The Self in "Fieldwork": A Methodological Concern

Beverly J. Stoeltje, Christie L. Fox, Stephen Olbrys
1999 Journal of American Folklore  
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. American Folklore Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of American Folklore. A Methodological Concern As
more » ... ncepts of reflexivity and postcolonial perspectives have advanced our understandings of the way we represent those we study, they have also introduced a consciousness of the role of the self in research. This article reviews the history of the field offolklore with regard to the method of obtaining data or texts and demonstrates that collecting material contrasts with the practice of conducting research in the field. Pointing to a moment of transition, it shows that theories offolklore had to undergo significant change before methods of research would acknowledge the identity of the fieldworker and its significance. ENTERING A CULTURE TO CARRY OUT ethnographic research, whether it is familiar or strange to the ethnographer, is much like looking into a pool ofwater. Depending on the light and the time of day, one may see a reflection of oneself, refracted perhaps because of the ripples on the surface. At sunset the reflection of the surrounding trees and foliage appear, and eventually one sees deeply into the water, simultaneously becoming aware ofthe underwater world, the forest, the sunlight, and one's own reflection. We find this analogy meaningful in our postcolonial world, in which all academic research has been problematized by issues such as history and catastrophe, boundaries and power, identity and reflexivity. Questions concerning authority, legitimacy, location, and intimacy, to name only a few, have rendered the static models of folklore and anthropology obsolete.' In a recent article, George Marcus states, "Discontinuity in cultural formationstheir multiple and heterogeneous sites ofproduction-has begun to force changes in the assumptions and notions that have constructed the traditional mise-enschne of fieldwork" (1997:96). Equally significant are developments in the academy. Michael Lambek has noted that it is "our 'discoveries' of feminism, race, transnationalism, displacement, and diaspora; the sheer growth in the number of practitioners, and the elaboration of a hierarchy of distinction among them-that BeverlyJ. Stoeltje is Associate Professor of Folklore and Communication and Culture at Indiana University Christie L. Fox and Stephen Olbrys are Ph.D. students at the Folklore Institute at Indiana University Journal of American Folklore 112(444):158-182.
doi:10.2307/541947 fatcat:ltyis5lh5rau7nxmrlrnww5dtu