Conclusions

This summer I set out to Ghana with an idea.  An experiment.  A crazy out there theory based project that I struggled to describe in one single sentence.  I wanted to know more about the nature of experience and the authenticity of travel documentation.  It was frustrating to see how European explorers like Henry Morton Stanley and Joseph Conrad had contributed to the stereotype of a “dark continent” of Africa based off of their limited interpretations of their experiences.  As a writer myself, I understand the desire to experience and the need to try to express these experiences as a personal kind of truth.  Still, how often do we consider the nature of how we experience a world foreign to ourselves, or the “truthfulness” or consequential effects of these accounts in regards to their cultural authenticity?  Whether these truths are more “truthful” than what really happened, we could find a copious amount of arguments stemming as far back as Aristotle’s Poetics, but truth was not what I was questioning here.  I was more interested in authenticity.   These questions were the fuel of my project proposal.  A lot has happened since I wrote my objectives, but I have been pleased to see that my project was a success.  Our experiences are indeed significantly subjective based on the way we see the world and the mediums we chose to record it in. 

Gipsy- The Postmodern Traveler/Writer Avatar

In order to look at the true nature of experience during my stay in Ghana I decided to look not only at how the medium I recorded in impacted my experience, but also at how the way I saw dictated it.  I divided different aspects of my personality into five avatars to show these differences.  Gipsy was my favorite of my avatars, being something between a postmodern traveler and a writer.  I think like her most of the time, and so it came easy.  Being Gipsy meant that I could be open with my thoughts, liberal in my themes, and creative with my descriptions and comparisons.  As a writer, this avatar could make sense of the experience by reaching into my past. My goal was to have something of a Virginia Woolf style and more stream of conscious.  I think in the field note process it meshed into Ava, but having more of that tone would definitely be something I implement if I were to do this project again.  It allowed me to be more personal and less conscious of some of the taboos you run into with judgment calls in ethnography. 

Pros:

1. Culture Shock- Dealing with jarring situations and encountering the cultural other could be fun with Gipsy.  Her writings are more accessible to someone from my paradigm, and so are probably easier to relate to (FN:7:19, FN:8:13). 
2. Physical Conditions- Being sick was something I pawned off on Gipsy, allowing me to be open and honest that drinking bad water is not fun, and there is little to romanticize like Ava would.  I also fleshed out my Larium dreams (lucid dreams caused by my anti malarial medicine) and talked about some of the other strange side effects that the pills gave me (FN:9:6, FN:18:1, FN:21:1, FN:28:1-5, FN:67:1, FN:78:8).
3. Honesty- Being Gipsy allowed me to be personal and less conscious of some of the taboos you run into with judgment calls in ethnography.  My classic example for this was a poem I wrote in the field that I ended up feeling really bad about.  There are just some things you cannot explain on a surface level when you are being a romantic anthropologist like Ava, so these two avatars would fight from time to time.  However, as a writer I was able to be more honest about my initial impressions without worrying too much.  This could make it more entertaining to read as well (FN:25:1, FN:29:1-2, FN:36:2, FN:40:1, FN:54:1-2, FN:70:1, FN:71:1, FN:78:4, FN:83:3).

Ava- The Romantic Anthropologist Avatar

As part of my field study project on the authenticity of experience, I looked not only at how different mediums of recording impacted my research, but also on the way I chose to see.  These different lenses I tried on I called avatars, or different parts of my personality that mediated the way I viewed what I was experiencing.  Having Ava, my romantic anthropologist, as an avatar was a life saver.  Being a student, and a clueless twenty something American who knew little about Ghana, this avatar allowed me to be romantic about my adventures and descriptive in my notes as I went along.

As an avatar, Ava was fairly straight forward and was probably the most stable of my avatars.  She underwent the least amount of evolution in the field.  Here are some of the things I learned as I saw through her eyes during my experience.

Pros:

1.  Romantic Spin- Like my "good things that happened today" journal, trying to be Ava helped me see my experience in a more romantic light.  By trying to see through that lens I was prone to have a better day, dealt with culture shock better, and handled different situations with more grace than an avatar like Gipsy (FN:7:18, FN:8:13, FN:17:1, FN:21:10, FN:23:1, FN:83:1, FN:84:3)
2. Productive- I got many more pages of field notes by far with Ava.  I found that being her was best in busy situations or when I was at school.  Whenever I was a student, this was the best choice of avatar to experience that moment, especially when coupled with some good jots (FN:18:17, FN:18:23, FN: 22:1, FN:22:321, FN:23:31, FN:27:1, FN:27:25, FN:62:32, FN:62:37, FN:69:1).
3. Observations- Since Ava is supposed to be more of anthropologist, I also recorded much more observations.  Some of them might not have seemed important at the time, but the actions of people and the things that they said could potentially have a lot of value looking back someday.  It also helped me be more aware of how to handle social situations (FN:17:3, FN:27:28).

