{"id":2065,"date":"2025-01-01T18:00:15","date_gmt":"2025-01-02T01:00:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/mulmod\/?p=74"},"modified":"2025-01-01T18:00:15","modified_gmt":"2025-01-02T01:00:15","slug":"chapter-6-ethnographic-letters-and-postcards","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/multimodalethnography\/2025\/01\/01\/chapter-6-ethnographic-letters-and-postcards\/","title":{"rendered":"Chapter 6. Ethnographic Letters and Postcards"},"content":{"rendered":"

Image: “May 1942 – Local residents in Rue Negrelli (now El-Gaish Street), Ismailia, Egypt (real photo postcard c.1930 – restored duo-tone version)” by aussiejeff, via flickr<\/a>, under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0<\/a><\/p>\n

At a glance…<\/h5>\n

Correspondence from the field\u2014whether formal or informal\u2014serves as a mode of self-reflection, dialogic exchange, and methodological innovation. From Margaret Mead\u2019s letters to interdisciplinary dialogues and speculative letters addressed to intellectual figures, these epistolary forms reveal the uncertainties, affective textures, and everyday details of fieldwork. Ethnographic postcards, in particular, offer a fragmented, multimodal, and emotionally resonant register for representing field experiences.<\/p>\n

Learning objectives…<\/h5>\n

By the end of this chapter, you will be able to:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Describe the methodological and epistemological functions<\/strong> of letters and postcards in ethnographic research.<\/li>\n
  2. Explain how correspondence reveals internal dialogues, uncertainties, and reflexivity<\/strong> in ways that complement or challenge conventional fieldnotes and reports.<\/li>\n
  3. Identify the compositional features of letters and postcards<\/strong>\u2014including second-person address, visual elements, and brevity\u2014and explain how these shape interpretation and affect.<\/li>\n
  4. Critically evaluate how postcards invite new forms of engagement<\/strong>, ambiguity, and meaning-making in ethnographic practice.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
    In the chapter…<\/h5>\n

    6.1. Introduction: Post deterritorialization<\/a>
    \n    6.2. Receptive methods<\/a>
    \n    6.3. Postcards for pedagogy and practice<\/a>
    \n    6.4. To read and to write<\/a>
    \n    6.5. Ethnographic postcards: A pedagogical experiment and exercise<\/a>
    \n    6.6. Learning Activities<\/a>
    \n    6.7. Showcase<\/a>
    \n    6.8. Suggested readings<\/a>
    \n    6.9. Other resources<\/a>
    \n    6.10. Works cited<\/a><\/p>\n

    6.1. Introduction: Post deterritorialization<\/h2>\n

    he critical role of correspondence and letters in ethnographic research is often underappreciated. Letter writing by anthropologists provides insights into the micropowers of fieldwork and offers closer examinations of methods and research processes. The open and\u00a0fragmented<\/a>\u00a0state of letters initiates dialogue, maintains connection, and prompts response and self-reflection. The practice of writing letters from the field signifies a place, measures distance, and\u00a0convenes both absence and presence<\/a>; letters depend paradoxically on a sense of alienation and distance as well as intimacy and immediacy (Derrida 1987: 185). This register of writing\u2014like any other\u2014is a certain method unto itself; it requires the writer to anticipate an audience and distill, capture, describe, and translate from a new perspective accordingly. These habits of translation, critical self-reflection, and intersubjectivity are particularly important aspects of fieldwork and the discipline of anthropology at large. The process, reflection, and contemplation through composition inherent to the practice of writing letters provides a moment for meta-analysis and methodological examination. While immersed in another culture, or feeling out of place, letters re-establish a sense of direction and connection to the location, position, readership, and objectives of origin. This makes them valuable, as Margaret Mead describes, to balance between the \u2018immersion\u2019, \u2018empathy\u2019, and \u2018self-awareness\u2019 that fieldwork \u2018depends on\u2019 (Mead 1977: 38). Letters contain details of the culturally unfamiliar intended for a familiar audience, this requires a step of translation important to anthropology which conveys the estranged experience of the researcher and casts a new light on the familiar.\u00a0 A hyperbolic example of this can be found in the 1979 poem by Craig Raine,\u00a0\u2018A Martian Sends a Postcard Home\u2019<\/a>\u00a0in which a Martian writes of life on Earth to an extraterrestrial audience. Read from the terra, this poem provides a new and estranged view of some earthly preoccupations which may seem mundane and familiar.<\/p>\n

