RSS Feed  Twitter

Introduction

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 2:52 AM Posted by Ross
This page features an 'audio essay', a new concept with which we
experimented in our audio production course this year. The aim was to apply
principles drawn from qualitative social research methodology to a
reflective discussion of our experiences of putting together audio
documentaries. At the bottom of the page, there is an explanation of the
relationship between my own approach to the practice of producing audio
documentaries and principles drawn from qualitative social research
methodology. The right hand panel lists concept drawn from social research
that I find of value to my own practice. In the main panel, I present a
series of radio talks reflecting on different aspects of my experience of
producing an audio documentary. Each talk draws on the theoretical concepts that I discuss on the page. By listening to the talks and studying the text, listeners \ readers will hopefully find that theory and practice comes together into a meaningful whole.
0 comments

My original plan

2:42 AM Posted by Ross
In my first reflection I discuss my ambitions when I first started out creating the documentary. I talk on how I wanted to structure it as well as the narration style.

0 comments

The Interviewing Stage

2:41 AM Posted by Ross
Here I reflect on the interviews conducted during my fieldwork. Ultimately I reflect on the situations where I spoke with Thandiswa. Where she showed two completely different personalities.

0 comments

From raw material to paper edit

2:40 AM Posted by Ross
This deals with the most demanding aspect of my paper edit. I had aimed for a very distinct type of narration style, putting this into practice proved to be more difficult than I imagined.

0 comments

Changing back to Sound

2:38 AM Posted by Ross
On Bringing the paper edit back into actual sound I realised that I needed to show Thandiswa’s true personality. Here I reflect on the minor details that I purposefully included to mirror Thandiswa’s personality.

0 comments
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

My Philosophy

MY PHILOSOPHY

According to Ellis, a documentary “is purposive, it is intended to achieve something in addition to entertaining audiences” (Ellis, 2009:4). A documentary is made up of a series of sound placed together in such a way that it illustrates some sort of overall aim. They are meant to reflect a reality of a certain situation. Nichols illustrates, a “documentary-equals-reality, and that the speakers are a window rather than a reflecting surface.” (Nichols, 1981: 172). In documentaries one needs to achieve the very essence of your subject. I have achieved this through the use of qualitative research. This type of research shuns the positivist idea of social research, but looks at the social contexts of the subject in question. This type of research is not quantifiable it sees the social world through the views of the research subjects; it illustrates a deeper meaning when it comes to these subjects and their certain social situations (Newman, 2001). I held many qualitative interviews which were conducted to “obtain descriptions of the lived world of the interviewees with respect to interpretations of the meaning of the described phenomena.” (Kvale, 1996:29).

Ethongraphy is the type of philosophy that is most useful when it comes to my genre of qualitative research. It is seen as the science of cultural description. Ethnography comes from cultural anthropology and means describing a culture and understanding another way of life from a native point of view (Newman, 2001: 381). The researcher immerses oneself into the culture and understanding of the certain subject that is being interviewed. This was my case with Thandiswa, the teenager who I based my entire documentary on. Ethnographic research is seen as a holistic approach. This illustrates that Not only does the researcher study the culture, but he/she also interprets it as well in the specific context. This is achieved through in depth interviews with the subject about her experiences.

Kvale illustrates a metaphor which looks at the researcher either being a “miner” or “traveller”. In my work I had the characteristics of the traveller metaphor. The traveller illustrates that the interviewer goes on a journey where he tells his story when he returns home. On his travels he is directed and guided by the certain people he converses with. In turn these people provide gateways to other people who will talk on their own experiences (Kvale, 1996). As a researcher I went into my documentary with a naïve light, and only found my story after speaking to a number of subjects, who in turn referred me to more subjects.


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ellis, J. (2009). A new History of Documentary film. The Continuum International publishing Group Ltd.

Kvale, S (1996). InterViews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. Sage Publications. Newman, L. W., 2001, Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. 3rd edition. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Nueman, M. & Makagon, D. 2009, Recording Culture: audio documentary and the ethnographic experience. SAGE Publication Inc.


About Me

My photo
I am a fourth year radio student studying at Rhodes University in Grahamstown. This blogsite will document my last year of Radio Journalism as a student. My aim is to be as proffesional as possible in this industry, and to take all my academic assignments as seriously as if they were for a corporation. Below will hold various accounts of my experiences, as well as how I feel I will grow as a journalist.

Followers

    Guidelines that proved useful in my findings.

    Objectivity

    In this scenario Kvale’s third case of objectivity is heavily emphasized, this illustrates that the documentary must “reflect the nature of the object researched, letting the object speak, be adequate to the object investigated and express the real nature of the object studied.”(Kvale, 1996:85) This mode illustrates the subject speaks for itself, if the researcher ushers any subjective comment it will be emphasized as simply a statement from the researcher himself. The subject is given the space to talk about his/her situation. The researcher is not seen as either with or against the subject, he simply creates a space for the subject to speak freely and openly.

    Deliberate Naiveté

    This illustrates where the researcher does not go into an interview having it preformulated and ready made categories for analysis. The interview needs to be presuppositionless and semi-structured (Kvale, 1996). The interview must bring as much unexpected, open and new content as possible. A semi-structured interview illustrates a few general questions to start off the interview, yet the researcher delves into more questions from the content produced by the subject.

    Interpersonal Situation

    This illustrates the very interview itself. It is seen as a conversation between two people. The very word, conversation, means ‘wonder together with” in Latin, (Kvale, 1996). Each interview has its own social boundaries of respect. In an interpersonal situation there is more than just a series of dialogue. Body language is also seen in interpersonal situations, and adds an extra ingredient to one’s interview (Kvale, 1996).

    Life world

    This illustrates the “lived world of the subjects and relation to it.” (Kvale,1996:29). By having detailed interviews with the subjects, one is allowed to dive into the lives of these people. They illustrate the various factors that affect their lives, and how they feel about these factors. The main purpose is to understand and describe those central themes that the interviewee experiences.

    Underlying Meaning

    A qualitative research interviewer will not only write down the words the subject is saying, he/she must also “describe and understand the underlying meanings of central themes in the life world f the subjects” (Kvale, 1996:31). The interviewer must interpret what has been said to him./her, and needs to ‘read between the lines’ of what the subject is saying. This isn’t only in speech but also in the actual body language of the subject. The subject may in fact say one thing yet feel completely opposite to this altogether.

    Informed Consent

    This illustrates “informing the research subjects about the overall purpose of the investigation and the main features of design.” (Kvale, 1996: 112) At any time the subjects were allowed to pull out of the interview. One must also get permission to talk to certain people, such as professionals and minors.



Powered by Blogger