Now that you're nearly on your way with your fieldworking project, it's prudent to look at your three fieldworking "mentor texts"--The Mole People, Friday Night at Iowa 80, and House for the Homeless--to carefully examine how these researchers (1) framed their research (the WHO, WHERE and the WHY); (2) carried out their research (WHEN & HOW); (3) and found once they synthesized and analyzed their data (WHAT).
For this weekend's blog post, look over the chart I asked you to make for class, where you were to delineate each fieldworker's relationship to their site (subjectivities), methods for data collection, and findings. Also, think about Jennifer Toth's account of her research, especially given what happened to her as a result of her research. Think about how some of the truckers were suspicious of Rick Zollo as he asked what seemed like probing questions. Think about how Ivana Nicolic was inspired by her curiosity to begin volunteering at the homeless shelter.
Each researcher developed a relationship with their site and the people there. Each relationship was different, but nonetheless, this kind of research requires social interaction, bravery, authentic inquiry (to motivate that bravery!), and a personal investment of some sort.
Share with us your reflections on the three researcher's:
1. subjectivities in regard to their site and subculture
2. processes of cultivating participants and collecting information (what sources did you notice?)
3. findings...what assertions is the researcher able to make by the end of the study, based on the data they collected?
WHAT DID YOU NOTICE? I'm most interested in how your posts will differ from one another, so please don't feel like you must deliver to me all the "right" answers wrapped with a tight bow. Share with us your impressions, your takeaways, and whatever stuck out for you (relative to my questions above!) Knowing that you'll be engaging in this same kind of research should bring all sorts of things to the surface for you as you revisit these mentor texts.
Although each of the 3 authors had the same purpose, their methods were very different. I feel the most passionate about writing about Mole People, just because it was the longest piece and the most interesting. Toth had no previous knowledge about the tunnels, but I think she might have had some previous connections. Her piece scared me the most… I feel like she took her research too far. To me, it sounded a little like a fiction piece of writing. It was hard to connect with her because I knew I would never be that brave or stupid depending how you look at it. I think she also might have not considered all perspectives of the homeless underground, and became too connected with them. She even admits to sometimes caring a little too much. This applies to how she cultivated participants and collected information. I would not put my life on the line, for my field working study. I related more to the Iowa 80 and House for the Homeless pieces more because I thought their field working was more realistic. All 3 field working studies found a good amount of information, through talking with people and observing the environments. I think it was interesting how the author of House for the Homeless was almost an insider. She was not homeless herself, but an active volunteer. This made it easier to interview people, but it would be hard to remove yourself from an environment you work in to study it subjectively. Rick Zollo was not an insider but hung out around the truck stop occasionally. Because he didn’t have any connections or worked there, I feel like we read a “more real” response from the people. People are naturally suspicious of people who they don’t know who are trying to interview and question them. Toth received some suspicion, but the volunteer at the homeless shelter did not get as much suspicion. That is one example of a difference it makes being an insider or outsider. Overall, I’d consider all 3 field working studies a success because they did get a lot of research, but it’s interesting to look at what happened after their studies. Zollo and the volunteer for the homeless seemed to continue their lives normally, while Toth had to move out of New York, had consistent nightmares, and was being threatened to death by one of the people she initially trusted, Blade. That is why I think Toth took hers a little too far, because it impacted her life way too much. This thorough of a study of a new or familiar environment may cause you to look at some things differently, but it shouldn’t affect you as much as it did for Toth. Overall it was a nice comparison to look at all 3 different results. I found it very helpful to look at the different methods and results of their field working studies.
ReplyDeleteKatie: Thank you for getting us started! Two things I find most engaging about what you've written are how you describe Toth's writing like "fiction." I wonder if that's due to her thick description (vivid images) or to the extremity of her story sometimes (like, "that can't possible be real! It has to be fiction!"). It does seem like she pushes the boundaries between what's the truth and what makes for compelling reading...these are the attributes of a journalist, someone charged with writing a story that "hooks" readers, not someone charged with presenting the stories of people in a dignified and honestly subjective manner. The second point I find interesting is this: "I think it was interesting how the author of House for the Homeless was almost an insider. She was not homeless herself, but an active volunteer. This made it easier to interview people, but it would be hard to remove yourself from an environment you work in to study it subjectively." Ivana Nikolic was what we call a "participant observer," someone who belongs in the fieldsite but also is observing and collecting data. Teachers who study their own classrooms are participant observers, for instance. You've correctly identified the dilemma of participant observers, which is why I've cautioned all of you about studying people and places you know; it's difficult to present an "honest" portrait of people with whom you've had a prior relationship! Your relationship with them colors your portrayal. The same goes for places. So...our subjectivities are the ideas, opinions, perspectives, judgments we already have about people and places before we encounter them. It is nearly impossible to remove our subjectivities from our research, which is why it's important that we write about them and "come out" about them to our reading audience!
