Ethnographic field research involves not only work, but also personal and existential experience. Sometimes it is routine, ordinary, and on schedule, but generally, it is not without difficulties and challenges. I discuss some of these in this article. The analysis is based on my own research experience, the common feature of which is the transgressive nature of experiences related by people and issues generally defined as “difficult”. My research projects involved war victims (exiles, refugees, deportees), i.e. people who often found themselves in life-threatening situations, had experienced loss, trauma and death of their relatives. Our meetings and interviews had cognitive, psychological and devel- opmental dimension, both in a personal and professional sense. I refer to these situations as “initiatory” experiences, as they constitute significant turning points in my perception of reality and my approach to research as a profession. In this paper, I discuss both meth- odological challenges related to research deemed difficult, as well as dilemmas related to ethnographic epistemology and the auto-ethnographic turn. My main concern here is whether and how to write about what is happening on the margins of field research and the personal struggles involved in such research.
In the article, we present the circumstances surrounding the establishment and activities of the “Gryf Pomorski” secret military organisation and contemporary forms of its commemoration in the context of historical policy. We discuss the causes and effects of the conflict over the memory of the partisans of “Gryf Pomorski” and the manifestations of competing discourses about them. The basis of the analysis are materials collected during ethnographic field research in Pomerania.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.