no less bruising, aspects of the research interplay. Equally, it is offered in the hope that, in bringing into the open our limitations and vulnerabilities as researchers, we might be better positioned to understand, indeed honour, that which is most important for those in distress.

In this chapter we apply a range of insights drawn from social science studies of hope amidst contexts of illness, and studies of hope emerging from the sociology of emotions, in critically considering social processes of hoping amidst the Covid-19 pandemic. While much of the health sciences literature on hope emphasises positive outcomes in terms of coping and motivation, we also draw upon various perspectives which denote a dark side of hoping, whereby inequalities and injustices are tolerated, or where feeling rules insidiously coordinate collective hopes in ways which serve various political-economic interests. Reflecting this ambivalence across different literatures, our examples and analyses suggest that hoping as a social process is itself inherently conflicted, dissonant and rife with tensions. As we explore the contradictions of hoping amidst a pandemic, the tensions between expectations and desire, tragedy and optimism, aspiring to act and fatalistic acceptance make apparent that emotions of hope can be neither neatly delineated nor disentangled from a ‘messy’ web of related feelings and framings. We extend our emphasis of these blurry, dissonant and messy aspects of hoping through work on ‘tragic optimism’, following Frankl, wherein wider lifeworlds or imaginaries pertaining to deeply embodied and implicit notions of self and a good life are central to maintaining hope amidst heightened vulnerability and uncertainty. We close by laying out a post-formal approach to hope, which methodologically and conceptually focusses on contradictions and dissonance in narratives of hope, whereby living hopefully always involves living awkwardly with these tensions.