DeleteJennifer Toth has got guts. She plunged right into something so dangerous and outside of her element that she would have to be incredibly brave. Toth was able to uncover so much new information that it seemed worth it for most of the book, until the end when she leaves New York for fear of being killed. I wonder what finally pushed her to get out—she didn’t seem to be overly bothered when she knew her life was in danger in the tunnels. Maybe because it was someone who knew a lot about her and was able to figure out her address and phone number: I’d be pretty scared myself. Toth grew up in St. Louis and was not originally used to the homeless scene of New York City. She must have had that much of a harder time trying to become acquainted with the tunnels. Toth must have read up on the life underground before she went down, but I’m sure you can’t really prepare yourself for what you experience down there. I was glad that she used the police as well as the underground homeless to collect information for her research. If she had just gone to one or the other, she wouldn’t have gotten the full scoop from either. Thanks to spending time with both, she uncovered a lot of excellent information. She portrayed to me something that I had never imagined: people living below the streets of New York City. She showed the audience that there is more going on underneath us than we realize. One of the most shocking things for me was that children live down there. Toth also revealed something I found bewildering: many of the underground homeless, prefer to be down there. I questioned this, but Toth seemed to believe this was because that was what they had grown accustomed to and it would be hard for them to get back into the swing of things in the aboveground. This was their home now; it was where they felt they belonged.
ReplyDeleteRick Zollo’s approach to his fieldwork at the Iowa 80 seemed kind of strange to me. I found he was distant when he was taking notes while eating his dinner, but then he would ask questions of the truckers and when right up in their faces. His questions weren’t taken very well by all of the truckers, most likely due to his previous aloofness. They did eventually warm up to him enough to tell him their personal stories and views—especially those involving the changing trucking life. All of the truckers can share what problems they find with new policies as well as the ones that have been improved. This is a community setting, and this truck stop is their town hall.
Out of the three researchers, I felt that Ivana Nicolic was the closest thing to an “insider” we had. Her family had not been very well off at the beginning, but they were able to build themselves up. Nicolic had a strong connection to her field site, which is very important. She was desperate to explore this world in depth and wanted to find out more about the life of the homeless. She was excited about her work and that made the people she was interviewing more receptive to what she was doing. They didn’t mind answering questions, which is important when you are looking for very personal information. One thing that made me question her methods was the homeless shelter she chose. The shelter was “nicer” than others due to the people not being allowed to drink or use drugs. I wonder if her experiences may have been different if she had gone to a less strict shelter or one in an even worse part of town. Nicolic discovered that most of the people had aspirations that they hoped to fulfill in the future. They also wanted to stop having to depend on others and get back on their feet, but this would be a severe struggle.
Thank you, Meghan! I like this line from your post, in reference to Toth, "She showed the audience that there is more going on underneath us than we realize," and I think it applies to each of the studies. In a way, there's an underground in the subculture of truckers, too, an underground that Zollo introduces (and sort of demonstrates) to us, those who don't follow the rules (keeping a true log book, mandated number of hours of rest, etc), who traffic in contraband, who are wary of the law, who are skeptical of people asking questions. In homeless shelters, there also seems to be an 'underneath," as you point out (well, as Nikolic points out). The underneath is those homeless who are addicted to substances, those who can't seem to help themselves. Even within subcultures, there are striations within society...we split into factions, based on subtle differences. Strange, isn't it?
DeleteThe three field working projects, Iowa 80, House for the homeless, and Mole People are all very similar while also being vastly different. For example, all three of these field-working projects were overall successful in examining their place. The field-working project that sticks out to me the most is Jennifer Toth’s ‘Mole People’. I think this is because Toth tells her project in an almost fictional sense so it seems like a piece of fiction instead of a long time research project. This piece was the most enjoyable for me to read because I enjoyed reading about everyone’s story and their life and why the eventually ended up in the tunnels. This is most likely because I enjoy hearing about people’s past lives and what their family traditions were when they children- and little bits of information about their past. However entertaining her book ended up being though, I think her methods of gathering information were not orthodox. She willingly put herself in grave danger multiple times, even going as far as not listening to her friends in the tunnel and going into what they called ‘the devils den’. In the end she had to end her field-working project and move away from New York City because one of her former friends Blade was after her and wanted to murder her. She became to attach to her subjects and the people in the tunnels, which affected her work and writing.
