Confessional Tales

lf you want to understand what a science is you should look in

the first instance not at its theories or its findings, and certainly
not what its apologists say about it; you should look at what the
practitioners of it do.
Clifford Geertz

Chapter 3 suggested that ethnographic writing is anything but

a straightforward, unproblematic descriptive or interprctivc task
based on an assumed Doctrine of Immaculate Perception. Rathcr,
ethnographic writing of any kind is a complex matter, dependcnt
on an uncountable number of strategic choices and activc con-
structions (e.g., what details to include or omit; how to summa-
rize and present data; what voice to select; what quotations to
use). In this chapter I explore another representational form of
ethnographic writing, the fieldwork confessional. It is an increas-
ingly popular genre that contrasts sharply in a number of ways to
the realist tale. The distinguishing characteristics of confessional
tales are their highly personalized styles and their sclf-absorbed
I
mandates.
The confessional tale is often a response to some of the realist
conventions that have proved most embarrassing. In some in-
stances, the confessional tale stems from the notorious sensitivity
of many fieldworkers to aspersions cast on the scientific status of
their undertakings. The result, then, is an attempt to explicitly
demystify fieldwork or participant-observation by showing how the
technique is practiced in the field.' Stories of infiltration, fables
of fieldwork rapport, minimelodramas of hardships endured (and
overcome), and accounts of what fieldwork did to the fieldworker
are prominent features of confessions.
In other instances (perhaps more important), the confession is

77
 Confessional Tales
Chapter Four

a rcsponsc to thc growing importancc and pcnetration of ['luro- policc do X). 'Ihcrc is an intimacy to bc cstablished with readcrs,
pean social thought in Amcrican social sciencc.3 In various ways, a pcrsonal character to develop, trials to portray, and, as with real-
iomc mcntioncd in chapters I and Z, thc implications of phc- ist tales, a world to bc reprcscnted within which thc intrepid ficld-
nomcnology, hcrmencutics, semiotics, and othcr intrcprctivc pro- workcr will roanr. With this last featurc, thc aims of fieldwork
ccclures arc being fclt in thc cmpirical trcnches. By and largc, confcssionals and rcalist accounts may ovcrlap, cvcn though the
Arncrican fieldworkers havc bccu, until fairly rcccntly, at casc and tcxtual rrcans <tf supporting thc resulting cultural portraits are
comfortable with thcir scat-of-thc-pallts, holncspun methocls, ancl quite different.
havc bcen unreasonably proud of their otltward-bound, lonc- Confcssionals do Irot usually rcplace rcalist accounts. They
wolf, muddy-boots imagc. Given thc lofty issues of human rncan- typically stand bcside thcm, elaborating extcnsivcly on thc formal
ings treated in ethnographies, many a ficldworkcr-author fits snippcts of method dcscription that decoratc rcalist talcs. Thcy
Boon's (1982:5) idcal typc of "lcarus rvith clirty fect." occasionally appcar in scparate texts and proviclc sclf-cxplanatory
Such pride apparcntly gocth bcforc a [all, bccausc in thc con- and sclf-sealing accounts of how thc author conductccl a picce of
fcssional fonn of cthnographic writing, ficlclworkcrs trow show rcscarch rcportcd clsewherc. Conlessions also appear, with in-
thcmselvcs to bc sorncwltat ttcrvous about thc looscttcss antl opcn- creasing frequcncy, as scparate articlcs, chaptcrs of llooks dcvoted
cndcd naturc of thcir work. Considcrable worry is cxpresscd about to fieldwork practicc, or lengthy appcndixcs attachcd kr rcalist
the obvious lack of a thcory of dcscription that might liclp legit- monographs. All are distinct, howcver, lrom thc ct]rnography it-
imize an entcrprisc prcttrisccl on thc dclicatc good-faith assllnP- sclf. 'l'hc c<nfessional writings collccrn how the ficlclworkcr'.s lifc
tion, the assurncd sclf-cviclcnt value of cxploring littlc-known so- was livcd uprivcr anong thc nativcs. '['hey arc conccnlccl pri-
cial worlds, and thc prcsumptive usc of natural scicncc notiotts marily with how the ficlclwork oclyssey was accomplishccl by thc
concerning thc powcr of oltscrvation. Such discomfort surfaccs in researcher. 'l'here is then a clcar break between thc reprcscntation
confcssions as writcrs try to sh<lrv that ethnography is not ilrcrcly of the rcscarch work itself and thc rcsulting cthn<lgraphy (which
old-fashioncd social scicncc in its gcriatric dccay. Thcse writcrs appcars elscwlterc in the tcxt or in another tcxt altogcthcr). Nor-
attempt to demonstratc tl'rat an ctl'rnographic report is norc than mally only thc f<lnner is of concerr in a cortfcssional talc.
a pcrsonal document; that it is something disciplined by proper Much confcssional work is done to convincc thc auclicncc of
fieldwork habits, including tl'rc attention an cthnographcr pays thc hurnan qualitics of thc fieldworkcr. Oftcn thc ctlurographer
to thc epistemological problcms charactcristic of social scicuce. rnentiorrs personal biascs, charactcr flaws, or bad habits as a way
Most confessionals have at ttreir corc soilrc hopc of making ficld- olbuilding an ironic sclf-portrait with which the rcaclcrs can idcn-
work, if not fully safe for science, at lcast respcctable in tcrms of tify (Scc, I'm just like you, full of human foiblcs). 'l'hc ornnipo-
upholding somc commur"rity standards and disciplining thc un- tcnt tone of rcalism givcs way to tl-re modcst, utrassuming stylc of
disciplincd of fieldwork. As with rcalist writings, therc arc con- onc struggling to picce togcther somcthing rcasonably cohcrcnt
vcntions at work in the confessional talc. A discussion of threc out of displays of initial disorder, doubt, and difficulty.
such conventions follows and scrvcs to sct up an cxamplc. According b Clifford (l98la), thcrc arc two convcntional ways
for cthnographers to orient thcmselves for the coufcssional audi-
Personali zed Author (i ty) cnce. Onc is to cast oncsclf as a simplc studcnt of thc observed
Author-fieldworkers are always closc at hand in confcssiotral talcs. group, an apprcnticc of sorts, who comcs to lcam of thc culture
Thcir writings arc intcncled to show how particular works camc mtrch as any child or ncwcomcr to tl'rat culture might (Van
into bcing, ancl this dcmands personalizcd authority. No longcr is Maancn and Kolb, 1985). Lcarning fron living in the culturc is
thc ubiquitous, disembodied voicc of thc culturc to bc hcard the 1>rcclorninant thcmc. T'he othcr way, possibly morc fashion-
(e.g., The police do X). In ih placc is a pcrsor-r (..g., I saw thc ablc thcse days, is to cast onesclf as a translator or intcrprctcr of

