The Concept and Methodology of Narrative Prefiguration

We are often asked what the Democracy School actually does, whether we are political, and whether we are an arts organisation. The answer to all of these questions is yes and no, depending on who you ask.

To answer more conclusively, we present this article by Nico Heller, the Democracy School's founding director, exploring narrative prefiguration – the foundational methodology at the heart of our work. Written in first person to reflect Nico's direct experience developing these concepts, the paper illuminates how seemingly diverse activities across artistic and political domains are unified by a coherent approach that reveals transformative possibilities conventional frameworks often miss.

The Concept and Methodology of Narrative Prefiguration

This article by Nico Heller was first published May 15, 2025. Contact him via our contact form or visit his profile page.

Abstract

This paper introduces narrative prefiguration as a distinctive methodology for addressing the complex challenges of our current moment. At a time when conventional approaches increasingly fail to engage with the polycrisis we face – climate disruption, democratic erosion, systemic inequality – this approach offers pathways for transformation that work with rather than against the fragmented conditions of contemporary life.

Narrative prefiguration integrates interpretive agency – the capacity to read existing narrative structures – with creative agency – the ability to reconfigure these structures to actualise latent possibilities. Unlike approaches that position change as distant goals requiring gradual progress, this methodology recognises that alternative configurations already exist prefiguratively within present circumstances, waiting to be recognised and actualised through strategic reconfiguration.

Drawing on insights from Paul Ricoeur while extending far beyond individual identity formation, the approach develops concrete methodologies for working with narrative fragments across ecological systems. Through the Democracy School's Narrative-based Action Learning and Narrative Coaching practices, it demonstrates how practitioners can strategically navigate between fragmentation and coherence, work across scales from individual to collective transformation, and overcome systemic resistance to fundamental change.

The methodology proves particularly relevant for practitioners working at the intersection of artistic and political domains, offering tools for ethical engagement that honour complexity while enabling meaningful contribution to urgent challenges. Rather than promising resolution, it reveals how transformation emerges through responsive engagement with what already exists in latent form – enabling practitioners to participate authentically in actualising possibilities that serve collective flourishing.

This paper articulates both theoretical foundations and practical applications, establishing narrative prefiguration as an approach uniquely suited to our moment of systemic breakdown and the need for fundamental reconfiguration of how we understand and engage with reality itself.

Words Create Worlds

I live in a space where art and politics converge, where stories shape reality and prefiguration reveals possibilities already present but not yet actualised. I might explore how a poem illuminates policy as readily as political theory informs a performance – not by conflating these domains but by recognising their inherent connections.

Consider a recipe. It contains ingredients that exist and instructions that imply a meal not yet made. The meal exists prefiguratively – fully conceived yet waiting to be actualised through practice. But notice something more: you could follow the instructions precisely, measuring each ingredient and timing each step with methodical care. Or you could read them as inspiration, improvising with what's available, substituting flavours, adjusting to taste. The first approach demonstrates interpretive agency – the capacity to read and follow narrative structures. The second reveals creative agency – the ability to rewrite and reconfigure those same frameworks.

The most satisfying cooking happens when both work together. Someone preparing dinner reads the recipe's underlying logic whilst simultaneously creating something new through improvisation. They work with elements already at hand – a technique from one dish, a flavour memory from childhood, a seasonal ingredient from the local shop – weaving these into coherent wholes that actualise potential already present within the text's implicit logic.

They approach the kitchen with intention while remaining open to discovery. They might begin with an impulse – comfort, surprise, celebration – but allow that intention to evolve through actual ingredients, this particular kitchen, these specific people around the table. Here responsive intentionality shapes how they read prospects without predetermined outcomes.

This movement from implication to realisation, from interpretive reading to creative reconfiguration, forms the foundation of my approach. Whether developing a theatrical production or facilitating a policy dialogue, I work with the narrative materials already present in the situation, helping others recognise and reconfigure them into transformative openings.

Narrative prefiguration represents a distinctive methodology that integrates both forms of agency – the interpretive capacity to read narrative structures and the creative capacity to rewrite them. Through this integration, one discovers transformative potential that conventional frameworks might miss – not by creating something entirely new but by reconfiguring what already exists in latent form.

The World as Text

Every political situation tells a story. Every artistic intervention reframes our perception. I begin with this recognition: reality unfolds as text – a narrative we both read and write simultaneously.

From this perspective, reality itself is narratively constructed. This doesn't mean reality is arbitrary or purely subjective, but rather that our access to and understanding of the world is fundamentally mediated through narrative structures. Even scientific knowledge, with its claims to objectivity, functions as a story that organises and gives meaning to observations.(1)

A parliamentary debate and a theatrical performance both unfold as narrative; each contains elements of the other. The politician crafts metaphors and dramatic arcs; the artist navigates power relations and ideological frameworks. Neither domain exists in isolation from the other.

