The first reading (a collection of writers' descriptions of ethnographies) is a nice summary of ethnographies and the importance of anthropological studies.It's hard to have an emotional or personal reaction to a few paragraphs about these authors' career choices, but they are well-written, and the page highlights the importance of ethnographies to anthropologists and sociologists (as well as others).
The Wikipedia article about ethnographies is a detailed history and explanation of ethnographic methods. Generally, holistic ethnographies are necessary; every factor in a culture is vital to its structure, including habitat and communication. Solely focusing on specific phenomena is not without merit, however, like Geertz's study of communication. His cultural "web" structure makes more sense to me than does the traditional "outline" structure because people are not merely grouped by one culture or another. Many bridge gaps between cultures.
One section of this article was of particular interest to me: the ethics section. From the beginning of the class, I've had reservations about working with a group of people that I had no intention of joining. I have felt like I might be violating their privacy and infiltrating their social structure as opposed to helping develop something useful for them. I have come to the conclusion, not only from this article but from some soul-searching as well, that I would like to avoid deception as much as possible. On the other hand, I do realize that some level of deception might be necessary to obtain natural results. "The Unobtrusive Ethnographer" appeals to me most, probably because it involves minimal interaction and explanation. (I'm a terrible liar, so trying to convince people that I fit in will be a huge obstacle in my ethnography)
Coming of Age in Samoa is one of the quintessential anthropology books. Margaret Mead wanted to know if adolecence was a universally turbulent time or if societal structures affected coming-of-age. As a result, she lived among a group of Samoans and observed young and adolescent women; she concluded that a monocultural society afforded less confusion for young people than does a multicultural society like that of the United States. The amount of candor that the Samoans apparently show toward human facts (like sex and bodily functions) shocked Western readers and incurred a great deal of criticism. Derek Freeman's quest to disprove Mead's work resulted in a number of documented interactions with her informants, who claimed that they had lied to Mead. After his work was published, many anthropologists determined that he waged a vendetta against Mead (for some reason) and that his attacks were mostly baseless and inaccurate. After reading this cursory article, I think that Mead was not duped, but I probably lack the understanding to fully make that claim.
No comments:
Post a Comment