?(
74
 Confessional Tales
Chapter Four

indigcnous tcxts that arc availablc to the cttrnographer in the ficld '|he r'ieldworker's Point of View
(()ecrtz, 1973). 'I'hc maior problcm with this tactic is convincing
thc audicrrcc that such tcxts arc in fact authcrliic, natural, uscful As autobiographical dctails mount in cottfcssional talcs, it bc-
for analytic purposcs, and more or less urttaintcd by tlic ficld- .o.,t., that thc point of vicw bcing rcprcscnted is that of
"ppri.nt
the ficldworker. 'lypically, the cotrccnt for thc fieldworkcr's per-
workcr'.s touch. Ficlclworkcrs, uttlikc litcrary critics, historians' or
linguists, facc thc problcrn that thcir tcxts (or-r bchavior, bclief, rit- spcctive is told as somcthing of a charactcr-builcling conversion
ual, ctc.)takcn from thc ficld must first bc constructcd, sincc they tale in which the fieldworkcr, who saw things olrc way at thc out-
do not conc prcpackaged. '{'he first oricntation lcnds itsclf niccly sct of thc study, comcs to see them in an cr-rtircly cliffcrent way by
to a cognitive, rule-bascd and ltchaviorally focusccl ethnographic the conclusion of thc stucly. Thc ncw way of sccing the world is
clisplay; thc scconcl to a morc rcflexive, languagc-based, inter- nornrally claimed to bc sirnilar to the nativc'.s point o[ vicw' But
prctivc onc. careful attention is givcn to insuring that thc ficldworkcr docs not
'fhc dctails that mattcr in confessional tales arc tl.rosc that con- appcar to be fully altcred, the proverbial cultural tltrpc or convert'
stitutc thc ficld cxpcricncc of thc author. This l.ruman bundlc of Thc attitude convcycd is one of tacking back and fortlt bctwccn an
cxposccl ncrvc-enclings stands alonc irl thc culturc supposcdly pcr- insidcr'.s passionatc Pcrspcctive and an outsidcr'.s dispassiorlatc
cciving and rcgistcring thc various happenings arouncl him. F}no- onc. Pcrhaps uo other confcssional convention is as difficult for
tional rcactiolls, l rcw ways of sccing things, ncw things to sce, alrcl the writcr as rnaintaining in print this paracloxical' if not schizo-
various rnundatrc bttt tutcxpcctccl occurrenccs that spark insight phrcnic, attitude toward the group observcd. A dclightful dancc
arc all c<lnventiorral c<ltfcssional materials that suggcst how thc of words oftcn ensucs as fieldworkcrs prcsent themsclvcs as l>oth
fieldworker cantc to urtdcrstand a studicd sccnc. Morcover' coll- vesscls and vehiclcs of knowlcdgc.
fcssional writings rarcly portray thc author as a passivc, unrc- In much confcssional writing, a sort of tcrltativc "surrcnclcr" is
markablc charactcr wlto sirr.rply stands around waiting for somc- uscd by thc ficldworkcr as a tcmporary resolution kr thc daily
thing to happcn or for thc arrival of tl'rc whitc flash of discovcry. problcrns of ficldwork. But, going nativc can hardly lrc prcsctttcd
Who could trust such an ttttadvcnturous and timid soul? Thc nar- with terminal glce. Thc mcrc prescnce of thc corlfcssiottal sug-
rator ofthe confessional is oftcn a foxy charactcr awarc that othcrs gests that thc fieldworkcr is rtow scriously back arnong his pccrs,
nray bc, intcntionally or ut'rintcntiorlally, out to dcccive him or rcady to tcll of the advcnturcs in thc ficld. 'l'his is pcrhaps why
withtrold important information. 'l'he cthnographcr as thc visiblc sorne find Carlos Castaneda, the flying trun of atrtltr<4lology, such
actor in thc confessional tale is often somethirlg of a trickstcr or a silly character, fclr if hc were fully cornrlittcd irnd convcrted
fixer, wise to the ways of thc world, apprcciativc of human vanity, why would hc bottrer with us?
ncccssarily wary, and thereforc invcntivc at getting by and win- A readcr often lcarns of the cthnographcr'.s shifting point of
ning little victories over thc hasslcs of lifc in thc rescarch setting view during a pcriod of ficldwork in a cortfcssiottal. Cornnron fea-
(c.g., Berrcm an, 1962; Powdermakcr, 1966; Gans, 1982; f . Doug- tures ofresearch confcssions arc episotlcs officldworkcr shock ancl
las, 1976).* Nor is the ficldworkcr who writcs tnost coufessions surprise. Subjects includc thc l>iunclcrs tlf ficldworkcrs, the social
brimming over with correctional zcal or ticd b hard-and-fast gaffcs thcy comntit or secrets thcy uncarth irl unlikely places ancl
ethical principles. Indeed, some of thc most unflattering portraits ways. Such accounts are frcquent and indicatc perhaps that dc-
of ethnographic practice arise, as the labcl in'rplics, in ficldwork spite the differcnt theoretical languagcs and attitudcs taken into
confessions whcre it sccms aPparent that the researcher has lcss the ficld by cthnographcrs, thc significance of inserting the self
paticnce and good will than his subiccts (e.g., 'I'urnbull, 1972; into the daily affairs ofothcrs is, at lcast on thc cxpericntial planc,
Malinowski, 1967). sirnilar f<lr-evcryottc.' Thc unplanned, ahnost ranclom, happen-

77
76
 Confessional Tales
Chapter Four

always end up supporting whatever realist writing the author may

stance is dramatically set forth in confessional tales with the uni-
have done and displayed elsewhere (in or out of the text in which
versal message attached that fieldwork is as much a matter of luck
and being in the right place at the right time as it is a matter of the confessional tale appears). The linguistic footwork required is
good training. Given this advice, time in the field and close, in- considerable, but it often boils down to thc simple assertion that
even though there are flaws and problems ir.r one's work, when all
volved contact with the group studied (allowing for a greater op-
portunity for lightning to strike) provide the normative guidelines is said and done it still remains adequate. Though confessional
(the more the better).6 writers are forthcoming with accounts of errors, misgivings, limit-
There is, however, a line to be drawn, for the fieldworker can- ing research roles, and even misperceptions, thcy are unlikely to
not stay in the field forever and still be considered a fieldworker. come to the conclusion that they have been misled dramatically,
Convcntions grow up around what is to be considered an ade- that they got it wrong, or that they have othcrwise presented
quate field experience, and various communities (and subcom- falsehoods to their trusting audience. The implied story line of
munities) of fieldworkers adopt different standards. The more many a confessional tale is that of a fieldworker and a culture
targeted or limited the ethnography is to a particular and well- finding each other and, despite some initial spats and misunder-
dcfined cultural problem, the less time in the field is thought nec- standings, in the end, making a match.'
essary in order for revelation to strike.
No doubt part of this is due to the screening policies of the pro-
Much of the confessional genre is familiar to readers of method fessional communities at which fieldwork accounts are aimed, as
texts where the various pros and cons of intense involvement or well as the self-screening work of the authors, so that the only eth-
participation in the culture of interest are discussed. Within con- nographies in print are the more-or-less successful ones about
fessional ethnography, however, the writers seem less sanguine which the author (and at lcast somc reviewers) are fairly confident
about the presumed wide range of role options available to field- that the work is up to snuff. We rarely read of unsuccessful field
workers. There is, in fact, something of a they-made-me-do-it projects where the research was presumably so personally disas-
character to many confessionals in which certain non-negotiable trous to the fieldworker that the study was dropped or failed ever
demands are made by the natives, the refusal of which would to find its way to publication. While there may be some nervous
mean instant exile. These demands may be tied to biographical indications that things are not so certain as they appear in print or
particulars (e.g., young women must behave appropriately) or to that future voyagers into similar research worlds may see things in
situational particulars (e.g., "don't do that now"), but such de- different ways, confessional tales usually end on an upbeat, posi-
mands are represented as being made on the fieldworker in no un- tive, if not fully self-congratulatory, note.
certain terms. In confessional tales, then, cultural knowledge Stoddart (1985) provides a happy list ofconventional practices
may rest securely on the testimony of personal experience and can of,eonfessionalists by which some intractable fieldwork dilemmas
be presented to readers in the form of explicit behavioral norms or
can be said to be overcome (for all practical purposes). One prac-
interpretive standards the ethnographer learned to follow in the tice, readily apparent, is the way authors normalize their presence
field in order to stay in the field. coming on the scene, in the scene, and leaving the scene. Ade-
quate ethnographic practice in the confessional requires field-
Naturalness workers to tidy up their roles and tell how they think they were
The last convention of the confessional tale I want to exhibit is
received and viewed by others in the field. The good guy presen-
also the broadest and perhaps the most inconsistently treated one.
tation is one familiar role, as is the just-like-anyone-else role,
It concerns the way fieldworkers argue that their materials are rea- where the fieldworker claims to more-or-less melt into the re-
sonably uncontaminated and pure despite all the bothersome search setting by virtue of being cver present and hencc, disat-
problcms exposed in the confession. Fieldwork confessions nearly tended to by all.