Skilled practitioners don't simply encounter textual reality – they actively participate in its construction. They approach contexts with what I call 'strategic textuality': reading existing configurations while simultaneously authoring new ones. A community advocate working within constrained budgets doesn't just respond to policy limitations – they strategically document stories that reveal gaps between official narratives and lived experiences, knowing these accounts will generate new pressures for change.

Consider how practitioners engage through 'responsive curiosity.' An artist working with displaced families approaches their situation with genuine attention to what people want to share, not extracting content for predetermined ends. What emerges may completely reshape the artist's intended work. A community organiser facing housing cuts enters conversations with sensitivity to what residents actually need, not confirmation of existing campaign strategies. Ideally, their approach emerges from authentic relationships that transform all involved.

Through my work across domains, I've discovered how narrative operates everywhere. The policy researcher and the dramaturge both work with story structures, tension, and resolution. More significantly, both actively shape the textual realities they inhabit, creating new possibilities through strategic engagement with existing materials.

When we engage with reality as text – whether examining institutional policies or creating artistic works – meaning emerges through active participation. This co-creation mirrors both democratic processes and artistic collaboration, where significance arises through the dynamic interplay between reading existing narratives and authoring new ones.

Redefining the Real, Present, and Possible

Within this textual understanding, conventional definitions of what constitutes the 'real', the 'present', and the 'possible' require reconsideration. These terms take on distinctive meanings that distinguish my approach from both naive constructionism and simple empiricism.

The 'real' extends beyond the merely factual or material to encompass the full range of meaningful experience. A work of art may be 'real' not just as a physical object, but in its effect, its presence, its capacity to create meaning. Even when an object is revealed as 'inauthentic' in material terms – a reproduction rather than an original – the experience it generates may retain its reality.

This understanding recognises that reality emerges through narrative engagement rather than residing in objects independent of interpretation. The 'real' includes relationships, meanings, capacities, and potentials that conventional approaches might overlook. Practitioners learn to work with this expanded reality strategically – identifying which aspects of meaningful experience might be brought into sharper focus to transform how situations are understood.

The 'present' is not merely a thin slice of time between past and future, but a rich field constructed through narrative. What is deemed 'present' or 'absent' emerges through the narrative frameworks we employ rather than existing as objective facts.

This multidimensional understanding includes not just what is materially before us but what is conceptually, relationally, and prefiguratively present within current configurations. Different narrative frames construct different forms of presence, making some elements visible while rendering others invisible. A housing campaign might strategically reframe 'empty buildings' as 'present possibilities' rather than 'absent homes', revealing potential that existing policy narratives miss or ignore.

What is 'possible' cannot be predetermined through abstract formulas but emerges within specific narrative contexts. Possibility is not merely what is permissible within existing constraints, but what is latent within current configurations – what exists prefiguratively, waiting to be recognised and actualised.

This contextual understanding distinguishes my approach from both political pragmatism – which accepts existing constraints as given – and utopian thinking – which imagines without regard to present conditions. It recognises that what becomes possible depends partly on collective belief and engagement – when enough people believe something is possible, that belief itself can transform conditions of possibility.

These redefinitions don't merely offer analytical insights – they provide operational tools for transformation. When practitioners approach situations with expanded understandings of reality, presence, and possibility, they can identify intervention points invisible within conventional frameworks.

Narrative as Methodology

Stories are more than vessels for information – they are our primary tools for creating meaning out of complexity. Through narrative, we transform scattered events into coherent understanding, distinguishing between what matters and what distracts.

This meaning-making capacity operates at multiple scales. For individuals, personal narratives shape identity and possibility. In groups, shared narratives create collective understanding and enable coordinated action. At societal levels, cultural narratives establish frameworks for interpreting complex challenges.

I have developed distinct methodologies that harness this narrative capacity strategically, transforming it from natural process into deliberate practice. Through the Democracy School, these methodologies demonstrate how practitioners can work with narrative to enable transformation rather than merely understanding.

In group settings, Narrative-based Action Learning brings diverse perspectives into productive tension through strategic scenario construction. I don't merely facilitate discussion – I carefully craft scenarios that will surface specific tensions I believe need addressing, then create conditions where groups can discover new possibilities through their engagement with these provocations. These scenarios become strategic interventions that make visible what conventional approaches miss, enabling collective recognition of latent possibilities.

For individuals, Narrative Coaching helps participants actively reconstruct the stories shaping their experience and action. Rather than simply exploring existing narratives, we collaborate in strategic narrative reconstruction. The coaching relationship becomes a laboratory where individuals experiment with alternative story constructions, testing how different narratives enable different possibilities for meaning and action.

What distinguishes these methodologies is their integration of purposeful design with genuine openness to emergence. In Action Learning, I construct scenarios to surface particular tensions while remaining committed to being surprised by group insights. The scenarios become invitations for collective discovery rather than prompts toward predetermined conclusions. Similarly, in Coaching, I listen for transformative reconfigurations that must emerge from the client's own material and meanings, becoming a collaborator in authentic narrative exploration.

