Engaging Ethnography
Understanding ethnographic methodologies
The goal of ethnographic research is so that “we may arrive at a closer understanding of the worlds that other people live in” (36). Visually, “photographs, videos and other images… do not necessarily take on the status of being knowledge about the research question or findings in themselves, but rather can be understood as routes to knowledge and tools through which we can encounter and imagine other people’s worlds (39). As someone who seeks to share the good news of Jesus with others, my first responsibility is to understand other people and their contexts.
To summarize an ethnographic anthropologist I know quite well, ethnography is an approach to understanding others by not just describing what they’re doing, but describing what they think they’re doing (Kip Lines, personal interview, summarizing Clifford Geertz). That is, entering into a context as an insider, seeking insider knowledge. As Pink explains, “when researching everyday life as ethnographers, we do this from inside, we become immersed in its flow and, indeed, our own actions and feeling become part of the very contexts that we are researching” (35).
“We become part of the very contexts we are researching”
One of the delicious ironies of doing ethnographic research is the concept of reflexivity; that is, as we do research, we also reflect on who we are and how we affect the research, and how the research affects us, in a continual, circular pattern. As we spend time listening, recording, photographing as ethnographers, we are changed and re-formed through our interactions with research participants and the environment of the research. Indeed, Pink challenges that “we might also turn the lens onto ethnographers, to develop a reflexive awareness of how we too are consumers of digital and visual technologies and images” (42).
Dr Kip Lines working with research participants in Turkana, Kenya.
Even our own presence influences and changes the context of our research. Cultures are not static, and are continuously transforming from inner and outer influences. For instance, while I’m stepping a bit out of my comfort zone in suggesting this, current theories on ethnographical methodologies seem to contradict any notion of a Star Trekkian protocol of a Prime Directive; that is, the principle which prohibits the Star Fleet from influencing a different civilization.[1] Any Trekkies wish to reflect on this? Our very presence within the context of the research participants is bound to alter that context in some fashion.
Subjectivity & Collaboration
Finally, like Adler’s impossible challenge to remain ideally impartial to a text, ethnographic researchers recognize that our research itself is subjective: “If the researcher is the channel through which all ethnographic knowledge is produced and represented, then the only way reality and representation can interpenetrate in ethnographic work is through the ethnographer’s textual constructions of ‘ethnographic fictions’. Rather than existing objectively and being accessible and recordable through scientific research methods, reality is subjective and is known only as it is experienced by individuals,” Pink reminds us (36). One of the author’s goals is to show that “not only is the idea that we might produce objective knowledge as detached observers problematic, but that similarly we cannot record it with the camera” (39). Ethnographic researchers cannot truly present an unbiased description of a specific context, as each person views and interprets images based on their own knowledge and experiences (40-41).
How then, can this method of research even hope for viability? Is the goal of “understand[ing] ethnographic texts as a subjective, but hopefully loyal, representation of ethnographic encounters and of the people who participated in their research” (165) even possible? Pink suggests that this can be accomplished most successfully through collaboration with the research participants, partnering with them to potentially stage, select, or even snap some of the visual images used in research. Collaboration can also alleviate the primitivizing tendency to “impart an image of the Other” (171).
Pink, Sarah. 2013. Doing Visual Ethnography. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
[1] While I have not watched a Star Trek episode or movie, many of my friends do. Conversations like this—connecting ethnography to the Prime Directive—frequently occur around our faculty lunch table at work. Thanks to Dr Fay Ellwood for this image.
About the Author
Katy Drage Lines
In God’s good Kingdom, some minister like trees, long-standing, rooted in a community. They embody words of Wendell Berry, “stay years if you would know the genius of the place.” Others, however, are called to go. Katy is one of those pilgrims. A global nomad, Katy grew up as a fifth generation Colorado native, attended college & seminary and was ordained in Tennessee, married a guy from Pennsylvania, ministered for ten years in Kenya, worked as a children’s pastor in a small church in Kentucky, and served college students in a university library in Orange County, California. She recently moved to the heart of America, Indianapolis, and has joined the Englewood Christian Church community, serving with them as Pastor of Spiritual Formation. She & her husband Kip, have two delightful boys, a college junior and high school junior.14 responses to “Engaging Ethnography”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Lot’s of good thoughts there, Katy. It was probably one of the most challenging books I’ve ever read.
I’m a Trekkie! Actually, what are missionaries doing if they are not influencing the culture? Of course we were taught in our intercultural studies classes to respect their culture and not try to change things that were just cultural. But won’t some things change if they accept the Gospel?
You will have to instruct me, Mary, on things Trekkian.