78 79
Chapter Four Confessional Tales

Sonrctimcs nrctnbcr tests for fieldworkcrs arc represctrtcd as oftcn ur-rder sorne obligation to trot out thcsc lcgcndary figurcs
ways of displaying the acccptancc atrd compctencc of thc cttr- when daring to bare all. Such figurcs rnust be said to know thc
nographcr. 'l'hc confcssional bccontcs, itr part, a special kind of culture well. They arc rcprcsented thcrcforc as "experienced,"
ctiquctte lxrok in which ficlclworkcrs show how thcy lcamccl to "veteran," "rcvcrcd," "respected," "scnior," and "ccntral" inf<lr-
cornport thcnsclvcs according to thc propcr stanclards of bchavior mants. 'fhe question hcrc is how mucl'r knowlcdgc thc ficld-
in thc ctrlturc of intcrest. 'Ihe writcr bccomcs a Miss Manncrs of workcrs should attribute to their having squattecl at thc fect of
ficldwork, a Dcar Abby of thc stucliccl sccnc. Typically lessons arc their informants during their ficld trips.
said to bc lcarncd through brcacltcs of local propriety. Thus thc Confcssional ethnographies are ordinarily vaguc on such mat-
cxpcricnccs of thc bunrbling, awkward ficlclworkcr, painfully fig- ters, for bcing prccise may raisc anxious qucstions for thc rcadcr
uring things out, proviclc a goocl dcal of thc sttbstatrcc rlf thc con- about who is doing all the ethnographic work, atryway? 'lbo little
fcssional tale. Thc rcsult is a gr-riclc kr how to gct alortg and livc reliance on cntitlecl infornrants may suggest tlt:rt too rnany inragi-
with gracc and honor anrong ficrcc warriors of tlte Gitchi-Gunri, nativc libcrties are being takcn in the realist clainrs of thc cth-
shy huntcrs of thc fr<lzcrt north, or laid-l>ack win<ls o[ Peach- nographer. 'loo much rcliancc on informants alsrl raiscs artxious
trcc Plaza. questions about thc rcprescntativencss of thc ficldwork rtratcriirls
Anothcr way of showir.rg that onc has thc right stuffto gct to thc and may lcad rcaders t<l worry about thc identity of thc rc:rl author
hcart of a cultttrc is tlrrough displays of cmpathy atrd itrvolvc- of the realist talc. I-ithcr over- or underapprcciating irrformants
rncnt. Unclcr most col<litiols, ficldworkcrs arc cxpcctcd by rcacl- provokes concctn in readcrs.
crs, if their accourrts arc to bc trustccl, to like ancl rcspcct thosc
they study (ancl vicc vcrsa).''l'hcy arc also expcctcd lot to with-
Producing Confcssional'lhles
draw frorn thc passing ctrltr,rral sccnc but t<l bccotrtc as involvcd
and fully cngrossccl in thc claily affairs of thc pcoplc studics as pos- Thcsc thrce convcntions providc a short guide to how confcs-
siblc. Iirnpathy ancl iuvolvctttctrt arc, h<lwevcr, tricky tnattcrs. sional talcs arc constructed. The genrc is now a fairly largc onc.
Writcrs o[ cor-rfcssionals arc thcrcf<rrc quick to point out that thcy While the quality of confessionals varies tremcndously in tcrms
likcd somc peoplc rnorc thatr othcrs, and that thcrc wcre certain of both the self-reflection of an author and thc sophistication with
pcriods during tl-rc study that wcrc dull, unconrfortablc, ancl per- which an author faces thc cpistemological issucs involved in field-
lraps distastcful. Modcration l>ccomcs thc kcy which norrnalizes work, the nccessity of providing a confessional to supplcmcnt sub-
thc sctting and convcys to rcadcrs thc scnsc that ficldwork is not stantive (rcalist) reports of fieldwork is now rnorc or lcss institu-
vcry differcnt from othcr kinds of work. T'hc cxotic is downplaycd, tionalizcd in both anthropology and sociology. It is pro forma
thc thcatrical is undcrstated, intcnsc fcclings arc lclt out, and few thcse days to appcnd a confessional to a fieldwork disscrtation or
of thc absurditics of rnincling othcr pcoplcls busittcss arc allowcd to include onc in a separate chaptcr o[the thcsis undcr thc "mcth-
into thc cor.rfessional talc. ods" labcl. Most confcssions, like most disscrtations, never see
I"inally, considcr how nativcs, as itrftrrttrartts of thc ficldworker, publication. Those that arc publishcd, howcvcr, normally issue
arc handlcd in confessional writings. An oftcn-stated platitr-rdc from authors who havc first publishcd notablc, attention-getting
(howcvcr infrcqucntly it is treatcd as such) Irotcs that ficldworkcrs tales in the rcalist tradition. Thc confcssior.ral is apparently inter-
arc only as goocl as thcir informants. l"icldwork novices arc stcrttly esting only insofar as thcre is something of notc to confess as well
remindcd of such things in confessional accottnts in which cth- as sometl'ring of notc to situate thc confcssion.o It is apparently
nographcrs must rcveal (or clairn to rcvcal) how thcy carne to morc difficult to achieve thc lattcr than thc former. Authors of un-
know what thcy know. In Back'.s (1956) words, thc "wcll-informccl known studies, while they surcly have rnuch to confcss, will rarely
informant" is onc answcr to this problcn, and fieldworkcrs arc find an audiencc who cares to read thcir confessions.

80 8l
 Confessional Tales
Chapter Four

Collcctions of autobiographical reflcctions on past proiects ian qucstion of social order, thc deus ex machina. Through their cx-
represcnt thc most comrnon outlet for confessional talcs of the clusive mandatc to intervene directly in the lives of the citizenry,
ncta. fn anthropology, Casagrandc (1960) is a standard sctter, thc police are crucial actors in both our cvcryday antl cercmonial
focusing on work with informants. Otl-rer, morc general-Purpose affairs, and, as such, deserve intensive ancl continual study for their
collections includc Epstein, 1967; Kimball and Watson, 1972; rolc and lunction in socicty is far too important to bc takcn lbr
F-rcilich, 1970; Spindle4I970; Ben-David ar-rd Clark, I977; Nar- .qranted or, worsc, ignorcd."
oll and Cohen, 1970; and, in a rcorienting mission, Hymes, Such high sounding sentiments providc, I am surc, thc sort of
1972. ln sociology, Emerson'.s (l9Bl) rccent collection includes doctrinal or ideological canopy which covcrs virtually all policc
a goocl number of confessionals' Others includc Shaffir ct al', studics. Yet, speaking sociologically, such statcmcnts arc inade-
tgg0; Bclland Newby, 1977;1. Douglas, l97Z;Habenstein' 1970; quate explanations lor rvhy such stuclies are undcrtakcn in at least
I,'ilstead, 1970; and Vidich et al'' 1964. Also, since the con- two rl,ays. First, questions about the place of policc study within
fessional talc is ordinarily tied to giving the craft norms' a rcader the social scienccs arc glosscd ovcr ncatly n'hcn a rcscarchcr points
can find confessions-although thcy may be abstracted as mis- only to thc "pcculiar and signi{icant" aspc-cts of a spccilic rr-searclr
steps to bc avoided-in ficldwork mcthod primcrs, where authors location. Second, research, e-specially research conrluctc<l in the
in iearch of examplcs (cxtraordinary or dull) reach back to their fieldwork tradition, is both a social ancl a pcrsonal act, an<I, as such,
own field expcrienccs for guidclines for the novicc' Examples is subjcct to the same sorts of biographically and situationally spc-
include Agar, l9tl0; Burgcss, 1983; Douglas, 1985, 1976; Lof- cilic understandings through which any individual act t'an bc
landa, l9i;Scl-ratzman and Strauss, I973; Pclto and Pclto, 1973; undcrstood.
Powdermakcr, 1966; R. Wax, I97l; Glaser and Strauss, I967; and Social scicntists generally adhcrc to something of a hicrarchy of
Schwartz and facobs, 1979' professional values in which pcrsonal motivcs rank lou,an<l scicn-
Lct mc now pr<lvidc a rcasonably elaborate example o[the con- tific motivcs high. At the apcx of such a hierarchy are usually tht:
fcssional tale. Again, it is rry own work that scrves as the cxhibit' formal thcoretical conccrns-11'[n1 is it that is to bc cxplaincrl by
Thc excerpt is callccl "Johnny gets his gun."
'fhc matcrials were thc rcscarch? In my case, I was interested in questions surrounding
originally publishcd un<lcr the more somber and scrious title, adult socialization and the formation of occupational idcntitics. As
"Notcs on the production of cthnographic data in an American such, I searchcd about fbr a work world that might compcl ncu'
police agency," in l9tll.'Ihc piccc is drawn from a collection of cntrants to acccpt, if not seek, a good deal of changc in their per-
confessionals written by ficlclworkcrs interestcd in the sociology sonal idcntity and style of life in the process of lrt:coming fully ac-
and anthropology of law. Unlikc thc previous cxample o[ a rcalist cepted members of an occupation and organization. From this ana-
tale, whictrwas reasonably sclf-cont:rincd, tl-ris illustration is only lytic (and somewhat rcmote) standpoint, the policc seemed to bt:
a small part of a fairly lengttry, nonnal-form confcssional'"' It is a logical, and tlor,vnright dramatic, choice. Yet, altcrnative possi-
cclited herc in rathcr hcrky-icrky fashion to cxplicitly highlight a bilities u,ere most certainly availablc-rloctors, lau,ycrs, crooks,
few of thc more rampant at-rd obvior'rs cotrvcntions of thc genrc' priests, accountants, profbssors, architects, railroad rvorkers, and
so on. At this point, then, more gritty matters concerning why a
specific researcher chooses to study a spccific social world must bc
Johnny Gcts His Gun raiscd. Of course, to establish a motivc, e ven one's own, is a tricky
In 1969, I wrote in my thcsis proposal: "1'he police are quite Pos- business. .. .

