Abstract
This chapter reflects upon our fieldwork process and experiences, and shows how there is no absolute disjuncture between “real life” and the “field” and between researcher and research participant. Starting from the genesis of the research project, we trace how our research scope expanded to new music groups and how our concept of the field widened to include the spaces and situations outside of formal research moments. We argue that conventional interviews and positivist methodologies for data collection are neither “scientific” nor the best or only way to understand social life, by sharing the insights from anthropology’s reflexive turn and cultural critiques. When researchers set out to investigate people’s complex personal identities, it is crucial not to merely rely on respondent’s cognitive discourses, which certain interview methods tend to elicit. Indeed, tapping into one’s own subjectivity, by means of empathy, self-awareness, code-switching and sharing, is just as integral to gaining insights about people’s subjectivities and affects. The chapter also elaborates on the impact of information technology, in particular the Internet, on our subject of research, namely in relation to issues of creative transnationalism and the construction of virtual artistic identities. Lastly, we explore the importance of nonacademic practices of public engagement and giving back to the communities we study, as a means to access additional research insights and, more importantly, as an ethical duty.
Anthropology demands an open-mindedness with which one must look and listen, record in astonishment and wonder that which one would not have been able to guess.
(Margaret Mead 1977, p. ix)
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.
Refers to “Chinese, Malay, Indian and Other” ethnic communities in Singapore. See Chap. 2 for further discussion about this social classification.
References
Primary Sources (Interviews)
Guo, M., email interview, Apr 02, 2017.
Lum, C.-H., email communication, July 11, 2017.
Peters, D., personal interview, Dec 29, 2016.
Rajasekaran, R., personal interview, June 28, 2016.
Tse, N., email interview, May 03, 2017.
Xu, R., personal interview, Jan 18, 2017.
Secondary Sources
Armbruster, H., & Lærke, A. (Eds.). (2008). Taking sides: Ethics, politics, and fieldwork in anthropology. New York/Oxford: Berghahn Books.
Barz, G. F., & Cooley, T. J. (2008). Shadows in the field: New perspectives for fieldwork in ethnomusicology. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Behar, R., & Gordon, D. (Eds.). (1995). Women writing culture. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Bennett, A., & Peterson, R. A. (Eds.). (2004). Music scenes: Local, translocal and virtual. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.
Boellstorff, T. (2008). Coming of age in second life: An anthropologist explores the virtually human. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Breglia, L. (2009). The “work” of ethnographic fieldwork. In J. D. Faubio & G. E. Marcus (Eds.), Fieldwork is not what it used to be: Learning anthropology’s method in a time of transition (pp. 129–142). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Burrell, J. (2006). “Through a Screen Darkly”: On Remote, Collaborative Fieldwork in the Digital Age. In R. Sanjek & S. W. Tratner (Eds.), EFieldnotes: The makings of anthropology in the digital world (pp. 132–152). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
CARE. (2018, Jan 18). Sounds of Singapore [Video File]. Retrieved from: https://vimeo.com/251755750
Clifford, J. (1988). The predicament of culture: Twentieth-century ethnography, literature and art. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Clifford, J., & Marcus, G. (Eds.). (1986). Writing culture: The poetics and politics of ethnography. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Davies, J., & Spencer, D. (Eds.). (2010). Emotions in the field: The psychology and anthropology of fieldwork experience. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Day, E., Hoggard, L., & Bromwich, K. (2015, September 27). 99% of women working in the film and TV industries have experienced sexism. The Guardian online. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/sep/27/sexism-film-industry-stories
Dresch, P., James, W., & Parkin, D. J. (Eds.). (2000). Anthropologists in a wider world: Essays on field research. New York/Oxford: Berghahn Books.
Farley, S. (2017, June 29). Women in audio: Yes, we exist! Retrieved from http://designingsound.org/2015/03/women-in-audio-yes-we-exist/
Faubio, J. D., & Marcus, G. E. (2009). Fieldwork is not what it used to be: Learning anthropology’s method in a time of transition. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Geertz, C. (1988). Works and lives: The anthropologist as author. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Harris, M., & Rapport, N. (2016). Reflections on imagination: Human capacity and ethnographic method. London/New York: Routledge.
