Participant Observation Exercise: My visit to the mosque
I have never visited a mosque before, so I decided to visit one on a Friday. I did this as I knew it would be very busy on a Friday, as traditionally Friday is the day that you must visit the mosque to pray. On most other days Muslims tend to pray in their own homes. Before entering the mosque I realised that I didn’t know anything about the Islamic way of life, so I decided to go to the education centre for Muslims just inside the mosque. I realised that my views of Muslims was actually a view that had been manipulated and created by what I see on television and hear through the media. Through the negative media representation of Muslims, I thought that extremists gathered in mosques to converse about terrorism and their negative thoughts about the west. I by far did not think that Muslims were all terrorists; however I had a lack of understanding of their beliefs. I was feeling quiet inferior to this but wanted to experience going to the mosque as the only pictures I had in my head were those painted by the media.
So, when entering the building I felt very nervous about the situation. After spending some time in the education centre I waited until it was time for prayers on the bench outside the room. Many people walked by and looked at me and I felt very much like an outsider. However, every person that past asked me if I would like to join them for prayers. Then a lady asked me and she agreed that I could watch her. We took our shoes off and walked into the prayer room. She went into a cubicle and washed her face, ears, hair and neck three times with water; she then washed her feet and her arms up to her elbows three times. I asked her why she did that, she said to make sure that she is clean and pure for God. I then sat aside whilst she started her prayers following the Imam (The person that everyone follows at the front of the room) I observed her standing upright and now and again she would touch the floor and her knees whilst praying and move her head side to side. I was unsure of shy she was doing this so she agreed to explain me after.
She said that whilst she stands in front of God she says in her head “I am saying these prayers in the name of Allah”. Then she touched her ears whilst facing the direction of Mecca, and then ties her hands in front of her stomach. Then the Imam says some verses “Allah is the greatest” and she bends down and puts her hands on her knees. Then each time the Imam says a holy phrase she gets up and then goes on her knees again and touches the floor with her forehead and hands.
This was a religious event completely new to me, which changed my preconceptions or stereotypes which are given to me by the media. When I first entered the mosque I was nervous and unsure but many people especially my participant put me at ease and introduced me to Muslim ritual in a very welcoming way. Before entering the mosque I thought that maybe my presence would upset or disturb some who pray but I got completely the opposite reaction. My participant was very enthusiastic about teaching me the Islamic way of life. It was very calm and peaceful place. We talked about mosques being places where terrorism evolved and she said that people like that who call themselves Muslims are not, and that Allah (their God) would not approve. She also said that she has never experiences anybody talking of terrorism in a mosque, and she also stated that many Muslims are very happy to teach the west of their beliefs and that they are not what the media projects. I realized that they were extremists, but not in the way painted by the media. They were extreme in a way they followed the Koran precisely in their everyday lives. My participant explained to me how she lives a very religious life and that everything she does revolves around whether it will be accepted by Allah in order to be a good person, and not the negative extremist I see through the media. I found it a very humble and relaxing place to be and watching the Friday prayers and talking to my participant enabled me to paint my own picture what it is to be a Muslim and it completely inspired my views.
Advantages of Participant Observation – The Dou Donggo
Using the example of Peter Just Experience in the Donggo, he came to realise that by creating a good network of friends and gaining the trust and acceptance of his participants he could achieve more valid information about the Donggo. Whilst living with the Dow Donggo for two years this enabled him to gain a good understanding of the culture including the behaviour of its people. Whilst living there was an assault on a lady, Ina Mone occurred by a young man called La Ninde. Everyone on the village acted shocked at his behaviour and didn’t mention to Peter that there was actually more behind the story. However, spending a large amount of time there he gained a good friendship with one of them who told him the truth. After talking to him it became clear to Peter that the assault never happened and that the accusation was more to do with the repeat for the institution of marriage. This is because previously La Ninde was seen talking to another girl which the people didn’t like, as they have strong marital values and that is why nobody cared to call Ina Mone a liar. Therefore the daily life in Dow Donggo made Peter realise that he must look beyond the superficial events that occur. Therefore Peter was able to discover what the assault accusation was really about because of his long stay at the village. Also having good relationships with the villagers enabled him to ask questions about the content of his findings.