'l-hrcc rathcr pcrsonal and perhaps pivotal factors scem best to

sibly the most vital o1'our human scn'icc agcncies. Certainly they
arc the most visiblc and active institution of social control, reprc- cxplain my particular choice to study thc police. First, when I bc-
senting thc technological and organizational ansrver to thc Hobbes- gan thinking seriously of the policc as a topic for research in the

82 83
Chapter Four Confessional Tales

latc sixties, thc police werc prominently f:ixed in thc imagery of

the asked for any assistance he might be willing to providc. I also told
day. Whe-ther .lu-,l",I or piaised, thcy wcrc both participants and him of the great difficultics I was having getting into a policc
,.,Lj".t. in the clramatic intl scaring issucs of public dcbatc' In- agency. At thc time we talked, I had becn dcnicd acccss to fburtecn
rlectl, the police rvcre visible rcmindcrs that thc Amcrican society departments on various and sundry grounds, the most popular of
*,u., iri,a".iy dividcd. Second, howcver, not much sccmcd to which seemed to be the legal complications that administrators
bc

known about thc policc. Whilc evcryonc I knew had cop stories to claimed my presence in their particular department would crcate.
mystcry to
tcll, therc rt,maini"l in all thcse talcs somcthing of a as. At any ratc, this faculty member agreed to hclp and, using the rap-
rvhy the policc actcd as thcy did. I.discovercd rathcr quickly that port that perhaps only a sensitivity traincr can achieve, was able to
thc policc-rclated litcraturc was at thc time rclatively thin'particu- persuade the command in Union City of thc mcrits of my planned
larly u'hcn it camc to dcscribing-thc actual activities ol policcmen' study and approach.
Third, thc available litcrature did not seem to squarc with my o\'\rl The rest of the negotiations followcd in a rather hurricd ancl pro
ranclom obsen'ations antl run-ins rvith thc policc' Ccrtainly'
with
forma fashion Within a week, I flerv to Union City, mct u'ith the
ferv exceptions, thc aritl portraits which represcntcd a good por- Chief of Police and several of his aides. After an afte rnoon of mcct-
tion of thc social scicncc iitcraturc of the day (circa 1968) did not ings with these men, I was granted access to thc departmcnt on
match my own visccral belicfs. As a young man growing up in a Los what could only be called open terms. In the fbllowing trvo wceks,
Angelcs suburb, I had many times becn..sulj":: t" Policc.attcntion' I had a number of telephone conversations to work out somc ad-
Ari t""n"g". driving a scrics ofunusually shabby but stylizcd auto- ministrative details of my study with the Captain of thc Training
mobilcs, it-scemc<l ls il I could ncver unclertakc a journey of any Division, who was to be my official guide and sponsor in tht: orga-
length without bcing stoppcd by -the police lbr somc rcason or nization during the period of my residency. Thc ncxt week I bcgan
I had bccn arrcrtcd ."ueiul times for minor misdceds such my work in Union City with a rcserve commission (u'hich ncatly
"rlo"th".. fighting' solved whatever lcgal complications thcrc werc-at least from tht:
as undcragc drinking, curfew violations, pctty theft, and
Ancl, of ,io." i^-"iiatc cxpcricncc, the cordons o[ grim' often police perspcctivc), a slot in the upcoming rccruit training class,
antagonistic, policemcn that dcmarked thc boundaries of cvery po- tentative approval, subject to my graduation from thc policc acad-
litical clcmon.stration I attcndcd coultl not be easily forgotten' In cmy, for scveral months of study in the patrol division (rvhich I was
many ways, I both fcared and loathcd the policc' ' ' ' able to stretch to almost six months and thcn rcncw scvcral timcs,
My u.."r. (into the Union City Policc l)epartment) was, to Put ycars later). . . . No editorial control was askcd for nor vl'as there
it blu;tly, the result of good f<rrtunc' Whilc good lbrtune does not any direct cliscussion of what the police thcmsclvcs hopcd to gct
Icnd itsclf well to analytic tliscussion, a few events in my cntry pro- out of this initial rcscarch bargain. . . .
ccss shoultl bc noted primarily to providc context for my discus- To penetrate the back regions of policc organizations rcquircs a
sion of working rolcs in thc ficld. rcscarchcr, like any ncwcomer to the setting, to undcrgo a lengthy
Most critica'i to the trntry Proccss \l'as a contact I dcvcloped at process of examination. As I have described in some detail clsc-
thc University of Califbrnia, Irvine, whilc in the midst of seeking a where, the novice in police organizations must cross several work
"represcntative" American policc departmcnt (i'c', large and ur- bounclaries, pass a series of social tests dcsigned to discover somc-
b",'r) *ithi., rvhich to conduct my work' Altcr six frustrating thing about thc prudcncc, inclinations, and character of thc per-
months of attcmpting to gain acccss' I discovcred, almost by son, and, of course, carve out a fcrv intimatc rclationships rvith
chance, a faculty *"Inb,,r in thc Graduatc School of Aclministra- membcrs of the organization upon whom the newcomer can de-
tion, my school, rvho had once run a scries of cncountcr group pend (Van Maanen, 1973, 1974, 1978a).
scssions'u'ith upper cchclon police officcrs in Union City' I sought Furthcrmorc, the student of thc police, again like any rookic
out this p.of".ror, told him ,rf g"t-t"tul plans and intercsts' and
-y patrolman, must also come to terms with somc rathcr concrctc

84 u5
 \

Confessional Tales
Chapter Four

When asked, I turncd dorvn offers to sit with staff mcmbers at

anrl pcn'asivt' cmotional issucs. In short, thcre arc personal qualms
lunch, visit their ofiiccs on brcaks, or go drinking rvith thc-m after
ulr,r,it ,rr-,t.'', orvn safcty to quiet. Indcc<i, much of thc occupational
work. I fblt this appropriate since a very strict fbrmality normally
talk ofthc policc carrics the tune ofviolcncc. Danger, u'hether rcal
obtains betlr'een rccruits and staff members. Similar to the in-
or imaginc<I, is a constant companion to thc policc. And, fcar is
dustrial workcrs studied a generation ago, policc recruits (and pa-
conscqucntly an cmotion every rcsearcher who spcnds timc in thc
trolmcn in gencral) rvere particularly scnsitivc to the possible con-
field with thc police must facc.
ncctions a rescarchcr might have with thcir bosscs. On scveral
Ft:ar, to an obscrvcr of thc police, stems fiom scvcral sources'
occasions, when I had chanccd to havc an cxtcnded conversation in
Certainly, bv associating closcly rvith the polictr, it may comc from
the hall with a staff ofticcr, I u,as immediatcly quizzcd on my return
tht: evcr prcscnt danger cxisting in city strects. I can rccall I'eeling
to thc rccruit areas as to what thc convcrsation had bccn about.
as if I had a bLrll's cye painted on thc side of my hcad the {irst [cu'
liarly in thc training program I r,vas askcd on a fi:lv occasions to
timcs I rotle in the front scat of a patrol car. Fcar may also arist:
plead a special casc on bchalf of a particular rccruit to ()ur aca-
from thc policc thcmsclvcs. I once witncssctl a bar fight between
tlcmic supcriors. I rcplied on thosc occasions that as far as thc staff
two ofiicers, cach bclieving thc othcr ha<l embarrasscd him in thc
\\.erc conccrncd I carried no morc wcight than thcy thcmsclves
c-ycs of a Captain. Tht: policc, of ncccssity pcrhaps, are not gt:ntle,
(u'hich may or may not have bec.n truc)-although I usually said
impassionatc sorts who can easily toleratc a dcviant in their midst.
-fhc altcr my disclaimer that if thcy fclt my talking to the Scrgcant in
rvorking stylc of an ethrtographcr is surc to rcflt:ct this. Of
charge of our particular class woulcl do some good, I rvould <lo so.
course, one cannot know until thc moment ariscs how he rvill
When it becamc apparcnt to the mcn that my nominal intcrven-
handlc thesc fcars. llut, the police will certainly be watching
tions were of littlc or no assistance to the'm, I was not askcrl for
closcly to dcterminc, on the one hand, whethcr or not thcy can
morc special favors.
"dcpcnd" on thc rttscarcher, and, on the othcr hand, whethcr or
Thc policc academy, with its strict discipline, prescribcd calcn-
not they can "take tht: rescarcher out" without adversc conse-
dar, and enfcrrccd lincs of authority, \\'as an cnvironment clcarly at
qucnces arising should thc need arise.
odds with thc patrol division. Yet, without doubt, my l3-rvcck
At another lcvel, the policc adhcre to an organized format
stint as an academy rccruit hclped immenscly whcn it camc to
in going about somc of thcir daily tasks. This format is rigid
building an obscrvational rolc among working patrolmcn. I)uring
in some cascs, such as thc police academy, and rclatively loose in
my lirst six wecks in the patrol division. I always u'orkcd rvith a
other cascs, such as roll calls an<l strect work in thc patrol division.
recruit I ha<l known in the acadcmy and his assigned vctcran part-
A researcher, in either contcxt, is conspicuous to thc degrec he
ncr, called, in Union City, the Field Training Officcr (FTO). On
docs or does not fit the format. In thc acadt-my, lbr t:xample, a
virtually evcry occasion, I u,as introduccd by my rccruit collcaguc
rescarcher who did not participate in thc Program would havc
to his FTO with a tag line that wcnt somcthing likc, "This is John
bccn so conspicuous as to precludc him from asking qucstions that
Van Maancn, he's OK, he w,cnt through the academy with me."
might uncover the attitudes rccruits might be fbrming toward cach
Following thc initial period in thc patrol division, I dccided to
other, the staff, the dcpartment, or thc rvork itselL On the street,
begin to focus my ficldu,'ork in trvo sectors and, in particular, w,ith
howcver, thcre is considerably morc leervay for a fieldworker to
two squads, thus, conlining my work to onc shift (7 ena-3 ana).
fhshion a rcsearch role lor himself without fbllowing a rigid format.
Several reasons were behincl this choicc. First, the shilt I chosc w.as
In my stutly, I entered thc police academy as a self-acknowl-
the most activc in tcrms of dispatchcd calls. Second, thc scctors I
edgcd researcher who, I wanted made known, would stay with the
selcctcd n'ert-' thought to produce thc most "policc work." One
clais through graduation and spend somc time working with the
sector took in thc skid row and dow,ntou.n busincss district ancl
recruits afterr thcy had left the academy. I)uring training, I con-
the othcr scctor included a largc part of the black ghctto in Union
sciously avoidcd establishing obvious links with the academy staff.

