Critical Review 4

Barz discusses the importance of fieldnotes in the ethnographic process, as including fieldnotes in an ethnography will allow both the writer and the reader to reflect on the "individual processes of knowing" (p. 207). Reviewing fieldnotes allows the ethnographer to take a step back and gain new perspectives each time notes are reviewed, and sometimes the ethnographer can realize certain biases she had initially assumed without realizing. Barz presents the idea of the fieldnotes serving as a fulcrum balancing out experience (field research) and interpretation (ethnography)--rather than a linear model with fieldnotes in between--which demonstrates that an ethnography does not necessarily need fieldnotes to translate experience into interpretation. In general, fieldnotes and additions to fieldnotes are beneficial because they allow the ethnographer to reflect on the change over time in his views and evaluations of the situations and of his own thought processes.

Barz discusses the importance of fieldnotes in the overall reflective process of transferring one's experience into an ethnography. There is importance, Barz tells us, in the way in which the ethnographer perceives her experience, and thus fieldnotes serve as a guide for reflection and re-reflection, on one's own interpretations. How does recording (either audio or video) a fieldwork experience affect our individualized fieldnotes? Will things be brought out to us in reviewing recorded material that were not originally noted or noticed by the ethnographer? Is this a good thing or a bad thing, or doesn't it make a difference?