Myra- The Photographer Avatar

In order to look at how limited experience really is, I chose to look not only at how the medium I recorded in impacted my experience, but also at the way I chose to see it in.  I divided different parts of my personality into different avatars to show these different view points and how different my experience was by being different avatars.  My photographer avatar, Myra, has been quite the learning experience.  The medium of digital photography itself offers a lot of questions about the authenticity of experience and brings in a lot of ethical questions.  However, what interests me the most about my Myra experiment was the difference between an “essence” and an “authentic” photograph. 

Somewhere along the lines I realized that my photograph experiment was failing.  I did not feel right about “taking” pictures of people that I did not know with little intention of giving anything back in return.  It made me serious question National Geographic, and more than ever I believe that establishing proper rapport is necessary to get those kinds of images.  Out of my frustration, I developed a new idea.  I would take a picture every hour on the hour and juxtapose that to the “essence” picture, or what I considered the posed National Geographic type of image that would go in a portfolio.  They are not pretty to look at, but it shows a more accurate presentation of my experience.  Granted, it is not purely authentic.  I could have taken a picture on the half hour, or the five-minute mark, and had a completely different experience.  I just think that it is one step closer to authenticity. 

Here is a slideshow of one of my favorite days where I did this every hour on the hour experiment.  To see the more of these photos click here.

Shelley- The "Experiencer" Avatar

In order to look at how fragile and limited our experiences are, I chose to conduct a project that looks at this phenomenon through analyzing the medium I recorded in, as well as the avatar, or aspect of myself I chose as a lens for that day.  Like my native avatar, Akua, my “experiencer” avatar, Shelley, was a little problematic.  Here are some of the reasons why I had to change my attitude when it came to this way of seeing my experience.

1. Because the essence of Shelley was about being in a moment and letting that dictate the experience, I was not able to plan for it.  I could not plan a whole day because it only came in glimpses.  A moment could not be planned for, even if I was open and receptive to it (FN:11:1-4, FN:26:2-3, FN:39:9, FN:41:2-3, FN:60:5, FN:60:13, FN:87:12, FN:88:5).
2. This avatar came to be what the others thought of as the “ideal.”  Because I had previously decided that she would not have a voice, and could only be seen from the point of view of the other avatars, this got a little tricky.  It was easier when I could show how my other avatars dropped their guard and tried to be more like Shelley.
3. There was also a lot of development with Shelley in the field, as with all of my avatars.  While I was still trying to figure out how to be her, I tried a new approach where I was kind of a yes man.  I agreed to do everything as long as it was honor code appropriate and safe.  It did open a few windows of opportunity, some more awkward than others, and I think that my experience was changed because of it (FN:41:23, FN:41:2, FN:58:1).
4. Because this avatar was not supposed to have a voice, it made field notes an issue.  To not take notes or write seemed almost impossible.  I would think that everything was passing me by, or try to memorize everything to record later.  It did not work.  I did not realize until trying to be Shelley that just experiencing and not making sense of it is a lot harder than we think. 

My conclusion for this avatar is that she could not be planned for.  If a moment arose where she could have a better experience than my other avatars, then I would switch into her and let the moment consume me.  Otherwise, it was more beneficial to be someone with a voice.

Photo credit to hm on flickr

(More data on Shelley can be found in my field notes FN:18:27, FN:26:5, FN:39:1, FN:39:4-5, FN:60:1-2)

Akua- The Native Avatar

In setting out to conduct my field study project on the authenticity of experience, I decided to look at the different ways my experience showed limitations and biases based on the medium I used to record, as well as the lens, or avatar, I used to see my actual experience.  As I have mentioned before, trying to be Akua, my native avatar, turned out a lot differently than I anticipated.  There are two main reasons why I think this was the case. 

1. I am not a native.  I cannot see like a native, let alone try to think and act like one.  Maybe if I would have spent a few years or decades among the community I could have pulled this off, but in just a short three months this was not going to happen  It was not like I could just go out and experience a day like a native would.
2. Language was a problem.  Again, if I would have had more time or language skills I might have been able to figure out how to write a native avatar, but the only luck I had was writing an aesthetic overlay of local phrasing.

I think that the closest to knowing how a native would think would be when I was trying to be Shelley.  Eating with my hands, being in a moment with the family, etc.  I found that these avatars seemed to overlap, except that Shelley was more feasible.  If I were to do this project again I think that I would merge these two avatars.