Disadvantages of Participant Observation
One problem that ethnographers create is that they tend to romanticise their work. The lonely, isolated feelings that they encounter on the field in a so-called exotic place is romanticised. One person I believe who avoided this is Nigel Barley (1986) who carried out fieldwork in the mountains of North Cameroon; he studied a mountain community called Dowayos. He represents the community as he sees it and does not romanticise it. Romanticing fieldwork is a trait seen often and does not reveal more about the society being observed rather the pre occupations of the observer.
Another one of the biggest problems of all must be whether the ethnographer has been biased and whether his or her work has been influenced by their own cultural pre occupations. Each individual is unique; no two people have lived the same life, felt the same feelings or dealt with the same experiences. Each individual has a unique upbringing, education and personality. There have been many instances where two ethnographers have studied the same area but unfortunately have collected different results.
A good example of this is Margaret Mead (1925-1926) and Derek Freeman’s (1954-1958) time in Samoa. Mead wanted to investigate whether the teenage girls were rebellious and going through a time of psychological upheaval. Mead found that the Samoan girls were untouched my sexual competition, guilt and sexual inhibition. Mead throughout her work emphasis that growing up in Samoa is easy and that there is no adolescent crisis. Romantic love does not occur in Samoa, and that sex is just play. Mead states that adultery occurs often “which hardly threaten the continuity of established relationships”, and that jealousy is barely seen. She says that this view of sex that the adults have given a free period of lovemaking and promiscuity before marriage. She stated that young girls want to live like girls “with many lovers for as long as possible”.
Mead findings have been branded a mere myth by fellow researches. Derek Freeman states that her findings were totally wrong as she was an inexperienced fieldworker, she didn’t stay in Samoa for long enough and that she could not speak the language very fluently. He believes that Mead was dubbed and that she was completely biased and he believed that she knew what she was looking for before she even left her home. Mead wanted to prove that human behaviour is totally determined by culture or nurture and not nature. Freeman says that Samoan girls dubbed her and are very accomplished at distorting the truth.
However, both researchers can be criticised as Freeman, it has been argued, could not communicate to the girls effectively being an older man (would a young girl really feel able to tell him she sleeps around?!). He has been criticised for concentrating mainly on the older, powerful men, in other words, the girl’s fathers. So surely the fathers would be kept in the dark about their daughters’ promiscuity. However this case has been named one of the greatest anthropological controversies of the twentieth century, and it can be argued that they were both correct in their findings; they just visited Samoa at different times. Their difference in age, gender and personality may be just some of the reasons why such contrasting results were found. Maybe this is a good example to demonstrate that participant observation does in fact reveal more about the researcher’s cultural pre occupations?
Conclusion
Throughout this report I have demonstrated that participant observation can both show the truth about a society for example by forming trusting relationships you can gain more in-depth and representative data using Peter Just work in the Dou Donggo. I have also shown that the cultural pre occupations can affect the observer’s findings using Mead and Freeman’s work Samoa. However a conclusion cannot be made. I believe that participant observation is one of the best ways of collecting data, which enables us to look back at our history and learn about different cultures. Although some say its from the individuals point of view. I think that it is far more effective that questionnaires, surveys or the artificial setting of the laboratory. Observing a culture in its natural setting, gaining good relationships with your subjects is a great way of collecting data. However I do not believe that this can be done by anyone, you must be experienced, patient and live the same way as them in every way possible to gain truthful results. For this report I carried out my first participant observation exercise and found it daunting but exiting. I realised the experience that is needed and found that the more time you spend with your subjects the more you learn about the particular culture.
References:
Barley, N. (1986) The Innocent Anthropologist: Notes from a Mud Hut. Penguin Books Ltd.
Bernard, H. R. (1994) Research Methods in Anthropology. 2nd Ed. Sage Publications Ltd.
Freeman, D. (1983) Margaret Mead and Samoa: The Making an Unmaking of an Anthropological Myth. Penguin Books Ltd.
Freeman, D. (1999) The Fateful Hoaxing Of Margaret Mead. Western Press.
Holmes, D. L. (1987) Quest for the Real Samoa. Bergin and Garvey publishers.
Mead, M. (2001) Coming of Age in Samoa. Harpercollins Publishers.
Monagham, J. and Just, P. (2000) Social and Cultural Anthropology: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press
Punch, F. K. (1998) Introduction to Social Research: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. Sage Publications Ltd.
