Navigating the Quandaries of Asylum Storytelling in Dina Nayeri’s Who Gets Believed?

Parveen Kumar, Kumar Gaurav

Abstract


The current discourse on refugee justice poses a significant question: How do the asylum systems decide to dis/believe the stories of asylum seekers? At present, through a screening process, the asylum seekers are categorised as ‘deserving’ or ‘undeserving’, ‘rightful’ or ‘unrightful’, ‘refugees’ or ‘migrants’, and ‘victims’ or ‘threats’. This reductionist approach overlooks the intersection of contextual factors that complicate the experiences of displaced people. This paper identifies the bifurcated nature of asylum storytelling: first as a conduit for conveying personal experiences and second as a barrier to getting believed. Through an analysis of five asylum cases, approaching them as metaphors, genre, and discourse, depicted in Dina Nayeri’s book, Who Gets Believed?, the paper examines the vulnerabilities within the UK and US asylum systems that limit asylum seekers’ voice in storytelling. Based on a consolidated narrative inquiry and conceptual content analysis framework, the paper complicates the determinants of belief, credibility, and consistency in the institutional subculture of the asylum system, the ‘culture of disbelief’. The paper teases out the implications of the instinctive response of the asylum-granting authorities towards asylum storytelling as an illustration of the politics of believability materialising as a loss of truth, language, meaning, and narrative for the storyteller in the asylum space. Additionally, it highlights the role of new refugee literature in problematising the quiet politics of storytelling and envisioning solutions for centring asylum storytellers’ voices, experiential truth, and narrative.

 

Keywords: agency; asylum; Dina Nayeri; narrative; storytelling


Full Text:

PDF

References


Anderson, J., Hollaus, J., Lindsay, A., & Williamson, C. (2014). The culture of disbelief: An ethnographic approach to understanding an under-theorised concept in the UK asylum system. Refugee Studies Centre, 53(102), 4-20. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:148489039

Asl, M. P. (2020). The politics of space: Vietnam as a communist heterotopia in Viet Thanh Nguyen’s The Refugees. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 26(1), 156-170. http://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2020-2601-11

Baillot, H., Sharon, C., & Munro, V. E. (2009). Seen but not heard? Parallels and dissonances in the treatment of rape narratives across the asylum and criminal justice contexts. Journal of Law and Society, 36(2), 195-219. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6478.2009.00463.x

Bromley, R. (2021). Narratives of forced mobility and displacement in contemporary literature and culture. Springer.

Bruine, G., Vredeveldt, A., & Koppen, P. J. (2023). Culture and credibility: The assessment of asylum seekers’ statements. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 29(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2023.2279328

Dawson, C. (2023). Flights of fancy: imagination, audacity, and refugee storytelling. In E. Espiritu & V. Nguyen (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of refugee narratives (pp. 15-25). Routledge.

Espiritu, Y. L., Duong, L., Vang, M., Bascara, V., Um, K., Sharif, L., & Hatton, N. (2022). Departures: An introduction to critical refugee studies. University of California Press.

Estevez, A. (2022). The necropolitical production and management of forced migration. Lexington Books.

Fassin, D., & Halluin, E. (2005). The truth from the body: medical certificates as ultimate evidence for asylum seekers. American Anthropologist, 107(4), 597-608. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.2005.107.4.597

Ferreira, N. (2022). Utterly unbelievable: The discourse of ‘fake’ SOGI asylum claims as a form of epistemic injustice. International Journal of Refugee Law, 34(3), 303-326. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eeac041

Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford University Press.

Haas, B. M. (2017). Citizens-in-waiting, deportees-in-waiting: Power, temporality, and suffering in the US asylum system. Ethos, 45(1), 75-97. https://doi.org/10.1111/etho.12150

Holland, M. (2018). Stories for asylum: Narrative and credibility in the United States political asylum application. Refuge: Canada’s Journal on Refugees, 34(2), 85-93. https://doi.org/10.7202/1055579ar

Jubany, O. (2017). Screening asylum in a culture of disbelief: Truths, denials and skeptical borders. Springer.

