Is all ‘I’ IR?

Abstract

Narrative approaches to International Relations have steadily increased in popularity in recent years. As narrative has gained further acceptance among other methodological traditions in International Relations, it has also provoked questions about the sort of restrictions that should be placed on academic writing in general and narrative writing in particular. Narrative approaches have faced challenges that ask whether they allow room for critique or if they necessarily turn into standpoint epistemologies. This author views narrative approaches as both valid and necessary in addition to the stable of other methods utilised in International Relations scholarship. However, in order for narratives to contribute effectively, they must be subject to critique. This article proposes two questions that both authors and readers should ask when engaging with narrative: 1) Does the narrative disrupt notions of congruity in political thought? Does it bring to light contradictions that may otherwise be ignored? 2) Does the narrative make room to incorporate those who have been excluded from political science discourse? Through asking these questions, International Relations scholars who utilise narrative approaches can open the field to novel lines of inquiry.