a'7
86
 Confessional Tales
Chapter Four

City. Third, scvcral of the men with whom I hacl dcvelopcd the event, he explained, we were to be disarmcd. l'his too violatcd dc-
clolest tics in the acaclemy werc assigned to the squad-s I picked partmcntal rcgulations. Even my 357 magnum rcvolvt-'r was against
and a clisproportionate numbcr of mcn from my acadtmy class departmental regulations. This was a gift from my acadcmy class-
workcd in the samc scctors on overlapping shitts' Finally' by re- mates, given to me lbrmally during the graduation excrcisc in front
stricting my rangc, I hopcd to be able to build {irmer, more trust- of thc policc command, members of rccruits' families, and local
;ng ,"laiionrhipJwith the ofiicers, both rookies and vetcrans' of
the television news cameras. Evcn thc ammunition I rcccivcd through
tJo .quads. Although I sometimes worktxl outside of thesc two regular departmcntal channels was oflicially taboo. While I was
,q,r"dr, I spcnt at lc'-'ast lour of the frve rvorking shifts cach u'cek something of a walking talking rule violation, so, t(x), rvcre my col-
with thesc trvo squads. l.'agu.'s.
A critical poini nceds to be made in this regarcl' By allowing C)n the street, I cncountcrcd littlc overt hostility liom patrol-
myself to be closcly itlentificd rvith thc patrolmen, I rvas purposely mcn, although a fcw vcteran o{licers refused to allow mc to work
rn'utl.,g a choicc atout thc data I u'ould gather' My 'sclf-imposed with them. C)ne instance bears mention becausc it shcds light on
isolatiJn lrom thc managers of the organization antl the other en- the research process itsclf. I was working thc "last out" shift (11
claves of special police in*tercst uery clcarly biased my. study toward err.r-7 am) r.vith an academy classmate when wc receivcrl an assign-
the perspcctivcslf thore at the strect level' ln thc policc sy'stem'
as ment to check on a possiblc "brcak" in a warchousc closcd for thc
p".hupr'in any social systcm, thosc of the lowcr castc (in this casc' cvcning. Wc wcrc some <listance away and when w'c arrivr'<l at thr.
ih., put..rl-"n) arc thought to bc sub^servicnt and 4iffcrential to call, several other units were already on the scene. In fact, a fcw
those ofthe highcr castclin this case' from sergt:ants on uP), who, ofiiccrs werc alrcady insidc thc warehousc, flashlights in han<I. As
in turn, balanJc thc system, theoretically at least, by shorving. a wc got out of thc car to entcr the building, another ofiict'r camc
pat"r,lnii.ti. rcgar,l foi thc lower caste' In the police world, the over and, aftcr asking who thc hell I was, told my partncr to clcar
po*,", of thc liigher caste holds the systcm rclatively stable' but the call as unfoundcd, thcrc wcrc no burglars on hancl, just an opcn
lh"r., i, a goo4 i"ul ol tcnsion and conf'lict cxisting not far below door. If anything had bcen taken, the manager of thc rvarchousc
thc surface-l I o a field rvorkcr, this usually means that the members would make a rcport in the morning. We did as wc u,crc tol<I,
o[ the lorvcr caste will make better informants (reveal more). Not staycd on thc scenc fbr a short timc, but left bcforc tl.rc othcr olli-
only do they havc less to lose objectively, but they arc under le-ss ccrs departcd. l)uring the next hour or so, my partncr cnlightcned
,t."in to upp"u. faultless to either their internal or external audi- me about what might have been occurring in thc warchousc rvhcn
enccs. we arrived. "'Ihose fucking mopes," he said, "trying to makc off
My appearancc whilc on patrol wa-s tailored aftcr the plain- with as much as they can get and on my call yct! You can't trust
clothes ofit.".r; in the dcpartmcnt. My hair was closely cropped, I anyhotly in this outfit." . . .
worc loose fitting sport jackets that did not make conspicuous the [n summaryl To some ofticers with whom I worked, I was a
bulge of my.".ui"."'.""ulucr. I wore hard-toed and heavy shoes, slit sort of "acceptable incompetent," capablc pcrhaps of shortening
or ilip-on tics, and carried with mc a fla-shlight, chemical mace, the long hours on patrol through talk b'rt incapablc of doing any-
rosewoocl nightstick, handcuffs, various kcys, and sometimes a thing remotcly connectcd to the job itsclf. To most officers, I was
two-way po.iubl" ra<lio- Scveral patrolmen, at various times during more the rescrve officer, a "friendly helpcr" sort rvho could, whcn
the stuiy, gave mc (for no doubt mixcd reasons) fist loads, saP callcd on, handlc somc light paper work, thc radio, conduct an in-
glovcs, u.t,ll., assortment of jacks to carry u'ith mc on patrol' And terview at, say, thc scene of a fendcr-bcndcr trallic accident, but,
i,li,l .ur.y a fcw ol'thesc tools of the police trade although-depart- nonetheless, required continual supervision and could not be as-
mental rtgulations prohibitcd their use' Onc ofiicer insisted I carry sumed to know what to do should an occasion arisc in the ficld
a sccontl !.rr-t, u "two incher," in my coat pocket in the unlikely that callcd for "rcal police work." To a very I'ew ofticcrs, two or

