Search

This methodological paper connects posthuman conceptualizations of voice with artistic research and examines whether it opens toward different registers and levels of embodied and aesthetic forms of knowing that cut across normative accounts of what it means to know. We start from what Patti Lather calls 'a praxis of stuck places' and ask how to give voice to experiences such as chronic illness and pain, while at the same time disrupting representational forms of illness and pain. To investigate this, we first critically engage with the popular genre of the health diary and its representational form. Secondly, we explore how Lisa A. Mazzei concept of 'voice without subject' can support us in disrupting the normative and representational production of voice, while working with a failing voice. Finally, we analyze the sound installation, A Borrowed Diary —made by M. Broeckmeyer, and explore how it opens up alternative approaches to voice and chronic pain. We will argue that making 'voice without subject' work, touch, and resonate can impact the lives of people who often remain unheard, in that it acknowledges experiences and expressions that are mostly not validated. Creating with 'voice without subject' makes tangible how personal experiences, however, temporarily, contribute to the bigger picture of how we look at and listen to people with illnesses and/or disabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a fruitful tension in ethnomethodological work. On the one hand, real-world data are used to rein in analytical privilege. On the other, conceptual discussions necessarily take place in a more open analytical space. Describing settings in detail and thinking about things in the abstract are both essential components of the ethnomethodological project. What ethnographies might consist in complicates this picture. Garfinkel initially deflated the concept of 'ethnography', using it to refer to how all members of society make sense of their world. Sacks, on the other hand, initially construed his sociological project as a more rigorous form of professional ethnography. Ethnographic methods rightly remain an important tool for ethnomethodological analyses. They provide an empirical grounding for analysis and facilitate 'thinking about things' in a more open manner than some other forms of data. This paper argues that ethnographic analyses more generally can be used as ethnomethodological resources, (re)introducing the idea that others' fieldwork and analyses are legitimate resources for ethnomethodological work. Some materials from Elijah Anderson's classic ethnography A Place on the Corner are used to illustrate the possibilities taking this approach might offer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Critical epistemologies and methodologies have over time challenged the static and mono-dimensional approaches to fieldwork, allowing researchers to contemplate and conduct their research in spaces of in-betweenness. Despite this important shift, the essentialist idea that both 'the field' and 'home' in a fieldwork setting must be actual places persists. In this article, we challenge the conceptualization and operationalization of 'home' not only as the juxtaposition to 'the field', but also as the embodiment of a place in a specific temporality. We argue that the postulation of 'home' as a constant disregards the non-predetermined and unpredictable nature of fieldwork relationships that are often complicated by implicit and explicit power dynamics, especially in places researchers identify as 'home'. We demonstrate that unequal power relations, especially (1) between the Global North and Global South, (2) between majority and minoritized groups, (3) among genders, and (4) between elites and non-elites, require us to envisage 'the field' and 'home' in relative terms. We propose the reconceptualization of fieldwork place as a hybridized space that conjoins 'the field' and 'home' as 'field-home', particularly at a time when research mobility is restricted by the COVID-19 pandemic. In this way, we extend the literature on issues related to power, positionality and reflexivity in qualitative research, and provide practical insights for those preparing for fieldwork. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ethnographic practice in contentious and high-risk spaces raises important ethical and methodological questions. When working with grassroots activists who actively avoid forms of surveillance, the boundary between consensual observation and potentially harmful documentation becomes difficult to discern. This article aims not only to identify the gaps in qualitative research methodologies for scholars working with grassroots activists, but also to think of practical ways in which researchers should mitigate concerns both for participants and themselves. Based on fieldwork in Australia, the author explores the ethical, methodological, and emotional dilemmas of conducting research with activists as a militant ethnographer. The article argues that activist-centred project designs must consider the challenges between the researcher's mandate to collect data and their responsibility to uphold security culture both in and outside activist spaces. Reflexive research ethics, further, should be a part of ongoing research engagement to address the emotional tensions overlooked in standardized ethical protocols. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article addresses the methodological aspects of a multi-voiced, collaborative ethnographic research process, in particular how video can enhance and amplify this research endeavour. The authors illustrate and discuss how experimental filmic methodologies can help to capture processes of becoming in a collaborative research endeavour, both enabling the development and production of diverse empirical materials and enhancing the multivocality of research practices. Using explorations of the National Tourist Route towards Havøysund in northern Norway as our empirical context, we reflect on diverse engagements along the process, such as becoming aware how the camcorder becomes a member in the research team. The filmed material forms an entanglement where our explorations along the route, our cultural practices related to the northern landscape and diverse disciplinary practices come together. We address three main ways video contributed to our research process and the creation of research materials. First, we highlight how video enables the creation of empirical traces that can be used as research materials. Second, we explore how video can work for mobilisation of multivocal dialogues. Finally, we point out that video opens the way for integration of the sensual into the research process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article focuses on various ethnographic procedures and findings in ethnomethodology (EM) and conversation analysis (CA), addressing the question of how EM and CA relate to ethnography. Given the obvious answer that EM includes ethnography, we also argue that CA does as well, though just how EM and CA do so needs to be qualified and specified. Ethnographic procedures have been used in EM for decades, although often in non-standard ways, and currently with some ambivalence. In CA, it is more common to disavow ethnography in favor of recorded and transcribed interactional exchanges. However, we argue that CA often makes use of ethnographic insights drawn from extended study of recordings, while also identifying "ethnographic" inquiries of a sort that take place within the organizational settings studied. Our aim is to identify the place of ethnography within EMCA by taking an inventory of ways "ethnography" has been used, invoked, produced, and/or disavowed in particular studies and to highlight what is distinctive about those various EMCA uses of ethnography in contrast with more conventional ethnography. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This text discusses the relationship between ethnomethodology and ethnography and sketches what can be called an ethnomethodological ethnography. To do so, it shows that Garfinkel and his collaborators work ethnographically in order to adequately describe social phenomena and make their phenomenal field properties noticeable. To highlight the distinctive features of ethnomethodological ethnography, the text first discusses other ethnographic approaches. Differences between these approaches and the ethnomethodological ethnography become apparent through two argumentative steps: first, by discussing Garfinkel's reflections on ethnomethodology and ethnography, and second, by discussing actual ethnographies by Garfinkel's collaborators. The text concludes with a general reflection on the methodological principles of ethnomethodological ethnography. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]