Across contexts, these methodologies work strategically with narrative's creative power. They don't merely analyse existing stories but actively participate in constructing new ones. When practitioners change how situations are storied, they transform what possibilities become recognisable and achievable within them. This strategic engagement with narrative's constitutive power forms the bridge between understanding and transformation.

Responsive Intentionality in Practice

Narrative prefiguration becomes transformative practice when practitioners integrate what I call 'responsive intentionality' with emergent process. This distinguishes it from manipulative approaches that impose predetermined outcomes and from purely passive approaches that avoid any purposeful engagement.

Responsive intentionality means approaching any situation with authentic interest and provisional purpose that remains genuinely open to transformation. Practitioners develop what might be called 'ethical presence' – clear enough about their commitments to guide engagement, humble enough to be fundamentally changed by what they encounter. A community organiser working on housing justice holds genuine care for housing security while remaining open to discovering that community priorities might differ from initial assumptions.

Creative agency means participating in the co-construction of new narrative configurations rather than unilaterally imposing them. When practitioners exercise creative agency ethically, they become participant-authors within collaborative processes of meaning-making rather than external manipulators of others' stories.

Consider how this integration works in practice. An artist documenting neighbourhood changes doesn't arrive with a predetermined narrative about gentrification. Instead, they engage responsively with residents' own accounts of transformation, allowing these stories to reshape their understanding whilst contributing their own perspective to collective meaning-making. Their creative agency emerges through authentic participation, not extraction.

Similarly, a policy researcher examining welfare cuts approaches affected families with genuine curiosity about lived experiences, knowing their predetermined frameworks may be inadequate. They read existing policy narratives whilst remaining open to having these completely reconfigured by what they learn. Their interpretive capacity serves responsive engagement rather than confirming existing assumptions.

The integration creates 'ethical prefiguration' – the capacity to recognise latent possibilities AND actively participate in cultivating conditions where authentic possibilities can emerge. Through this approach, narrative prefiguration transforms from analytical framework into empowerment methodology that honours the agency and integrity of all participants.

Such integration proves essential because transformation requires both understanding current configurations and participating responsively in their reconfiguration. Genuine transformation emerges through the dynamic between intentional engagement and genuine openness to being transformed by the process itself – not through manipulation or passive observation.

Narrative Ecology

Understanding how different narratives interact while maintaining their integrity requires moving beyond linear models to ecological ones. I propose the concept of narrative ecology to illuminate how narratives function as an interconnected ecosystem rather than isolated constructions, influencing each other while maintaining their distinctive characteristics.

Narratives can be understood through two fundamental dimensions. The first concerns their relationship to reality: factual/empirical narratives claiming direct correspondence to observable phenomena; counter-factual narratives exploring alternative possibilities; fictional narratives creating coherent worlds without claiming direct correspondence; and creative non-fictional narratives employing artistic techniques while maintaining factual commitment.

The second dimension concerns their mode of expression: textual/verbal using written or spoken language; visual using images and forms; auditory using sound and music; conceptual using ideas and frameworks; and multimodal combining multiple expressive forms.

From the perspective of "the world as text," all forms – from scientific papers to dance performances to architectural spaces – constitute texts that can be read and interpreted. The differences lie not in whether they are textual but in how they relate to reality and how they express themselves.

The ecology metaphor highlights several key aspects of how narratives function: they interact without conflation, maintaining distinctive characteristics while influencing each other; they exist in dynamic relationships, creating meaning through connections rather than in isolation; they generate emergent possibilities that couldn't be predicted from individual elements; and they maintain contextual validity appropriate to their mode without being reduced to the standards of other types.

Practitioners learn to read ecological patterns strategically – identifying where certain narrative types might be underrepresented, where productive tensions might be cultivated, where new connections might generate breakthrough insights. A policy analyst addressing climate change might strategically bring together scientific data, community testimonies, economic projections, and artistic visualisations – not merely collecting different perspectives but facilitating their interaction in ways that generate new understandings.

This ecological understanding avoids both naive constructionism – where all narratives are equally valid or invalid – and simple empiricism – where only directly observable phenomena are 'real.' It recognises meaningful distinctions between narrative types while revealing opportunities for strategic intervention in their interconnections. Through such intervention, practitioners can participate in evolving the ecology itself, creating new possibilities for meaning-making and transformation.

The Fragment Dimension

The narrative ecology described does not consist primarily of complete, bounded wholes. Instead, narratives typically present themselves as fragments – partial expressions that point toward larger constructions while containing significant gaps, elisions, and indeterminacies. Understanding why fragments matter fundamentally shapes how practitioners work with narrative for transformation.

