Advertisement

How We Tell the Stories We Tell

Chapter
  • 67 Downloads

Abstract

This chapter foregrounds why borders and stories matter as objects of study. Stories about national borderlands are social practices of bordering, rebordering, and debordering: political and social efforts to generate, reinforce, redefine, or contest social differences. These practices affect state and federal policies on immigration, health care, education, and the economy. Data collection methods are detailed, including ethnography, participant observation, interviews, focus groups, and media analysis. Issues, influences, and the potential of “studying up” and fieldwork at home are discussed.

Keywords

Ethnography Media analysis Studying home Fieldwork at home Bordering 

Works Cited

  1. Abrajano, M., & Hajnal, Z. L. (2015). White backlash: Immigration, race and politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bowman, T. P. (2016). Blood oranges: Colonialism and agriculture in the south Texas borderlands. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press.Google Scholar
  3. D’Alisera, J. (1999). Field of dreams: The anthropologist far away at home. Anthropology and Humanism, 24(1), 5–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. De Genova, N. (2012). Border, scene and obscene. In T. M. Wilson & H. Donnan (Eds.), A companion to border studies (pp. 492–504). Oxford: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. DeChaine, D. R. (Ed.). (2012). Border rhetorics: Citizenship and identity on the U.S.-Mexico border. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
  6. Duarte, F. (2010). What does a culture of corporate social responsibility “look” like? A glimpse into a Brazilian mining company. International Journal of Business Anthropology, 2(1), 106–122.Google Scholar
  7. Fleuriet, K. J., & Castañeda, H. (2017). A risky place? Media and the health landscape in the (in)secure U.S.-Mexico borderlands. North American Dialogue, 20(2), 32–46.Google Scholar
  8. Gupta, A., & Ferguson, J. (1992). Beyond “culture”: Space, identity, and the politics of difference. Cultural Anthropology, 7(1), 1–23.Google Scholar
  9. Gusterson, H. (1997). Studying up revisited. PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review, 20(1), 114–119.Google Scholar
  10. Gusterson, H. (2017). From Brexit to Trump: Anthropology and the rise of nationalist populism. American Ethnologist, 44(2), 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Harvey, W. (2011). Strategies for conducting elite interviews. Qualitative Research, 11(4), 431–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Heyman, J. (2010). US-Mexico border cultures and the challenge of asymmetrical interpenetration. In H. Donnan & T. Wilson (Eds.), US-Mexico border cultures and the challenge of asymmetrical interpenetration (pp. 21–34). Lanham, MD: University Press of America.Google Scholar
  13. Heyman, J. (2012a). A voice of the US southwestern border: The 2012 “we the border: Envisioning a narrative for our future” conference. Journal of Migration and Human Security, 1(2), 60–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Heyman, J. M. (2012b). Constructing a “perfect” wall: Race, class, and citizenship in US-Mexico border policing. In P. Barber & W. Lem (Eds.), Migration in the 21st century: Political economy and ethnography (pp. 153–174). New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Heyman, J. M. (2012c). Culture theory and the U.S.-Mexico border. In T. M. Wilson & H. Donnan (Eds.), A companion to border studies (pp. 48–65). Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar
  16. Heyman, J., Slack, J., & Guerra, E. (2018, Winter). Bordering a “crisis”: Central American asylum seekers and the reproduction of dominant border enforcement practices. Journal of the Southwest, 60(4), 754–786.Google Scholar
  17. Ho, K. (2009). Liquidated. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Honey, L. (2013). Media, ideology, and myths of East-West difference: Constructing American ideals through images of a “Red-Hot” Russian Spy. North American Dialogue, 16(1), 12–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. hooks, b. (2008). Belonging: A culture of place. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Lincoln, M. (2014). Tainted commons, public health: The politico-moral significance of cholera in Vietnam. Medical Anthropology Quarterly, 28(3), 342–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Luque, J., Bowers, A., Kabore, A., & Stewart, R. (2013). Who will pick Georgia’s Vidalia onions? A text-driven content analysis of newspaper coverage on Georgia’s 2011 immigration law. Human Organization, 72(10), 31–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Maskovsky, J. (2009). Some new directions in anthropology “at home”. North American Dialogue, 12(1), 6–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Moeran, B. (1996). A Japanese advertising agency: An anthropology of media and markets. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
  24. Nader, L. (1972). Up the anthropology: Perspectives gained from studying up. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health Education & Welfare Office of Education. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED065375.pdf.
  25. Nájera, J. R. (2015). The borderlands of race: Mexican segregation in a South Texas town. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  26. Narayan, K. (1993). How native is a native anthropologist? American Anthropologist, 95(3), 671–686.Google Scholar
  27. Nevins, J. (2010 [2002]). Operation gatekeeper and beyond: The war on “illegals” and the remaking of the U.S.-Mexico boundary. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Nordquest, M. (2007). Of hats and switches: Doing fieldwork at home. North American Dialogue, 10(1), 18–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ortner, S. (2010). Access: Reflections on studying up in Hollywood. Ethnography, 11(2), 211–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Peirano, M. G. (1998). When anthropology is at home: The different contexts of a single discipline. Annual Review of Anthropology, 27, 105–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pletcher, D. M. (2010, June 15). Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Retrieved January 7, 2020, from Texas State Historical Commission: https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/nbt01.
  32. Richardson, C. (1999). Batos, bolillos, pochos and pelados: Class and culture on the south Texas border. Austin: The University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  33. Richardson, C., & Pisani, M. (2012). The informal and underground economy of the south Texas border. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  34. Richardson, C., & Pisani, M. J. (2017). Batos, bolillos, pochos, and Pelados: class and culture on the south Texas border. Revised Edition. Austin, TX: The University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  35. Richardson, C., & Resendiz, R. (2006). On the edge of the law: Culture, labor and deviance on the south Texas border. Austin, TX: The University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  36. Souleles, D. (2018). How to study people who do not want to be studied: Practical reflections on studying up. PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review, 41(S1), 51–68.Google Scholar
  37. Udupa, S. (2012). News media and contention over “the local” in urban India. American Ethnologist, 39(4), 819–834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. U.S. Census Bureau. (2019, May). Annual estimates of the resident population for incorporated places of 50,000 or more. Retrieved January 7, 2020, from United States Census Bureau: https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk.
  39. U.S. Census Bureau. (2019, July 1). Quick facts: Starr County, Texas; Willacy County, Texas; Hidalgo County, Texas; Cameron County, Texas. Retrieved January 7, 2020, from United States Census Bureau: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/starrcountytexas,willacycountytexas,hidalgocountytexas,cameroncountytexas/PST045219.
  40. Vélez-Ibañez, C. G., & Heyman, J. (2017). The U.S.-Mexico transborder region: Cultural dynamics and historical interactions. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
  41. Vigness, D. M., & Odintz, M. (2010, June 15). Rio Grande Valley. Retrieved January 7, 2020, from Texas State Historical Commission: https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/ryr01.
  42. Wilson, T. M., & Hastings, D. (Eds.). (2012). A companion to border studies. Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of AnthropologyThe University of Texas at San AntonioSan AntonioUSA

Personalised recommendations