ReplyDeleteWhile Iowa 80 was not as long term as Mole People, it was still a successful field-working project and was able to delve into the life and culture at Iowa 80. However, where as Toth was able to make the homeless people at ease with her presence most of the time, Rick Zollo seemed to put the truckers on edge when he interviewed them. He did not seem to have a very good ability to connect with the people he was observing causing him to be seen clearly as an outsider. Jennifer Toth was able to blend in to the culture in the tunnels. Zollo ate the food at Iowa 80, but he was taking notes, which did not seem to do well with the truckers in the truck stop. I also felt that by making the truckers uncomfortable, Zollo was not able to gather as much information as possible when interviewing people. He was able to get a considerable amount of information but I feel that he could have dug deeper into why the truckers enjoyed coming to Iowa 80 or if this truck stop held a deeper meaning to them.
Out of the three fieldworkers, the closet we get to an insider is Ivana Nicoli. She did her field-working project on ‘Home for the homeless’, which is a homeless shelter. At the age of 13 her mother, brother and herself had to leave their home and they were then forced to live in homeless shelters. She has had to start her life over twice from the beginning so she knows what it is like for the people she interviews in this shelter and she can connect with them on the deepest level since she has actually experienced what these people have been through. All three of these field-working projects have their weakness and strong points, however it is safe to say that all three were successful in finding out the cultur
Thank you, Ava. I am most engaged with this passage from your post: "where as Toth was able to make the homeless people at ease with her presence most of the time, Rick Zollo seemed to put the truckers on edge when he interviewed them. He did not seem to have a very good ability to connect with the people he was observing causing him to be seen clearly as an outsider." This is an astute observation about the methods and body language and approachability of the researchers and begs the question: Are you going to be awkward or will you put your participants at ease? (you as in "you guys" not "you, Ava"). You are correct in concluding that the more comfortable you're able to make your participants, the more eagerly they will welcome you into the subculture, the inner circle, the insiders. The more off-putting you are, whether it's from too much giggling or too much silence, the better chance you have of being deemed an outsider and unworthy of too much "inside information." So, yes, the personality of the researcher has A LOT to do with the quality of social science research.
DeleteThe three researchers, Jennifer Toth, Rick Sollo, and Ivana Nikolic, subjectivities differ yet collided because it was mostly done out of unreserved curiosity. Thoth was a graduate student who became aware of the “mole people” through the stories of a little girl who she tutored. Her only previous involvement with homeless had been volunteering at soup kitchens, and she view them as “wild and frightening”. She was basically ignorant to their world, and didn’t have any experienced that related her to them. Yet she became too involved with some of their lives it affected her psychologically and physically. Her personal feelings got involved in her research leading her to do dangerous things along the research process. She used many methods throughout her research, interviews, historical research, governmental records, own explorations, police records, and interviews of governmental programs that help the homeless. Rick Sollo’s research didn’t affect him in such an emotional level as it did to Toth, neither had he had previous experiences to which he could relate to the truckers. His research was done out of pure curiosity and intrigue. His research was also less intent than Toth’s because he only used interviews and some background research. Nikolic started her research out of guilt and because she could relate to the homeless who lived in the shelters. Her research was mostly personal and it was based on just interviews and observations. She did not get too involved, but she got closed enough to have some questions answer. I personally think that Toth was an insider, because she basically was involved in their lives, even though she tried not to. While Sollo was a completely outsider, he barely got some people talking and even so they were hesitant to answer because they though he was part of the government trying to unveil their secrets about the logbooks. Nikolic was also an insider, because she volunteer at the shelter and had the opportunity to observed them closely, share with them, and had similar experience that brought her closer to understanding them better. Of the 3 researchers Toth was the one most impacted by her research because of her involvement, but I like hers the best because she put her heart, soul and a lot of work into it. She also took risks. I’m the type of person that thinks that you need to risk yourself to gain meaningful experiences. That way she uncovered the truth, and sadly the truth is painful, the more aware you are the more your life changes. That’s what happened to her. I’m not saying the other researches did a bad job, they were actually more professional than Toth, and got the job done, but to me that is not enough. After reading their researches, I have a clear picture of how it might turn out to be, but I’m also left with questions, how personal will my research be, and how much will it affect me? I hope it has a positive impact on my life, and I hope to gain new perspectives and views. I’m eager to begin this project.