Klaas, S. (2023). Little knowledges: Shifting visions of childhood, care, and technology in the contemporary novel of forced migration. In E. Espiritu & V. Nguyen (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of refugee narratives (pp. 341-352). Routledge.

Limbu, B. (2023). Refugee narratives and humanitarian form. In E. Espiritu & V. Nguyen (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of refugee narratives (pp. 39-49). Routledge.

Lowe, N. J. (2004). The classical plot and the invention of Western narrative. Cambridge University Press.

Luker, T. (2014). Performance anxieties: Interpellation of the refugee subject in law. Canadian Journal of Law and Society, 30(1), 91-107. doi:10.1017/cls.2014.13

Maryns, K. (2005). Displacement in asylum seekers’ narratives. In M. Baynham & A. Fina (Eds.), Dislocations/relocations: Narratives of displacement (pp. 174-194). St. Jerome.

Mogiani, M. (2023). Alternative spatial imaginaries: Refugees’ counter-narratives of settlement and mobility in patras. In E. Espiritu & V. Nguyen (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of refugee narratives (pp. 395-406). Routledge.

Moyn, S. (2020). Human rights and humanitarianisation. In M. N. Barnett (Ed.), Humanitarianism and human rights: A world of differences (pp. 33-48). Cambridge University Press.

Nayeri, D. (2023). Who gets believed? When the truth isn’t enough. Catapult.

Pollabauer, S. (2004). Interpreting in asylum hearings: Issues of role, responsibility and power. Interpreting, 6(2), 143-180. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.6.2.03pol

Puvimanasinghe, T., Denson, L. A., Augoustinos, M., & Somasundaram, D. (2015). Narrative and silence: How former refugees talk about loss and past trauma. Journal of Refugee Studies, 28(1), 69-92. DOI:10.1093/jrs/feu019

Rogers, H., Fox, S., & Herlihy, J. (2014). The importance of looking credible: The impact of the behavioural sequelae of post-traumatic stress disorder on the credibility of asylum seekers. Psychology, Crime & Law, 2(2), 139-155. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2014.951643

Shumam, A., & Bohmer, C. Representing trauma: Political asylum Narrative. The Journal of American Folklore. 117(466), 394-414. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4137717

Solodoch, O. (2023). Overburdened? How refugee dispersal policies can mitigate NIMBYism and public backlash. Journal of European Public Policy, 20, 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2023.2191271

Sontag, S. (2003). Regarding the pain of others. Picador.

Stepnitz, A. (2023). Storied pasts: Credibility and evolving norms in asylum narratives 1989–2018. Minnesota Journal of Law and Inequality, 41(2), 1-43. https://doi.org/10.24926/25730037.680

The Migration Observatory. (2024, May). The UK’s asylum backlog. https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/the-uks-asylum-backlog/

UNHCR. (2022, February). Global trends: Forced displacement in 2022. https://www.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/2023-06/global-trends-report-2022.pdf

United Nations Department for Economic and Social Affairs. (2023, January). The 3rd International Forum on Migration Statistics. https://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic-social/migrationstat-forum-2023/

Vogl, A. (2013). Telling stories from start to finish. Griffith Law Review, 22(1), 63-86. https://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2013.10854767

Weiser, S. B., & Higgins, K. C. (2023). Believability: Sexual violence, media, and the politics of doubt. Polity Press.

Woods, K. (2020). Refugees’ stories: Empathy, agency, and solidarity. Journal of Social Philosophy, 51(4), 507-525. https://doi.org/10.1111/josp.12307

Woolley, A. (2017). Narrating the ‘asylum story’: Between literary and legal storytelling. Interventions, 19(3), 376-394. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369801X.2016.1231585




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17576/3L-2025-3101-07

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


 

 

 

eISSN : 2550-2247

ISSN : 0128-5157