Narrative fragments exist in multiple forms across the ecology. They may be literal fragments of longer texts, partial expressions of larger ideas, incomplete articulations of complex experiences, or deliberate constructions that resist closure. What unites them is their incompleteness – they gesture beyond themselves, creating spaces of indeterminacy that invite both interpretive engagement and creative reconfiguration.

Many fragments are intentionally incomplete, designed to create particular effects through their partiality. Artists deliberately employ fragmentation to invite co-creation; political actors strategically leave narratives incomplete to create space for multiple interpretations. This intentional incompleteness isn't a failure of communication but a sophisticated strategy that creates conditions for transformation – fragments require active engagement in ways that complete texts often don't.

Other fragments result from unintentional processes as narratives move across time, space, and contexts. Historical accounts reach us as fragments through material transmission; cultural narratives transform as they move between communities; personal stories exist partially articulated, awaiting occasions for fuller expression. These fragmentations reveal how narratives exist not as stable entities but as dynamic processes continually reconfigured through interaction.

Skilled practitioners develop what might be called 'strategic fragment work' – the capacity to deliberately select, construct, and assemble fragments in ways that generate new possibilities. An artist creating work about social inequality might deliberately collect fragments from vastly different contexts – an overheard conversation in a corporate boardroom, a policy document's bureaucratic language, a child's drawing from an underresourced school – knowing that their juxtaposition will reveal connections invisible within any single context.

The fragmentary nature of narrative creates the dynamic space where transformation becomes possible. Fragments demand that we exercise both interpretive agency – reading their implicit meanings – and creative agency – completing them through our own engagement. This dual requirement makes fragment work central to the methodology: practitioners learn to recognise the transformative potential within partial expressions and to help others see how these fragments might be reconfigured into new possibilities.

Practitioners who master fragment work become skilled curators of possibility – not merely collecting interesting pieces but strategically assembling them in ways that reveal latent connections and generate new realities. They understand that transformation often happens through recombination rather than wholesale creation, finding power in the spaces between existing elements.

Between Fragmentation and Coherence

The tension between fragmentation and coherence is not a problem to be resolved but a productive dynamic that creates conditions for transformation. This approach operates precisely within this tension, utilising both the openness that fragmentation creates and the integrative capacity that coherence provides.

This dynamic manifests across different levels of engagement. At the individual level, we constantly navigate between fragmentary experiences and coherent identity stories. At the collective level, groups move between multiple partial perspectives and shared frameworks for action. At the societal level, cultural narratives oscillate between contestation and consensus, between multiplicity and unity.

Skilled practitioners learn to work strategically with this tension rather than simply accepting it. They develop what might be called 'dynamic navigation' – the capacity to deliberately modulate between fragmentation and coherence depending on what a situation requires. Sometimes they intentionally fragment existing coherent narratives that have become rigid or exclusionary, breaking them into constituent elements that can be recombined differently. Other times they help weave fragmented experiences into provisional coherences that enable coordinated action.

A community mediator working with divided groups might begin by fragmenting dominant narratives that maintain separation – breaking down totalising stories about "us versus them" into specific experiences, particular grievances, individual hopes. This fragmentation creates space for new connections to emerge. Later in the process, they might help the group construct new, more inclusive coherences that honour the complexity revealed through fragmentation while enabling collaborative action.

What distinguishes my methodology from other approaches is its ability to work with both poles of this tension simultaneously. Rather than privileging either fragment or whole, it recognises how possibilities emerge through their relationship:

The drive toward coherence provides direction and meaning without which fragments would remain disconnected and inert
The reality of fragmentation creates spaces of indeterminacy without which coherence would become rigid and totalising
The movement between these poles generates the dynamic through which prefigurative possibilities can be recognised and actualised

Some expressions exist as "relatively complete" constructions – novels, films, theories, historical accounts – providing structures that guide how other elements are integrated. But even these more bounded forms function as fragments within larger contexts, their apparent completeness giving them particular influence without granting them absolute authority.

Master practitioners develop the ability to sense when a situation needs more fragmentation – when existing coherences have become constraining – and when it needs more integration – when fragmentation has created paralysis or disconnect. They learn to work with groups and individuals to navigate this dynamic consciously, using fragmentation and coherence as strategic tools for transformation rather than simply experiencing them as forces beyond their influence.

Narrative Prefiguration Within Ecological Systems

Within the dynamic landscape of ecological fragments and drives toward coherence, prefiguration operates distinctively. Unlike linear approaches that see possibilities emerging through gradual development of singular stories, the ecological perspective reveals how prefigurative potential often exists in the relationships between different types and fragments.

This ecological understanding transforms how we approach transformation in several ways:

First, it reveals how prefigurative possibilities often exist at the intersections between different domains – where factual and fictional, visual and conceptual, individual and collective expressions meet and interact. These intersection points frequently contain latent potentials invisible within any single framework.

Second, it illuminates how the very multiplicity of expressions within an ecology creates conditions for transformation that single dominant stories might foreclose. The tensions, contradictions, and resonances between different forms create spaces where new configurations become possible.