ReplyDeleteSilvia! Your eagerness is palpable and contagious. Thank you! I love so many lines that you've written here, among them this: "She used many methods throughout her research, interviews, historical research, governmental records, own explorations, police records, and interviews of governmental programs that help the homeless." I so very much appreciate your attending to the types of data Toth collected during her research adventure. She's providing you with good modeling for your own study--multiple sources of data leads to triangulation and validation (or contradiction and paradox!). I urge you to collect artifacts, historical documents, and personal anecdotes from the clients/participants in your own fieldsite. I'm sure it'll be a place rich with data. And, I'm sure it will strike some personal chords for you and also that you will be affected by it, though maybe not obviously so at first. And, to conclude, I love, love, love this passage, Silvia, and think it summarizes part of your life perspective: "I like hers the best because she put her heart, soul and a lot of work into it. She also took risks. I’m the type of person that thinks that you need to risk yourself to gain meaningful experiences. That way she uncovered the truth, and sadly the truth is painful, the more aware you are the more your life changes." YES!
DeleteI first took a look at Jennifer Toth, the researcher who wrote "The Mole People." The first thing to say about Toth is that she's coming from the perspective of an extreme outsider, as most people in her scenario would be. I noticed that she was extremely cautious and biased against the people in tunnels. I say that without any negativity as I believe even the people in the tunnels themselves were extremely careful around their neighbors, but there is no denying that her cautious bias did have an effect on the research, as courageous as she was to have gone that far into the communities. Her depiction of "Satan" particularly was one where her caution comes out. While most people in the tunnels are portrayed by Toth to be very relatable and human, she spared no expense in making this character seem as evil as the legends say him to be. Toth got most of her data straight from the people living in the tunnels themselves, as well as the New York Transit Authority. As for Toth's findings, she seemed to portray the tunnel people in a very human light save for a few examples, I also thought it was interesting that she pointed out how many would rather live in the tunnels than in the shelters. She's able to also make the assertion through personal experience that there are vast communities living in the tunnels and food scarcity is not the biggest of their problems down there. One interesting point was the relationship between some of the Graffiti artists and the tunnel people, and how sometimes they would make works specifically for the people living in the tunnels. The second researcher to take a look at is Rick Zollo who wrote "Iowa 80." Much like Toth, Zollo was coming from an outsider's perspective, and was a very persistant outsider at that. I did notice that Zollo was mainly interested in the truckers and not their trucks. He seemed to focus his study on the trucker's personal lives and opinions on the job rather than the details of the rigs which take them across the country. I did notice that Zollo included dissenting opinions in his piece, rather than leave out a single contradictory account he included it and made it seem just as valid an opinion as the others that were presented. Zollo's data came from the employees and some of the truckers, but also a few books which had been written about the American trucker that he used as reference. I thought this was interesting as it assumes the trucker culture of Iowa 80 is the same as the books which focused on the bigger picture. Zollo seemed to portray the conclusion that the business has gotten on the nerves of many truckers in the last decade or so, only one veteran trucker disagrees with this, and most of the contention is over the subject of their logbooks. He includes mostly everything he can in his study so we also see his failures to talk to certain truckers. By leaving nothing out we can see how many truckers are suspicious of him and believe he might be from their company and checking up on them. Zollo had to go out of his way and stake out various truckers before deciding to approach them for a conversation.
