Understanding Cancer Patients’ Narratives: Meaning-Making Process,Temporality, and Modal Articulation

Temporality is a fundamental dimension of each narrative process of meaning making. In fact, the narration constructs and organizes temporal frames that connect one's own experiences. From this point of view, oncological illness is experienced as a traumatic experience that interrupts the sense of continuity of one's own life, resulting in the configuration of different temporal frames, which are not always able to support the processes of elaboration of this experience. The aim of this article is to explore the way the modal verbal predicates (must, can, will, know) are organized and work in relation to the representation of time in narrations of cancer patients. The modal verbal predicates—introducing the meanings of possibility, knowledge, will, desire, duty, need, or ability—allow us to organize the relationship between the subject, action, and context. Six narrations of cancer experience were analyzed—one for each time frame (linear, circular, fragmentary, static, cyclic, and spiral) proposed by Brockmeier (2000)—by means of quali-quantitative analysis of the use of modal verbs. Narrations show specific modal positioning: dispersion, plasticity, focusing, rigidity, and poverty. It is possible organize them along a continuum from plasticity to rigidity. The modal plasticity is the capacity to reconfigure a new temporal relation between subject and context, whereas modal rigidity shows a repetition of a specific and same modality in connecting subject and context. This preliminary research allows us to reflect about some possible clinical implications to support and foster processes of meaning making of cancer conditions.     

“Two Jews walk into a Coffeehouse”: the “Jewish question,” utility, and political participation in late eighteenth-century Livorno

This article examines the distinct ways in which the Jewish condition was perceived during the Enlightenment in the port city of Livorno, arguing that the privileged status of certain mercantile Jewish communities could be a force for conservatism and not necessarily a trigger of emancipation. On the basis of literary and governmental sources, including the little-known ironic philosophical dialogue Les Juifs (Livorno, 1786), and an analysis of Tuscan municipal reforms, it appears that Livorno offers an alternative model of integration to the better-known Prussian and French cases. The Tuscan government and intellectual elite did not consider the useful Livornese minority in need either “to be improved” or better “integrated into society,” and thus the Enlightenment critiques of Jewish society typical of French and Prussian reformers and the calls for Jewish self-improvement that characterized the Haskalah are not applicable to Livorno. However, the notion of utility that defined the Livornese community during the Old Regime was not a station on the road to emancipation. Jewish utility in Livorno did not bring about greater civil rights for individual Livornese Jews. Rather in both function and perception, it contributed to the arrested political integration of Livornese Jewry in the 1780s compared to events in all other Tuscan Jewish communities