Third, it shows how prefiguration operates through reconfiguration of relationship patterns rather than merely through development of individual stories. Just as ecological systems transform through changing relationship patterns between elements, this approach transforms through new connections between existing fragments.

Skilled practitioners learn to work strategically within ecological systems as 'prefigurative agents' – not imposing change from outside but positioning themselves as catalysts within existing relationships. They identify what might be called 'ecological leverage points' – places where small, strategic interventions can create cascading reconfigurations across the system. An artist working with housing justice might position their practice at the intersection of policy discourse, community organising, and academic research – creating works that enable these typically separate domains to recognise shared concerns and complementary capacities.

Practitioners develop sensitivity to ecological timing – understanding when systems are ready for particular kinds of reconfiguration and when they need continued cultivation. They learn to introduce elements strategically, not as foreign impositions but as authentic extensions of their own multi-domain engagement. A social entrepreneur might bring storytelling methods into corporate strategy sessions not as manipulation but because narrative thinking genuinely informs their business approach.

Most significantly, this ecological approach reveals how practitioners can strategically cultivate conditions where prefigurative possibilities naturally emerge rather than forcing predetermined outcomes. They learn to work as 'ecological gardeners' – creating conditions conducive to new growth while allowing specific forms to emerge organically. This might involve introducing new narrative types into established networks, facilitating connections between previously isolated domains, or creating spaces where different validity claims can interact productively.

By positioning themselves thoughtfully within narrative ecologies and working with rather than against ecological patterns, practitioners can participate in fundamental reconfigurations while maintaining the integrity of the systems they seek to transform.

Validity and Evaluation

The ecological perspective raises important questions about how different forms of expression, each with their own validity claims, can be evaluated within a single framework without either collapsing all distinctions or creating rigid hierarchies between them.

My approach recognises that different types make different validity claims appropriate to their mode and purpose:

Factual/empirical expressions claim correspondence with observable phenomena and are evaluated through evidence, verification, and explanatory power
Counter-factual expressions claim plausibility within alternative conditions and are evaluated through logical consistency and illuminative potential
Fictional expressions claim internal coherence and meaningful world-creation and are evaluated through aesthetic criteria and generative capacity
Creative non-fictional expressions claim both factual grounding and aesthetic quality and are evaluated through both evidential and artistic criteria

Rather than imposing a single evaluative standard across all types – which would inevitably privilege certain forms while marginalising others – I recognise the contextual nature of validity. Each type maintains integrity within its own domain while entering into ecological relationships with others.

Skilled practitioners learn to work strategically with these different validity claims as tools for transformation. They understand that evaluation itself becomes a form of intervention – how we assess different expressions shapes which possibilities gain legitimacy and support. A policy advocate might strategically deploy artistic validity claims in governmental contexts, arguing that a community theatre project's capacity to generate new understanding constitutes legitimate evidence for policy consideration. They're not abandoning empirical rigour but expanding the ecology of acceptable evidence.

Similarly, an artist working across domains learns to translate between validity frameworks without compromising their integrity. They might present their practice using economic metrics when engaging with funders while maintaining aesthetic criteria when discussing the work with artistic peers. This isn't duplicity but strategic multilingualism – the capacity to honour different validity claims while working toward shared goals.

Practitioners develop what might be called 'evaluative fluency' – the ability to read which validity claims will be most generative in particular contexts and to frame their work accordingly. They learn to create what could be termed 'validity bridges' – frameworks that help different domains recognise each other's contributions without abandoning their distinctive criteria.

What matters in prefiguration is not establishing hierarchies between types but strategically working with their different validity claims to create richer ecologies where transformation becomes possible precisely through the tensions and interactions between different ways of making meaning. Practitioners learn to position their work at the intersections of different validity frameworks, creating spaces where new forms of legitimacy can emerge.

Through strategic engagement with evaluation, practitioners can participate in expanding what counts as valid knowledge and meaningful expression, opening pathways for transformation that purely single-domain approaches might foreclose.

Breaking Systemic Limitations

Systems resist transformation from within. When faced with instructions for fundamental change, they absorb disruption while maintaining essential structures – what my artistic research has identified as "the cube problem."(2)

The "cube problem" emerged from an art-based research inquiry exploring how AI systems respond to instructions for visualising systemic collapse. Despite explicit instructions for asymmetrical dissolution, these systems persistently defaulted to cubic forms – revealing a structural bias toward geometric order that parallels how political and social systems absorb disruption while maintaining fundamental structures.(3)

The research involved developing a hundred-stage generative process aimed at visualising systemic collapse through increasingly sophisticated prompts. What began as an attempt to depict a dense, layered mass representing the Status Quo – meant to fracture, twist, and evolve asymmetrically – consistently resulted in cubic forms regardless of prompt sophistication. Even when specifically instructed "It is not a cube," the AI returned cubes. When demanded to generate asymmetry, it produced right angles. When requested to create organic turbulence, it defaulted to geometric order.(4)

This persistent reversion to cubic forms wasn't merely a technical limitation but revealed deep-seated algorithmic logic that prioritises geometric simplicity over conceptual depth. When examining the system's internal parameters, I discovered the root cause: "mesh.geometry.default = cube."(5) The systems begin with the cube as their foundational primitive, and all subsequent modifications are applied to this cubic foundation.

