Methodological
considerations
b) Subject Positions, Cultural Difference and
Authority.
The question of being aware
of the cultural framework and political interests from which researchers makes
choices as to what to record, and that colour the interpretations they make, is
part of what I have discussed as reflexive research.[1]
The idea of a completely objective viewpoint is hardly tenable any more at
least within the social sciences and humanities. The antidote to this myth is
to make the level of objectivity apparent through methodological transparency
and to be honest about the spin that is provided on the material at least to
the extent that these things are consciously known.
Michael Agar argues that a
clear distinction between the subjectivity of an ethnographer and any subject
is no longer possible - the world is too culturally interpenetrated. An example
is isolated tribes who might nonetheless watch the 'Discovery' satellite TV
channel. But the position of the researcher is also a part of a claim to
authority. There is the claim to speak an informed truth about a particular
people that is socially validated by academic institutions, journals and
learned rituals. The PhD itself is part of a series of rituals that can help
confer such authority.[2]
My subject position as an
artist committed to collaborative working, with experience of around ten
cultural collectives clearly motivates my research and leavens my research with
experience. On the other hand I am aware how my own preferred practice clashes
with the Exploding Cinema formula. I would prefer to work in a more
site-specific way relating to the locality[3]
I'd prefer a less brash and more thematically unified style of decor, which
would be possible if I made the effort but I feel would not have been popular.
I would prefer such a group to be more mutually supportive around the making of
work rather than being focussed only on shows.[4]
These sort of differences lead
at times to a certain tone of discontent in my account which if taken a face
value, would not be consistent with my role as 'detached' observer. At the
same time I'm aware that any member of the group will have such 'moans' and
that my own are probably not that unique. Because of my background, my experience
is the experience of a collective member even if I am also a researcher. To
have retained a cool distance would have been to miss the frustrations and
discords that are integral to collective working.
[1] A discussion of reflexivity was part of the general
introduction.
[2] See Pierre Bourdieu's Homo Academicus, (Cambridge 1988, orig. Paris 1984) for a full
discussion of this from a French perspective.
[3] L1 p73
[4] Logbooks p66, 71, 81, 229, 331 & 349. Other
members of the collective who regularly made films also felt this lack of
support.