Over the course of this class, we have read various ethnographies and methodological approaches regarding field research. Some have been very helpful, providing new theoretical insight relevant to my own field work whereas others, while undoubtedly interesting, seem less relevant to my own circumstances. In this essay, I present what I thought was useful or not useful from these five assigned ethnographies.
First, what I enjoyed about Eduardo Kohn’s How Forests Think is the legitimacy he seeks to give non-human beings. As he argues, “Without realizing it we attribute to nonhuman properties that are our own, and then, to compound this, we narcissistically ask them to provide us with corrective reflection of ourselves” (21). Trees, animals,
…show more content…
As she so boldly states, “My argument should be familiar to anthropologists who have long acknowledge that the terms people use to organize their lives are not simply gloss for universally shred assumptions about the world and one’s place in it but are actually constitutive of different forms of personhood, knowledge, and experience” (16). She rejects the process of academic translation or the reductionism of universality and seeks to give authority and legitimacy to the people who participate in the ethnographer’s analysis. This approach has been the direction I want my ethnography to go in, away from a process that seeks to transfer an informants’ words into another language. It is indeed the scholars job to sort, present, and critique data in a way that is useful and thought provoking, not simply the mere parroting of the informants words, however, it is imperative not to squeeze these people into already established realms and categories, which do not adequately relay their true feelings and actions and promulgate ethnocentric assumptions and ideals. I hope my research is reflexive of what the people are indeed feeling and perceiving in addition to a critical
This approach, which combines aspects of ethnography and autobiography (Ellis et al., 2011), found legitimacy based in the postmodern critique of how the mediums of scientific research - its lexicon and paradigm – constrained the findings of a study (Krizek, 1998; Kuhn, 2012) or as Richardson (2000) puts it “form and content are inseparable” (p. 923). In that way scientific research’s goal of pure objectivity is challenged as unattainable.
Madison, D. Soyini. "Chapter 1: Introduction to Critical Ethnography: Theory and Method." Critical Ethnography: Method, Ethics, and Performance. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2005. N. pag. Print.
Ethnographic fieldwork in Anthropology certainly requires anthropologies to understand the limits and biases they will be exposed to while preforming their research. Through the text “Ethnography and Culture”, James P. Spradley discusses some of the concepts anthropologies must be aware of just as “naive realism”, “explicit culture” and “tacit culture”. These three concepts can be appreciated when reading Richard B. Lee’s selection “Eating Christmas in the Kalahari”.
Taking Two Of The Theoretical Approaches To Social Research Discussed In The Module, Demonstrate The Connections Between Their Ontological, Epistemological And Methodological Assumptions. Which Method Or Methods Would Proponents Of Each Theory Favour As A Result Of Their Assumptions.
Field work is the hands on component to anthropology. The person will immerse themselves in the culture that they will study. These people must pay attention to every little thing that happens while there. It is important for the ethnographer to stay a little over a year in order to experience things they missed while they were in culture shock (page 42). They must adapt to the natives way of life and stop see the thing they do as something alien and see it as a part of their culture. Although the studier will be an alien in the culture they are in, they must try to live and immerse themselves in the way the locals live. Anthropologist Marjorie Shostak formed personal relationships with their cultural consultants. Shostak worked with the !Kung San in the Dobe region of southwest Africa, on the border between Botswana and South Africa (page 41). Field work must be done in order to really study the culture that is of
Nanda, S and Warms, R.L. (2011). Cultural Anthropology, Tenth Edition. Belmont, California: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. ISBN – 13:978-0-495-81083-4.
Schensul, Stephen L.; Schensul, Jean J. & LeCompte, Margaret D. (1999). Essential ethnographic methods: observations, interviews, and questionnaires (Book 2 in Ethnographer's Toolkit). Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.
Dorinne K. Kondo in Dissolution and Reconstitution of Self: Implications for Anthropological Epistemology suggested that to understand the culture one studies the ethnographer should account his/her presence. In other words, the ethnographer should write about his/her experiences because it establishes the “I was there” author...
Murchison, Julian. Ethnography Essentials: Designing, Conducting, and Presenting Your Research. John Wiley and Sons, 2010.
A good formal theory ought to be at least the equivalent ought of a ton of ethnographies and perhaps half a gross of substantive theories (Strauss 1987, p.248). A substantive grounded theory is a tailor-made theory while a formal grounded theory is a ready-made theory (Kearney 1998). Substantive theory may limit its application to other contexts if a constant comparative method of modifying a theory is neglected. Nevertheless, it may have important general implications and relevance to other areas. It is for this imperative that, the emergent substantive grounded theory generated from data, is moved to a formal theory. Formal theory allows more generalization, and transferability of research results, which may be adapted to other different scenarios.
Embarking on a journey of anthropological fieldwork will undoubtedly include a plethora of setbacks. At its foundation, fieldwork requires developing rapport with the native people in order to gain access of genuine knowledge pertaining to the specific culture being studied. Subsequently, social communication between the researcher and the native people is a key component to the entire process; yet simultaneously it is a root of the many problems a researcher can encounter while in the field. It is no secret that the cultural background of the researcher can often highly contrast the culture he or she enters during fieldwork. This initial cultural adaptation one must undergo while doing anthropological fieldwork is what many in the realm describe as culture shock.
Reflexivity emphasizes the point of theoretical and practical questioning, changing the ethnographers view of themselves and their work. There is an increased awareness of the collection of data and the limitation of methodological systems. This idea becomes inherent in the postmodernists study of the culture of the anthropologist/ethnographer. In much of his essay, Marcus shows that reflexivity is an immense area of comment and interest by questioning: Is reflexivity a license or a method? Furthermore, he writes that reflexivity opens up “the possibility for the so-called polyphonic text or the completely collaborative project, but more often than not, it merely reinforces the perspective and voice of the lone, introspective fieldworker without challenging the paradigm of ethnographic research at all (Marcus 193).
James P. Spradley (1979) described the insider approach to understanding culture as "a quiet revolution" among the social sciences (p. iii). Cultural anthropologists, however, have long emphasized the importance of the ethnographic method, an approach to understanding a different culture through participation, observation, the use of key informants, and interviews. Cultural anthropologists have employed the ethnographic method in an attempt to surmount several formidable cultural questions: How can one understand another's culture? How can culture be qualitatively and quantitatively assessed? What aspects of a culture make it unique and which connect it to other cultures? If ethnographies can provide answers to these difficult questions, then Spradley has correctly identified this method as revolutionary.
Participation is also a crucial part of fieldwork, as it creates bonds and deepens the fieldwork through emotional involvement. McHugh managed to achieve the first two elements by participating and quietly observing, proving how necessary it is during fieldwork. She makes an exemplary effort to stick to the ethnographic commitments of an anthropologist, shown by how she embraces the different dress code and how she is eager to engage herself in the public activities. Fieldwork isn’t just about describing the details of people’s lives, but also analysing them to find out why people do the things that their culture has conditioned them to do
Shaffir, W. (1986). In the Field: An Introduction to Field Research/Ethnographic Research: A Guide to General Conduct (Book). Sociology of Health & Illness, 8 (2).