Introduction
Postmodern anthropology can be described as a method to write about cultures in a certain way, by scrutinizing and interpreting the information gathered. Postmodern ethnographers believe that it is the way we interpret information that must be studied and that the voice of societies should be advocated through an informant. They also believe that to do this the use of collaborative ethnography is of vital importance. Collaborative ethnography is a relationship between ethnographers and informants. This, however, could be a team of ethnographers observing and studying a society, it could be a couple of ethnographers and more than one informant or it could be an ethnographer and his/her students. There are many different ways in which it could be done but the important factor is that it is a cooperation and bond between more than one author, in order to construct an anthropological writing. This essay is going to look at some of the advantages and limitations of using collaborative ethnography and how this in turn can affect the style of the anthropological writing used. It will argue that, this type of ethnography is important in obtaining reliability, relevance and efficiency when writing about a society in a collaborative way, but will also include the limitations that need to be addressed when working in a team towards a general goal.
Advantages and limitations
When using collaborative ethnography the anthropologist would need to consider the benefits of using such a technique to gather information and observed data. Due to the nature of collaborative ethnography having more than one person co-write is a benefit in its self. In an article written by Luke Eric Lassiter (2008), he aimed to move away from th...
... middle of paper ...
...C, (2009) Careers in 21st Century Applied Anthropology: Perspectives from Academics and Practitioners, John Wiley & Sons.
Lassiter, L.E, (2004) ‘Collaborative Ethnography’, AnthroNotes, Museum of Natural History Publication for Educators, Volume 25, No 1. Pages 1-9.
Lassiter, L.E, (2005) The Chicago Guide to Collaborative Ethnography, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
Lassiter, L.E, (2008) Moving Past Public Anthropology and Doing Collaborative Research, Huntington, Marshall University Graduate College Press.
Nanda, S & Warms, R.L, (2010) Cultural Anthropology, Edition 10, California, Cengage learning.
Stringer, E.T, (1997) Community-based ethnography: breaking traditional boundaries of research, teaching and learning, New Jersey, Routledge.
Turner, P & Risjord, M, (2007) Handbook of the philosophy of science, Amsterdam, Elsevier.
Murchison, Julian. Ethnography Essentials: Designing, Conducting, and Presenting Your Research. John Wiley and Sons, 2010.
Hayano (1979) first introduced the term “auto-ethnography” in response to his questions around the issue of how people could create ethnographies of their own cultures, but the extent of its relevance and application only arose in the coming years. This relevance was due to the shift away from canonical forms of research that were “author evacuated texts” (Sparkes, 2000, p. 22) towards a more personalised approach. This was a direct echo of the post-modern movement burgeoning at the time, which questioned the scientific paradigm that qualitative research was subjected to. Rather autoethnographies “are highly personalized accounts that draw upon the experience of the author/researcher for the purposes of extending sociological understanding” (Sparkes, 2000, p. 21).
Sir Raymond Firth famously said that ethnography “makes the exotic familiar and the familiar exotic.” You mainly hear stories of ethnographers and anthropologist going to other countries to study societies that are fascinating and unknown so that we can become familiar with their culture and understand. This is how we make the exotic familiar. Within our own country we are under the impression that because we live around these people we know them and there is nothing to learn, but when we step in and begin to observe what’s in our own backyard we realize there are things that we don’t know. This is what Philippe Bourgois and Jeff Schonberg have done in Righteous Dopefiend.
Cultural Anthropology: The Human Challenge, 14th Edition William A. Havilland; Harald E. L. Prins; Bunny McBride; Dana Walrath Published by Wadsworth, Cengage Learning (2014)
Journalist John G. Neihardt’s Black Elk Speaks is one of the most famous texts on the Sioux culture. However, when considering journalism and anthropology, one may realize that Neihardt’s work was much more journalistic than anthropological. When studying culture, an anthropologist would do it holistically. Rather than only looking at individual components of culture, anthropologists must consider every piece of a society to fully understand it. Additionally, an anthropologist would use the ethnographic method. This technique is conducted through fieldwork and requires a person to become immersed into the culture as an active participant. To effectively learn about a new culture, the person must have an open mind by setting aside all of their
Stanford, Craig B., John S. Allen, and Susan C. Antón. Exploring Biological Anthropology: The Essentials. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2010. 17. Print.
Ethnography Works Cited Missing Anthropology is defined, in the most basic terms, as the study of other cultures. This field can subsequently be divided into more specific sections, and contain more precise defining characteristics, but this definition is essentially all that is needed. Anthropology is a science that attempts to look at other cultures and draw conclusions to questions that are raised while studying. An anthropologist is someone who accepts what is presented before them and is driven by an urge to understand each presentation as thoroughly as possible. Once the concept of anthropology is accepted, one must identify the means of reaching the goal of this field.