88 89
 Confessional Tales
Chapter Four

sault reports, whilc at other times I simply stood in the shadows

thrce at most, I was more or less a "working partner," albeit a
and watched the police go about their tasks or, less frequcntly, but
temporary one.
more discretcly, "did a train" and slippcd liom vicw cntirely. . . .
As an acceptable incompctent, I sat in the backseat of a two-
In thc academy, I helped cover for tardy classmates by concocting
man unit, taking no part in the decision bcing rcachctl in the front
what I thought to be reasonable tales to tcll supcrior officers. Scv-
scat, save those decisions about where and when to eat or take a
eral times I cheated on cxams by passing my answcr shcet arountl
break. On thcse shifts, I rarely spokc u'ith anyone but my police
the back of the room (as I too lookcd at others' ans\\,ers shccts).
guides. I did no policc work other than to occasionally keep a per- These mostly mundanc matters would hardly bc worth mentioning
ionally protectivl cye on a prisoner who might happen to share the
werc it not fbr the fact that they point to thc difficulty, if not im-
backscat with me.
possibility, of maintaining a clear cut aml rccognizablc observa-
As a fricndly helpcr, my time was split somewhat er"enly be-
tional or participatory research rolc. At least in thr: policc rvorld,
tween one-man and- two-man units. In this role, I was delcgated
the variation cxisting in the environmcnt as u,ell as that among thc
tasks such as kecping thc log or calling radio for a liccnse plate
pcople studiecl, rcquircs a situational and very llcxiblc sct ofguidr:-
check on a vehicie that iust might turn out to bc stolcn' Other
lincs not casily categorized-even rvhcn w,riting with thc luxury of
times, I would be asked to post myself at the corncrs of buildings
hindsight.
when checking out a potcntial burglary or prowler call' In this role,
I was also expectcd to physically or othcrwise assist antl back up an
officer if any altcrcation arose during the tour. Confcssional'llles in Pcrspcctivc
Finally, i, a *orking patrolman, I was put in the role of what 'l'hc confcssional tale has bccomc, as I argued earlicr, an irrstitu-
Union iity police callcd thc shotgun Partner. I played this part
tionalized and popular form of fieldwork writing. 'I'hc confcs-
only with olfi."., working solo beats and during thesetours I was
sional attcmpts to rcprcscnt thc fieldworkcr'.s participativc
responsible for radio communications' PaPerwork (oftcn signing
prcsence in the stucliecl sccnc, the fieldworkcr's rapport ancl scrr-
mf namc to ttre log, arrest rePorts, ficld invesigation slips, etc'), sitive contact with othcrs in thc world describccl, and soncthing
back-up responsibility on traffic stops (positioning myself just out-
of the concrctc cultural particulars that baffie thc ficldworker
side the puit".tg". tloor on the patrol car), and for the shotgun
whilc he learns to livc in thc setting. It is ncccssarily a blurrcd
carried in most policc cars should its use bc requircd (hcnce, the
acconnt, combining a partial description of thc culture alongsidc
Union City tag for the role, "you're shotgun tonight' I'll clrwc")'
an equally partial descriptior-r of thc fieldwork cxpcricncc itself.
On calls ,u.h i. thc various sorts of disturbancc calls, I would help
Since the authors arc writing of thcir own sightings, trcarings, and
scparate the quarrcling parties, restrain thcm if nced be' and usu-
interpretations, the soft subjectivity of the ficldwork expericnce
ally takc a share in the decision about what, if any, police action
begins to slip into fieldwork confessions in a way it does not in
wis to be taken. On no occasion, howcver, did I drive a vehiclc on
rcalist versions of a culturc. Missing data, incrlmplcteness, blind
routine patrol. This was probably for thc samc reason few rookics
spots, and various other obscuritics arc adnrittcd into thc account.
do much driving of prowl cars-vetcran officers do not trust the
The avowccl purposc, of course, is to lift thc vcil of public sccrccy
novice driver who, firrt, docs not know the district, and, sccond,
surrounding ficldwork.
is unaccustomed to thc unpredictable ways other motorists react
Unmasking ficldwork is a relativcly rcccnt phenomenon. A
lr'hcn spying the police black-and-whites.
gcncration (perhaps hvo) of fieldworkers, in both anthropology
Whii c"m"t through as a rcsult of this cursory ovcrview of
and sociologv, apparently felt r-ro grcat urgc to enlightcr-r their
thcsc thrce somewhat distinct roles playcrl by one ficldworker is
rcaders as to what canny tricks of the traclc carried them through
the inconsistency associated with the cthnographic research role'
thcir rcspcctive research projccts. I,br the most part, thcy were
At times, I lrisked susPects, put handcuffs on prisoners, wrote as-

9l
90
 Confessional Tales
Chapter Four

willing to simply state something to the cffcct, "This study is based of ficldwork. Yet howcver involuted somc confcssional accounts
to may appear, thc rcader who wonders why the confessional writers
nu t*l y.^r, uf'fi.l,ltork" and leavc it at that; allowing rcaders
juclgc tlic adequacy of thc mcthod by the final result' No more' don't do their pcrvcrse, self-centered, anxicty work in private and
3"u-.rol ,"rruur; can bc gc'crated for thc current popularity
ofthe simply comc forward with an cthnographic fact or hvo arc, quitc
ficldwork confession' frankly, missing thc point.
First,muc}rofthctraditionalaut}rorityclainrcdforfieldwork A good deal of recent confcssional work rests ott what many
(myself included) take to be a fundamental turning point in Ameri-
by its carly promotcrs and iustified by thcm ot'r thc basis of their
as a human and behavioral science' can social thought. No longer is thc social world, as mentioned in
"rtrblirhi,-tg'ethnography
akin to the obscrving natural sciences, has worn thin' Some
con- chapter l, to bc taken for granted as mcrcly out therc full of neu-
fcssions arc thercfore an attempt to shore up thc fieldwork
craft as tral, objective, obscrvablc facts. Nor arc nativc poir.rts of view
a still scicntifically valid onc.
'l'hcy attcmpt to show how a readcr to be considcred plums hanging from trees, nceding only to be
of the conditions under which the pluckcd by fieldworkcrs and passed on to cousutncrs. Rathcr, so-
,r,ight *ork back irom a display
fi.fr*ork was accomplishcd to somc assessmcnt of how rcliable cial facts, including nativc points of view, arc httman fabrica-
ancl valid thc realist ethnography itself might be' Presumably
the tions, themselves subjcct to social inquiry as to thcir <lrigins.
.lri,,'tr, anecclotcs, and pcrsonal iitters contair-rcd in my confcs- F'ieldwork constructs now are seen by many to emcrgc frorn a her-
sional tale might inform tl-re rcadcr who worrics about the trust- mcneutic process; ficldwork is an interpretivc act, not au obscrv:r-
worthiness of my stati<lnhouse scrgcant dcpiction. Becausc
realist tional or descriptive one (Agar, I986). 'fhis process bcgins with
accounts arc,r,ciltodologically silcnt, bccause they adopt the con- thc cxplicit exanrination of onc'.s own preconceptions, biascs, ancl
ccit that data must be cleanly scparated fr<'rm thc fieldworkcr (im- motives, moving forward in a dialectic fashion toward undcr-
plying, no doubt, that virtually anyonc would sce , hear, and think standing by way of a continuous dialoguc behveen thc intcrprctcr
itr" ,t""t" things wcrc they i' the fieldworker's shoes), and bccause and interprcted (scc Rabinow and Sullivan, 1979).
tl,.y off", oniy the fieldworkcr's tightly packaged account of the Son're confessionals suggcst that the acutc sclf-cotrsciousncss

culturc studicd, cortlcssions arc llcccssary' brought on by working through such a process can lcad to sorne-
Sccor.rcl, some confessional writcrs are not at all interestcd
in thing of a paralysis (e.g., fulcs-Rosette, 1976; 'l'hornc, l983;
rccstablishing and confirming orthodox vicws on thc scientific Krieger, l9B3; Tylcr, l986). 'l'here is obviously a ncccl for balancc
chartcr of ficldwork. In fact, somc confcssional talcs arc written bctwccn introspectior-r and objcctification. Whcn only thc former
is involved, a sort of "vanity ethnography" rcsults, in wltich only
cxplicitly to question the vcry basis of ethnographic authority and
kl transform ethnography, irlsofar as possiblc, into a more philo- the private mrrses and demons of thc ficlclworkcr arc <lf concern.
sophical, artistic, f,h.no,tt.nological, or political craft; a craft Conventions of confcssiolrals offer somc aicl, if not cornfort, for
sensitivc to rnatters thought by thcsc writers to be morc relevant
ficldworkers trying to grasp occurrenccs irt thc field ernpathcti-
an<l irtrportant than what ethnography providcd to readers
in the cally, but to stand away to situate thcm in othcr contcxts, both so-
past." In skillcd hancls, thc personal voicc can bc a giftto readers cial and pcrsonal. 'Ihe textual organization of the standard con-
a,,cl thc confessional becomes a self-reflcctive meditation
on the lcssional tale nray bc of some liclp for ficldworkcrs who rcgard
nature of cthnographic understanding; the reader comcs away participant-obscrvation as a mctaphor bcst rclorrnulated in her-
with a clecpcr ,.*" ,rf th" problems posed by the cntcrprise itself' rneneutic tcrms: a dialcctic between cxpcricncc ancl intcrpretation.
In unskilled hands, a wild and woolly involuted tract is produccd Thcre is, as cxcmplified in rny confessional, somcthing of a
that secms to suck its author (and rcadcr) into a black holc of in- norm about wl'rat constitutcs a minimally acceptable table of con-
trospcction; thc confcssi<tnal is obsessed with method, not sub- tents for an account of fieklwork. Atrthors rnust discuss thcir pre-
jcct, and clrifts toward a singlc-rnindcd, abstract represcntation undcrstandirrgs of thc studied sccnc as wcll as thcir owr-r intcrests

