Recent scholarship has demonstrated an increasing awareness of the need for more grounded, empirical research into the micro-level dynamics of violent contexts. Research in these difficult, dangerous, and potentially violent conflict or post-conflict settings necessitates the formation of new relationships of dependency, and assistants, friends, collaborators, and guides become central figures in the field. However, all too often, these figures are written out of academic accounts and silenced in our analyses. This not only does them a significant disservice, but it also obscures potential biases, complexities, and ethical dilemmas that emerge in the way in which such research is carried out. Drawing upon fieldwork exploring the 2007–2008 Kenyan postelection violence, this paper argues that reliance upon insider-assistants is essential in conflict settings and explores the challenges inherent in these relationships. As researchers become increasingly engaged in micro-level studies of violent contexts, we must interrogate the realities of how our knowledge has been produced and engage in more open and honest discussions of the methodological and ethical challenges of conflict research.
Ajwang’Robert O.EdmondsonLaura. 2003. “Love in the Time of Dissertations: An Ethnographic Tale.” Qualitative Inquiry9 (3): 466–80.
2.
Angela CarettaMartina. 2015. “Situated Knowledge in Cross-Cultural, Cross-Language Research: A Collaborative Reflexive Analysis of Researcher, Assistant and Participant Subjectivities.” Qualitative Research15 (4): 489–505.
3.
BarleyNigel. 1983. The Innocent Anthropologist: Notes from a Mud Hut. London: British Museum Publications.
4.
BelousovKonstantinHorlick-JonesTomBloorMichaelGilinskiyYakovGolbertValentinKostikovskyYakovLeviMichaelPentsovDmitri. 2007. “Any Port in a Storm: Fieldwork Difficulties in Dangerous and Crisis-Ridden Settings.” Qualitative Research7 (2): 155–75.
5.
BerremanGerald D.2012. “Behind Many Masks: Ethnography and Impression Management.” In Ethnographic Fieldwork: An Anthropological Reader, 2nd ed., edited by RobbenAntonius C. G. M.SlukaJeffrey, 153–74. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
6.
BrewerJohn D.1993. “Sensitivity as a Problem in Field Research: A Study of Routine Policing in Northern Ireland.” In Researching Sensitive Topics, edited by RenzettiClaire MLeeRaymond M., 125–45. Newbury Park: Sage.
7.
CampbellLisa M.GrayNoella J.MeletisZoe A.AbbottJames G.Silver.Jennifer J.2006. “Gatekeepers and Keymasters: Dynamic Relationships of Access in Geographical Fieldwork.” Geographical Review96 (1): 97–121
8.
ChavezChristina. 2008. “Conceptualizing from the Inside: Advantages, Complications and Demands on Insider Positionality.” The Qualitative Report13 (3): 474–94.
9.
ConsJason. 2014. “Field Dependencies: Mediation, Addiction and Anxious Fieldwork at the India-Bangladesh Border.” Ethnography15 (3): 375–93.
10.
CrickMalcom. 1992. “Ali and Me: An Essay in Street-Corner Anthropology.” In Anthropology and Autobiography, edited by OkelyJudithCallawayHelen 177. London: Routledge.
11.
DeaneKevinStevanoSara. 2016. “Towards a Political Economy of the Use of Research Assistants: Reflections from fieldwork in Tanzania and Mozambique.” Qualitative Research16 (2): 213–28.
12.
GillHannah E.2004. “Finding a Middle Ground between Extremes: Notes on Researching Transitional Crime and Violence.” Anthropology Matters6 (2): 1–9.
13.
GrindalBruceSalamoneFrank, eds. 1995. Bridges to Humanity: Narratives on Anthropology and Friendship. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland, 1995.
14.
HapkeHolly M.AyyankerilDevan. 2001. “Of ‘Loose’ Women and ‘Guides,’ or, Relationships in the Field.” Geographical Review91 (2): 342–52.
15.
HoffmanDannyTarawalley Jr.Mohammed2014. “Frontline Collaborations: The Research Relationship in Unstable Places.” Ethnography15 (3): 291–310.
16.
HolmbergDavid. 2014. “Ethnographic Agency, Field Assistants and the Rise of Cultural Activism in Nepal.” Ethnography15 (3): 311–30.
17.
HossainShahadat. 2005. “Poverty, Household Strategies and Coping with Urban Life: Examining ‘Livelihood Framework’ in Dhaka city, Bangladesh.” Bangladesh e-Journal of Sociology2 (1): 45–52.
18.
JacobsBruce A.2006. “A Case for Dangerous Fieldwork.” In The Sage Handbook of Fieldwork, edited by HobbsDickWrightRichard, 157–68. London: Sage.
19.
Kovats-BernatChristopher J.2002. “Negotiating Dangerous Fields: Pragmatic Strategies for Fieldwork amid Violence and Terror.” American Anthropologist104 (1): 1–15.
20.
KumarNita.1992. Friends, Brothers and Informants: Fieldwork memories of Banaras. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992.
MacKenzieCatrina A.2016. “Filtered Meaning: Appreciating Linguistic Skill, Social Position and Subjectivity of Interpreters in Cross-Language Research.” Qualitative Research16 (2): 167–82.
23.
MalonyThomasHammettDaniel. 2007. “The Friendly Financier: Talking Money with the Silenced Assistant.” Human Organization66 (3): 292–300.
