Читать книгу Introducing Anthropology - Laura Pountney - Страница 92

DESCRIBE YOUR ETHNOGRAPHIC RESEARCH.

I have carried out four major pieces of fieldwork. The first was for my PhD, studying the Hill Pandaram people, who are hunters and gatherers in South India. I also carried out my research in Malawi on the relationship people have with their environment. I later returned to Malawi to study people’s relationship with animals, small mammals.

HOW DID YOU GAIN ACCESS TO THE GROUP YOU STUDIED?

I never actually had a problem gaining access in Malawi, as I lived and worked there for seven years on a tea plantation before I began my fieldwork. Very few people spoke English there at that time, so I had to learn the local language, Chichewa. So, when I began my research, I already knew the context and language well.

WHAT RESEARCH METHOD(S) HAVE YOU USED IN YOUR FIELDWORK? The main research method I use is to participate and join in activities and to observe. The best way to join in is by chatting with people. If you ask me what my research method is, it is chatting! In Malawi the word they use for chatting is ‘kucheza’. It is very important in Malawi culture. To chat or discuss means to be sociable, so it is seen as important to chat to people. I would also go with local Malawi people to do what they were doing, and I constantly asked questions. When I studied mammals in Malawi I joined in rituals, which allowed me to be part of the group. I would often just listen to people’s conversations. I learnt a lot about Malawi culture this way.

WHAT WAS THE MOST DIFFICULT PART OF YOUR FIELDWORK?

The main difficulty I faced in my research in India was living in the forest. I decided to walk barefoot in the same way as the Hill Pandaram people, which was not easy. Sleeping was another problem. I am only an average height, but the Hill Pandaram are small, on average around 5 foot tall. They don’t have houses; instead, they make small conical shelters with palm leaves to cover themselves and to protect them from the rain. I found it very difficult sleeping in these because it rains most of the time and there is always a dog trying to hog the warmth of the fire (dogs are very important to them for hunting), and it was really a problem. I would have to sleep either in the foetal position or put my legs straight, with my legs outside the sleeping bed. I got wet with the rain and I did not have any blankets. The Hill Pandaram people are nomadic and move continually between camps, approximately every ten days, so I became nomadic too. I would spend three days with the Hill Pandaram in the jungle and then return to the village, where I lived with my family. I was there with my wife and three young daughters. It was very difficult for my family, but having children actually was not a handicap for my research at all. It opened to us many things, as Indians love children. So we were accepted very quickly in the village.

HOW DID YOU LEARN WHAT TO LOOK FOR?

I go around like a hunter-gatherer but I gather knowledge, and I gather anything that relates to my topic of research. So I would go and chat with people, stay at cheap rest houses, sitting there and drinking beer, and then I would turn the conversation towards insects, for example, to see how people might relate to them. I would cut out all of the local newspapers reports on insects. I would look at archives for locust swarms and dig up information on everything. I would then gather this data and put it into my field book.

HOW DID YOU RECORD YOUR DATA?

The only thing I would have is my notebook. So everything I did, learnt, would go into my journal. I call my notebooks ‘journals’. Fifteen to twenty journals would be the basis of my book. I have a camera and a pair of binoculars, which is all of my equipment.

WHO WERE YOUR MAIN INFORMANTS?

All my informants are people that I get along with. For example, there were some people in Malawi who knew what I was after straight away and there were some others who were not very informative at all. You naturally gravitate towards people that you get on with and with the people that will help you with your research. I got close to certain individuals that I worked and shared food with.

WHAT WAS THE IMPACT ON YOUR RESEARCH PROCESS AND FINDINGS OF INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES (AGE, GENDER, ETHNICITY, CLASS, NATIONALITY) BETWEEN YOU AND YOUR INFORMANTS?

There are certain behaviours in Malawi that you have to observe. You have to conform to local customs. Malawians have always related to Europeans throughout history in one way or another. When you are an anthropologist you are always ambiguous. You are part of the culture but you are always an outsider.

WHAT WERE THE PRACTICAL ISSUES THAT YOU ENCOUNTERED BEFORE, DURING AND AFTER YOUR FIELDWORK?

In Malawi I always had a motorbike, as you can get everywhere, especially during the rainy seasons. There are lots of dirt roads and they get very muddy, so buses and lorries get stuck and nothing can get past. However, on a motorbike you can go anywhere. Unfortunately, I always had accidents on my motorbike and suffered a lot in my research – falling off the motorbike!

WHAT WERE THE ETHICAL ISSUES THAT YOU EXPERIENCED IN YOUR FIELDWORK? Ethics are a part of everyday life for everyone. Doing fieldwork is no different than my going around here and talking to people here in my town in England. There are certain things that I should do as a human being and those that I should not. Anthropology is always ethical. I don’t see the difference between how I treat people here and how I treat people in Malawi. You can’t just barge into people’s houses and ask questions; you have to have tact. All my informants became my friends. It starts off with being an informant but then it turns into friendship, so there is no distinction between informant and friend. I always tell my informants that I am there because I am interested in understanding their way of life.

WHAT WERE THE THEORETICAL ISSUES THAT YOU CONSIDERED IN THE PROCESS OF WRITING YOUR ETHNOGRAPHY?

I was always aware of the theories regarding hunters and gatherers, about the movements of these people, and all my books are theoretical in a way. But I don’t have a high theory in my head when I do research. My research is more in the way of a broad interest. I am not going there to prove Mary Douglas’s thesis or Tim Ingold’s theory.

WHAT WERE YOUR FINDINGS?

I argue that there are many ways to understand the world around us. When I studied insects, it was basically my view that there are these insects called termites and they are real, rather than being socially constructed. Malawi people look at the context of these creatures in their world in different ways. So there are many different ways of looking at the world or insects or mammals. Sometimes they are important in terms of the way they see animals in an empirical way; animals are important in terms of eating, in terms of hunting, medicines, for example. In local rituals, animals are important as well as in folklore and myths. Malawians have multiple ways of relating to animals and understanding them. We always see the world from a certain perspective, a particular way of looking at it, and some of these ways are contradictory. Termites, for instance. In Malawi, in some contexts, termites are the most blessed things on the Earth; for Malawians the termites are real food, absolutely wonderful. Then in another context termites are horrible, because they destroy your crops. Termites are also used as symbols. The termite mounds are of real symbolic significance in relation to the matrilineal society. If you look at the termite colony, it has a queen that is 100 times bigger than other small termite workers. And she continually produces. So in different contexts the termite means different things.

empirical Verifiable through the senses (sight, touch, smell, hearing, taste), either directly or through extensions (reliance on observable and quantifiable data)

WHAT IMPACT (IF ANY) DID THIS RESEARCH HAVE ON YOUR OWN LIFE?

Doing research fieldwork, they say, is like a doing a vision quest, an ordeal. I have never seen research as an ordeal. I always enjoyed it. I am a perpetual student. In a way my research and my life are intertwined. I never had a problem with my identity. I have always seen myself as a working-class lad from the Black Country [English West Midlands]. And, added to that, I have always seen myself as a teacher and as a kind of anthropologist doing research, so my life in a way and my research are completely intertwined. It is not like my research is there and my life is here. They complement each other. Doing fieldwork is an experiential thing as well as being intellectual. The move from being experiential to intellectual is the process of conveying the experience into a kind of knowledge.