Traveling to some exotic part of the world to undertake an ethnographic research project would be exciting and different. However, I believe there are enough topics to explore and understand, enough options to be undertaken and questions to be answered to keep me right here in America. The inspiration for my analysis is based on a current personal experience. Presently, my husband and his siblings are wrestling with moving their 85 year-old mother to an assisted-living facility, as she is unable to continue living independently. She cannot take care of herself any longer, needing assistance to dress, to ensure she is eating right, to cut her meat at meals, to ensure she takes her medications, and a general need for 24-hour surveillance for her protection. This personal circumstance inspires me to study the new intentional communities that the elderly and frail are integrated into when they are moved to assisted-living accommodations.
I believe this would be a worthwhile study, because with the significant population of the aging Baby Boomer generation, there will be increased demand for intentional communities to help the Baby Boomers live and deal with their daily lives. All that can be learned to understand why some are successful and why some are not, is input into helping ready a large portion of the United States population for later life circumstances.
People who join this type of intentional community are brought together due to circumstance. They come from varied backgrounds and different everyday experiences. They have different values, traditions, and ways of thinking and behaving. They have to build new routines and meet new people while struggling with the sense of loss they feel in leaving their “old world” behind. Is their acceptance of their new home influenced by whether they planned ahead and voluntarily moved? Did their medical condition or family force the move against their will, and therefore impacts their acceptance and induction into the new community? Yet after the move-in, they begin, hopefully, to form new relationships with people in their new community. How do the new relationships and new groups within the community form? How deep do they get? Are there new rituals and traditions that get initiated which become meaningful? What about the old traditions, celebrations, and rituals; does the family keep those alive bridging the past with the present? Does family geography and frequency of visits affect acceptance? Do those who are happiest with the new living arrangement become that way because they find others and develop common interests, new rituals and traditions? Is that commonality based on or driven by age, gender, their belief systems, common verbal, customary or material interests, their values, common experiences, their medical conditions or something else? How do the members of this group communicate creatively? My approach to fieldwork would be observation and interviews. It would include the residents themselves, the care-giving help, the families and visitors to the facility that bring forms of celebration, culture and new interests to the residents. It would include visiting different facilities first locally, and then expanding out geographically dependent upon the results of the local study.
Folklore reaches groups of people who share personal connections. As I visited my mother-in-law’s facility this last Friday evening, a group of elderly, most in wheelchairs, sat in the living room/reception area around a piano and sang World War II era songs as a pianist, one of their own, accompanied them on the piano. These residents have formed a new, informal, folklore community. Based on common interests and maybe some of their old traditions, they have found creative ways to share together, possibly bridging or creating new traditions and rituals, like their Friday night sing-along.
This blog entry is my response to the Chapter Seven Reflection Question.
Sunday, April 20, 2008
Friday, April 11, 2008
The Routes to My Roots
In Tyler’s blog posting titled St. Patrick’s Day, it is evident his family enjoys celebrating their “roots.” They have traveled the “route” to Wexford, Ireland many times to relish the traditions, rituals and performances of the holiday and to celebrate their heritage.
His article reminded me of my roots. I grew up knowing I was Irish. My father shared with me his Irish heritage and instilled pride. Yet, it was not until my late forties that I obtained genealogy information from a distant relative who had traced our family tree back to Ireland. My great-great-great grandfather, Patrick McCrea, a medical doctor, came from Ireland to America in 1797, settling in northern Pennsylvania. This gave my husband an idea for my 50th birthday, and he surprised me with the perfect gift, a trip to Ireland to visit the homeland of my ancestors. In 2002, we headed to Ireland for a two and one-half week trip. We found the country beautiful, the people delightful, the history intriguing, and the pubs, like Tyler said, a wonderful gathering place. What we did not find in Ireland was … any McCreas.
