Challenge Question

Jeff Titon writes that "The problem with being a participant observer is that you sometimes know too much. It is like not knowing the forest for the trees: the closer you are to a situation, the less of an overall view you have, and in order to address your project to an outside reader, you will need to imagine yourself an outsider, too" (2002. Worlds of Music. New York: Schirmer). Titon focuses on the study's audience, but what style of ethnography is most beneficial to the musical culture itself? Is the final product of ethnography really just a written project aimed at an "outside reader"?

I believe that efficiency in producing ethnographic research that benefits the culture of study itself is rooted in authenticity and ethics. In Kofi Agawu's article Representing African Music, he discusses the ethics of representation. In short, Agawu concludes that maintaining an ethical outlook while conducting research is one step to presenting ethnography that is “honest” to the culture of study. The definition of what is ethical is circumstantial, because it changes depending on the culture, atmosphere, and context of study. Agawu does site that “deception” can be somewhat of a necessary evil in ethnography when it comes obtaining certain materials of study crucial to the project, but the use of “deception” in research is just as circumstantial as considering ethics. In chapter 10 of IN: Worlds of Music, Jeff Titon discusses ethics as an important aspect of ethnography. He states, “...think carefully about the impact of what you propose to do. Always ask permission. Understand that people have legal rights to privacy and to how they look, what they say, and what they sing... be honest with yourself and with the people you study...” The importance of respecting the culture of study is clear in Titon's statement. First and foremost, a person's image and privacy must be respected and not exploited against their will. Ethics is one step toward benefiting a culture while conducting ethnography.

Titon uses the oxymoron participant-observer to denote a helpful way for producing research that is more authentic. In Gregory Barz's article Confronting the Fieldnote in and Out of the Field, he explores the act of being a participant-observer and how this practice should be documented in research. A researcher must conduct his/her studies both while immersed in the culture and on the sidelines. Efficiently recording research as a participant is linked to the phenomenon of epoche'. Epoche', the act of releasing oneself totally to the moment without inhibition, allows one to really absorb their experiences in a culture. Recording one's feelings and actions in moments of epoche' relays a side to the research unable to be obtained by mere observation. Becoming a participant-observer is one step toward producing research that is more authentic.

The audience of ethnography/ ethnomusicology can most readily be separated into two groups, ethnographers/ ethnomusicologist and “other.” In most cases, people who belong to the culture of study are grouped into the “other” category and regarded as such. Regardless of how ethically one interacts with the culture of study or how authentically the study is portrayed , the relaying of research materials to an audience all comes down to the writing. Who is the reader? Like most research, ethnographic and ethnomusicology studies cater to the esoteric. Without a doubt, writing style and terminology will be most relatable to researchers in the same nook. Whether or not this phenomenon is beneficial to the culture of study depends on the circumstances. Titon talks about providing a copy and explanation of the research to people involved in the study. He suggests that this is an ethical way to inform the culture itself regardless for whom the research was intended.