In response to Denzin and Lincoln's claim that using a variety of interpretive analyses enables a better understanding of the world, I examine two different analyses of the same data set. Using a survey of preservice elementary education students (n = 208) asked to describe their perceptions of teacher professionalism, I contrast the application of Polkinghorne's paradigmatic and narrative analyses. Using the crises of representation, legitimization and praxis, I interrogate both sets of results making an argument for the value of multiple and varied analyses. (Contains 1 figure and 3 notes.)