Re-Entering Earths Orbit...

Just wanted to share some final thoughts on my term paper and the course in general. As you all know, if you've been reading my blog, I was one of the few class members that chose to analyse a book-length ethnography instead of conducting my own online research. Although I still think that was the right idea because it really did shed a lot of light on the ethnographic process, it is too bad I didn't get a chance to conduct research of my own.

Originally, my intentions were to conduct my research within the Facebook community because I was really intrigued by the size and scope of the network. Perhaps the largest virtual community in the world, it might of been interesting to study how and why it grew so fast, how social interactions differ or relate to those in the physical world, and also– much like Christensen did with Inuit in Cyberspace– to try and understand how individuals negotiate their self-identity in this particular media rich environment.

Another intriguing area to look at, within the Facebook framework, may have been to consider Ferdinand Tonnies ideas about communal living. In writing about Inuit in Cyberspace, I briefly spoke about Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft and how the social theories applied to the context of the ethnography I was analysing. As I laid out the implications of these theories, relative to Inuit in Cyberspace, I couldn't help but think about how these concepts apply to the Facebook community.

If I had to begin my research today, I would explore whether the Facebook community was one which displayed aspects of Gemeinschaft or Gesellschaft. It would be interesting to speak to various members and see how they valued the relationships fostered online, do these relationships nurture feelings of inclusion and loyalty seen in Gemeinschaft or is Gesellschaft inevitable because of the sheer size of the network. Also, does the number of friends
in an individuals 'Friend List' affect the way one is involved within the social landscape? Perhaps, as Friends Lists grow Gesellschaft replaces the sense of Gemeinschaft felt by the user. If so, is their a magic number, a sort of symbolic threshold that, when crossed, begins to disconnect the individual from the community. This sort of disconnect occurs in the physical world as villages and towns transform into cities, it would be interesting to see if the Facebook community is a sort of microcosm of this type of transition.

Having said that, I don't think I would of been capable of bringing up these questions–or go about systematically researching them through ethnography for that matter– had I not put Inuit in Cyberspace under the microscope. For that exact reason, I am glad I chose to analyse the book.

To all, good luck in the future!
Spil Vass

Hmmm, meaning of culture raises some questions...

Well I'm now in the stretch run of running my paper... As I cover the outline I laid out with information from class discussions applied to Christensen's work, a pretty big issue has come up for me which I never really put much stock in and just might be worth mentioning as I critique the ethnography. I wish Christensen had spent a little more time on defining his critirea for online information being culture capital. He speaks about culture online, but may have been well-served to actually consider the depth of cultural flags not just the scope. I can't help but thinking more time should of been spent seperating the cultural markers he speaks about into categories of impct. Having not done that, a simple gif image of a pair of seal skin gloves can be considers as culturally significant in asserting Inuit culture as anything else considered...

Also raises questions of authenticity as to what is real Inuit culture online and what is just displayed to identify themselves by presenting symbols that foreigners stereotype to those communities...

Thoughts on Snowrunners last post

I was just reading some of the post by other class members and kind of related them in terms of how they fit into Christensens belief of cyberspace as an extension of 'real-space'. Actually, Snowrunner posted an interesting note last Friday that spoke about old institutions and industry giants are shaping cyberspace and defining it's direction. 

I relate that article to my last post, in that, as offline institutions assert themselves even more, the perception of a totally separate 'online' space becomes less and less relevant. A lot of the institutions are instrumental in creating offline barriers and constraints. Their presence online enforces the continuum that exists offline and and acts to create a consistency between virtual and real space...

Hmmm, Im curious to know if Christensen made any mention of this sort of institutional control as a reason for cultural embedding in Inuit webpages. I didn't pick up on anything of the sort, but perhaps that's due to the fact that I wasn't really looking...

Cyberspace as non-space

As I sit here writing the term paper, I've realized how important it is to focus on the environment of cyberspace as a location for fieldwork. I know that sounds obvious as this entire semester has been about doing that, but in the case of my research I think that there is a great deal to learn by critically looking at the considerations of Christensen as he writes the ethnography. He spends a bit of time early on talking about how early cyberspace researchers saw  the environment as a non-space without boundaries yet his research led him to believe that, for Inuit users, it is regarded as another place to be 'who they are' just like any other environment they may frequent offline... I'm actually looking for literature that may back up or enforce this point of view...

I'll let you know how she goes!!

Culture vs. Technology

I think it's pretty interesting to consider a point Christensen makes early on in his ethnography. The author states that we've somehow created a dichonomy between culture and technology, almost as if the creation or growth of one inevitably spells disaster for the other. I think he's bang on in stating that this struggle is perceived rather than actual. As he continues to introduce the landscape of his research, he talks about how his observations demonstrated that highly traditional inuit cultures are adopting internet technologies to actually reinforce their culture rather than have it be marginalized. It got me thinking about one of the readings from early on in the course that dealt with the real versus the virtual and the concept of virtuality. 

Culture, for all intents and purposes is just information and the interpreting of said information, so I guess its no surprise that what Christensen speaks about is not really that far out there since the internet is just a means of sharing and transferring information. Sure the medium adds and shapes the message to some degree, as it does the messenger—however, the message, for the most part, is parlayed in virtual space as it would be in real space. I'm not sure if that makes sense, or if I'm explaining it properly, but it just may be worth exploring a little bit when looking at the content of ethnography...

Thoughts before liftoff on my research paper

Well, I'm sitting down to begin the research paper due next week and want to jot down a few thoughts before I begin laying out my research paper outline.

I finished reading Inuit in Cyberspace a second time this past week with a more critical eye than the first time. When I first read the book, I tried viewing it strictly as a reader interested in the subject matter. I was only concerned with subject matter that the author, Neil Blair Christensen, researched and reported. The second time I read through the text, I tried to be aware of the methodologies and ethniographic techniques the researcher employed to conuct his research. I just want to note that even the second read-through was kept pretty light though; I didn't take any notes or highlight anything that may be important when writing my report. I felt that that may slow me down and may cloud my vision when trying to observe any points that may be noteworthy. Instead, I plan to read through the text a third time with a much more critical intent. Having read the ethnography twice already, I have a general idea of what I am looking for and when. It is now simply a matter of documenting the exact examples that may illustrate the points I will be making in my final paper.

What I'm thinking of doing, and this may work itself out in the next day or two, is recapping the ethnography, Inuit in Cyberspace, in a chapter by chapter basis and summing up my observations or critiques in ethnographic terms. In other words, I may explain the observations and insights Christensen presents in the chapter and then go ahead and look at how his reseach was conducted and these conclusions were drawn.

Well, like I said I'm going to take the next day or two to analytically go through the text and collect examples and instances where the ethnographic process is particularly evident, highlighted, or flawed. I'll let you know how it goes...

PS: I just wanted to thank you all for those great oral presentations in class. Your research, observations, and presentations are particularly important to helping me write my research paper because they allow me to draw on a larger pool of real-world research examples when comparing Inuit in cyberspace to other ethnographies. Thanks again!