Anthropologists conduct fieldwork by studying people, their behaviours, and their culture. This is done in the field by actively striving to interpret and understand the world from the perspective of those studied (Powdermaker, 1968, Keesing 1981). Anthropological participant-observation includes a “deep immersion into the life of a people” (Keesing, 1981 p.16) with an aim to produce an ethnography that accurately details the experience in a holistic and valuable style (Powdermaker, 1968, Keesing 1981). Generally, full participation in a culture is thought to reduce the interference the researcher has on the behaviour of the informants (Seymour- Smith, 1986). Participant-observation is still widely used by anthropologists as it offers deeply insightful real world accounts which are difficult to achieve using other methods (Seymour-Smith, 1986, Li,
Robbins, R. H. (2014). Cultural anthropology: a problem-based approach (Second Canadian ed.). Itasca: F.E. Peacock.
Personal experience and reflexivity should be used within anthropology as a tool to reflect on the culture that is being studied and not a refocusing of attention on the self. Works such as Dorinne Kondo’s “Dissolution and Reconstitution of Self,” use the idea of reflexivity as a mirror in which to view the culture being studied in a different manner. This use of reflexivity allows for the focus to stay on the culture being studied. A move away from this is the new branch of humanistic anthropology represented in this essay by Renato Rosaldo’s “Grief and a Headhunter’s Rage” and Ruth Behar’s “Anthropology that Breaks Your Heart” allows anthropologists to use reflexivity as a way to explore universal human feelings. For me, this is not the study of anthropology as much as self-reflexive psychology. The focus shifts from culture to self. The anthropologists completely understands the feelings of the people he/she is studying. I think that it is rather ambitious to state that emotion is univeral, and I do not think that it is the job of anthropologists to do so. The reflexive voice is a necessary aspect of ethnographic writing, but the anthropologist must be careful not to shift focus from concentrating on culture to concentrating on herself.
Growing up in a multi-cultural family can broaden not only your life experiences, but also influence how you view the world. Culture is something that can either be accepted, or something to be apprehensive of. Ethnography helps society learn about culture by fully immersing yourself in the culture. By observing, learning and participating in various cultures it can eliminate a lot of apprehension as well as broaden your ability to accept others. Throughout this essay, I will answer a few questions associated with ethnography and how studying a culture can help our own society progress as well. It is important to know what ethnography is, as well as methods that can be useful (or even detrimental) to your experience. These are questions that
1. Stanford, Craig. Allen, John S. Anton, Susan C. Exploring Biological Anthropology second edition. Pearson Education, Inc. 2008. Pages 238-420.
Park, M.A. (2008). Introducing anthropology: An integrated approach, with PowerWeb, 4th Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill. ISBN 978–0-07-340525-4
One of the major advantages of participant observation is the ability of the anthropologist to gain access to events, locations and intimate situations where outside observers would not be allowed. DeMunk and Sobo (1998) describe some benefits of the observation method over alternative methods of anthropological data collection including the fact that it allows admission to the “backstage culture” (DeMunk and Sobo 1998 p.43), it allows for intimately detailed description, and provides the anthropologist with opportunities to be a part of all events. DeWalt and DeWalt (2002 p.92) also suggest that it increases the quality of the data that has been collected and the interpretation of the anthropologist, as well as analysis of that data and assisting in the development of new research questions and hypotheses. However, DeMunk and Sobo (1998) also address some disadvantages of using the particip...
The American Anthropological Association 's (AAA) aim is to offer guidelines and promote education and discussion. American anthropologists do this often by speaking and interacting with individuals living and experiencing the culture. Truly understanding, learning, and becoming accustomed to a new cultural environment takes a significantly long period of time, perhaps even years of exposure to the culture in order to truly understand traditions, morals, and customs. For instance in the Shostak`s study on the !Kung people, it was important for the researchers to say words correctly, at appropriate times, and in a culturally accepted manner, in addition, in order to interview individuals, specifically women, the anthropologist would ask one to “enter work” with her and they would talk for an hour or a day, or over a long period of time, perhaps two weeks. When studying another culture, American anthropologists include host country colleagues in their research planning and when requesting funding, establish true collaborative relationships, include host country colleagues in dissemination, including publication, and they also ensure that something is given back to the host. When studying other countries, the process is done carefully and thoughtfully, in order to end the study with new information on a culture and to establish new connections