Lane, J. (2016). The Digital Street: An Ethnographic Study of Networked Street Life in Harlem. American Behavioral Scientist, 60(1), 43-58.
Notes by Jolynna Sinanan
Digital Ethnography Research Centre (DERC)
RMIT University, Melbourne
See other posts under Digital ethnography reading group
In this month’s reading group, we interrogated the idea of the digital street as posed in ‘The Digital Street: An Ethnographic Study of Networked Street Life in Harlem’ by Jeffrey Lane (2016). The article argues that the contemporary street life of Harlem teenagers is characterised by the integration of online and offline communication, and is difficult to comprehend without participating in both contexts.
We noted that contemporary street ethnography can’t simply be conducted face-to-face; we also need to consider multiple forms of social interactions, ‘online’ and examining social media networks and discussing more private communication such as within the home as well phone calls and private chat over platforms such as Messenger. If Facebook is a visual representation of extended networks, does it necessarily translate to meaningful engagement between those in the actual networks? By considering these different forms of communication, we can then better understand how public and private spaces are formed and the norms of conduct in these spaces.
We also discussed the power dimensions of contemporary street ethnography by questioning the role of the pastor, or ‘gatekeeper’ in accessing research participants and the implications of street life as monitored by police officers described towards the end of the article.
The most significant aspect of the article for the reading group was how ethnography and ethnographic writing of ‘the street’ was developed as the idea of the ‘digital street’. For example, in Stuart Hall and Tony Jefferson’s edited volume Resistance Through Rituals: Youth Subcultures in Post-War Britain, Paul Corrigan’s chapter ‘Doing Nothing’ is an ethnography of street corner culture, which presents data as reporting conversations, describing context as gesture, language and movement as part of the street’s social ecology. We question to what extent, do we lose some of these contextual elements when discussing chats. We pose that other digital ‘gestures’ may be at play.
Lane also employs boyd’s theorisation of ‘networked publics’ to “explore both the net- working of space and the spatiality of the network” (2016, p50) but perhaps not enough is made of the networked elements to bridge the gap between the data presented and the analysis.
We concluded on the subject of how the street may be conceptualized as an ethnographic place in relation to digital technologies and social media. How can we think about how people perform or navigate sociality on the street to effectively analyse how Facebook and private messages compliment or extend these dynamics and interactions? To appreciate the potential social media has to transform the street, we discussed if the street and social media should treated as separate components, to better understand the relationship between the two.
In our next reading session (Wed Aug 10, 2016 12:30pm – 2pm, B9-4-31) we will be looking at the introductory chapter of Yuri Takhteyev’s book “Coding Places: software practice in a South American city”. Available from http://codingplaces.net/
boyd, d. (2010). Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In Z. Papacharissi (Ed.), A networked self (pp. 39-58). New York, NY: Routledge.
Hall, S. and T. Jefferson (eds), 1993. Resistance Through Rituals: Youth Subcultures in Post-war Britain. London and New York: Routledge
Lane, J. (2016). The Digital Street: An Ethnographic Study of Networked Street Life in Harlem. American Behavioral Scientist, 60(1), 43-58. doi: 10.1177/0002764215601711
Takhteyev, Y. (2012). Coding Places: Software practice in a South American city. MIT Press.
Essential reading on our current global predicament by the anthropologist Thomas H. Eriksen.
The world is ‘overheated’. Too full and too fast; uneven and unequal. It is the age of the Anthropocene, of humanity’s indelible mark upon the planet. In short, it is globalisation – but not as we know it. Leading anthropologist Thomas Hylland Eriksen is the author of a new book Overheating:An Anthropology of Accelerated Change, which is linked with an international anthropological project, centered at the University of Oslo. In this post, he introduces the themes of the book, and the importance of the project.
‘What do the fateful Brexit referendum, the epidemic spread of Nintendo’s ‘Pokémon Go’ game, the escalating death of Australia’s Great Barrier Reef and the fivefold growth in tourism since 1980 have in common? The short answer is that they all express symptoms or outcomes of global accelerated change, or ‘overheating’, as I call it in my new book.
It is as if modernity has…
View original post 1,185 more words
A physical copy of the brand new book Digital Keywords (2016) has just arrived through the post. On first inspection, it looks fantastic, and I’ve got the feeling I will be making frequent use of it in my research and teaching. Here are some quick notes on Benjamin Peters‘ intriguingly Peircean essay on the keyword ‘digital’, freely available here (PDF).
p. 94. Digits do the same thing as index fingers: they count, point and manipulate. They count symbols, point or index the real, and manipulate the social world. It follows you cannot understand digits only computationally (as things that count).
Counting the symbolic: the triumphs of digital computing
p. 95. In 1946, Von Neumann’s cybernetics: all signals can be made into digital format via binary code of ‘discrete, symbolic thresholds’: 0 to mean below level, 1 above level. ‘All real signals can be reduced, with certain loss, into digital symbols’.