ReplyDeleteThe final researcher to observe is Ivana Nicolic who wrote the piece, "House for the Homeless." I can say I was honestly slightly confused about the perspective which Nicolic was coming from, on one hand I remember her asking her friends for their conceptions about the homeless and how she didn't know much about them, but on the other her background as a refugee and her own words of identification seem to suggest she's been in a similar situation before. I considered her an outsider to the culture, but only barely. The interesting part about Nicolic's study was that she was an active participant for the duration of her study. This definitely skewed the report a bit just by the nature of her having to work at the soup kitchen while also studying the people there. Her duties certaintly made it a bit more personal, but that was in the nature of Nicolic's piece from the start. She concludes by saying that the research was also about herself, and allowed her to see her past in a new light. She was very careful with her questions due to not wanting to open up old wounds for the homeless, and due to this we don't get the full story of course, but she is considering morality in her research. She got the majority of her information first from her American friends, and mainly from the homeless people she spoke to at the center as well as the full time staff members there. In the end Nicolic discovers that the homeless are not as hopeless as she initially thought they were. She was surprised to find that many were friendly and she could hold intelligent conversations with a good number of them. Her piece was much about her in relation to others though, especially the focus she put on the girl named Hope in the end which she spent a good time studying and comparing to herself. Overall from these researchers I took away that different levels of ethics and morals will yield different results. It seemed to me that Nicolic was so concerned about her questions that we do not learn as much as the other two. On the opposite end it seemed that Zollo went out of his way to pressure people to answer questions, gained some insight, but also some opposition to his nosey-ness as a result. I feel as though Toth represents a middle ground. She was unafraid of asking questions and going out of her way to research, but could call it quits and trust good advice if a situation became too testy or too dangerous such as when she avoided certain areas and left town after threats from Blade. (Had to do two replies due to length)
DeleteCam! Thank you for your thorough reply! I appreciate how you've addressed each study here specifically and how you've taken the time to differentiate each researcher's decision making when it came to ethics and perspective-taking and representation of participants. I also appreciate that you mentioned Zollo's use of secondary sources, something Toth also uses to a great extent. You state, "Zollo's data came from the employees and some of the truckers, but also a few books which had been written about the American trucker that he used as reference. I thought this was interesting as it assumes the trucker culture of Iowa 80 is the same as the books which focused on the bigger picture." I like how you say "the bigger picture," recognizing that there a truck stop and then there is the subculture of truck stops. One is singular and represents a place in time and space, and one is plural and represents both physical places and conceptual ideas, rooted in share cultural norm and mythologies. Truck stops are vastly American, we think, but do other countries have colorful kinds of truck stops, one stop shopping for all a long hauler's needs? Are there truck stops across the Trans-Siberian Highway? Zollo looks at one truck stop in one place in one point in time with one group of particular people. Can he generalize to all truck stops? Probably not...and that's one of the hard truths of social science research...the more descriptive it is, the more local it is, the more it's almost impossible to generalize. And, maybe that's the point...???? Culture is not generalizable...it's local. It's particular. It's idiosyncratic. It's place-based.
DeleteJennifier Toth's The Mole People, Rick Zollo's Iowa 80 and Ivana Nikolic's House for the Homeless differed in many ways. In The Mole People, Jennifer Toth was an outsider. She knew about the mole people and naturally, she was curious but outside of that she was not a part of their community in any way. Her primary source of interviews was interviews with the homeless and those associated with them, and through this she investigated many of the individual communities that make up the homeless. By investigating and even venturing down into the tunnels, she uncovered a great deal about the mole people and their lifestyle. Although I don't necessarily agree with her methods of research, I will admit that they were effective. She found out a number of things that many people would never know unless they pushed their limits and researched in the way that she did. However, she may have still gone a little too far. What concerns me is that she put herself in immensely dangerous situations showing that she has a real lack of self preservation. She went down into the tunnels with complete strangers and in the end, because of this she was forced to move away because her life was actually in danger. Luckily, Zollo and Nikolic did not go to nearly this kind of an extreme. In Iowa 80, Zollo also has the perspective of an outsider. He talked to the truckers and a waitress, but seemed to get most of his information from a man that seemed to have a lot of knowledge about the truck stop. He was ultimately successful in finding out information on the truck stop, but in the end his research methods also had certain flaws. Many of the truckers were uncomfortable and didn't necessarily want to talk to him because he made them suspicious and uncomfortable. This is a real problem, because if he hadn't made them so unwilling to talk, then he would probably have gotten even more information than he did. In House for the Homeless, Ivana Nikolic had a perspective that was nearly that of an insider. She interviewed the people in the homeless shelter and talked to the staff members. She was sensitive and tried not to ask the wrong questions, but in a way I feel that this may have taken away from the research because she didn't find out everything due to the questions she didn't ask, although the information that she did gather was significant enough.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that each of the writers of the three pieces had in common was that they were all written from outsider perspectives. For they all emerged themselves into a place that they were not entirely apart of. They each had an interest in what they focused on and used that interest to drive their field study. I personally found Jennifer Toth's piece to be the most interesting, due to the fact that she put herself on the line for her study. To some this might be a bit extreme but to me it shows passion, but also how much she cared about the mole people and disprove the stereotypes about them.
ReplyDelete“particularly the emphasis on the self as part of the research process”(FieldWorking23). The main sources of data for each of the field work projects was indeed the self. For the main ways of collecting data was studying the looks and feelings of their field site, and interviewing those who were heavily involved in said site.
