According to his argument, ethnographers are seen as a curse for Native American communities where they have been treated as objects by these researchers. (1973), Cecil King (1997), Ofra Greenberg (1993), and Nancy Scheper-Hughes (2000).ĭeloria (1973) wrote the article as a critique of the ethnographers and called them outsider intruders or even vultures. These conditions were discussed within the articles from Vine Deloria Jr. It can be a cruel, critical, misinterpretation, or even an offensive statement from those who were our valuable informants. Moreover, this feedback is not always good. Rejection from the research subjects can be avoided by any experienced and trained ethnographer, but it is more difficult to handle when our research subject ‘talks back’ to us after the actual study has been done. Continue reading “Safety Issue in Doing Fieldwork” → FebruFebrufieldwork, safety issue Leave a commentĮthnographic fieldwork is a difficult task especially if the ethnographer has not anticipated certain obstacles that might occur during the field research. Therefore, to be able to calculate the risk and to be prepared for any possibilities remained important.
While she was concerned about her own safety, she was also afraid that her data during the fieldwork would jeopardize the safety of the informants. The consequence was she had to face threats from the ‘government agency’ and even was suspected as a spy. Additionally, she claimed that it was not possible to remain neutral. June Nash (1976) explained when she worked on her study about tin-miners groups in the revolution era in Bolivia, she had to take their side. In a conflict situation, sometimes it requires the ethnographer to take sides with one of the groups that are involved in the conflict. While maintaining a close relationship with informants resulted in an advantage for the study, it also influenced the objectivity of the researcher. He said that the threat was part of the unforeseen consequences of his close engagement with the informants (Whitehead, 2002). However, rather than to argue what he experienced as something to be avoided, he believed it was inevitable.
While he was interested in understanding this dark shamanic practice within the culture, he also experienced the threat of kanaimà where it almost took his life. Whitehead (2002) once studied a dangerous area when he was doing ethnography of kanaimà in Guyana. Many ethnographers who have been conducting these kinds of fieldwork became victims since they failed to calculate the possibility of the dangers of the study. The conflict itself is not always related to war or revolution, but can also be formed as sociopolitical conflicts. Sluka (1995) argued that even today when we think the world is a much safer place compared to the past, ethnographic fieldwork is still a dangerous task especially if research is conducted in a conflict area. One of the major concerns in doing a fieldwork is about the safety issue.