Horst, H. A. (2016). Being in fieldwork: Collaboration, digital media and ethnographic practice. In R. Sanjek & S. W. Tratner (Eds.), EFieldnotes: The makings of anthropology in the digital world (pp. 153–170). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Jackson, M. (2010). From anxiety to method in anthropological fieldwork: An appraisal of George Devereux’s enduring ideas. In J. Davies & D. Spencer (Eds.), Emotions in the field: The psychology and anthropology of fieldwork experience (pp. 35–55). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Kisliuk, M. (2008). (Un)doing fieldwork: Sharing songs, sharing lives. In G. F. Barz & T. J. Cooley (Eds.), Shadows in the field: New perspectives for fieldwork in ethnomusicology (pp. 183–206). New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kolb, D. A., & Fry, R. (1975). Toward an applied theory of experiential learning. In C. Cooper (Ed.), Theories of group process. London: John Wiley.
Lai, A. E. (1998). Some experiences and issues of cross-cultural fieldwork in Singapore. In P. P. H. Lim, C. G. Kwa, & J. Morrison (Eds.), Oral history in Southeast Asia: Theory and method (pp. 98–115). Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
Lauzen, M. M. (2009). The celluloid ceiling II: Production design, production management, sound design, key grips, and gaffers. The Center for the Study of Women in Television and Film, School of Theatre, Television and Film, San Diego State University, California, USA.
Lim, P. P. H., Kwa, C. G., & Morrison, J. (Eds.). (1998). Oral history in Southeast Asia: Theory and method. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
Lunn, J. (Ed.). (2014). Fieldwork in the global south: Ethical challenges and dilemmas. London: Routledge.
Manilowski, B. (1922). Argonauts of the Western Pacific. Reprinted in 2002 by Routledge.
Marcus, G. (Ed.). (1999). Critical anthropology now: Unexpected contexts, shifting constituencies, changing agendas. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.
Marcus, G., & Fischer, M. (1999). Anthropology as cultural critique: An experimental moment in the human sciences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mascarenhas-Keyes, S. (1975). The Native Anthropologist: Constraints and Strategies in Research. In A. Beteille & T. N. Madan (Eds.), Anthropology at Home. Delhi: Vikas Publishing House.
Mead, M. (1977). Sex and temperament in three primitive societies. London/Henley: Routledge/Kegan Paul.
Myerhoff, B., & Ruby, J. (Eds.). (1982). The cracked mirror: Reflexive perspectives in anthropology. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Nazaruk, M. (2011). Reflexivity in anthropological discourse analysis. Anthropological Notebooks, 17(1), 73–83.
Ortner, S. B. (1995). Resistance and the problem of ethnographic refusal. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 37(1), 173–193.
Ortner, S. B. (2006). Anthropology and social theory: culture, power and the acting subject. Durham: Duke University Press.
Parkin, D. (2000). Epilogue: Fieldwork unfolding. In P. Dresch, W. James, & D. J. Parkin (Eds.), Anthropologists in a wider world: Essays on field research (pp. 259–273). New York/Oxford: Berghahn Books.
Raja, P. (2017, January 26). Sonic Multiplicity: Reflections on “Sounds of Singapore.” Arts Equator. Retrieved from https://artsequator.com/sounds-of-singapore/
Reddy, D. S. (2009). Caught! The predicaments of ethnography of collaboration. In J. D. Faubio & G. E. Marcus (Eds.), Fieldwork is not what it used to be: Learning anthropology’s method in a time of transition (pp. 89–113). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Rice, T. (2008). Toward a mediation of field methods and field experience in ethnomusicology. In G. F. Barz & T. J. Cooley (Eds.), Shadows in the field: New perspectives for fieldwork in ethnomusicology (pp. 42–62). New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sanjek, R., & Tratner, S. W. (Eds.). (2006). EFieldnotes: The makings of anthropology in the digital world. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Smith, M. K. (2001, 2010). David A. Kolb on experiential learning. The encyclopedia of informal education. Retrieved from http://infed.org/mobi/david-a-kolb-on-experiential-learning/
Srinivas, M. N., Shah, A. M., & Ramaswamy, E. A. (Eds.). (1979). The fieldworker and the field: Problems and challenges in sociological investigation. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
UNESCO-NIE CARE (Centre for Arts Research in Education). (2017). Sounds of Singapore [Video File]. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.unesco-care.nie.edu.sg/projects/contemporary-identity-singapore-musicians-interpretations-and-translations-within-historica
Wolf, M. (1992). A thrice-told tale: Feminism, postmodernism and ethnographic responsibility. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lizeray, J.YM. (2018). Fieldwork in Singapore’s Music Scene: Reflections and Dimensions to Explore. In: Semionauts of Tradition. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1011-9_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1011-9_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-1010-2
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-1011-9
eBook Packages: Literature, Cultural and Media StudiesLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)