The main thing I found that was throughout all the pieces was that they all worked to disprove the stereo types. For example in the Mole People , Jennifer Toth proved time and time again that the homeless people said that they would rather live in the tunnels. This is something that no one could have guessed, which is one of the reasons I believe Jeniffer Toth decided to write the book, it was a way for her to help the mole people by informing the public about their lives and feelings.
The biggest things that jumped out at me while reading these three texts were the relationships the fieldworkers had with the subcultures they were studying and how the subculture's view of the interviewers changed the way the fieldworkers interacted with the subculture. Firstly, in Jennifer Toth's Mole People, Toth started out quite hesitant and perhaps a bit afraid of the underground homeless she was hoping to learn about. After Toth had been studying this culture for a while, she became much more open to them and learned that many of them were caring, loving, and friendly. After noticing that many of the underground community, such as Bernard, were protective, respectful, and moral men and women, Toth began to open up to the community and felt much more at ease spending time with them and asking questions of them. This same feeling of welcomeness wasn't exactly evident in Rick Zollo's adventures at Iowa 80. Being an outside like Toth, Zollo knew there were boundaries that he had to carefully toe if he were to get the information he sought for his study. While interviewing the truckers of Iowa 80, Zollo quickly realized that there were questions that were off limits. He knew that many of the truckers he spoke to, and even some of the staff, had a resentment against him because he was a four-wheeler, and even worse, a possible government check in man. Realizing that he was at odds with many of his subjects, Zollo knew to cut some questions from his interviews that pertained to the business side of trucking. Though he seemed very curious about some of the more regimented aspects of being a trucker, he recognized that asking such questions would jeopardize his chance to collect any data at all for his study. Making due with what he could, Zollo went on to collect some great data from the folks who spent a friday night at the Iowa 80 and wrote a very interesting piece about what he found there. Lastly, Ivana Nikolic's relationship with the homeless that she volunteered with seemed to be the most interesting to me. Being Bosnian war refugee, Nikolic can sympathize with the people she is studying and seems to have a much closer and almost more intimate relationship with them than Toth or Zollo were able to have. Still knowing that her struggles differed from those of the homeless in the Ramsey House, Nikolic knew that many of the folks she talked to would be hesitant to talk about their pasts.Because of this, she focused something that she knew all of her subjects had in common; hope. Nikolic's concentration on hope and the goals of everyone in the Ramsey House to move on to a better life was very touching to read about considering she had once been a person of very little worldly possessions but hope. In seeing how these three authors acted and reacted around the subcultures they were studying, I feel as though I have an inside view as to how to respectfully treat the people and places I wish to study and know how to respectfully conduct fieldwork in a manner that is informative, yet not intrusive.
ReplyDeleteFor the Mole People and Iowa 80, Toth and Zollo were complete outsiders to their field site, but Nikolic had a sense of her field site. Nikolic had been a refugee for eight years so she knew what is was like to be homeless. While Nikolic's research was more about herself Toth and Zollo jumped into fields they had never witnessed before. Toth’s field site gave the rest of the outsiders into the mole people’s lives, and she found answers to a lot of people’s questions. Zollo was really interested in finding out the reason why the truckers really liked going to Iowa 80 so he decided to immerse himself in the truck driver culture. All three field site data mostly were interviews from the insiders. In mole people Jennifer Toth interviewed a lot of people who lived in the tunnels, and she interviewed people from different parts of the tunnels. She asked a lot of people about other tunnel dwellers and for most I believe that the answers could have varied depending on who she was talking to. Although Jennifer Toth got a lot of great information her method was completely reckless. She went into the tunnels alone sometimes and although she knew some good people, that didn’t mean they were all good, especially when she brought herself right into the Dark Angel’s cave. Toth brought herself right into their culture, but she was not safe especially when she was forced to leave because Blade was threatening her. I believe that Toth really captured the mole people culture but her ways were too extreme. For Zollo and Nikolic, their information was much more reasonable to come by, and their topics were something they were truly interested in. Zollo interviewed a wide variety of people at Iowa 80. Zollo was able to question the truckers, the waitresses and the man who really provided him with the whole idea of what truck driving is all about. Zollo’s research focused on the type of work that the drivers do, like the logbooks that they have to keep, and he also researched the area around Iowa 80 and experienced what that was like. The one thing that I really liked about Zollo’s work is that he really tried to be part of their culture, like ordering the one thing that truckers eat. Although many drivers were skeptical of talking to Zollo I believe he received a well-rounded picture of what Iowa 80 was about. I do feel however his research became more about what the truckers do than what Iowa 80 was about. Nikolic really understood what her topic was, and she ultimately learned a lot about herself. She knew where to draw the line when talking to the homeless people, but yet she was still able to get enough information to really understand the people there and herself. Through their research I believe all three achieved their goals and answered the questions they had about their field site. Toth was able to see that the mole people weren’t terrible like most people believed they were. She was able to talk to them and realize that some got caught in the world of drugs but some just had those hardships that they couldn’t get past and that led them towards the tunnels. Zollo was able to confirm that Iowa 80 was a kind of community where most truck drivers come to spend their time. He witnessed all of the customers talking and one calling Iowa 80 his “home away from home” which is exactly the thing Zollo wanted to find. Nikolic found out a lot about the homeless and she learned a lot about herself. Her researched helped her reflect on her own life and see just how far she has come after those years of being a refugee. Overall I believe that all three authors found the cultures they were looking for at their field sites.
