Search

In this article I correct previous misconceptions about the London-based Imago Group (1954–71). In doing so I provide the first ever detailed history of the group, and of the role of the composer, Robert Still, in founding it in 1953 as an analysand society geared to its members using their experience of having been psychoanalysed in seeking to understand social issues and improve society. Examples are given of papers presented in this vein during the group's history of monthly meetings beginning in February 1954. Reasons for the group's demise following its meeting in July 1971 are also indicated as are examples of its inspiring similar groups in Canada and in Britain, including the Oxford-based New Imago Forum concerned with psychoanalysing social issues today. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Subscribers to the British Sociological Association will be aware that its newsletter, Network, has recently been carrying correspondence on the ethics of covert observation, provoked by Roger Homan's paper, in a previous Sociological Review, 'Interpersonal Communication in Pentecostal Meetings'. Homan, himself, has contributed to this correspondence and defended his stance at more length in a paper, published with a rejoinder by Martin Bulmer, in the British Journal of Sociology.[1] I am not, however, convinced that we have yet reached some of the core issues in this area, because the ethical discussion has become so far removed from an adequate understanding of the nature of fieldwork. In this paper, I want to reunite these two topics, partly because I believe ethical debate to be a rather futile activity if it is not grounded in everyday practice and partly to show that there are so many grey moral areas in ethnography that an over-academic analysis may ultimately be inimical to our continued use of this approach to social life. Although I shall concentrate on field practice, this should not be taken to imply a disregard for planning and writing-up research. Plainly the ethical questions are at least as important, but their better documentation makes an extended consideration a less urgent matter for this present paper. By ethnography I intend to include all research based upon naturalistic modes of inquiry within a predominantly inductivist theoretical framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents a commentary on a paper by Robert A. Stebbins in a previous issue of The American Sociologist which provided an account of professional and amateur sociology in the U.S. The British organization, Mass Observation existed in a relatively nonintrusive society with (as compared to the U.S.) greater concern for one's own and other people's privacy. Canada and Great Britain may in this respect have more built-in defenses against the risks of some kinds of amateur sociology that the U.S. would have. However, according to the commenter, Stebbins already anticipates this objection by requiring amateurs to be supervised and to start with a certain amount of instruction and proper cautionary comments. By engaging primarily in the use of unobtrusive measures and observations, the amateur will avoid the risks of harm to which Stebbins is already sensitive. The commenter relates that one of the public areas in which he has encouraged such unobtrusive observations is in churches, where the observer in outward appearance is similar to the congregation and hence not seen as an intruder. According to him, he has had a fair amount of experience with undergraduate amateurs of the sort described.