    At night, when all the colours die,
    \nthey hide in pairs<\/p>\n

    and read about themselves \u2014
    \nin colour, with their eyelids shut.<\/p>\n

    (excerpt from Raine 1979)<\/p>\n

    Back to Table of Contents<\/a><\/p>\n

    6.2. Receptive methods<\/h2>\n
    \"\"
    Margaret Mead displaying photographs. From Wikimedia, courtesy of Los Angeles Daily News.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

    Letters written from the field that reveal the author\u2019s internal dialogue provide clarity over the impressions, doubts, and discomforts that inevitably accompany fieldwork. In doing so they expose more of the process and struggle of interpretation and writing. Letters also open retrospective probing over the ethics of fieldwork. This discussion over generations of scholars is vital to the methodological and practical growth and health of the discipline. They also serve as reminders that authors have their own insecurities and hesitations, and that the final product is never \u2018complete\u2019\u2013in a comprehensive sense\u2013but inevitably admits many omissions and compromises (Scheld 2009).<\/p>\n

    Transparency over these details is integral to developing adaptive and responsive methods. In Mead\u2019s reflections on letter-writing she confesses that \u201c[w]hen I started to write these letters, I had no sense that I was discussing the making of a method, that in making what I was doing intelligible to myself and to my family and friends I was recording steps in the development of a new kind of holistic approach.\u201d (Mead 1977: 35). Her letters, as she predicts, promised to be useful for future fieldwork as she narrated the work-in-progress as a whole. Anthropology, as Mead points out, is\u2014and should be\u2014continually \u2018building on itself\u2019; each generation of students must adapt to a \u201cworld that has changed\u201d (Mead 1977: 38). And letters offer a particularly valuable correspondence between past, present, and future anthropologists, conveying challenges and intricacies of the research process. For Anthropology to remain adaptive and responsible it must be critical of its own methods and pasts, personal reflections through letters are an effective way of building upon and learning from the mistakes, blindspots, oversights, and limitations of those that came before.\u00a0Letters that offer self-conscious internal dialogue leave their authors vulnerable to future examination; a willingness to admit this exposure demonstrates a continued commitment to the growth of the discipline. In this sense, letters extend the usefulness and \u2018afterlife of ethnographic work\u2019 (D\u00e1nyi, Suchman, Watts 2021) beyond the conclusions of the final report for future examination of methods.<\/p>\n

    Evident correspondence and letters also offer an important counterpoint to the mythical figure of the ethnographer, sardonically dubbed \u201cThe Lone Anthropologist\u201d by Renato Rosaldo and \u201cThe Great White Man\u201d by Trinh T. Minh-ha (from Cerwonka & Malkki 2007, 5). This stereotype portrays the ethnographer as an isolated, authoritative figure who single-handedly produces knowledge in the field. However, the collaborative and dialogical nature of correspondence disrupts this myth by showcasing the interdependent and relational aspects of ethnographic research. The exchange between Cerwonka and Malkki in their co-authored text, \u2018Improvising Theory: Process and Temporality in Ethnographic Fieldwork\u2019\u00a0<\/i>(2007), reveals how ethnographers rely on the intellectual and emotional support of colleagues to navigate the complexities of fieldwork. This dialogical process highlights the collective and situated nature of knowledge production, challenging the notion of the ethnographer as a solitary, omniscient observer. Instead, it presents ethnography as a collaborative endeavour shaped by continuous interaction and mutual influence, underscoring the importance of community and collegiality in the research process.<\/p>\n

    Back to Table of Contents<\/a><\/p>\n

    6.3. Postcards for pedagogy and practice<\/h2>\n
    \"\"
    Postcard tales. Credit to Steve Shook, retrieved from Wikimedia. Image\u2019s Source<\/a>.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

    Beyond close methodological examination, letter-writing can be valuable as a pedagogical tool: an exercise in composition and creative writing, and active responsive reading. As Suzanne Scheld (2009) points out, by lending a proximity to the field, an informal and open-ended prose, as well as a sense of being addressed directly, letters incite a feeling of culpability, responsiveness, and agency in their readers in a way that is often absent in academic texts. Letters can serve as a way of connecting students to authors that otherwise might remain abstract intellectual figures. Scheld proposes that letter writing to anthropologists as a pedagogical strategy reminds students that they are valued and valuable by\u00a0 affirming that they are \u201clegitimate members of an academic community\u201d (2009: 66). She also describes that letters from anthropologists about their own work and publishing process \u2018underscore[s]\u2019 writing as an imperfect, \u2018on-going\u2019 process that requires \u2018patience\u2019\u00a0 (2009: 67).<\/p>\n