ReplyDeleteJennifer Toth’s exploration of the underground city below New York seemed to be, at first, from the perspective of an outsider. It begins much more like a narrative story than a field study, with Toth asking few questions and making few comments, preferring instead to listen to what those living an underground lifestyle want to tell her about their lives. As she goes deeper (inquisitively and literally) into the tunnels, she transitions to a more interactive, insider dialogue which explores not only the feeling of the environment around her, but to a great extent, her reaction and emotional response to the tunnels and their inhabitants. Toth pulls her information primarily from first-person sources, typically in conversation with or in observance of both the homeless and those around them, such as police, charity workers and ex-tunnel dwellers. She often supplements this with statistics from various reports, though she is careful to note that data from some of these sources is subject to corruption and bias. Through her research, Toth’s greatest finding was perhaps her discovery of just how very intricate the relationships below the streets of New York were. Additionally, she asserted that the underground tunnel societies are not by any means the urban-legend accounts of secluded mole people with webbed feet. Rather, they bear extensive resemblance to “topside” society, perhaps not in the goals or desires of those living underground, but in their hierarchies, interactions, and even in some of their beliefs.
ReplyDeleteRick Zollo’s research into the culture of the Iowa 80 truck stop proved to be a thoroughly outsider experience. Not being a trucker himself, and having no way to experience such a lifestyle except through the acquisition of a trucker’s license, he was entirely stuck outside of the trucking world. He soon learned how incredibly guarded this world was. Though his best sources to learn more about the truck stop’s culture were, of course, the truckers themselves, many were uncomfortable and evasive around him, fearing that he was a “spotter” who would get them in trouble with their employers. This likely led to holes in the data, some of which Zollo was able to fill through the use of accounts from truck stop workers as well as from a variety of literary sources. It seems, however, that his outsider stance has only made Zollo’s assertions and theories stronger. He paints, throughout his field study at the Iowa 80, a picture of the truck stop as a place where even the otherwise companionless members of the trucking culture come together and share what they are unable to share with outsiders.
Ivana Nikolic took her reader on a trip into the world of the Ramsey House. Likely due to her years living as a refugee with her family, she tried to take an insider stance, but ultimately remained largely an outsider. Nikolic, stricken with curiosity and moved with empathy, decided to look further into the lives of the homeless in the Ramsey House. Acknowledging that the Ramsey House represented only a small portion of the homeless population, Nikolic went on to express the great variety and diversity she nevertheless found in this culture. Speaking to people from all walks of life, who were homeless, non-homeless and volunteers, she found that while there are many people who had lost hope and resigned themselves to homelessness (most of whom refused to talk about their past, present or future), there were a few, like Hope, who had hopeful plans for their life. In this way, she discovered not only the diversity of the homeless in terms of culture, education, age, and past, but also the diversity in hopefulness, faith, and stages of recovery and struggle.
(Take 2, I accidentally hit reply while scrolling up to try to read the initial post again, so my response was lost.)
ReplyDeleteI believe that Zollo and Toth both were very much outsiders to the subcultures that they were preparing to investigate, so the only subjectivities they could possibly have would be based on the rumors they hear about the groups and the little that they may have observed in their lives. For the homeless, this would probably be that they are dirty and dangerous people that shouldn't even be acknowledged while passing them on the street. Since, if her upbringing was anything like mine in Rhode Island, that is pretty much all we are told about them. While truckers are not talked about, or disliked as much as the homeless, so Zollo may have not had as strong a pre-disposition towards them, which could lead to a better result. On the other hand, with Nicolic's volunteering, he had been closer to the homeless and able to observe them, making him almost like an insider and possibly shedding the negative views that many people have about them for a more objective representation of them.
