Writing up, concluding Stephanie Gabrys - Anth 510 Research Methods.

Davies Ch. 12

Writing up, concluding

Stephanie Gabrys - Anth 510 Research Methods

Postmodernist critique of ethnography in generalEthnography is literary activity with no

possible relation to the social world outside itself

Use the term “stories” to discredit the ability of ethnography to capture a separate social reality apart from the personal and partial experiences of it

For postmodernists, contact with people in field work simply enriches the personal experience and adds depth to one’s writing about one’s self… so why do research at all?

responseEthnography is fiction in that it is “made or

fashioned”Critical consideration should be given to the

rhetorical and textual devices usedEthnography must remain grounded in

practice so it is relevant to both professional audiences and for those who are the subjects of study.

Reflexivity at all stages is key!

“Critical Realist” perspectiveForm of analysis that relies on the “creative tension

between abstract explanation and grounded description” (p.272)

There is a social reality out there, separate from our knowledge of it

Accessible to investigation and understandingThat understanding is still open to critical evaluationGain insight into this reality / alter it through our

presenceReflexivity is part of all research; But the research is

not about the ethnographer!

ReflexivityReflexivity should not be the end purpose of

research, it is a means to approach the outside reality though always partial.

“Reflexivity in the text is not the same as a thoroughgoing reflexivity that informs the research process at each stage.” (p.265)

“Postmodernists have been notably unreflexive regarding the politics of their own main (academic) field of endeavour.” The ethnographic products “are so obscure that they are clearly written for a small elite made up primarily of first-world academics with literary inclinations.” (p.266)

Feminist scholars note the irony, in that postmodernists refuse to privilege any voice of others (women, colonized peoples, non-white peoples) when they were beginning to be empowered (p.266)

Textualization and RhetoricTextualization

trying to express experience, observation, reflection and analysis in written form

Field notes, and every other way of recording, are partial and reflect the ethnographer’s perceptions

Literary rhetoric choices and style in the text effect validity, authority and acceptance of ethnographic works.

Literary choicesGeertz- principle way which ethnographers

establish validity is by demonstrating “their having actually penetrated (or if you prefer, been penetrated by) another form of life, of having, one way or another, truly ‘been there’ (p.257)

Arrival story, establishes the ethnography as a scientific work and then “near disappearance of any further personal references from the text”.

Other literary choicesGeneral style/title style

subtitle contrasts with primary title (Festival of the Poor: Fertility Decline and the Ideology of Class in Sicily)

Acknowledgments expose the “webs of relations” and the fact that anthropologistsare subject to a range of “duties and obligations”

More literary choices Metaphor

vivid descriptive passage, “locates” the ethnographer in the site and prepares readers for intellectual arguments to follow

often the arrival story is fashioned to provide metaphor for the people/subject being studied and suggesting the framing for the analysis.

Meta-Narrative forms use of separate narratives

arranged in such a way to tell a broader story

even those extensively first-person quotes from subjects are necessarily collected, edited and organized to address author’s theoretical model

Final literary cautions Fictional devices risk making ethnography a

frivolous literature fiction composite characterscompressed action imagined conversations interior monologues

stories that “things like these happened to people like this” (p.262)

use with caution!

Razzle dazzleMay be easy to accept

a set of ethnographic findings due to the literary skill of the ethnographer

Validity should ultimately be judged on the effectiveness of the research method and how it is presented in a formal written argument.

“you can put pink panties on a pig… but it’s still a pig”

“you can polish a turd… but it still smells like s!@#”

Ethnographic authorityAuthority

rests on the evidence and argumenthow the research was carried outhow the findings were reachedeventually will be compared by professionals

against other ethnography and theory (which are the current knowledge base of the field)

Audience Professional

anthropologists and other social researchersSubjects

direct informantswider community of peoplepractitioners (potentially informed by the

research)

Conflicting perspectives/expectations

Seek input from both groups at all stages of writing process

Subjects judge your work against their own experience and knowledge

extremely important and should be sought out (example study p.270)

But are NOT ultimate veto authority to publicationEven if “subjects” aren’t accessible, keep possible

reactions/responses in mind“A barefoot village kid who used to trail along after you

will one day show up on your doorstep with an Oxford degree and your book in hand (Wolf 1992)” p.269.