But careful with digital theorists’ hype, warns Peters, now exacerbated by big data fans: not everything that is, is countable. Computer uber-nerds may see promise of total convergence, but this will never happen, as we’ll see in the remainder of this essay.
Indexing the real: how digits point elsewhere
Digits don’t only compute, they also point (index). Indexing is not an exact science. Digital media incl. fingers, coins, piano keyboards, filing systems, typewriters, electronic telegraph, etc. All are digitally interfaced (via human fingers).
p. 98 Pragmatist and semiotician Peirce distinguished 3 types of signs (icon, index, symbol) unlike ‘Saussurian signifier-signified binary behind the postmodern turn’. ‘Digital media have long indexed the world’, e.g. index in a book sends you to rough – not to exact – location on page.
In Peircean scheme, ‘smoke signals fire by saying, roughly, “Follow me to an ongoing combustion process”. From Austin to Wittgenstein et al meaningful relations necessarily exclude, i.e. structure of meaning is indexical. ‘Digital media… have meaning insofar as they index the world’. An index finger is not the same thing as the object it refers to.
Because they point elsewhere, digits are ‘fundamentally analogic’ (p. 100). Shannon in 1948 info theory launch (strictly computational approach to communication) said real-world meaning irrelevant to the engineering problem of communication, so long as we ‘understand digits as only those things that count’. (p. 100).
… but in fact, argues Peters, analogue and digital not at loggerheads, they ‘coexist quite happily’ (p. 100), e.g. probabilities have indexical relations with a space of possible outcomes, that is to say, ‘all digital messages… are part of a possibility index’.
Manipulating the social: the discontents of digital power
Big data has big data brokers. Social network sites transform ‘our many different selves into one [composite] persona’. Digits ‘manipulate our many social worlds’ (103) and the power to do this is highly unevenly concentrated.
104. To understand digital age it is not enough to understand only numbers handled by digits, as ‘digital media can point to or index all possible worlds, not only our real one’.
104-105. Human hands were first digital medium ‘to don real-world units that apply with probabilistic, and never precise, degrees to all possible worlds around us’. Much work needed ‘to model more equitable and sustainable worlds’.
I spend ages reading and summarising Bourdieu’s mammoth On the State (2014 ) for a journal review – I was even congratulated by a stranger on a Melbourne tram for reading a book instead of a phone – and now I discover that the whole argument is summed up on the back cover. Will have to pay more attention to such things in future.
PS. A friend on Facebook asked me about the quality of the translation. Here’s what I had to say, in case you’re wondering:
The translator is someone called David Fernbach. I haven’t read the original (not that I’d be any good at judging the quality of the translation) but the English is excellent, doesn’t feel awkward. It’s an unusual Bourdieu (at least for me) in that it’s based on transcripts of his lectures, so it’s got that strong oral feel to it. It’s also been painstakingly edited and proofread. I’ve only spotted one typo so far in 381 pages. A labour of love by the [book] editors, Patrick Champagne et al, [and copy editor].
Wacquant, L. J. D. (2004). Body & Soul: Notebooks of an Apprentice Boxer. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Notes by Edgar Gómez
Digital Ethnography Research Centre (DERC)
RMIT University, Melbourne
See other posts under Digital ethnography reading group
Body and Soul, the wonderful ethnographic work of Loïc Wacquant about boxing was the chosen text for the May DERC reading group. Originally written in French, we all agreed that the book captures, in an almost perfect writing style, the spirit of the black boxers from the Woodlawn Boys Club. While writing an ethnography of boxing was not Wacquant’s original idea (he just wanted to exercise and know more about the black community in Chicago), he ended writing two books about it.
The group soon noted the beautiful craft of writing in Body and Soul. As one participant suggested, the book combines three different forms of writing almost to perfection: sociological style, ethnographic style and sociological novella. Body and Soul tells the story of an ethnographer becoming a boxer while using other boxer’s voices to rely on, to learn from. The process of Wacquant becoming a boxer himself is the key of the book since we, as readers, witness what we could call embodied reflexivity. He sweats, gets punched, feels fear and physical exhaustion. This “carnal sociology” is a great example of the process of learning a craft while capturing, theorizing and analyzing this same process. With detailed fieldnotes and compelling arguments that keep the reader interested at all times while unfolding a detailed ethnographic story, sociologically explained, Wacquant was not only able to engage with the community of boxers as one of them but to present box convincingly as an exciting, ritualistic and highly punctuated sport (very much in the sense of Goffman’s theatrical approach).
Wacquant ‘s way of taking notes (and presenting them in the book as almost literary vignettes), his immersion in the field, his respect and admiration for the gym’s members and the way he captured the slang were some of the elements that turned a sociological text into a beautifully crafted book.
