John Van Maanen is one of the authors of the organization theory, which he applied to ethnography. The book, which is the subject of this essay, namely “Tales of the field: On writing ethnography” is one of the most famous ones in the field of ethnography.
In this work Van Maanen made a classification of ethnographic tales. But his classification can be applied also to other sciences, especially humanitarian and social ones, because his conclusions are universal. He distinguishes three groups of works: Realist, Confessional, and Impressionist tales. The criterion for the classification is the following: whether the above-mentioned tendencies present the clear truth or do they distort it by their own subjective perception.
Van Maanen believes the realist ethnography to be the core of sociology and anthropology. He sees the realist author as invisible and all-mighty one, who replaces his subjective “I” by the God’s eye. Van Maanen’s view of the realists can be drawn from this abstract:
Realist tales are not multi-vocal texts where an event is given meaning first one way, then another, and then still another. Rather a realist tale offers one reading and culls its facts carefully to support that reading. Little can be discovered in such texts that has not been put there by the fieldworker as a way of supporting a particular interpretation.”
Realists usually pretend to be objective and follow the concrete way and order in their research or reflection, trying to be fully committed to science.
Confessional tales pretend to be honest. The author of a confessional tale reflects his own ideas and strives for better knowledge, for the very truth, and the reader follows this path alongside with him. Together they gradually overcome their ignorance. They learn the truth together.
Impressionists do not concentrate on objectiveness, unlike realists. They try to show the world in a way that they themselves see it. They often structure their works as a sequence of recollections, and the reader can understand the author’s ideas only through understanding of his feelings. “The idea is to draw an audience into an unfamiliar story world and allow it, as far as possible, to see, hear, and feel as the fieldworker saw, heard, and felt.” Such position often leads to contradictions and confusions, as every fieldworker has his own point of view.
Thus, we may conclude, that John Van Maanen described not only the types of research works, but also the types of researchers’ mindset. We see, that the results of any research, its formulation depend on the personal qualities of a fieldworker. If we try to look on this work in a broader way, we may classify all people into three groups, pointed by Van Maanen.
It is hard to say which one of the types is more credible or stands nearer to the truth. This is a question of philosophy more than of ethnography or any other science. Every point of view has a right for life. Only providing the combination and thoughtful revision of the results of every fieldworker the success of science is possible. And a reader, if he wants to gain the full understanding of any subject, has to combine in his mind the achievements of all three directions. The only truth is in the combination of realistic objectiveness, confessional researcher’s faith and impressionist’s feelings.
Works sited
Van Maanen, John. Tales of the field: On writing ethnography. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1988.