This dynamic parallels how political, economic, and social systems respond to change initiatives. They absorb disruption through surface modifications while maintaining their essential structures. Reform efforts that operate solely within a system's internal logic become reduced to variations on its existing patterns – the persistent cube beneath changing appearances.(6)

The methodology of working with fragments addresses this systemic resistance by operating differently than conventional change approaches. Rather than attempting to reform systems using only elements and logics internal to those systems, it identifies latent possibilities that exist across and between different frameworks. This approach bypasses the "cubic" tendency of systems by introducing elements from outside their internal logic, creating configurations that existing systems cannot easily absorb or neutralise.

This requires 'ethical leverage' – identifying where authentic engagement creates generative disruption without manipulation. Skilled practitioners introduce elements from their genuine multi-domain engagement: an artist brings embodied practices to policy discussions because that's authentically how they understand issues; a policy advocate introduces historical perspectives because those emerged from their own learning journey. The key lies in offering genuine aspects of one's engagement, creating space for others to respond authentically.

Practitioners learn to position themselves at the boundaries of systems, where different logics meet and interact. They work with the understanding that transformation often requires introducing elements that cannot be processed through existing frameworks, creating productive friction that opens new pathways rather than simply being absorbed into existing patterns.

Prefiguration Across Scales

Prefigurative practice manifests differently at individual and collective scales, while maintaining consistent principles across domains. This cross-scale coherence is crucial to understanding how fragment work can contribute to transformation from personal recognition to cultural change.

At the individual level, prefigurative elements often exist as unrealised capacities, unrecognised patterns, or unacknowledged experiences that, when reconfigured, create new possibilities for action and meaning. The Narrative Coaching methodology I've developed specifically addresses this level, creating conditions where individuals can recognise and actualise these prefigurative elements within their own story constructions.

At the collective level, prefigurative elements emerge through the interplay of multiple perspectives across different contributors. Here, they exist in the patterns of relationship between different viewpoints and in the spaces between them – what remains unsaid or unrecognised in dominant collective understandings. The Narrative-based Action Learning methodology addresses this level, creating conditions where groups can recognise and actualise these elements through structured dialogue and exploration.

Skilled practitioners develop what might be called 'strategic scale-bridging' – the capacity to work deliberately across levels of social organisation, creating connections that enable transformation to propagate between scales. They understand that individual recognition without collective context remains isolated, while collective movement without individual commitment lacks sustainable foundation. A community organiser building housing campaigns doesn't just mobilise individuals or address policy – they strategically create conditions where personal experiences of housing insecurity connect to collective action frameworks that can influence systemic change.

Practitioners learn to identify what could be termed 'scale leverage points' – moments when intervention at one level can catalyse transformation at others. An artist whose practice involves individual storytelling workshops might strategically time these to connect with broader cultural conversations, creating conditions where personal narrative transformations feed into collective discourse shifts. They develop sensitivity to 'cross-scale timing' – understanding when conditions at different levels align to enable breakthrough moments.

What unites these manifestations is the fundamental principle that transformation emerges not through imposing external visions but through recognising and reconfiguring what already exists in latent form. Whether working with individuals or collectives, the approach focuses attention on present potential rather than distant futures, on reconfiguration rather than invention, on actualisation rather than gradual development.

Most significantly, this scalable approach enables practitioners to contribute to transformation processes that extend beyond any single intervention. They learn to position their work strategically within larger movement ecologies, understanding how their specific contributions can amplify broader transformation patterns. Individual fragment work can catalyse broader recognition; collective reconfigurations can create conditions where individual possibilities multiply.

The methodology creates pathways between scales that enable what might be called 'prefigurative cascade effects' – moments when transformation at one level creates conditions for breakthrough at others, generating momentum that propagates through the entire system. Practitioners learn to position themselves as strategic connectors within these cascades, facilitating the flow of transformative energy across different levels of social organisation.

Navigating Conflicts

Any approach that recognises multiple frameworks inevitably encounters conflicts between them – situations where different accounts make incompatible claims or suggest contradictory actions. Rather than seeing these conflicts as problems to be eliminated, prefigurative practice approaches them as sites of potential transformation.

These conflicts manifest at multiple levels: between different forms of expression (factual vs. fictional, verbal vs. visual); between different scales (individual vs. collective, local vs. global); between different cultural or disciplinary frameworks (scientific vs. artistic, traditional vs. progressive); and between dominant and marginalised accounts within any context.