As you get older, you become more inquisitive about your past, as you realize you are coming closer to becoming part of that past. After returning home, we were bolstered to do further research, and discovered that Patrick McCrea’s ancestors had come to Ireland from Scotland. Patrick later headed to America, almost fifty years before the Irish Potato Famine, a time when many Irish people immigrated to the United States. In 2004, my husband and I traveled to Scotland, and enjoyed the “other” country of my ancestors, Scotland, discovering there the home of the MacRae clan in the Kintail district. The routes I traveled in Ireland and Scotland finally led me to my true roots.
My heritage is Scottish. The MacRae’s were a clan, with a crest, a motto, dress and hunting tartans, and even a castle. But I am also Irish with a special day for celebrating that ancestry. As a Scot-Irish, I enjoy the best of both roots.
This is the second peer review blog posting.
His article reminded me of my roots. I grew up knowing I was Irish. My father shared with me his Irish heritage and instilled pride. Yet, it was not until my late forties that I obtained genealogy information from a distant relative who had traced our family tree back to Ireland. My great-great-great grandfather, Patrick McCrea, a medical doctor, came from Ireland to America in 1797, settling in northern Pennsylvania. This gave my husband an idea for my 50th birthday, and he surprised me with the perfect gift, a trip to Ireland to visit the homeland of my ancestors. In 2002, we headed to Ireland for a two and one-half week trip. We found the country beautiful, the people delightful, the history intriguing, and the pubs, like Tyler said, a wonderful gathering place. What we did not find in Ireland was … any McCreas.
As you get older, you become more inquisitive about your past, as you realize you are coming closer to becoming part of that past. After returning home, we were bolstered to do further research, and discovered that Patrick McCrea’s ancestors had come to Ireland from Scotland. Patrick later headed to America, almost fifty years before the Irish Potato Famine, a time when many Irish people immigrated to the United States. In 2004, my husband and I traveled to Scotland, and enjoyed the “other” country of my ancestors, Scotland, discovering there the home of the MacRae clan in the Kintail district. The routes I traveled in Ireland and Scotland finally led me to my true roots.
My heritage is Scottish. The MacRae’s were a clan, with a crest, a motto, dress and hunting tartans, and even a castle. But I am also Irish with a special day for celebrating that ancestry. As a Scot-Irish, I enjoy the best of both roots.
This is the second peer review blog posting.
Sunday, April 6, 2008
Folklorists' Interpretive Approaches
In assessing the interpretive methods used by folklorists as described in Living Folklore Chapter 6 “Approaches to Interpreting Folklore,” I was drawn to the post-structuralist approaches: feminist interpretations, reciprocal ethnography, and intersectionality. These three methods, in combination with each other, could be quite strong in capturing the total essence needed to best understand the dimensions affecting folklore interpretation.
It seems logical that male folklorists, who are in a profession that has been historically male-dominated, bring their masculine biases, viewpoints and approaches to their fieldwork and are inherently influenced by those masculine experiences, perspectives and stereotypes. What they studied and how they interpreted what they studied could be affected by their gender and past experiences in a male dominated society. This is supported in the statement that folklorists came to the “realization that a relatively small number of studies and articles had been published about women’s culture” (193). Without the feminine perspective, this has possibly created an unbalanced and misrepresented set of analysis results. It should be considered whether the studies of folk cultures by male folklorists have subconsciously and erroneously downplayed or dismissed the roles and influences of females in those studies. Therefore, for me, it introduces the possibility of flawed and incomplete studies, devoid of the female perspective, though women make up more than half of the population of the world.
A strong point is made that the feminist interpretations approach created a means “to think about all folklore study,” determining how “socially and politically constructed assumptions can marginalize some groups that don’t belong to a dominant group’s definition of mainstream” (195). This reiterates the probable gaps in the male folklorist studies as noted above and emphasizes the need for a worldview, calling for the interactions or intersection of a multitude of elements beyond just gender such as age, politics and power, religion, class, ethnicity, sexuality, and others. This defines and opens the door to understanding the intersectionality approach.
