This past Tuesday, I took my second set of fieldnotes at my actual, primary fieldsite, the Blackstone Valley Fencing Academy. It was nice to be taking notes in an environment in which I'm very comfortable and among people who I know and get along with.
Sitting down this time around, I think I was much more aware of what I needed to do in order to take meaningful and valuable fieldnotes. I feel like I was able to push aside the information that I would normally take for granted in order to take fieldnotes that don't easily betray me as an insider to the culture. I focused a lot on the physical layout of the room, despite the fact that I've been there three nights a week, almost every week, for the past three or four years. I also took notes on simple, ordinary things (to me) that my coach said or did that would not be so ordinary or apparent to an outsider.
Looking back on my feelings at the time of taking my second set of fieldnotes, I realize that the atmosphere of my club feels very different than that of the Worcester Fencing Club, where I took my first set of fieldnotes. The Worcester Fencing Club is significantly larger and has a more... corporate feel to it. I think that the Blackstone Valley Fencing Academy, even upon entering it for the first time, has a more homey and communal feeling to it.
This is something I noticed at the competition I attended this past weekend too. I've been thinking of the correlation between larger, more economically advantaged fencing clubs in New England and their motivation for operating. On the opposite end of the spectrum, you have the smaller clubs, like my own, that aren't considered "wealthy" and their motivation for operating. It seems to me that larger clubs are geared more towards people who are considered "rich" or "naturally talented". As a result, these clubs seem to train their fencers to win and are only concerned with results based fencing. In contrast, my club is small and relatively affordable compared to other clubs in the area. It comes off as a very "middle class" club and our focus is different than larger, wealthier clubs. Like I said in my digital fieldsite analysis post, my coaches teach their fencers that winning is secondary and that personal growth and strengthening of mind and body are what really matter in fencing.
This ended up being a little rambly and more focused on an idea I had percolating since the weekend, but I think it may be an interesting angle to look at for my fieldstudy.
Kevin!
ReplyDeleteWoW! I am so very interested in the direction in which you are heading here, down the socioeconomic class highway. Yay! But, you want to be careful, too, and not fall prey to the slippery slopes we see the presidential candidates sliding down all too often (rhetorical slippery slopes!). For instance, in this paragraph, which sounds very smart and informed, you actually provide no evidence as to why small fencing clubs are not money-driven or revenue-oriented. In fact, you set up a fallacy here, false logic that has no basis in fact.
"I've been thinking of the correlation between larger, more economically advantaged fencing clubs in New England and their motivation for operating. On the opposite end of the spectrum, you have the smaller clubs, like my own, that aren't considered "wealthy" and their motivation for operating. It seems to me that larger clubs are geared more towards people who are considered "rich" or "naturally talented". As a result, these clubs seem to train their fencers to win and are only concerned with results based fencing. In contrast, my club is small and relatively affordable compared to other clubs in the area. It comes off as a very "middle class" club and our focus is different than larger, wealthier clubs."
I think your logic here is based in your opinion, right? If so, fair enough. But, not enough to base your theoretical research assertion on...not yet.
Don't be discouraged by me...use my ideas as fuel for the engine that's driving this research...get to the bottom of this class phenomenon...what makes it tick and why...why are your own assumptions rooted in "big=bad and small=good?"
Fieldworking at two seperate locations (one which you were rather familiar with, and one with which you were not as much) helps to give your project a nice clear prospective. Being both an insider and an outsider gives readers "an interesting angle to look at for [your] fieldstudy."
ReplyDeleteI think that you hold the Blackstone Valley Fencing Academy close to heart, which might affect your outlook on your academy vs. "corporate academies." But, we all have lenses right? I'd just be weary of that a little. It's good that you took detailed notes focusing on things you'd find ordinary but outsiders would be baffled by. Good advice by your coach!
ReplyDeleteWhat really stood out to me in this post was your last paragraph about the differences between so called "wealthier" clubs and the smaller, less expensive to take lessons from clubs, such as your own. It's really interesting how the bigger clubs for the rich just seem to churn out amazing fencers--it reminds me somewhat of music conservatories! (Sorry, everything can relate to music in the eyes of a musician.) In any case, I think this is a huge factor and maybe you might want to dig a little deeper as to this aspect in your research.
ReplyDeleteGreat post--thanks!!