    In\u00a0Improvising Theory: Process and Temporality in Ethnographic Fieldwork<\/i>, Allaine Cerwonka and Liisa Malkki (2007) emphasize the value of an extended e-mail exchange between the authors\u2014an at-the-time novice ethnographer and her mentor, Malkki\u2014during Cerwonka\u2019s fieldwork in Melbourne, Australia. In this sense, letters also serve as a valuable pedagogical tool between researchers and their supervisors. Indeed Mead wrote to Boas; and Malinowski requested that his student, Camila Wedgwood, write to him. Cerwonka\u2019s exchanges with Malkki provide a platform for their thoughts, emotions, and methodological choices. Their correspondence reveals many anxieties and uncertainties inherent in fieldwork, such as her concerns about the appropriateness of her field sites and the ethical dilemmas she faces. This reflexive process also helps clarify the researcher\u2019s positionality and the impact of their presence in the field. Their correspondence documents the research process, emotional experiences, and intellectual developments in real-time and offers a unique perspective on the ethnographic method. Malkki subsequently used the letters to teach ethnographic methods, demonstrating the challenges and decisions faced by fieldworkers. This approach provides students with a practical understanding of ethnographic research that goes beyond theoretical instruction, emphasizing the dynamic and improvisational nature of fieldwork.<\/p>\n

    Moreover, letters facilitate an ongoing dialogue that bridges disciplinary boundaries. In Cerwonka and Malkki\u2019s case, their interdisciplinary correspondence between anthropology and political science enriched their respective approaches and highlighted the benefits of integrating multiple perspectives in ethnographic research. This dialogue underscores the collaborative nature of knowledge production and the value of diverse academic influences in shaping robust ethnographic insights.<\/p>\n

    In another interdisciplinary dialogue, Charles Briggs (2014)\u00a0writes a letter to write to Sigmund Freud<\/a>, contextualizing his ethnographic experience in the Delta Amacuro rainforest of Venezuela through the lens of psychoanalytic interpretations of mourning.\u00a0By addressing Freud directly, Briggs takes the act of putting authors in conversations more literally; this playful tactic is useful to situate different perspectives and conceptual developments, imagine how they might respond to one another, and lend transparency over his process of reading observations through a Freudian interpretation. The letter\u2014seemingly expectant of a response\u2014provides many points of analysis couched in a speculative, open-ended prose. It also occasions Briggs to reveal his rethinking of the role of anthropology\u2014as \u2018the work of mourning\u2019, he proposes\u2014highlighting some of the strengths of both interdisciplinary dialogue and meta-reflection.<\/p>\n

    Back to Table of Contents<\/a><\/p>\n

    6.4. To read and to write<\/h2>\n

    Letters generally open with a declaration of place and time to situate the author. This act initiates a self-conscious examination, which, as Margaret Mead affirms, inevitably prompts reflection on the feeling of being \u2018observed back\u2019 (1977).\u00a0 While Mead was referring to being \u2018observed back\u2019 by one\u2019s readership, letters may also provide a moment to reflect on the feeling of being \u2018observed back\u2019 by one\u2019s interlocutors and company in the field. The form of the letter also invites close detailed descriptions of one\u2019s settings, impressions. Often, this entails engaging multiple senses to suspend the reader temporarily in the place of the writer. The impulse to write a letter arises in part from the desire to affirm one\u2019s place and presence and maintain a kind of intellectual and emotional proximity to the reader(s); they therefore often include highly descriptive accounts, the relevance and analytical significance of which may not be necessarily or immediately clear. This affirmation, projection, and proximity and are nonetheless significant, however, particularly for developing dexterous and skillful writing. Each of these dimensions to letters draw on compositional techniques that are important for writing ethnographic accounts, writing letters thereby incidentally strengthen overall writing prose.<\/p>\n

    The succinct form of letters, sometimes explicitly imposed by the setting in which they are written\u2014as is the case for Mead here, \u201cIt\u2019s no use, dear friends, I just can\u2019t write you a nice long descriptive letter on this ship, it rolls too much. To summarize:\u2026\u201d (1977, 65)\u2014constrain content. Consequently, they require concise writing and leave the reader wondering what was left out (Scheld 2009). This incites distinct forms of both reading and writing\u2014that which is speculative, open-ended, and partial. Usually postcards also include a photo, drawing, map, or graphic which symbolically captures some fact about the whereabouts or context of the writer (Danyi, Suchman, Watts 2021). In this sense, postcards require pause, they capture disparate sites, punctuate work, represent spans of time and space, and offer a backdrop to political cultural contexts (ibid.). This feature also opens a kind of \u2018third meaning\u2019 (Barthes, from Taussig 2011) from the interplay between the content, form, and visual element; this dynamic inevitably inspires different composition; either the writer has to explain the visual or else they know that it\u2019s there and that their composition will be interpreted, on some level, \u2018beside\u2019 it.<\/p>\n

