Multiple Narratives

The “multiple narratives” dodge is bad enough, but the nescience it portends or presumes is even more troubling.


When the Faculty Senate has attempted even minimal oversight of the Professional Standards Committee [PSC] and other aspects of faculty governance, it has often confronted “multiple narratives.” Of late, colleagues who have never exhibited postmodern thinking have intoned gravely that one simply cannot understand decisions or disputes without appreciating the inside perspectives of Power Committees. When the “multiple narratives” gambit is combined with one or another confidentiality con that covers for those selfsame insiders, the inevitable result is that senators cannot know, cannot understand, and cannot oversee Power Committees. Ignorance may not be bliss, but it certainly is expedient for shielding Power Committees from accountability! Thank you, Multiple Narratives!

Colleagues never call up “multiple narratives” when an official narrative suits their ends or tastes. Administrators, propagandists, and committees disseminate definitive accounts. If an alternative interpretation surfaces publicly and even one detail of that alternative account may plausi­bly be contested, faculty eager to resume their belief in the system will presume “Wrong in one regard, wrong in all regards” without concern for just how insignificant an alleged error might be. At times, the merest claim that there might be details known to insiders but unknown to senators or other faculty may suffice to stifle alternatives to the official account. Since in every instance there will be some factlet or fabrication unknown to outsiders, this fallback is always available to shameless apologists.

When an official narrative or public document loses ground to alternative accounts and the alternative accounts cannot be denied or their authors discredited, apologists will proliferate accounts, allegedly from insiders who would love to show the wisdom and justice that guided their decision-making but – damn it all! – are barred by confidentiality real or [far more often] fabricated. Even under these dire circumstances, insider narra­tives to occlude or to distract faculty oversight work best when they may be left unstated. Hinting at the existence of some double-secret factlets that cannot be expressed will de­feat half-hearted attempts at oversight. Since the Faculty Senate seldom ignites even half-hearted attempts at oversight, the flimsiest allusion to an intimation of some possi­bility that an insider might have had some impulse not yet fully appreciated that might account for this or that aspect of a decision that may or may not have figured in some way into the process … “Mr. Chair, I move the Senate adjourn before it finds out what is going on!”

Such “mul­ti­ple narratives” maneuvers rely on an intellectual defeat­ism rejected in scholarly pursuits. When biologists are con­fronted with “Intelligent Design” as an alternative narrative, they do not declare that the existence of more than one account dooms their science. Indeed, biologists and other scientists often claim that the elimination of multiple accounts is central to their research. Scientists can be so pre-post-modern!

In campus politicking, by contrast, senators usually surrender to any whisper of multiple narratives, even if no alternative narrative is or could be proffered owing to the Confidentiality Con or some other dodge.

Disappointing as “multiple narratives” chicanery is, it works. It preempts dis­cus­sion by encouraging faculty to believe that inquiry is useless and critical thought ineffec­tual. Such “encouragement” is not usually the mark of liberal arts.

With each surrender before multiple narratives, faculty become less and less able to govern their governors. Inexperienced faculty do not know. Experienced faculty cannot know or do not want to know. Thus do our leaders move the faculty from ignorance about specific personnel matters to systemic, systematic ignorance – nescience.


Next – “Nescience” – Most faculty know little about what goes on at most universities; however, many colleagues at Puget Sound take measures to make certain that what goes on cannot be known.