DLGP

Doctor of Leadership in Global Perspectives: Crafting Ministry in an Interconnected World

VE – In the Eye of the Beholder

Written by: on September 13, 2013

Sarah Pink’s Doing Visual Ethnography (2006, 2nd ed.) is a solidly researched and articulated text that offers an in-depth overview of utilizing the image – through various forms and methods – as viable research aid.

The text does offer an overview, but it really is an overview offered for someone already decently versed in the language and methods of her area/discipline.  I have graduate academic background in the areas she is discussing and felt reasonably at home with the reading due to this.  However, even with background similarity and philosophical affinity for much of how she was approaching the topic, I still found the read rather tedious at times.

Philosophically, I resonate strongly with her emphasis on the “centrality of subjectivity.” I think that is part of what makes any given research effort particularly fascinating.  Unlike the empiricist goal of reliability as evidenced through replicability, visual ethnographic research emphasizes contextualized authenticity in the midst of engaged (and therefore always already) conflicted contextualities.  The relationality that is involved in the research process is of utmost importance.  It may not be replicable, but it needs to be extrapolatable.  Personal encounter must be able to be articulated at some level as generally transferable to larger populations.  In this sense, I liked Pink offering the following point –even as I thought it was rather obvious, “VE is as much an applied as an academic practice.” (4)

Furthermore, relationality requires reflexivity of thought. That is, doing visual ethnography well requires one to be able to consciously consider the implications to self and others of the process.  Such considering requires a willingness to work at the boundaries of disciplines and engage, really, in interdisciplinary themes and approaches.  Moreover, Pink notes that personal reflexivity is not enough if one really wants to engage in collegial conversations and find meaningful ways to contribute more largely into ones field.  For larger scale projects to occur and for influence to increase there must be access to funding and for such funding to be offered by institutions, Pink writes that one must be able to be “conversant about such self-reflexivity in institutional language” (4)

“Images are everywhere…they permeate.” (21) From this it is not far to reason that there is a “transformative potential of the visual.” (15) We often talk about early cultures/peoples being oral cultures, being storytellers.  We also talk about our current American culture as being a visual culture. I think that early cultures were as much visual cultures as oral. Earlier cultures did not practice their visuality in fully the same way or with the same tools that we practice our visuality today, but unless we artificially limit what we would choose to call “visual” then they must be as visual in at least Pink’s sense of understanding that the visual permeates. (21) Visual ethnographies become keenly perceived and recorded instances within such cultures.  Visual ethnographies become constructed [and conflicted] narratives what Pink offers Clifford having suggested as “fictions.” (10)

This is not fiction in the negative sense per se, but a recognition of the limitations of any given act and the multiplicity of goals/perspectives for any project (even unknown goals) that must necessarily be present due to the amount of intermingling of ideas taking place.  Pink shows the idea of “intermingling” is much more healthy when it comes to fictions rather than fictions of “purity.”  Intermingling allows for intercultural and social collaboration(s) whereas pur-itanical ideas stem from and lead toward Pharisaicism. (21)

Finally, I greatly appreciated Pink’s emphasis on human rights and dignity.  I found her reflections on the ideas of seeking permission of participants, on being concerned for the well-being of the participant, and on grappling with the interconnections that transpire in long-term participant-observation situations (ie. becoming friends), to be very thoughtful and needed.

Certainly, there is room for more VE practices to be utilized and material to be produced and distributed in research related to Christ-centered, globally and interculturally connecting principles and themes.  It will be good to be a small part of such utilizing, producing and distributing in the near future.

About the Author

Clint Baldwin

Leave a Reply