92 93
Chapter Four Confessional Tales

in that sccnc; their modes of entry, sustaincd participation or pres- handling of inforrnants for whom I unproblcmatically clair-n to
encc, ard exit procedurcs; the rcsponses of othcrs on the sccllc to spcak in my tales. I know full well that thc understanding I have
thcir prcscnce (and vice versa); the naturc of thcir rclationship of their talk and action is not only incornplctc, but rcsts funda-
with various catcgories of informants; and their rnodcs of data col- mcntally on thc contextual mattcrs that surround nry corning to-
lcction, storagc, rctricval, and alalysis. 'Ib work through such gethcr with particular peoplc, at particular tirnes, for particular
matters dccply forccs on the ficldworker a private ertcounter witl'r purposcs, in particular placcs, and so or.r. 'fhus I put forward
sonre vcry basic hcrrnencutic issttcs, au encountcr which may bc- thc mcaning of such talk and action untruthfully in my writing
comc public. As fieldworkcrs consi<lcr and rcport their practiccs, withotrt also considcring (and rcpresenting) thc various contexts
confcssional talcs grow morc conrplex ancl sophisticated.rz within which it occurs. In what is rapidly l>ccorning somcthing of
ln this vcin, when I considcr rrry owlt colrfcssion I find it now a an in-group term in fieldwork circlcs, both infonnants and field-
rathcr flat, traditional, and unrcmarkablc onc.'t All thc conven- workcrs are "interlocutors" in cultural studies :rnd arc thcreforc
tions discussed in thc introcluctory scction of this chapter arc jointly cngagcd in making scnse o[ thc entcrprisc (Clifforcl and
prcscnt. The auttrority is highly pcrsonalizcd. It is certainly thc Marcus, l986). The line betwcen what infornrarrts and ficld-
case that it is my own point of vicw that is at issue in the talc and workcrs makc of thc world is not an casy onc to locatc (Van
not that of thc policc. 'Ihc naturalncss of thc data is implied by Maarrcn, 1979, 1981b).
thc various ways I dclcument my acceptancc into police circlcs as At issuc is the fact that thcre arc always nrany ways to intcrprct
a quzrsi mcmber in good standing. On this matter, thc unsaid but cultural data. Flach interprctation can bc disputcd on rnany
unavoiclablc implication of thc writing is that thesc world-wcary grounds. The data ficldworkcrs comc to hold arc not likc dollar
policcrnen ignored nlc as a researchcr and paid attcntion to mc bills found on the sidcwalk and stcalthily tucked away in our
only as an awkward trovicc or easy fricncl who was scen as rcliably pockets for later usc. F'icld data arc constructcd fron talk ancl ac-
on thcir siclc; they wcnt about thcir mostly unmcrry way in muclt tion. '['hcy arc thcn intcrpretations of ot]rer interprctations ancl
thc sarne fashion as they would had I not been thcrc. Certainly arc mediated rnany timcs ovcr-by the ficldworkcr'.s own stan-
this is thc mcssage I wishcd to convcy at the timc I wrote tl'rc con- dards of rclcvancc for what is of intercst; by thc hiskrrically situ-
fessional, ancl in a sensc it is my hopc that it still rcprcscuts at lcast ated querics put to informants; by the norms cnrrcnt in thc ficld-
a partial truttr. workcr's profcssional comnrunity for what is propcr work; by the
But I must admit I am far lcss certain or confidettt now about self-rcflcction dernanded of both the ficldworkcr and thc infor-
thc vcracity and faithfulncss of cithcr rny cortfessional or my real- mant; by the intentional and unintcntional ways a ficlclworker or
ist talcs than I havc bccn in thc past. Both kinds of writing arc informant is mislcd; and by the ficldworkcr's rncrc prcscnce on thc
highly conventionalizcd in both a rcprescntational and a stylistic scenc as an observcr and participant.
sensc. Both, as I know only too wcll, leave rnorc of my knowlcdgc F'icldworkcrs arc increasingly conscious that thc so-called clata
out of thc accounts than thcy put in. Both closc off too carly (and thcy pr<lduce and carry away from thc ficld havc alrcady becn thor-
to<l casually) what remain rathcr open mattcrs. F iddlesticks. I am, oughly workccl over. "'lbxtualization" is Ricocur'.s (1973) tcrm for
in short, still vcry much in the proccss of corning to unclerstand thc proccss by which unwrittcn bclravior, bclicfs, values, rituals,
my matcrials-which contintte to dcvelop each timc I revisit oral traditions, and so forth, bccornc fixccl, atomized, and classi-
Union City, talk to my fricnds there, rcad the r.rewspapcrs, rcview ficd as data of a ccrtain sort. Onlv in tcxtualizcd form do data yield
articles and books by othcrs relevant to rny matcrials, or sit and to analysis. T'hc proccss of analysis is not clcpcndcnt on thc events
consider old writings or notes of my own. thcmselvcs, but on a second-orclcr, tcxtualized, fieldworker-
I am also troublcd by my rathcr strait-laccd ancl straight-faccd depcndent vcrsiorr ofthc cvents. Thc problem herc is how to crack

94 95
Chapter Four Confessional Tales

open the textualization process itself. As we shall see, several pos- sional tales attempted to set their critics straight by demonstrating the
sanctity and worth of their "timeless way of knowledge." These legitimiz-
sibilities are being entertained in the more experimental forms of
ing works were celebratory in tone (sanctification by grace), and while
ethnographic writing.
exposing some of the warts of the activity, fieldwork came off splendidly
Nonetheless, despite growing discomfort among many field-
in the text, as might be expected since the fieldworker was doing the writ-
workers with these apparently intractable dilemmas facing their ing (e.g., Casagrande, I960; Adams and Preiss, 1960; Maybury-Lewis,
craft, if they are to write at all about their research, they must get 1965; Vidich, Bensman and Stein, 1964; McCall and Simmons, 1969;
on with it or retire from the sport entircly. Two forms of practical Spindler, 1970). These forms have now hardened into the genre pre-
resolution have been discussed thus far. In gross form, realist sented in this chapter. As I suggest, however, confessional tales, like real-
writings take what the authors know (or at least think they know) ist ones, are being modified now as the power of observation slips away as
as their subject matter and, by and large, ignore how such things the unique ethnographic strength. Marcus and Fischer (1956:B-44)
came to be known. In equally crude fashion, confessional writers discuss the direction such changes are taking under the label "interpretive
take the author or knower as subiect matter and by and large by- anthropology."
pass what it is that the author knows as a result of fieldwork. Each 2. I have in mind such examples as Junker, 1960; Freilich, 1970;
R. Wax, l97l; Kimball and Watson, l97Z; Bogdan and Thylor, 1975;
treats the other as supplemental.
Lofland, 1976; and many of the essays in Van Maanen, l98lb. This list
In chapter 5 another class of fieldwork tales are examined. I
is, however, a drop in the bucket. Apparently the quip attributed to
call these "impressionist tales" and argue that they are an attempt Evans-Pritchard (quoted in Clarke, 1975): "Anybody who is not a com-
to explicitly bring knower and known together in representational plete idiot can do fieldwork," seriously underestimates the felt need of
form. Currently, imprcssionist tales of the published sort are often fieldworkers lor more explicit guidance.
buried within realist or confessional ones and are thus something 3. Examples here would include Agar, 1986; Emerson, 1983; Ham-
of a subgenre and a marginal type of ethnographic writing. More mersley and Atkinson, 1983; Ruby, 1982; Schwartz and facobs, 1979;
frequently, however, impressionist tales are told to little gatherings Rabinow and Sullivan, 1979; and Douglas, 1976. This literature con-
of friends, collcagues, students, and other interested groups. tinues to grow.
While they rarely make it into print, impressionist tales are the 4. Confessional talcs do not always praise the trickster image. In
backstage talk of fieldwork. Telling them is a familiar enough oe: some, fieldwork is presented as a moral trial having anguish and ambiva-
lence as the felt result. In my own work, for example, I was once thanked
currcnce in fieldwork circlcs to warrant closer inspection. There
by some of my police acquaintances for coming to the funeral of one of
are, of coursc, important differences between the spoken and
their mates. I still feel like a hypocrite recalling the incident, since I was
written tales. I've chosen, however, to join the two in chapter 5, at the funeral to unravel a cultural rite and not to pay my respects. Hy-
with only a ritual nod given now and then to the distinction be- pocrisy is always at issue in fieldwork, and these (and other) inner experi-
tween them. ences mark the confessional tale (e.g., Powdermaker, 1966; Henry and
Saberwal, 1969; Gans, 1982; Habenstein, 1970; Thorne, 1980; Punch,
1986; R. Rosaldo, 1986a).
NOTES 5. From this standpoint, theory would seem to have most relevance at
I. Until the with few exceptions simply done
1960s, fieldwork was the second moment of ethnographic production, the writing phase,
and not much written about or analyzed. Critics of ethnography de- where an author's selection and choice ofethnographic facts and arrange-
lighted in pointing this out. To some, fieldwork became known, with a ment of them create the text. Theory matters in the field only insofar as
certain condescension, as the "anthropological method;" by others it was similar kinds of fieldwork experience for very different fieldworkers are
thought of as preparatory to the main business of social research and was given contrasting readings and weight. The same informantt account or
hence called a "pilot" or "exploratory" study; and to the most vehement activity can be seen as an example of false consciousness or as situa-
fieldwork was merely "pscudoscience" (Hughes, 1960). Early confes- tionally appropriate and creative behavior. Theory doesn't determine