Intersectionality links with the feminist interpretations approach, acknowledging that there are a variety of factors “that shape the underlying values and relationships we often express through folklore” (199). To perform thorough analysis, the folklorist should take into perspective all of the influencing factors, versus adopting a parochial view, using just one or two factors. Intersectionality undertakes a way to hypothesize about the combination of varied interactions of all involved, the “performer, performance, audience and observers” (200).
In the feminist interpretations approach, it has been offered that “women’s communication is often “process-centered and collaborative” (195). This collaborative approach has opened the door to collaborating with folk insiders, and incorporating the insider viewpoint in the folklorists’ interpretations. This collaboration is a direct entrée to the reciprocal ethnography approach. The emphasis here is on the people who are being studied by the folklorist knowing best what the folk culture is and what it means. This requires the folklorist to collaborate with the insiders and incorporate their points of view in the interpretation, versus providing only an academic version from the folklorist’s perspective.
The feminist interpretations approach has been the genesis for two other, more complimentary approaches being developed to folklore interpretations – reciprocal ethnography and intersectionality. These approaches are more inclusive and multi-dimensional. They allow the larger influences and cultural forces to be considered to better understand the meanings of folklore.
This blog entry is my response to the Chapter Six Reflection Question.
References
Sims, M. C., & Stephens, M. (2005). Living folklore an introduction to the study of people and their their traditions. Utah: Utah State University Press.
It seems logical that male folklorists, who are in a profession that has been historically male-dominated, bring their masculine biases, viewpoints and approaches to their fieldwork and are inherently influenced by those masculine experiences, perspectives and stereotypes. What they studied and how they interpreted what they studied could be affected by their gender and past experiences in a male dominated society. This is supported in the statement that folklorists came to the “realization that a relatively small number of studies and articles had been published about women’s culture” (193). Without the feminine perspective, this has possibly created an unbalanced and misrepresented set of analysis results. It should be considered whether the studies of folk cultures by male folklorists have subconsciously and erroneously downplayed or dismissed the roles and influences of females in those studies. Therefore, for me, it introduces the possibility of flawed and incomplete studies, devoid of the female perspective, though women make up more than half of the population of the world.
A strong point is made that the feminist interpretations approach created a means “to think about all folklore study,” determining how “socially and politically constructed assumptions can marginalize some groups that don’t belong to a dominant group’s definition of mainstream” (195). This reiterates the probable gaps in the male folklorist studies as noted above and emphasizes the need for a worldview, calling for the interactions or intersection of a multitude of elements beyond just gender such as age, politics and power, religion, class, ethnicity, sexuality, and others. This defines and opens the door to understanding the intersectionality approach.
Intersectionality links with the feminist interpretations approach, acknowledging that there are a variety of factors “that shape the underlying values and relationships we often express through folklore” (199). To perform thorough analysis, the folklorist should take into perspective all of the influencing factors, versus adopting a parochial view, using just one or two factors. Intersectionality undertakes a way to hypothesize about the combination of varied interactions of all involved, the “performer, performance, audience and observers” (200).
In the feminist interpretations approach, it has been offered that “women’s communication is often “process-centered and collaborative” (195). This collaborative approach has opened the door to collaborating with folk insiders, and incorporating the insider viewpoint in the folklorists’ interpretations. This collaboration is a direct entrée to the reciprocal ethnography approach. The emphasis here is on the people who are being studied by the folklorist knowing best what the folk culture is and what it means. This requires the folklorist to collaborate with the insiders and incorporate their points of view in the interpretation, versus providing only an academic version from the folklorist’s perspective.
The feminist interpretations approach has been the genesis for two other, more complimentary approaches being developed to folklore interpretations – reciprocal ethnography and intersectionality. These approaches are more inclusive and multi-dimensional. They allow the larger influences and cultural forces to be considered to better understand the meanings of folklore.
This blog entry is my response to the Chapter Six Reflection Question.
References
Sims, M. C., & Stephens, M. (2005). Living folklore an introduction to the study of people and their their traditions. Utah: Utah State University Press.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)