could not have been, foreseen. Even documents require situational
responses, as one phrase points to an unanticipated new source, possibly a
cache of letters in a distant archive or, in other uses of archival materials, an
individual to interview who resides in another country.
But improvisational research does not mean impressionistic research.
There is systematicity to improv, as there is to interpretive methods.
Whether in jazz, in medieval or Renaissance “Early Music,” or in theater,
improvisation builds on extended periods of practice and preparation, solo,
but also, importantly, with other people. One may not know ahead of time
what one will do in the moment, but one draws in that moment on a
repertoire of moves practiced with one’s band- or troupe-mates. And improv
does require being “in the moment”: an intense focus on the matter at hand
and on those with whom one is interacting. It requires a “yes, and” attitude
– the orientation toward building on what one has just been told, on an
invitation or challenge just extended, on an unexpected word just
encountered – rather than “blocking” (negating) it. So it is that interpretive
researchers practice their craft, learning how to observe or converse with “in
the moment” focus in order to remember the details afterwards; how to
“yes, and” in a conversation in order to keep it going and focused toward the
research topic. As with all practices, the repertoire of observational and
conversational “moves” builds up. Starting a conversation with a stranger
gets easier the more practiced one is at it, as does remembering an hour-
Convention