Goodall Ch.6The Future of New Ethnographic Writing

Stephanie Gabrys - Anth 510 Research Methods

Goodall Key questionsWhy/How do we

read ethnographies?What standards

should we use to evaluate their scholarly worth?

How do the answers to these questions inform how we write the New ethnography?

Why and How do we read?Why?

Professional obligationAvoiding house workIntriguing introduction

or abstract“Do you read because

you have nothing better to do? Or, do you read because you believe there is nothing better to do than to read?” (p.177)

How?Beginning to endAbstract/endingReferences/scholarly

associationKnown name of author

“Do you believe what you read, and then expose it to doubt? Or, is it the other way around?” (p.181)

What is it about ethnography that induces you to learn?“Do you learn best when you are emotionally

involved in the story, intellectually engaged, or both?” (p.185)

Rhetorical devices are used to construct/produce interest, empathy, knowledge

Cartesian division add, detract or interfere with your reading and what you “think” you should learn from a scholarly article? (p.185)

Scholarly worth of a text?“a contribution to

knowledge”…Whose knowledge? How do you know a

“contribution” when you read it?

Traditional scholarly standardsCompare a work

with others of the same form

Scholarly article, poem, fiction…

What happens when ethnography challenges the conventions of the form?

How do you make sense of those?

Review of “New Ethnography”Alternative style of qualitative writing,

combining personal and professional, blurs or blends literary genres

Authoring a “self” within “context of others”, the “truth of our experience”

Privileges the exploration of self in response to questions that can only be answered that way

Not narcissistic unless the writing doesn’t achieve this purpose

May challenge a readers “sensibilities”

“our work should be marketed with a warning form the Surgeon General: ‘ This form of writing may be dangerous to you! It may mess with your head!’ (p.193)

All scholarship should expand your mind

Objections to ethnographyscholarly work should be…

“New” ethnography is…

Clear, well reasoned arguments Value

based on contribution of “findings” about subjects that can be generalized

Author superior, distant and objective from his

subject Avoids reference to

self doubt personal vulnerabilities procedural ambiguities

“writing that privileges a masculine, middle-class, heterosexual, and white set of rhetorical and critical standards… and denies the importance of the vast human landscape of emotions.” (p.191)

Does not produce generalizable “findings”

Questioning role of emotion in scholarly writing Overtly privileges the personal

over “objective” Credibility

based on self-reflexive and vulnerable author

Close textual identification between writer and reader is a “very good thing”. (p.191)

Standards for “new ethnography”How do you judge

the worth of a personal story?

Same way you evaluate worth of stories in general…

Humans are symbol-users, use language, are story tellers, we learn from our experiences and the experiences of others

Scholarly writing in its rigid form is somewhat un-natural

Stories in general New ethnographyNot argumentativeNarrative style to

promote dialogue between reader and author

A good read, sparks the imagination and delights the senses

Affects and influences the reader… to think, reflect and feel.

Examine taken-for-granted assumptions and theoretical orientation

Evokes emotion, makes us read to challenge or further what we know

Self-reflexive; that then leads a reader to personal reflection

“Learn something entirely new or overturn something we have long believed.” (p.196)

Produces scholarly talk and controversy; something you recommend to “friends, colleagues and students”.

Goal of New Ethnography“Evolving a higher state of scholarly

consciousness.”“The time has come in the academy to

change some of our academic standards, for the better. To improve what and how we know, as well as whom we know it for, and why we know it at all. To enable an intellectual evolution in our field away from sponsoring knowledge for its own sake, to sponsoring knowledge for the sake of humankind. To use what we write, and what we write about, to make differences - positive, productive differences – in the lives of people.” (p.198)

Voice and experiencing the textA personal impression of Goodall

Challenged and attacked by a book!Always questioning, seeming to

leave pauses and an anticipatory stare.

Conversation with someone who isn’t “here” at least in the temporal sense.

Soap box prophet, soaring voice and logic trying to change the academy.

SummaryCritical Realist prospective

middle of the roadReflexivity

throughout the processTextual / Rhetoric choices

don’t try and cover poor/skewed research with fancy writing

Audience respect, balance and include all sides

Evaluating New Ethnography different from traditional scholarly standards, because it is

fundamentally a different form of work, but no less valuable to the discipline of Anthropology.