Conventional approaches to such conflicts typically attempt either to resolve them through establishing hierarchies – declaring one account "more true" than others – or to avoid them through separation – keeping conflicting frameworks in isolated domains. Both approaches ultimately limit transformative potential by reducing complexity.

Skilled practitioners develop what might be called 'strategic conflict navigation' – the capacity to work deliberately with tensions between frameworks to generate new possibilities. They understand that conflicts often signal the presence of latent potentials that existing frameworks cannot accommodate individually. Rather than seeking to eliminate tension, they learn to hold space for productive engagement between different perspectives while facilitating emergence of new configurations that honour essential elements from each.

A community facilitator working with groups divided by institutional conflicts might begin by helping each side articulate their deepest concerns rather than their positions. Through this process, they often discover that what appeared as fundamental opposition actually stems from shared values expressed through different frameworks. They then strategically guide the group toward experimental collaborations that test whether new approaches can address core concerns from multiple perspectives simultaneously.

Working with conflicts rather than against them requires a different orientation. It recognises conflicts as indicators of complexity rather than as failures of coherence. It explores the spaces created by these conflicts as sites where prefigurative possibilities might exist. And it seeks not resolution but reconfiguration – finding ways to create new relationships that neither eliminate differences nor leave them in isolation.

This approach doesn't promise harmony or consensus but creates conditions, where conflicting frameworks can generate new possibilities precisely through their differences. It recognises that transformation often emerges not despite conflicts but through them – utilising the energy and tension they create as catalysts for reconfiguration.

Master practitioners understand that most transformative innovations emerge from the collision of previously separate frameworks. They position themselves strategically at the intersection points of different narratives, creating what might be called 'conflict laboratories' – spaces where tensions can be explored safely and new syntheses can emerge. They develop the capacity to translate between conflicting worldviews, helping each side recognise valid concerns in the other while maintaining their own integrity.

Through strategic engagement with conflicts, practitioners can facilitate what might be termed 'productive synthesis' – the emergence of new frameworks that transcend the limitations of previous approaches while preserving their essential insights. This requires patience, skill, and deep commitment to the possibility that apparent oppositions often contain the seeds of breakthrough understanding.

Theoretical Foundations and Extensions

My approach builds upon Paul Ricoeur's insights regarding the relationship between story and temporality, particularly his concept of threefold mimesis (prefiguration, configuration, refiguration).(7) However, where Ricoeur primarily explored how individuals form identity through engagement with texts, this methodology specifically addresses how practitioners can work with fragments to enable collective transformation.

It extends beyond individual sense-making to examine how stories function ecologically across different domains, and develops concrete methodologies for actualising prefigurative possibilities in ways that overcome systemic resistance to change. This represents not merely an application of Ricoeurian concepts but their fundamental transformation and extension into new domains.(8)

Where Ricoeur's work emphasises how story mediates between action and understanding through the threefold mimetic process, my approach focuses specifically on how prefigurative elements within current configurations can be recognised and actualised to create transformative possibilities. It maintains Ricoeur's insight regarding the configurative power of story while directing this power toward recognition of latent possibilities rather than primarily toward identity formation.

Furthermore, while Ricoeur's approach has been primarily applied within literary and philosophical contexts, this methodology extends these insights into explicitly political domains – addressing how story operates not just in meaning-making but in transformation of material conditions and systemic structures. This extension maintains continuity with Ricoeurian foundations while developing them in directions that address contemporary challenges of political and systemic change.

The key distinction lies in moving from interpretive identity formation to transformational practice through strategic integration of interpretive and creative agency working with fragments. Where Ricoeur focused on how individuals make sense of their experience through engagement with complete texts, this approach develops methodologies for practitioners to work with partial expressions in ways that enable collective processes of recognition and actualisation.

This theoretical departure enables what might be called 'actionable prefiguration' – the development of specific practices that allow individuals and groups to participate actively in transforming the realities they inhabit rather than simply understanding them more deeply. While Ricoeur's framework provides essential insights into how meaning emerges through narrative engagement, my methodology extends this understanding into strategic practice.

Practitioners working with narrative prefiguration develop capacities that go beyond interpretive sophistication to include what could be termed 'configurative intervention' – the ability to strategically introduce new elements into existing narrative configurations in ways that generate transformative possibilities. This isn't manipulation but rather skilled participation in the ongoing collective authoring of reality.

The methodology also differs from Ricoeurian approaches in its explicit attention to power dynamics and systemic resistance. While Ricoeur's framework focuses on individual consciousness and meaning-making, narrative prefiguration addresses how entrenched systems absorb and neutralise change efforts, developing specific strategies for breakthrough that work with systemic patterns rather than against them.

This theoretical positioning establishes narrative prefiguration as both heir to Ricoeurian insights and departure toward more explicitly transformational practice. It honours the philosophical depth of Ricoeur's contributions while developing them in directions that serve practitioners committed to fundamental change in their communities, institutions, and societies.

