Workshop: Fieldwork in the Middle East
12 February, 2007 (University of Edinburgh)
Fieldwork in the Middle East
The workshop addressed issues such as the training that researchers receive, the methods and techniques they use, the obstacles and opportunities encountered in the field, and the way that these influence the research product. The discussion also asked to what extent, if any, these features of conducting fieldwork are particular to the Middle East. The workshop examined these issues from a variety of disciplinary perspectives, including anthropology, political science, history and literature.
The event was open to all post-graduates and interested undergraduates. The whole day was recorded and a final report has been produced and is available for download (see below).
The schedule of the day was as below:
9.30 Session One: Politics
The first session examined the fieldwork experiences of political science researchers in the Middle East. It considered a range of issues related to preparation for fieldwork, methodology, what actually happens in the field, and the way that these factors affect the final research product. Areas for reflection included the reliability of, and ease of access to, primary sources; the way in which interviews were conducted; the difficulties and obstacles encountered in the field, including any ethical and confidentiality issues; and the extent to which these factors may be said to be particular to the country or region studied.
Chair: Yasir Suleiman (Edinburgh)
Panel: Salwa Ismail (Exeter)
John Chalcraft (LSE)
Tony Gorman (Edinburgh)
10.45 Tea and Coffee
11.00 Session Two: Anthropology
The second session focused on the experiences and perspectives of anthropologists working in the region. Again it asked what, if anything, distinguishes the Middle East as a region in which to conduct fieldwork. Areas for consideration included: what research areas are defined as sensitiveӔ and why; how research topics are chosen, and whether some topics are studied disproportionately; whether the Middle East presents particular challenges to the anthropological method; and whether the anthropological imperatives of getting behind appearancesӔ and studying the tenor of everyday lifeӔ still make sense in this region.
Chair: Paul Anderson (Edinburgh)
Panel: Paul Dresch (Oxford)
Iris-Jean Klein (Edinburgh)
Shuruq Naguib (Lancaster) (unable to attend)
12.15 Session Three: Culture
This session focused on research into the literature, films and other art forms of the Middle East. Areas to consider included the availability of and ease of access to sources; the way in which art can be a means of political expression; how censorship regimes operate and change, and the implications of this for the researcher; the way in which art can challenge and contest socially taboo subjects, and whether this is characteristic of the Middle East; the different audiences for whom art is produced; and the role that the researcher plays in promoting or in acting as a conduit between the artist and new audiences.
Chair: Andrew Newman (Edinburgh)
Panel: Kamran Rastegar (Edinburgh)
Zahia Salhi (Leeds)
Paul Starkey (Durham)
1.15 Lunch
2.30 Session Four: Country-specific experiences
The third session invited speakers and other participants to reflect on the particular circumstances of the country in which they lived, and the way that these affected the methods and results of fieldwork. Panel speakers talked about their experiences in Syria, Iran, Palestine/Israel and Iraq, and may also draw broader cross-regional comparisons. Issues considered included the opportunities and obstacles that were encountered, how these were dealt with, whether they significantly altered the scope and direction of research, and the extent to which they were particular to the country or region in question.
Chair: Ayman Shihadeh (Edinburgh)
Panel: Khaled Hroub (al-Jazeera)
Daniel Neep (SOAS)
Ali Ansari (St Andrews)
Yasmin Husein (Exeter)
3.45 Tea and Coffee
4.00 Session Five: Engaging the Familiar?
The final session invited all participants to reflect on the situation of scholars, from whatever background, who work on a society or culture that is either their own or personally close to them. Areas considered included whether the way of knowing a society or culture that is ‘familiar’ or personally close is different from the way of knowing a society that is ‘other’; whether the ‘familiar/other’ distinction is a useful one; whether the process of claiming authority differs when the subject is ‘other’ rather than ‘familiar’; and what the advantages and disadvantages are of writing about a personally familiar society or culture.
Chair: Yasir Suleiman (Edinburgh)
Panel: Salwa Ismail (Exeter)
Ali Ansari (St Andrews)
Khaled Hroub (al-Jazeera)
Zahia Salhi (Leeds)
Yasmin Husein (Exeter)
Kamran Rastegar (Edinburgh)
Shuruq Naguib (Lancaster)(unable to attend)
5.30 Close
A final report on the workshop, compiled by Professor Yasir Suleiman and Paul Anderson, is available for download as a PDF document from here: Fieldwork_in_the_Middle_East_Report-1.pdf