As a missionary, there was constant tension for us to balance culture and Kingdom. Our very presence did influence the culture– as the only truck for miles around we were expected to carry sick patients (including goats!) to the clinic, etc. And we often struggled when a problem was posed to the church leaders and they would ask us, “well, how does the church in America do that?” We strongly discouraged answers to that question, as we sought to help them read scripture and figure out “how the church in Turkana should do it.” We were also hesitant to place our expectations of scripture on them– what does it mean to follow Jesus when you have more than one spouse? That’s not as easy to answer as you might think.
Hi Kathy,
I agree that this process is somewhat subjective but do you believe that with the collaboration process, it would initiate objectivity to provide a balance in the overall research project.
I can’t wait to hear about your mission work in planting churches and working with youth
Kathy I agree that the very practical implication of ethnographic research forces us as researchers to be reflective, collaborative, and objective. When I think about this I think about how I do life daily as a believer. With the Holy Spirit I do reflect, I try to see my life objectively. However, I see my daily engagement as a collaborative work that the Holy Spirit and I do together. Therefore, instead of just observing how He moves in my life I choose to partner with Him and allow Him to work in any area He chooses. Studying cultures and human behavior can follow a similar paradigm.
Oooh, nice connection to our collaboration with the Holy Spirit! I will have to chew on that for awhile. Thanks.
Katy
Thanks Katy. I am no Trekkie, so you lost me a bit there! I do think the issue of subjectivity and perspective is very interesting. Our filters and lenses affect our understanding and perception greatly – this can be a big deal in the way that we communicate with and understand each other, and often leads to conflict and miscommunication. Collaboration is indeed very important.
Thought provoking questions…thank you. I liked her point and your reminder of using collaboration. Do you anticipate using collaboration on your research?
Thanks for asking, Jen. If I actually had a grasp of what my research will be, I’d know if collaboration would play a part! However, as a teammate, team leader, ministry leader, supervisor, etc. I’ve always respected & sought collaboration– ideas are stronger, ministries and movements are more solid, and participants are invested when worked on together.
Thanks Katy. One of the greatest struggles that missionaries face is to know what is truly biblical and what is—in my context, “American” or even “traditional” for our faith context. Anyone who lives in another culture for the purpose of sharing the Gospel must come to terms with this question, rather quickly. There is no question you will influence culture, but you will be and should be influenced as well. I see this as the collaborative effort Katy highlights in her post. Without it, missionaries quickly become purveyors of their culture and not a biblical one—which is often much different than the one we perceive it to be, even when we know we are “absolutely correct!”
“Anyone who lives in another culture for the purpose of sharing the Gospel must come to terms with this question, rather quickly.” Yes, but that tension is something we wrestle with perpetually.
Katy, Good post! So, I have to say that the concept of reflexivity was probably the one thing from the book that I connected most with.
I think that is, in part, because it seems like common sense to me (If you come into my house and sit in the corner, of course that is going to have some effect). But even more because it highlights that truth that is central to understanding both our faith and humanity – that we are created and designed to be in relationship with each other, even if we don’t realize or acknowledge it.
I also like it because I think we do a great disservice to ourselves and others when we claim impartiality – something which I think is practically impossible to have. I would much prefer that we were all just honest about our biases
I think claiming impartiality has gone the way of modernity. While post-modernity has its own set of challenges, the willingness to live in ambiguity, to recognize that context is imperative to understanding, and that everything is subjective (thus we cannot be impartial) are all part of its strengths.
“…ethnography is an approach to understanding others by not just describing what they’re doing, but describing what they think they’re doing…”
This is a fantastic explanation. What I read between the lines in Pink’s book is the idea that adding the visual component to ethnography helps us see the research in ways that are tangible so that subject, researcher, and “reader” all connect at some level.
As far as the Prime Directive goes, it seems impossible to avoid influencing a culture even when simply observing because showing up creates a shift in the dynamic. At least, that seems to be the irony behind Star Trek.
Great thoughts and great comments here. I’m not as familiar with Pink or Visual Ethnography, although I have a friend who used photo elicitation with an ethnographic research method he calls “sight beyond my sight” in which research participants were trained to use cameras and then took photos themselves as part of the research: http://sightbeyondmysight.blogspot.com/
Something I would add here in the ethnographic process that you are describing but have not named is “epistemic humility.” The best ethnographers today not only state their standpoint as a researcher, but recognize the possibility of multiple epistemologies… and that the researcher’s epistemology should not automatically have a place of priority in the research. For the evangelicals among you, this should not be conflated with moral relativity, but seen as a sincere desire to understand identity and culture from the insider’s perspective first.
Nice post!