“Still-Life: Representations and Silences in the Participant Observer Role”

Brenda Jo Bruggemann

This article presented an interesting and negative approach to ethnographic research. I use the word negative because the researcher seems dissatisfied with her work even though it was a positive experience in regards to the friends and connections she made while doing her work. I can imagine that it would be difficult when one is thrust into someone’s classroom without their approval. It would be a hard pill to swallow when you are told that a person is going to come into your classroom and study your students and how you interact with them without asking if that is acceptable to you. Even then I was shocked to read in her notes of the specific incident of outright hostility and rudeness that she encountered at a faculty workshop. In the notes, a parent of a student from the school described the school as “occupied territory” with hearing faculty overseeing deaf students (36). Does this mean that this faculty had a history of unfriendliness and, if so, why?

What does one do when the subject that one is trying to study is overly emotional in either a positive or a negative way? An example of positive emotions that she had a problem with was the friendly relationship that she developed with Charles and Anna. Can a researcher make accurate and objective observations about people that they are emotionally invested in? Brueggemann wrote that she was having difficulty reworking her piece on Anna for reasons of miscommunication because the reviewers saw Anna’s story differently than Brueggmann had intended. From her relationship with these two students she was able to get more emotional testimony from them and, I think, it was valuable information about their experience that an uninvolved researcher wouldn’t have received.

The negative emotions I am referring to are those of the faculty that seemed to constantly resent her position. To understand this situation fully I think we would have to know the exact details of how she was introduced to the school and the connections that got her into the program. I would like to think that this was an isolated incident of unprofessionalism and rudeness but I think that some details are lacking or maybe I am naive in thinking that there has to be a history of events that leads to the sort of open hostility she found.

I found her point of ownership of a students experience intriguing.  It is very arrogant to think that we can retell their story in a better or at least more insightful way than they themselves can tell it. In the end of the article she mentioned that Charles and Anna were taking an active interest in her observations of them and were wanting to know if she had learned anything from their experience. In making them a part of the research in this way she was validating their experience( and possibly giving them ownership) but again I question how accurate her observations were knowing that they were her friends and wanted to see the results.

That brings me to another point that I question. How can we not skew our research when we know that those being observed are going to see the end report? What if the results show the school in a negative light? I know that we must try to present things accurately and as objectively as possible but that must be trying knowing that it will not be well received.