Box 20

Posted: May 4, 2011 in Uncategorized
Tags:

1. IN my first meeting with both of my informants I was struck by how incredibly similar we were. Minor differences aside, we had similar experiences with the notion that IW as investigating, and had similar opinions as to why and how it had originated and was propagated.

2. The differences between my informants and I are minimal, at best, at least insofar as they are relevant to conducting this interview. Both I and my informants are (relatively) well off, able to attend a respected university, and are not struggling for some sort of position in society. While one of my informants was female, and another was slightly older than I, creating something of a difference, it was not such that I felt it impeded our ability to communicate.

3. In effect, I have always felt that the best way to overcome any sort of minor difference between two individuals is to recognize that it exists, but to otherwise ignore it until it becomes obstructive or otherwise problematic insofar as accomplishing ones goal is concerned. In this way the minor differences present between myself and my informants were able to be completely disregarded in the course of this interview, while still obtaining valuable information.

4. Over time, I felt that the rapport between myself and my informants grew, as tends to happen in a calm, polite, mutual exchange of ideas, such that by the end of my interviews I felt comfortable saying I “knew” my informants, rather than that I had simply interviewed them.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s