Photo credit to Heart of Afrika Designs on flickr

(Data can be found in field notes FN:16:1, FN:16:5-7, FN:16:18, FN:18:24, FN:22:24, FN:42:24, FN:58:8)

Preliminary Predictions and Where I'm Going From Here...

Well, I am back. Not all the way, but I need to start somewhere. It is time to reel in my five avatars and speak as a slightly less skitso, multiple personality disorder victim, and be just Rachel—a name that started to collect a little bit of dust.

Here is an overview of what I am hoping to do for the rest of my time on this blog and a prediction of what I think I captured before I dive into my notes. Time to decode, interpret, and assign the meaning to a polished, tweaked experience. Ghana in retrospect.

I think that my project was a great success in ways I never anticipated, and the way I see it, I can look at this through two different frames. First, how did my avatar—the way I chose to look at my day—affect my experience, and second, how did the medium I chose to record the experience alter what I captured? Here are my preliminary predictions.

What's in a Name?

"Names are an important key to what a society values. Anthropologists recognize naming as one of the chief methods for imposing order on perception." ~David S. Slawson

I found a baby names book on the bottom of my parent’s bookshelf. After silently thanking them for naming me the sixth most popular girls name of the eighties (there are 2 other Rachels in my group of 7), I went through and picked out the names of my avatars.

Romantic Traveler: Ava (birdlike) or Chloe (young grass). Which do you like?
Postmodern Traveler: Gipsy (wanderer)
Photographer: Myra (quiet song)
Experiencer: Shelley (“from the meadow on the edge,” a spin off of my own name, and I like that it reminds me of Percy Shelley)
Native: Akau, my name in Twi

And Alma (learned soul)… I am considering a poet. Before I was thinking I would squish my poetry into the romantic and the postmodern, but I don’t know that it is the same. If I decide to do this, it means less show time for the other ones.

So lets iron this out. I am doing research approximately 90 days. But this whole thing could start as soon as I leave, ending when I return from England, maybe even a little bit after with a reflection piece from one of them. Still, I figure my travel time will be about 100 days, about 14 weeks.

If we do a day breakdown on a 100-day assignment… 85 with Shelley taking every Sunday… it is 17 days for 5 characters.

I think I will have Alma. With her, each character will have a run for 4 days, five if I really like a particular one that week, and that way I will be each character 4 times in the field with a little room to grow if I want. Plus Akua probably will just be a voice here and there and not a full-blown character experiment depending on how well that goes.

Also, I have decided it might be cool to add some of the kids writing. Obviously I would claim it to be theirs, but that might be an interesting authentic piece to a totally anti authentic themed narrative that will serve as voices like Akua.

This is exciting!

Sorting Out the Characters

So far, this is what I have been brain storming for my travel narrative.

I'll have a preface that explains that all the characters were me and kind of the objective behind the difficulty of mediating an "original" experience.

Then, I'll have these characters that I will see the world with. Each is an aspect of me, and it will make me hyper sensitive to the ways that I will see Ghana through that character. I'm still debating how long each duration should last, but I'm thinking 3-5 days a character. I have no idea what to name some of them.... I'm always bad at picking names out. But especially when it is supposed to represent me!


Some Name: Romantic traveler and anthropologist: This character will house my most obvious paradigms, deal openly with culture shock, be open to the new culture, maybe get homesick, be past thinking, and obsess about American food (when they make me eat vegetables.)

Mediums: Field journal, tourist snap shot pictures, letters home, jots

***

Some Name (thinking Virginia for Virginia Wolff): Postmodern traveler: This character will be darker, more pessimistic, write in stream of conscious style, find layers of meaning, and will be more existential and observant with more existence thinking.

Mediums: Field Journal, Short Stories, Poetry

***

Some Name: Photographer: This character will realize that words are not the only way to mediate an experience. She will be kind of quite, strange, reserved, sleep with her camera, and will use minimal words to express herself.

Mediums: Photography, To Do Lists

***

Olivia (Liv): "Experiencer." This is the adventurous, tries everything, open, present oriented "in the moment" person. I think I will do this character once a week, maybe on Sunday, where it is my day off. While I am this person, I will not try to mediate my experience with any immediate forms of recording it. This means leaving the jottings home, the camera, etc, and just living the experience. Obviously I will probably come home and record my experiences in my journal for my own sake (debating this), but I will not do it on scene.

Mediums: This person will not have a voice in my narrative, but will be seen over the shoulders of the other characters.

***

Akua: "Native." The theme of my narrative should definitely play into realizing that I can and never will be able to see from a Natives perspective, but this character will embody what I learn while at the secondary school system about attitudes towards English and writing. She will try to be the voice that kind of contradicts some of the truths of the American travelers (my other characters) through the narrative to show the difficulty of experience.

Mediums: Poetry, Oral Tradition, Commentary, Song