Identity
A RT I C L E
‘Where are you really from?’: representation, identity and power in the fieldwork experiences of a South Asian diasporic
M A R S H A G I S E L L E H E N RY University of Bristol
Q R
229
Qualitative Research Copyright © SAGE Publications (London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi) vol. (): -. [- () :; -; ]
A B S T R AC T
Feminist accounts of fieldwork have often been concerned with issues of representation, both of the researched and the researcher, exposing some of the complications that arise when the researcher must make critical decisions about representing herself to her research participants. These accounts demonstrate that a fieldworker’s identity does in fact impact upon the research process and product, challenging notions of researcher objectivity and neutrality. I contribute to feminist debates by complicating the process of representation and the power and problem of naming; identity and its impact upon the research process; and the field as a place of complex power structures, which can produce questions that seem all too familiar. One of the questions raised in relation to representation, identity and the field is one that I have been asked virtually all my life, but which has different meanings in different contexts. My research participants often asked, ‘where are you really from?’ This question in the context of the feminist literature on methodology has enabled me to analyse some of the difficulties and problems I faced in doing fieldwork and to develop a different conceptualization of the research process and research participants. Finally, it has also demonstrated some of the difficulties that our current and limited language of race, ethnicity and nationality pose for first generation South Asian researchers. diasporic, feminist, field, home, identity, insider/outsider, power, representation
KEYWORDS:
A substantial amount of literature explores the dilemmas faced by researchers using
‘Where are you really from?’: representation, identity and power in the fieldwork experiences of a South Asian diasporic
M A R S H A G I S E L L E H E N RY University of Bristol
Q R
229
Qualitative Research Copyright © SAGE Publications (London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi) vol. (): -. [- () :; -; ]
A B S T R AC T
Feminist accounts of fieldwork have often been concerned with issues of representation, both of the researched and the researcher, exposing some of the complications that arise when the researcher must make critical decisions about representing herself to her research participants. These accounts demonstrate that a fieldworker’s identity does in fact impact upon the research process and product, challenging notions of researcher objectivity and neutrality. I contribute to feminist debates by complicating the process of representation and the power and problem of naming; identity and its impact upon the research process; and the field as a place of complex power structures, which can produce questions that seem all too familiar. One of the questions raised in relation to representation, identity and the field is one that I have been asked virtually all my life, but which has different meanings in different contexts. My research participants often asked, ‘where are you really from?’ This question in the context of the feminist literature on methodology has enabled me to analyse some of the difficulties and problems I faced in doing fieldwork and to develop a different conceptualization of the research process and research participants. Finally, it has also demonstrated some of the difficulties that our current and limited language of race, ethnicity and nationality pose for first generation South Asian researchers. diasporic, feminist, field, home, identity, insider/outsider, power, representation
KEYWORDS:
A substantial amount of literature explores the dilemmas faced by researchers using
References: 241 Abu-Lughod, Lila (1988) ‘Fieldwork of a Dutiful Daughter’, in Soraya Atorki and Camillia Fawzi El-Solh (eds) Arab Women in the Field: Studying Your Own Society, pp. 139–61. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press. Abu-Lughod, Lila (1990) ‘Can There be a Feminist Ethnography?’, Women and Performance 5(1): 7–27. Acker, J., Barry, K. and Essveld, J. (1991) ‘Objectivity and Truth: Problems in Doing Feminist Research’, in M. Fonow and J. Cook (eds) Beyond Methodology: Feminist Scholarship As Lived Research, pp. 133–53. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Bell, Diane, Caplan, Pat and Karim, Wazir Jahan (eds) (1993) Gendered Fields: Women, Men and Ethnography. London: Routledge. Berik, Günseli (1996) ‘Understanding the Gender System in Rural Turkey: Fieldwork Dilemmas of Conformity and Intervention’, in Diane Wolf (ed.) Feminist Dilemmas in Fieldwork, pp. 56–71. Oxford: Westview Press. Brah, Avtar (1996) Cartographies of Diaspora. London: Routledge. Caplan, Pat (1993) ‘Learning from Gender: Fieldwork in a Tanzanian Coastal Village, 1965–1985’, in Diane Bell, Pat Caplan and Wazir Jahan Karim (eds) Gendered Fields: Women, Men and Ethnography, pp. 168–81. London: Routledge. Clifford, James (1986) ‘Introduction: Partial Truths’, in James Clifford and George Marcus (eds) Writing Culture: the Poetics and Politics of Ethnography, pp. 1–26. Berkeley: California University Press. Coffey, Amanda (1999) The Ethnographic Self: Fieldwork and the Representation of Identity. London: Sage. Dossa, Parin (1997) ‘Reconstruction of the Ethnographic Field Sites: Mediating Identities: Case Study of a Bohra Muslim Woman in Lamu (Kenya)’, Women’s Studies International Forum 20(4): 505–15. Fanon, Frantz (1990) ‘The Fact of Blackness’, in David Goldberg (ed.) Anatomy of Racism, pp. 108–26. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Fonow, M. and Cook, J. (eds) (1991) Beyond Methodology: Feminist Scholarship as Lived Research. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Foucault, Michel (1980) Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972–1977. Colin Gordon (ed.) New York: Pantheon Books. Gluck, S. and Patai, D. (eds) (1991) Women’s Words: The Feminist Practice of Oral History. London: Routledge. Golde, Peggy (1970) Women in the Field: Anthropological Experiences. Berkeley: University of California Press. Gramsci, Antonio (1971) The Prison Notebooks: Selections. Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey Nowell Smith (trans and eds), New York: International Publishers. Grosz, Elizabeth (1994) Volatile Bodies: Toward a Corporeal Feminism. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. hooks, bell (1989) Talking Back: Thinking Feminist, Thinking Black. Boston, MA: Southend Press. Kondo, Dorinne (1986) ‘Dissolution and Reconstitution of Self: Implications for Anthropological Epistemology’, Cultural Anthropology 1(1): 74–88. Lal, Jayati (1996) ‘Situating Locations: The Politics of Self, Identity, and “Other” in Living and Writing the Text’, in Diane Wolf (ed.) Feminist Dilemmas in Fieldwork, pp. 185–214. Oxford: Westview Press. Martin, Biddy and Mohanty, Chandra (1986) ‘Feminist Politics: What’s Home Got to 242 Qualitative Research 3(2) Do With It?’, in Teresa de Lauretis (ed.) Feminist Studies, pp. 191–212. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Minh-ha, Trinh (1989) Woman, Native, Other: Writing Postcoloniality and Feminism. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Narayan, Kirin (1993) ‘How Native is a “Native” Anthropologist?’, American Anthropology 95(3): 671–86. Ong, Aiwha (1995) ‘Women of China: Travelling Tales and Traveling Theories in Postcolonial Feminism’, in Ruth Behar and Deborah Gordon (eds) Women Writing Culture, pp. 350–72. Berkeley: University of California Press. Panini, M. (ed.) (1991) From the Female Eye: Accounts of Women Fieldworkers Studying Their Own Communities. Delhi: Hindustan Publishing Corporation. Patai, Daphne (1991) ‘U.S. Academics and Third World Women: Is Ethical Research Possible?’, in Sherna Berger Gluck and Daphe Patai (eds) Women’s Words: The Feminist Practice of Oral History, pp. 137–53. New York: Routledge. Rajan, Rajeswari Sunder (1993) Real and Imagined Women: Gender, Culture and Postcolonialism. London: Routledge. Reinharz, Shulamit (1992) Feminist Methods in Social Research. New York: Oxford University Press. Roberts, Helen (1990) Doing Feminist Research. London: Routledge. Schrijvers, Joke (1993) ‘Motherhood Experienced and Conceptualised: Changing Images in Sri Lanka and the Netherlands’, in Diane Bell, Pat Caplan, and Wazir Jahan Karim (eds) Gendered Fields: Women, Men and Ethnography, pp. 143–58. London: Routledge. Stacey, Judith (1991) ‘Can There Be a Feminist Ethnography?’, in S. Gluck and D. Patai (eds) Women’s Words: The Feminist Practice of Oral History, pp.111–19. London: Routledge. Stanley, Liz (1983) Breaking Out: Feminist Consciousness and Feminist Research. London: Routledge. Visweswaran, K. (1994) Fictions of Feminist Ethnography. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Wolf, Diane (ed.) (1996) Feminist Dilemmas in Fieldwork. Oxford: Westview Press. Zavella, Patricia (1991) ‘Mujeres in Factories: Race and Class Perspectives on Women, Work and Family’, in Micaela di Leonardo (ed.) Gender at the Crossroads of Knowledge: Feminist Anthropology in the Postmodern Era, pp. 312–36. Berkeley: University of California Press. M A R S H A G I S E L L E H E N RY is currently a Lecturer in the Centre for Health and Social Care in the School for Policy Studies at the University of Bristol. She has previously held a postdoctoral fellowship at the University of British Columbia, Canada, where she worked on the interdisciplinary research project ‘Narratives of Disease, Disability and Trauma’. Her current research is concerned with gender, immigration and health. She has previously studied at the University of Warwick (UK), where in 2000 she completed her PhD in Women and Gender. For her doctoral work, which is concerned with sex selective practices, she conducted interviews with women in southern India. Address: Centre for Health and Social Care, School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, 8 Priory Road, Bristol BS8 1TZ, UK. [email: Marsha.Henry@bristol.ac.uk]