I too enjoyed Don's thought-provoking post and wholeheartedly agree with the main point that we can't just come up with theories about "cyberspace" with no context of use (1990s "cyberbabble", heheh, I've have to remember that one). That said, I'm uncomfortable what seems to be the resurrection of the old theory/practice binary. Like Lori and Radhika, I do ethnographic work, but I'm also a poststructuralist. I certainly understand Don's concerns about imposing "northern strands" (I think those were his words) of theories in non-western contexts. But, what is the alternative? Taking participants' experiences and accounts as unadulterated "truth" that we have "discovered" through our research? Our own stories and that includes our theories, are always part of the frame. As Deborah Britzman say, ethnographic accounts are "overinvested in second hand memories." As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I use Foucault's conceptualization of the heterotopia. It was my data that led to me to work with this notion, not the other way around. Yet, the participants would not necessarily describe their "spaces" as heterotopic and might think it's just a bunch of academic whooey for all I know (but just be too polite to say so.) Rhiannon radhika_gajjala wrote:

ditto.

(I may even take this rant to my research methods class;-))

r

At 2:44 PM -0500 2/11/04, Kendall, Lori wrote:

...

Woo! I greatly enjoyed Don Slater's post on this issue and particularly the rant about ethnography. (No big surprise to anyone who knows me, I'm sure!)

Lori ________________________________________ Lori Kendall Assistant Professor of Sociology Purchase College-SUNY lori.kendall@purchase.edu

_______________________________________________ Air-l mailing list Air-l@aoir.org http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l

_______________________________________________ Air-l mailing list Air-l@aoir.org http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l