Page 88 - Culture Media Language Working Papers in Cultural Studies

ETHNOGRAPHY 77

It may well be that my critique traduces certain texts in the ethnographic
tradition. Certainly, there are examples in which a final account transcends the
limitations of its own stated methods. In what follows I have mainly relied on
codifications of method, such as those above, which are increasingly accepted as
authoritative guides for those wishing to use ‘qualitative’ methods.

The manifest posture
The most obvious thrust of ‘qualitative’ methodology has been against traditional
sociological theory and methods modelled on what are taken to be the
procedures and tests of the natural sciences. To simplify, the fear seems to be
that a theory can only, ultimately, demonstrate its own assumptions. What lies
outside these assumptions cannot be represented or even acknowledged. So to
maintain the richness and authenticity of social phenomena it is necessary,
certainly in the early stages of research, to receive data in a raw, experimental
and relatively untheorized manner— ‘Allowing substantive concepts and
11
hypotheses to emerge first on their own’. It is recognized, of course, that there
will have to come a time of closure. It is hoped, however, that the selectivity
12
and theorization of the final work will reflect the patterning of the real world
13
rather than the patterns of received theory. These ‘anti’-theoretical concerns
generate a profound methodological stress on contacting the subject as directly
as possible. It is as if the ideal researcher’s experience can achieve a one-to-one
relationship with that of the researched.
This conviction, and the general distrust of theory, are most clearly expressed
through and by the techniques and methods it is proposed to use. The researcher
14
is to work in the environment of his/her subjects rather than in the laboratory and
is to enter the field as free as possible from prior theory. S/he is to participate in
the round of activities of his/her subjects but to avoid ‘disturbing’ the field. S/he
should not question his/her subjects directly but be as open as possible to the
realm of the ‘taken-for-granted’. S/he must take great care to plan his/her
entrance into the field, prepare a feasible role and assiduously court those who
might sponsor his/her membership in selected social groups.
It is the openness and directness of this methodological approach which
promises the production of a final account which, like an icon, will bear some of
the marks, and recreate something of the richness, of the original.

The hidden practice
If the techniques of ‘qualitative’ methodology mark a decisive break from
‘quantitative’ ones, the way in which they are usually applied makes a secret

*This is an edited version of an article which first appeared in Culture and Domination,
WPCS 9 (1976).