Skip to main content
Log in

Ethnography and anxiety: Field work and reflexivity in the vortex of U.S.-Cuban relations

  • Published:
Qualitative Sociology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper explores the ways in which geo-political forces can shape doing, interpreting, and representing ethnographic field work. Using my field work in a law collective in Havana, Cuba between 1989 and 1994 as a starting point, I consider how macro-social relationship—in this case 30 years of political hostility between the U.S. and Cuban governments—can inscribe themselves on the micro-social relations between ethnographers and informants in the field, and ethnographers and their audiences at home. The combination of geo-political tensions and reflexive attempts to discern the impact of these tensions on my field work generated, what I term, disciplinary anxietyand discursive anxiety.I consider how anxieties became part of my reflexive routines in the field, shaped my interactions with Cubans, colored my attempts to interpret those interactions, and affected my framing of those interpretations for audiences at home. I suggest that reflexivity in fieldwork must be sensitive, not only to the standpoints imbedded in the field worker's biography, but also to the way in which macro-political processes enter into the biographies of field workers, their informants, and their audiences, and influence the interactions among them.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abu-Lughod, L. 1990. “Can there be a feminist ethnography.”Women and Performance. 5(1):7–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agee, P. 1976.Inside the Company: CIA Diary. New York: Bantam Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alarcon, R. 1991. Speech before the United Nations General Assembly. November 13.

  • Asad, T. (ed.). 1973.Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter. London: Ootheca Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bordo, S. 1990. “Feminism, Postmodernism, and gender skepticism.” inFeminism/Postmodernism. Nicholson, L. (ed.) New York: Routledge. pp. 133–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, E. M. 1986. “Ethnography as narrative,” in V. Turner and E. Bruner (eds.)The Anthropology of Experience. Chicago: University of Illinois Press, pp. 139–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burawoy, M. et al. 1991.Ethnography Unbound: Power and Resistance in the Modern Metropolis. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clifford, J. and Marcus, G. (eds.) 1986.Writing Culture. Berkeley; University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clifford, J. 1988.The Predicament of Culture. Boston: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crapanzano, V. 1986.Hermes Dilemma. “Hermes dilemma: the masking of subversion in ethnographic description”. in Clifford, J. and Marcus, G. (eds.)Writing Culture. Berkely: University of California Press, pp. 51–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Certeu, M. 1984. (Rendell, S., trans.)The Practice of Everyday Life. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • D'Estefano, M. (ed.) 1985. Agresiones de Estados Unidos a Cuba Revolucionaria. Habana: Editorial de Ciencias Sociales.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubisch, J. 1995.In a Different Place. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, C. 1994. “Emotional and ethical quagmires in returning to the field.” Paper presented at the American Sociological Association.

  • Foucault, M. 1979.Discipline and Punish, New York: Pantheon Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. 1980.The History of Sexuality, Vol. 1. New York: Vintage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halperin, M. 1981.The Taming of Fidel Castro. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. (ed.) 1987.Feminism and Methodology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karp, I. and Kendall, M. 1982. “Reflexivity in field work.” inExplaining Human Behavior: Consciousness, Human Action, and Social Structure, Secord, P. (ed.) Beverley Hills: Sage, pp. 249–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lutz, C. A. and Lial Abu-Lughod. 1990.Language and the Politics of Emotion. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mascia-Lees, F., Sharpe, P. and Cohen, C. B. 1989. “The postmodernist turn in Anthropology: Cautions from a feminist perspective.”Signs Vol. 15 No. 1; 7–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marcus, G. E. 1994. “What Comes (Just) After ‘Post’? The Case of Ethnography,” in N. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln,Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 563–574.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyerhoff, B. and Ruby, J. 1982, “Introduction,” J. Ruby (ed.),A Crack in the Mirror. Philadelphia University Press, pp. 1–35.

  • Michalowski, R. 1985.Order, Law, and Crime, New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michalowski, R. and Zatz, M. 1990. “The Cuban second economy in perspective,” in (Los, ed.)The Second Economy in Marxist States New York: MacMillan, pp. 141–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okely, J. 1992. “Anthropology and autobiography: Participatory experience and embodied knowledge,” in J. Okely and H. Callaway (eds.)Anthropology and Autobiography, New York: Rougtledge, pp. 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabinow, P. 1977.Reflections of Fieldwork in Morocco. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabinow, P. 1986. “Representations are social facts: Modernity and post-modernity in ethnography.” in Clifford and Marcus (eds.)Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography, Berkeley: University of California Press. pp. 234–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinharz, Shulamit, 1979.On Becoming a Social Scientist, San Francisco: Josey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinharz, Shulamit, 1992.Feminist Methods in Social Research. New York: Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, 1975. Quoted in Karp, I, and Kendall, M. 1982. “Reflexivity in field work.” inExplaining Human Behavior: Consciousness, Human Action, and Social Structure, Second, P. (ed.) Beverley Hills: Sage, p. 258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosaldo, R. 1989.Culture and Truth: The Remaking of Social Analysis. Boston: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, V. and Edward M. Bruner (eds.) 1986.The Anthropology of Experience, Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • U. S. Congress. 1976.Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Maanen, John, 1988.Tales of the Field. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wasserfall, R. 1993. “Reflexivity, Feminism and Difference.”Qualitative Sociology, Vol. 16, No. 1:23:40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, James B. 1984.When Words Lose Their Meaning: Constitutions and Reconstitution of Language, Character, and Community. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimbalist, A. 1990. “Does the Economy Work.”NACLA: Report on the Americas Vol. 24, No. 2:16–19.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Michalowski, R.J. Ethnography and anxiety: Field work and reflexivity in the vortex of U.S.-Cuban relations. Qual Sociol 19, 59–82 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02393248

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02393248

Keywords

Navigation