    Postcards are also unique in that they are addressed in the second person. This prose requires the author to consider and account for their audience\u2019s reception, and invites the reader to take part in the interpretive process. This form of writing departs from the conventions of the objective third person that characterizes most academic work, as well as the intensely reflexive sometimes confined nature of first person found in autoethnographic accounts, to instead open more of a dialectic of interpretation and speculation. By implicating the readers in both the writing and interpretation, postcards prove to be a dynamic register.\u00a0As Allan Bass points out in the introductory glossary of Derrida\u2019s \u2018The Post Card\u2019, \u2018poste\u2019 has etymological resonances in \u2018position\u2019 \u2018postilion\u2019 \u2018relay\u2019 and \u2018imposter\u2019; while the root \u2018post\u2019 evokes a \u2018halt\u2019 it also implies an immediate sending or conveying; notably, Derrida plays with\u2014or \u201cexploits\u201d\u2014these multiple meanings (1987, xxvi). This semantic variability illustrate the dialogic, speculative, paradoxical, and playful nature of letter-writing.<\/p>\n

    Because letters consist of descriptions, settings, and impressions intended for a mixed audience\u2013that is both intimate and public\u2013they require a kind of meta-perspective and flexibility that proves to be a valuable compositional and conceptual device. Calling on a range of prose promises to improve the flexibility of the writer. And while they might be direct, they are often\u00a0directionless<\/em>, suspending anticipatory schemas or preemptive understandings and instead demanding active and responsive \u2018good\u2019 reading (Derrida 1987).<\/p>\n

    Back to Table of Contents<\/a><\/p>\n

    6.5. Ethnographic postcards: A pedagogical experiment and exercise<\/h2>\n
    \"\"
    Jacques Derrida, by Pablo Secca (source<\/a>)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

    Ethnographic postcards, sent from the field, present a unique method for capturing and disseminating research insights. This showcase explores an assignment within an Urban Ethnographic Field School course at the University of British Columbia, where students were tasked with writing a series of postcards from the field. This innovative approach enriched students\u2019 comprehension and engagement with their fieldwork (see a few examples of student postcards\u00a0here<\/a>). By integrating contemporary ethnographic practices and theoretical frameworks, this assignment exemplifies a practical application of multimodal ethnographic methods.<\/p>\n

    In designing this activity, I considered how employing ethnographic postcards in anthropological fieldwork offers a distinctive amalgamation of personal reflection and public discourse. Inspired by Jacques Derrida\u2019s (1987) notion of the postcard\u2019s paradoxical nature\u2014both intimate and exposed, private and public\u2014in designing the activity, I considered how this method enables students to creatively capture and convey their field experiences through a medium characterized by fragmentation. Derrida\u2019s \u201cenvois\u201d demonstrates the potential of this communication mode, where the text is non-linear, disjointed, and follows a piecemeal structure. Postcards, especially those written by fieldworkers from various sites, emerge as a series of discontinuous, episodic pieces, reflecting a fragmented mode of representation. This representation mode disrupts traditional narrative expectations, fostering creativity to document aspects of field experience often omitted in other modes of ethnographic representation. Fragmentation often leads to juxtaposition and comparison. D\u00e1nyi, Suchman, and Watts (2021) employed ethnographic postcards to bridge disconnected field sites, illustrating how juxtaposition and comparison can yield new insights.<\/p>\n

    The potential for creativity through disruption and juxtaposition is further amplified by the playful nature of postcards, which engage the reader in the interpretive process. The fragmented, open-ended nature of the text, sometimes accompanied by drawings, necessitates active reader participation to piece together meanings and connections, transforming reading into a playful, interactive experience. This experience produces a proliferation of meanings. This multiplicity underscores that playful postcard fragments can generate a vast array of readings, none of which are definitive or authoritative.<\/p>\n