In our next reading session (Wed 8 June, 12-13.30, B9-2-9) we will be looking at the extensive methods utilised for a ‘network ethnography’ as documented by by Muzammil M. Hussain in his doctoral research on internet freedom stakeholder gatherings in the wake of the Arab Spring.
Hussain, M. M. (2014). Securing Technologies of Freedom after the Arab Spring: Policy Entrepreneurship and Norms Consolidation Practices in Internet Freedom Promotion. (Doctoral Ph.D), University of Washington. Available from https://dlib.lib.washington.edu/researchworks/handle/1773/26059
Wacquant, L. J. D. (2004). Body & Soul: Notebooks of an Apprentice Boxer. New York: Oxford University Press.
Review of The Manchester School: Practice and Ethnographic Praxis in Anthropology (Evens & Handelman 2006)
The Manchester School: Practice and Ethnographic Praxis in Anthropology. T.M.S. Evens & Don Handelman (eds). 2006. Oxford/New York: Berghahn. x + 334 pp.
Ethnos: Journal of Anthropology
Volume 72, Issue 4, 2007
This volume revisits the extended-case method, an ethnographic research strategy developed in the 1940s to 1960s by members of the so-called Manchester School of anthropology led by Max Gluckman. The book opens with an introductory section, followed by sections on the theorisation, history and practice of the extended-case method, and concluding with a coda by Bruce Kapferer. The introduction features reprints of classic texts by Gluckman (1961) and Mitchell (1983); the following section engages critically with the method’s enduring strengths and weaknesses, exploring new theoretical possibilities by way of Heidegger, Goffman, Deleuze and Guattari; the historical section traces the method’s mixed ancestry, including its hitherto little known Chicago connections; finally, the practical section assesses the method’s relevance to contemporary anthropological analysis.
The book accomplishes admirably its stated aim, namely ‘to highlight and critically examine the fundamental features of the extended-case method, in order to advance its substantial, continuing merits’. Its editors and chapter contributors demonstrate that the extended-case method is more than a ‘method’, it is a sophisticated mode of research and analysis arising from the long-standing political, institutional and epistemological concerns of Gluckman and his students. It is characterised by a painstaking ethnographic attention to socio-political processes as they unfold across varied contexts over time, with a focus on situations of conflict, or ‘trouble cases’ as Gluckman called them. Generalisation emerges from the data, not from a prior theoretical agenda. While Gluckman’s ‘The Bridge’ was the inspiration, the method’s masterpieces are Mitchell’s (1956) monograph The Yao Village, in which he followed witchcraft accusations in a single village over a period of six years, and Turner’s (1957) Ndembu study where he first developed the concept of social drama.
The innovation lay in bringing under a unified analysis a long series of events that were separated in time and micro-setting. This stood in stark contrast to the existing (and still common today) monographic practice of ‘apt illustration’, i.e., using unrelated ethnographic materials to support an overarching argument. Countering criticisms from Leach and others that the Manchester approach entailed the obsessive collection of masses of data for their own sake, the Mancunians defended – and still defend – the method for its openness to the messy actualities of social life and capacity to yield unexpected insights.
As Kapferer argues in the book’s coda, Gluckman and his associates were ahead of their time not only in theorising social process; their very ethnographic practice was reflexively attuned to the dialectical process of data description and analysis. Their use of situated analysis and extended cases helped to weaken static notions of bounded collectivity such as village, community or society and created a new anthropological lexicon aimed at capturing the flux and uncertainty of political life with notions such as social drama, social field, arena and action-set (see chapter by Kempny). The implications of this shift are, of course, still being worked out today (see Amit & Rapport 2002).
This book is a timely addition to the ongoing rethinking of practice theory after Bourdieu. As pointed out by the editors, American anthropology has long been besotted with aspects of Bourdieu’s theory of practice but has ignored the Manchester tradition. With its ethnographic grounding, attention to situated process, and stress on the latent potentialities of social interaction for the structuring of social life (cf. Giddens 1984), the renewal of this social anthropological tradition signalled by the present study has much to offer cultural anthropologists in the United States and elsewhere. Undergraduate and MA anthropology students will benefit from the book’s seamless integration of historiography, theory and methodology — three domains that are usually kept separate. For PhD students it should be required pre-fieldwork reading alongside one or two of the classic 1950s Manchester monographs where the method and its theoretical import are best developed (e.g., Mitchell 1956; Turner 1957; Epstein 1958). In addition, those interested in placing the book within its direct line of descent should read the edited volumes that followed the 1950s monographs (Swartz et al. 1966; Epstein 1967; Mitchell 1969) as well as Turner’s (1974) magisterial Dramas, Fields, and Metaphors.
Sheffield Hallam University, UK