24.
MazuranaDyanJacobsenKarenGaleLacey, eds. 2013. Research Methods in Conflict Settings: A View from Below. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25.
MertusJulie. 2009. “Introduction: Surviving Field Research.” In Surviving Field Research: Working in Violent and Difficult Situations, edited by SriramChandra LekhaKingJohn C.MertusJulie A.Martin-OrtegaOlgaHermanJohanna. London: Routledge.
26.
MiddletonTownsendConsJason. 2014a. “Special Issue on Fieldwork(ers): Research Assistants, Researchers and the Production of Ethnographic Knowledge.” Ethnography15 (3).
27.
MiddletonTownsendConsJason. 2014b. “Coming to Terms: Reinserting Research Assistants into Ethnography’s Past and Present.” Ethnography15 (3): 279–90.
28.
MiddletonTownsendPradhanEklavya. 2014. “Dynamic Duos: On Partnership and the Possibilities of Postcolonial Ethnography.” Ethnography15 (3): 355–74.
29.
NewboldBeverly. 1992. La Zandunga: Of Fieldwork and Friendship in Southern Mexico. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.
30.
NordstromCarolyn. 1997. A Different Kind of War Story. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
31.
NormanJulie. 2009. “Got Trust? The Challenge of Gaining Access in Conflict Zones.” In Surviving Field Research: Working in Violent and Difficult Situations, edited by SriramChandra LekhaKingJohn C.MertusJulie A.Martin-OrtegaOlgaHermanJohanna, 71–90. London: Routledge.
32.
PowdermakerHortense. 1966. Stranger and Friend: The Way of an Anthropologist. New York: Norton.
33.
PunchMaurice. 1989. “Researching Police Deviance: A Personal Encounter with the Limitations and Liabilities of Fieldwork.” British Journal of Sociology40:177–204.
34.
RobbenAntonius C. G. M.NordstromCarolyn. 1995. “Introduction: The Anthropology and Ethnography of Violence and Sociopolitical Conflict.” In Fieldwork under Fire: Contemporary Studies of Violence and Survival, edited by NordstromCarolynRobbenAntonius C. G. M., 1–23. Berkeley: University of California Press.
35.
RodgersDennis. 2007. “Joining the Gang and Becoming a Broder: The Violence of Ethnography in Contemporary Nicaragua.” Bulletin of Latin American Research26 (4): 444–61.
36.
SanjekRoger. 1993. “Anthropology’s Hidden Colonialism: Assistants and Their Ethnographers.” Anthropology Today9 (2): 13–18.
37.
ScottSteffanieMillerFionaLloydKate. 2006. “Doing Fieldwork in Development Geography: Research Culture and Research Spaces in Vietnam.” Geographical Research44 (1): 28–40.
38.
SixmithJudithBonehamMargaretGodring.John E.2013. “Accessing the Community: Gaining Insider Perspectives from the Outside.” Qualitative Health Research13 (4): 578–89.
39.
SlukaJeffrey A.1995. “Reflections on Managing Danger in Fieldwork: Dangerous Anthropology in Belfast.” In Fieldwork under Fire: Contemporary Studies of Violence and Survival, edited by NordstromCarolynRobbenAntonius C. G. M, 276–94. Berkeley: University of California Press.
40.
SmythMarie. 2005. “Insider-Outsider Issues in Researching Violent and Divided Societies.” In Researching Conflict in Africa: Insights and Experiences, edited by PorterElisabethRobinsonGillianSmythMarieSchnabelAlbrechtOsaghaeEghosa. Tokyo: United Nations University Press.
41.
SmythMarieRobinsonGillian, eds. 2001. Researching Violently Divided Societies: Ethical and Methodological Issues. New York: United Nations University Press.
42.
StaceyJudith. 1988. “Can There Be a Feminist Ethnography?”Women’s Studies International Forum77 (1): 21–27.
43.
StrockaCordula. 2008. “Participatory Research with War-Affected Adolescents and Youth: Lessons Learnt from Fieldwork with Youth Gangs in Ayacucho, Peru.” In Years of Conflict: Adolescence, Political Violence and Displacement, Studies in Forced Migration, vol. 25, edited by HartJason, 255–76. New York: Berghahn Books.
44.
TorosHarmonie. 2008. “Terrorists, Scholars and Ordinary People: Confronting Terrorism Studies with Field Experiences.” Critical Studies on Terrorism1 (2): 279–92.
45.
ThomsonSusan. 2010. “Getting Close to Rwandans since the Genocide: Studying Everyday Life in Highly Politicized Research Settings.” African Studies Review53 (3): 19–34.
46.
TurnerSarah. 2010. “Research Note: The Silenced Assistant. Reflections of Invisible Interpreters and Research Assistants.” Asia Pacific Viewpoint51 (2): 206–19.
47.
TurnerVictor. 1967. The Forest of Symbols: Aspects of Ndembu Ritual. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
48.
WhyteWilliam Foote. 1995Street Corner Society: The Social Structure of an Italian Slum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
49.
WiddowfieldRebekah. 2000. “The Place of Emotions in Academic Research.” Area32 (2): 199–208.
50.
YehEmily T.2006. “‘An Open Lhasa Welcomes You’: Disciplining the researcher in Tibet.” In Doing Fieldwork in China, edited by HeimerMariaThøgersenStig, 96–109. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