    If fieldnotes offer a form of liminality\u2014between experience and final representation\u2014postcards from the field embody another form of in-betweenness: neither public nor private, both intimate and exposed. They thus provide an opportunity for students to explore and experiment with ethnographic writing. The public and uncontrollable nature of written communication is epitomized in postcards, allowing students to reflect on the idea that once a text is written, its meaning is no longer under the author\u2019s control.<\/p>\n

    In designing the activity, the idea of meaning in a constant state of flux is another aspect that I prompted students to explore. Postcards, fragmented and brief, often reference people, events, and emotions that are not fully present within the text, requiring the reader to piece together meaning from both the said and the unsaid. Moreover, the sender\u2019s physical absence in postcards emphasizes how the message\u2019s meaning depends on the reader\u2019s interpretation, influenced by what is absent as much as by what is present. In this way, students can reflect on how meaning is never fully present or absent but is always in flux, constructed through the interplay of what is communicated and what is omitted.<\/p>\n

    The theme of absence and presence leads students to another significant aspect of the postcard medium that I considered in designing and including this active learning activity. Postcards convey a sense of intimacy between the sender and the recipient, paradoxically paired with physical distance. This highlights how feelings are experienced through absence as much as presence. It is therefore no surprise that \u201cone of history\u2019s great love affairs, that of Abelard and Heloise, was conducted mostly by letter\u201d (Peters, 2016:265). The written words on postcards attempt to bridge the gap created by physical separation. Michael Jackson (2010) reflects on this separation experienced in the traditionally distant field to explore the emotional and relational aspects of fieldwork. Jackson emphasizes integrating emotions, senses, and subjective experiences into ethnographic research, arguing that such integration fosters a deeper understanding of the complexities and nuances of human interactions and cultural contexts. The postcard medium provides an opportunity for students to engage with and capture some of these emotions, thus enriching their ethnographic practice. Moreover, inspired by\u00a0Andrea Gaspar\u2019s experimental provocation<\/a>\u00a0to explore what love and ethnography have in common by writing epistemic love letters, students can experiment with themes of love for the field, ethnography, or the discipline of anthropology in their postcards.<\/p>\n

    The assignment of writing ethnographic postcards can therefore serve as a powerful pedagogical tool, fostering a deeper engagement with the field and enhancing students\u2019 ethnographic practice. By embracing the fragmented, playful, and multimodal nature of postcards, students can explore the complexities of meaning-making, the interplay of absence and presence, and the emotional dimensions of fieldwork.\u00a0This method not only enriches their understanding of ethnography but also encourages a more critical, creative, and accessible approach to documenting and sharing their experiences. This multimodal technique can also make academic work more collaborative, self-critical, and accessible. These techniques challenge conventional representations and strive to democratize knowledge production.\u00a0<\/a>We dedicated a class meeting to reflect on and discuss the experience of writing the ethnographic postcards.<\/p>\n

    The Assignment<\/h5>\n

    he assignment invites students to explore the potential of postcards in capturing field experiences by writing a series of ethnographic postcards. Students are encouraged to reflect on various aspects of their fieldwork, including significant encounters, relational dynamics, embodied experiences, and the unsaid or unconscious elements of their interactions. The postcards, addressed to specific individuals, groups, or objects, serve as a medium for expressing thoughts, emotions, challenges, and discoveries, thereby fostering a deeper engagement with their research.<\/p>\n

    By integrating visual elements and concise narratives, students can creatively document their journey and gain insights into the emotional and relational dimensions of ethnographic practice. This exercise aims to enrich students\u2019 understanding of the fieldwork process, emphasizing the interplay of absence and presence and the fluid nature of meaning-making in ethnographic research.<\/p>\n

    \n
    \n
    \n
    \n
    \n
    \n
    Activity Instructions<\/h5>\n

    Jacques Derrida has written about the paradoxical nature of postcards. They are personal, addressed to a specific individual, yet they are open for anyone to read. Messages can be both intimate and exposed simultaneously. This assignment invites you to explore your field experiences by writing a series of postcards that capture the essence of your ethnographic journey. The aim is to encourage you to reflect on different aspects of your fieldwork. These postcards will serve as a medium for expressing your thoughts, emotions, challenges, and discoveries, framing your experiences as stories shared with an audience of your choice. By doing so, you will gain a deeper understanding of your field relationships and the knowledge production process.<\/p>\n

    Instructions:<\/strong>\u00a0We will provide the blank postcards. Over the course of your fieldwork, write a minimum of 3 postcards. Each postcard should be addressed to a specific person, a group of people, or something and capture a different aspect of your ethnographic experience.<\/p>\n

    Themes to Explore:<\/strong><\/p>\n