I like how all three of them decided to go straight to the source for their information, instead of going to a library to read about their groups on paper. Toth took herself down into the tunnels to learn about these people, interacting with multiple groups down there and really getting immersed in the subculture. Although I believe that she may have taken it too far, and since she was always open about her presence, that she may have influenced their behaviors while she was around. Zollo also talked to the truckers that he was observing, but since he never really seemed to gain their trust, I don't think that he got the best answers either. I believe they didn't open up to him completely since he was practically judging them, writing about their behaviors and food, and he was a little too personal with his questions. Lastly, Nicolic had my favorite information gathering, he observed while voluntering and slowly worked himself into the community before talking to the homeless. After seeing him around for long enough, they quite easily could have accepted him as a familiar face and would be more open and realistic around him.
My favorite field study would have to be Toth's in the tunnel, because it was so immersive and had me on the edge of my seat from a few chapters in right up until the end. This may have had to do with the fact that it was much longer than the others, but even when just starting House for the Homeless and Iowa 80, I couldn't shake the feeling that I was doing homework rather than enjoying what I was reading. I also liked how brave Toth was in her research, she put herself into a lot of dangerous situations by exploring the tunnels, no matter how much the people she met told her not to do it anymore, and she trusted a lot of people that she probably shouldn't have, people like Bernard, Blade and other names that I can't recall.
In The Mole People and Iowa 80, both researchers were outsiders looking in on a subculture. I thought Rick Zollo’s fieldwork was the most interesting because unlike Toth’s and Nicolic’s field sites, Zollo examined a subculture that wasn’t necessarily depressing to the public eye. Toth and Nicolic both researched subcultures of economic struggle which to me seem like a more obvious subculture to want to understand. Nicolic could relate to the homeless better than Toth because we know that her family growing up only made enough money to just barely get by. She had more of an insider understanding of the subculture.
ReplyDeleteThe Mole People seems like such a different and scary subculture that it doesn’t even seem real. I would never be as brave as Toth was. She just completely immerged herself into this subculture and I feel like she might have taken her research too far when her safety was in danger. She had to move away from New York and was being threatened by some of the mole people. I did like how she talked with the police to get their perspective on the mole people and then interviewed actual “mole people” and we saw the contrast of their perspective on themselves and the police. It just showed me how the police was even their own subculture in relation to the mole people. And how neither of the subcultures completely understood each other.
Nicolic did not have such a scarring experience as Toth did with her research. Volunteering at the homeless shelter didn’t cause her to move away. The people she interviewed were more receptive to her questions because she could relate to their economic struggles. To me the Ramsey House was portrayed as a nicer homeless shelter than what was described from mole people Toth interviewed. I wonder if this is the reason Nicolic had a better experience than Toth. Would her research have been different if she had chosen a different homeless shelter?
Iowa 80 is the only research I saw that occurred at night. It left me wondering what the trucker stop was like at different times of the day. Toth and Nicolic both continuously went back to their field sites. Zollo did not get as friendly of an experience as Nicolic. The truckers didn’t welcome Zollo. Even when he first walked into the restaurant he was marked as a “four wheeler”.
All three authors seemed to have the same purpose, although their methods seemed to differ. I liked “Mole People” the best, it was the longest and most interesting to me. She had no previous knowledge of the people and stumbled across them by accident. She seemed to be a bit more invasive than the other two researchers and paid for it by being scared of them in the end. Yes, she did care a lot about them, but I think she did take the story-telling part a little too far and the narratives sounded exactly like that, a narrative.
ReplyDeleteThe “House of the Homeless” was my next favorite because the author sounded like an insider and seemed more passionate about her field site. It made her interviews easier and that seemed to come through in her study. Her subjectivity was compromised due to her attachment to the place, but it did make her connection stronger.
Rick Zollo’s field study seemed the most “real”. He had been to the field site before, but not enough to become emotionally committed to it or its people so he was more subjective than the previous two. The people were more skittish of him asking personal questions, but those that did answer really represented the demographic. Toth’s subjects were suspicious of her, but not for the same reasons as Zollo’s were.
The one other thing I really noticed was that Zollo and the volunteer at the shelter seemed to be able to go on with their lives once their study was done, while Toth had to leave her home and was threatened by those she had trusted. It effected the rest of her life because she took it too far while the other two, attached to their sites in some way, stayed subjective and detached as much as possible.