From Nativeness to Strangeness and Back: Ascribed Ethnicity, Body Work, and Contextual Insiderness
From Nativeness to Strangeness and Back: Ascribed Ethnicity, Body Work, and Contextual Insiderness
Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, Ahead of Print.
This article offers a reflection on a certain variant of broadening the position of “being inside” with some “buts,” or through “within but.” Drawing on my field experience in the Ukrainian diaspora in Canada, I discuss the context-dependent, fluid and labile insiderness and the case of using a researcher’s embodied distinctions (senses, ethnicity, class) in the research site created by the fieldwork participants, and not the researcher him/herself. My considerations are embedded with the dialectics (not opposition) of the insider–outsider and point to the contextual “nativeness” and “strangeness” of the researcher. I also discuss the fluidity and contextuality of a researcher’s field familiarity, as well as when s/he conducts research in cooperation with “their own people,” as well as circumstances and factors that transform this familiarity into strangeness. I argue that the latter, instead of being an obstacle or barrier in the research, is a beneficial and mind-opening ethnographic tool.
This article offers a reflection on a certain variant of broadening the position of “being inside” with some “buts,” or through “within but.” Drawing on my field experience in the Ukrainian diaspora in Canada, I discuss the context-dependent, fluid and labile insiderness and the case of using a researcher’s embodied distinctions (senses, ethnicity, class) in the research site created by the fieldwork participants, and not the researcher him/herself. My considerations are embedded with the dialectics (not opposition) of the insider–outsider and point to the contextual “nativeness” and “strangeness” of the researcher. I also discuss the fluidity and contextuality of a researcher’s field familiarity, as well as when s/he conducts research in cooperation with “their own people,” as well as circumstances and factors that transform this familiarity into strangeness. I argue that the latter, instead of being an obstacle or barrier in the research, is a beneficial and mind-opening ethnographic tool.