Abstract
This chapter introduces the reader to the field work I have undertaken together with eight graduate students in Gitarama in 2004. The socio-economic and political profile of the province is presented as well as a detailed discussion of our methodological approach. Material from a lengthy interview with préfet Uwizeye brings history alive.
Co-authored by Jacob Boersema and Philip Verwimp
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Verdoodt and Van Ranst (2003), p. 80.
- 2.
Newbury (1988).
- 3.
Newbury and Newbury (2000), p. 848.
- 4.
Newbury and Newbury, ibidem, p. 840.
- 5.
Ibidem, p. 843.
- 6.
Ibidem, pp. 850–851, we refer in particular to footnote 46 for the references.
- 7.
Newbury and Newbury, ibidem, p.873.
- 8.
Interview with Fidèle Uwizeye, September 2004.
- 9.
Ibidem.
- 10.
Ibidem.
- 11.
Ibidem.
- 12.
Ibidem.
- 13.
Ibidem.
- 14.
Ibidem.
- 15.
Ibidem.
- 16.
Ibidem.
- 17.
Ibidem.
- 18.
Ibidem.
- 19.
Ibidem.
- 20.
Des Forges (1999) p. 272.
- 21.
Interview with préfet F.Uwizeye.
- 22.
They were: be a graduate student in one of the social sciences, have obtained good results at exams, demonstrate strong motivation for field work in Rwanda, demonstrate to be able to live and work in a stressful environment with minimum facilities, be a team player, be available between June and September 2004, able to find financial resources to pay for one’s participation.
- 23.
See for detailed guides on doing oral history: Caunce (1994); Thompson (1988); Tonkin (1992); Leydesdorff (2004).
- 24.
One of the research assistants was fired in the first week after showing little interest in performing the job. One of the assistants spoke English as a third language with one of the graduate students.
- 25.
Tonkin, p. 41.
- 26.
The comment proved invaluable for the research. There was an amazing variety in describing certain events but also recollecting things only fragmentarily and naming proved always difficult.
- 27.
Jon (1999) pp. 77–92.
- 28.
Leydesdorf (2004), p. 204.
- 29.
See Laub (1995), pp. 61–75.
- 30.
See Leydesdorf (2004), p. 107.
- 31.
Barbara L. Niles et al. Stability and fluctuation of veterans’ reports of combat exposure p. 311. Jon (1999), pp. 311–318.
- 32.
See Wagenaar and Groeneweg (1990), pp. 77–87.
- 33.
Hatzfeld in Leydesdorf, p. 112, my translation.
- 34.
Haynes, S.N. (1978) Principles of behavioral assessment. New York: Gardner.
- 35.
Page 264–5, 284) Myerhoff (1986) pp. 261–286.
- 36.
See Jon (1999), pp. 77–92.
- 37.
In Rwanda confessed perpetrators often make a ‘deal’ with the justice department through the ‘guilty plea procedure’. In exchange for a (single) confession they get sentence reduction. There is only little control from the judiciary system to what extent this confession are really true, or whether that are all the crimes they have committed. With Gacaca however, this perpetrators might face new acquisitions and witnesses of hidden crimes.
- 38.
Sykes and Matza (1957), pp. 206–213.
- 39.
The result of the work of the criminologist team member is published in the Dutch language criminology journal Panopticon. We refer to Thiry and Verwimp (2008).
- 40.
Cohen (2001) States of denial, knowing about atrocities and suffering. Cambridge: Polity Press.
- 41.
Janssen in his account on remembering the past post-war villages in Croatia gives some striking accounts how communities reinterpret local history through selective amnesia. See Janssen (2002), pp. 77–94. Janssen notes that for the Serbs still living in Croatia if any crime by Serbs was mentioned at all, responsibility was put squarely on the shoulders of ‘people from outside’, militant Serbs from Serbia and from other parts of Croatia.(Jansen, p. 84). This was precisely the same in Rwanda. If you asked if someone was killed in the cell, it would be outside the cell. If you asked in the sector, it would have happened in the neighboring sector. If you asked about the commune, the killings would have been done in the next commune. This types of denial were done through changing place and people.
- 42.
Jean Hatzfeld (2003) Seizoen van de machetes. Het verhaal van de daders. Amsterdam: de Bezige Bij.
- 43.
Tonkin, p. 114.
- 44.
It remains speculative why this differs so much but some possible reasons could be: One, the number of perpetrators originating from the community. Two, the number of perpetrators still at large and living in the community. Three, the number of surviving Tutsi’s and their position in the community. Four, the number of refugees that settled in the community. Fith, the leadership of the community.
- 45.
Tonkin (1992), p. 10.
- 46.
See Janssen (2002), pp. 77–94.
- 47.
Page 31 Ganguly (1992), pp. 27–50 and also p. 274. Myerhoff (1986), pp. 261–86.
- 48.
Ganguly (1992), pp. 29–31 and also p. 274. Myerhoff (1986), pp. 261–86.
- 49.
Page 78. Jon (1999), pp. 77–92.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Verwimp, P. (2013). Fieldwork in Gitarama Introduction, Setting and Methods. In: Peasants in Power. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6434-7_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6434-7_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-6433-0
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-6434-7
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)