Introduction

The metaphor of the ‘double arrow of time’ points to the problem I wish to explore in this paper, namely, the implications for research and theory about identity development of two contrasting approaches to the functions of temporal order in narratives: clock/chronological vs. narrative/experiential models of time. In discussing this problem, I will draw primarily on my studies of life history interviews with craftartists and sexual abuse survivors. I will argue that more is at stake for narrative theory and research in the choice made between these two models of time than the specification of narrative structure. And, as well, that the differences are consequential for theory and research on human development, raising questions, for example, about research strategies that rely on a clock-time view of causality and on prediction as a criterion of adequacy for such studies. Further, the alternative narrative-time model underlines the importance of context in the production of narratives by showing how temporal ordering is a function of both cultural preferences for well-formed stories and the situated nature of storytelling, for example, whether elicited in interviews or expressed in the course of naturally occurring conversations. Thus, addressing problems of time and temporal order leads us to general and complex issues about relationships between context, structure, and function in narrative studies of identity.