96 97
Chapter Four Confessional Tales

fieldwork experiencc, but it may provide thc dictionary with which it is deemcd interesting cnough by onc's collcagucs to warrant another ac-
read. See Feycrabend (1977) for a uscful, though polemic, treatmcnt of count of how such stcrling work was apparcntly clonc. Much confessional
this mattcr. writing hclps to establish the respectability of thc cthnographic work that
preccdcd it, eithcr by showing how the traditiorral canons ofpractice were
6. As noted earlicr, a relatively new school of ficldwork practice is
crnerging in sociology under thc existentialist banncr. This group argues followed in the field, or, conversely, by showing why traclitional canons
cogcntly for more intimatc involvement ("bccome thc phenornena") in were inadequate to produce the worthy talc thc confcssion indexes.
order to personally cxperiencc ernotion and mcaning in the lifc world 10. I should also note that whilc confession was partly on my mind
studied. F ieldworkers within this school rcgard both discourse and obscr- when I wrote this article, so, too, was a rathcr blatant attempt to smuggle
vation as inadequate devices for getting past tl.rc fronts, duplicity, and se- in some of ny police nratcrial that I found more difficult to rcprcscnt in
crecy that oftcn surround certair-r settings (e.g., nude bcaches, ncssage the realist tradition. This secondary objective is hardly atypical ofconfes-
parlors, drug dealing, adult bookstores). Sce J. Douglas (1976, 1985) for a sion, and, as I noted earlier, solne cthnographers (and thcir readers) find
statcment of aims and theory and Adler and Adler (1987) for a uscful the conlessional format pcrfectly tuned to thcir own thcorctical, philo-
rcview of somc of the ways thc cxistentialist desperadoes of ficldwork arc sophical, and personal commitments. It therefore scrvcs thcrn as a
putting thcir views (and fcelings) into practicc. favored form of ficldwork reporting.
7. I'his rnatchmaking sensc of ethnography rescmbles Giddcn s ( 1976) ll. T'he fieldworkcrs of interest hcre are likcly b considcr cthnog-
idca that different cultural realities arc, insofar as thcy are awarc of oue raphy rnorc an art form than a science (scc Gcertz, l9[i3; Marcus ancl
another, frames of Ineaning always in the process of nrediation. 'lhr:s, Fischer, 1986; Rabinow and Sullivan, I979). They oftcn chastisc thcir
fieldworker and native frames of meaning meet in an ethnography which rnorc scientifically oricntcd collcagucs for what they rcgard as failccl
prescnts thc results of a mcdiation process. These rcsults could, of prophecies, trivial research, and little progrcss toward any iron laws of
course, rcprescnt thc triumph of rationality, delusion, or cocrcion in behavior despitc thc constant whinc lor more rcscarch on a givcn topic.
fieldwork. Rcadcrs havc or.rly the final product on which to reflect and Not only do thc critics of traclitional cthnographic ainrs draw on intcr-
surnisc. prctivc thcorics for inspiration, but this bolting from thc fold occurs, as
{i. Things arc somewhat more in flux herc than thc tcxt suggests. A Clifford (l98la) suggcsts, at a tirne whcn colonial authority has varrislrccl
part of thc cor-rfcssional litcrature also debunks the previously unques- and most liberal dcmocracies arc said to be in a crisis of conscicncc
tioncd (and channing) myth of fieldwork rapport. Malinowski (1967) was (partly as a result ofthe social uphcavals ofthc 1960s and 1970s). In this
again path breaking in this rcgard (posthumously). More reccntly, it has clirnatc, the institutional role of fieldwork has bccn attackcd, sornctimcs
becomc fashionable in some circles to spcak of a confrontational form of savagely, for bcing but a spccial branch ofthc qucen'.s sccrct scrvicc, scrv-

fieldwork where from the outset of thc study littlc faith is placcd in thc ing nrainly to inform the crown during thosc long, hot sunrnrcrs whcrr
inrroccnt attainment of rapport as the neccssary precondition to unlock- the nativcs arc restless. A ncw form of ethnography is thcrcf<rre rcquircd
ing cultural knowledge. Clifford (l98lb) points out that thcrc is always a on nroral grounds-onc with a morc disperscd lorrl of authority and lcss
ccrtain amount of violence involved in fieldwork if only bccause the claim to posscss the correct intcrpretive stancc. Strong statcments urging
fieldworker's presencc is manifestly an intrusion. Cor.rfrontational ficld- a rnorc active and politically sawy rolc for cthnography arc found in
workcrs no longer avoid mcntion of such violence, so they attack the as- Hynres, 1972;Dwyer, 1977 and T'homas, 1983b.
sumption of rapport and with it the dream of an unobtrusive cthnog- 12. While complcxity and sophistication may indeed grow, there arc
raphy. In thc hands ofsornc sociologists confessions read likc dcbriefings limits to the gcnrc as well. Confessions, cndlcssly rcplayed, begin to lose
aftcr a battle in the social combat zone with accounts of how ir-rformants thcir novclty and powcr to inforrn. In thc cxtrcrnc, they also lose their
wcre bullied, l-row tactics of coercive pcrsuasion wcrc employcd, and how way altogethcr by tacitly suggcsting that ficldwork is a bctter method for
the wcaknesses, disunity, and confusiotr of thc natives werc cxploited learning about thc ficlclworkcr than it is for lcaming about the culturc thc
(c.g., J. Douglas, 1976, I985; Humphreys, 1970:185-91;Buhner, I982; ficldworker went to stucly. It may bc that standard-form confcssional tales
Punch, 1986). have exhaustcd thc possibilitics for improving what rcmains a neccssarily
9. In this light, to publish a confessional talc is often something of a runccrtain and risky task. New ways of understanding fieldwork rnay be
reward givcn thc fieldworker for having first prcscnted a rcalist accounl rcquired in ordcr to look morc closcly and critically at thc prcstudy as-

9u 99
Chapter Four

sumptions and practices that govern the production and dissemination of

ethnography. Both history and literary criticism are models for the kind
of work that is needed. Movcment along these fronts is visible (c.g.,
Rock, 1979: 178-217 ;Gusfield, I981 :81- 108; Stocking, 1983; Geertz,
I98l; Clifford, l98la, l98lb; Bulmer, 1984; Clifford and Marcus, 1986;
Marcus and F'ischer, 1986; and Beckcr, 1986a, l2I-75.
13. A striking cxamplc of this is the fact that I rnade no mcntion in
this confession of my simple desire to do ficldwork. This secms a curious
ovcrsight in retrospect, because I was very much committed to getting
bcyond the university and trying my hand at what I was beginning to
regard as "real research." At the time, my only cxposurc to what the craft
cntailed were two hurried observational proiects, one in a commcrcial
bank, the other in sevcral local city halls. I had, however, read enough
about fieldwork to prefer my imagc of it to other thesis prospects of mine,
such as standing over an IBM machine in the cornptrter ccnter running
data or hanging out in the library talking to myself. A very real motive
behind my commitment to fieldwork was (and I suppose still is) that it
seemcd like fun. A good part of my imagcry camc, of course, frorn the
lively confessionals I was then reading. The irony of all this is that, as
mcntioned in thc Preface, when all was said and done, my thesis, despite
the lengthy fieldwork, still put me in front of the IBM machinc cranking
out survey results and running back and forth to the library to dcvelop
some comparative framework for my numbers. I was not yet confident,
nor had I lcarned to write it up. Writing, not fieldwork, turned out to be
my problem. Becker (1986b) provides some much needcd advicc and in-
sight on thc most practical problems of deskwork in sociology.

100