The Present Future

This integrated approach reorients practitioners toward time and possibility while maintaining ethical grounding in authentic relationship. Rather than positioning transformation as goals to be achieved through strategic manipulation, it reveals how responsive engagement can participate in actualising possibilities already latent within present configurations.

Practitioners working with narrative prefiguration develop 'ethical presence' – the capacity to simultaneously remain open to what wants to emerge while offering their authentic engagement in service of possibilities they genuinely care about. They approach present configurations with both analytical sensitivity and responsive commitment.

A performance artist working with climate themes doesn't manipulate audiences toward predetermined responses – they create authentic experiences of their own relationship with ecological crisis, remaining open to how audiences might respond and what might emerge from that encounter. A policy entrepreneur addressing inequality doesn't strategically position alternatives – they offer genuine innovations that emerge from their own engagement with affected communities, trusting that authentic alternatives will find their own pathways to influence.

This approach proves essential for urgent challenges that require both analytical sophistication and ethical action. Climate disruption, democratic erosion, systemic inequality – these demand responses that honour the complexity of present conditions while actively participating in collective transformation.

The methodology reveals how transformation emerges through authentic participation in reconfiguring existing elements rather than strategic manipulation toward predetermined outcomes. Understanding and action integrate through practices that remain open to discovery while offering genuine engagement in service of collective flourishing.

The conceptual journey through narrative prefiguration reveals how possibilities emerge not through the creation of something entirely new but through reconfiguring what already exists. Understanding forms not gradually but through moments of recognition – insights that were prefiguratively present from the beginning awaiting actualisation.(9)

I live in this creative tension between recognition and actualisation, between what is implied and what is realised. I engage with practitioners across domains – not because I confuse these domains but because I recognise how each already contains elements of the other.

Through this integration without conflation, this connection without confusion, present potentials become realised through practice, through performance, through the ongoing work of creating meaning together.

For practitioners committed to ethical transformation, narrative prefiguration offers neither guaranteed control nor passive waiting but responsive capacity – the integration of analytical depth with authentic engagement that enables meaningful contribution to complex processes of change. Like ingredients that invite many possible configurations, present conditions contain multiple potential futures. Skilled practitioners learn to recognise these potentials and how to participate authentically in actualising those that serve the flourishing of all involved.

Like the recipe that prefigures the meal not yet cooked, this paper has offered ingredients and instructions. What emerges through your engagement with these elements – what connections form, what possibilities become visible, what configurations take shape – completes a process that was from the beginning collaborative. The narrative continues beyond these pages, into the spaces where text meets world, where words create worlds.

Endnotes

For a parallel discussion of how even scientific frameworks operate narratively, see Bruner, J. (1986). Actual Minds, Possible Worlds. Harvard University Press.
The "cube problem" emerged from an art-based research inquiry titled 100 Iterations of Collapse, which systematically documented how AI systems resist representing asymmetrical dissolution by defaulting to geometric simplicity. See Nicodemus, ‘Emergence of the Cube Problem: An Art-Based Research Inquiry,’ Unruhe Media, February 2025.
This parallel between technological and systemic resistance is explored in depth in ‘The Cubic Order: Technological Control, Environmental Collapse, and Resistance’ (Nicodemus, 2025), which extends the cube problem metaphor to analyse contemporary socio-technical-environmental systems.
This persistent reversion to cubic forms reflects what Parisi terms the "contagious architecture" of computational systems -- their tendency to reproduce certain structural forms regardless of input variation. See Parisi, L. (2013). Contagious Architecture: Computation, Aesthetics, and Space. MIT Press.
This insight connects to Stiegler's analysis of how technological systems grammatise continuous flows into discrete units. See Stiegler, B. (1998). Technics and Time, 1: The Fault of Epimetheus. Stanford University Press.
This analysis of how systems absorb change while maintaining essential structures resonates with Chun's concept of "updating to remain the same." See Chun, W. H. K. (2016). Updating to Remain the Same: Habitual New Media. MIT Press.
Ricoeur, P. (1984). Time and Narrative, Volume 1. University of Chicago Press. Ricoeur's threefold mimesis process includes prefiguration (mimesis₁), configuration (mimesis₂), and refiguration (mimesis₃), describing how narrative mediates between action and understanding.
For Ricoeur's application of narrative theory to identity formation, see Ricoeur, P. (1992). Oneself as Another. University of Chicago Press. My extension to collective transformation also draws on Benjamin's analysis of how systems encode structural biases: Benjamin, R. (2019). Race After Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code. Polity Press.
This understanding of transformation through reconfiguration aligns with Haraway's concept of "staying with the trouble" and creating new kinship relations within existing conditions. See Haraway, D. (2016). Staying with the Trouble: Making Kin in the Chthulucene. Duke University Press.