On Primacy of the Subject– Kaitlin McDermott

These two short videos highlighted the most prominent idea that I have garnered thus far from the Telling True Stories readings: the subject, and his or her comfort, consent, and clarity of shared narrative, is of utmost importance to story tellers and ethnographers. Though the point may seem obvious, it is important to recognize and to understand fully, as it remains the difference between treating an individual with a story to tell as such versus treating them as a story fitting into a larger narrative, and therefore as less than a unique human with a unique human experience to share. Brandon Stanton comments on this phenomenon when he noted in the video that he did not, “want to be the best at telling the story of humanity,” but rather wanted to focus his energies on telling the effective, truthful, and meaningful accounts of the people stood in front of him. In this way, Stanton comments on his own investigative standard in the HONY series, and emphasizes further, in conjunction with the authors that we have read so far, the primacy of the fair treatment of the subject above all else in ethnographic work.

Even though I have learned about ethnography in the past, the “Getting People to Talk” video taught a number of unexpected lessons. The first shift in my view occurred when one of the “expert” ethnographers stated that ethnography was not a set of beliefs, but rather a “philosophical observation.” In my mind, this triggered a discourse regarding the accepted definition of ethnography, including what can and cannot be classified as ethnography, and what purpose there is in deeming the practice a philosophical enterprise as opposed to a checklist of techniques. After watching the video and thinking more on the topic, I think I understand better the linguistic and practical divide between the two ideas. Classifying ethnography as a philosophical technique by which to learn more intimately the behaviors, feelings, and thoughts of a subject allows for greater latitude in investigation. If a researcher was to follow strictly a checklist of steps or functions to fulfill in an interview setting, it is possible that there would be difficulty connecting and building rapport between interviewer and subject because the conversational environment of a specific situation may not be conducive to certain methods of discussion. I think of this most clearly with the differentiation in technique noted in the video between the approach to “extreme users” and the “fly on the wall” technique. With a checklist mentality, it seems unlikely to me that the form of participant observation necessary to understand and observe the behavior of extreme users, many of whom have internalized their study-able behaviors, would exist. Further, I think that the benefit to consideration of ethnographic pursuits in a philosophical framework exists in the gained ability of researchers to craft more nuanced messages and statements about the human condition.

Though I understand better how ethnography should work on a practical level, I do still have questions about the practice and how to implement some of the suggestions for successful ethnography in my own policy project. Touched on in the shorter video was the idea that people craft responses that are not entirely truthful. Stanton responded to this by saying that as he has become more known in New York, more people seem inclined to fabricate accounts; however, coinciding with this rise, Stanton had become much better at interviewing and picking out lies. This is all fine and well for HONY and for Stanton, but for my purposes, as a relatively unskilled interviewer, I am wondering how I must deal with statements that seem less than true and additionally how I should go about securing interviews (re: that montage at the beginning of the IIT video–street rejection in NYC is real). Without the prestige of a project like HONY it seems like the only real way to get this done is to put in serious legwork and hope for the cooperation of those around you. And then the real work—dealing with a multi-dimensional, flawed subject who may breathe politically correct sentiments and lies—begins.