Rumbling on performativity_Frits Simon

In its diversity auto-ethnography aims at change, transformation, liberation,
breaking taboos, politicizing, personal change and theory-development (Alexander,
2013; Allen-Collinson, 2013; Anderson, 2006a; Anderson and Glass-Coffin,
2013; Bartleet, 2013; Boylorn and Orbe, 2014a; Chang, 2013; Chang et al., 2013;
Denzin, 2013; Douglas and Carless, 2013; Holman Jones et al., 2013b; Quicke, 2010;
Tedlock, 2013). Auto-ethnography is an attempt of re-enchantment of the world
(Brinkmann, 2012) against the ongoing processes of rationalisation.
Although individual and narrative auto-ethnographic research is dominant
within auto-ethnography, different approaches have been developed. Collaborative
auto-ethnography engages multiple authors and perspectives around a
subject, leading to interpersonal reflexive layers in the research (Chang, 2013;
Chang et al., 2013). Artful and embodied methods of inquiry, using music, dance,
film and performances, have also been developed as auto-ethnographic options
(Bartleet, 2013).
Viable and valuable (analytical) auto-ethnography
Especially for a comparison with a complex responsive process-approach it is
interesting to learn about an analytical auto-ethnographic line of approach.
Anderson (2006a) formulates five key features for a viable and valuable autoethnography.
These features implicate that the researcher should:
1 Be a complete member in the social world under study, being aware that he
experiences a role duality in being participant and observer, and being aware
that his perspective is still his perspective;
2 Take an analytic reflexive stance, through which he is aware of the reciprocal
influence of doing research and being researched;
3 Be visible, active and reflexively engaged in the text through which his feelings
and experiences, and his personal engagement become apparent;
4 Engage with others in the field of his study, as a dialogue with ‘the others’ is
needed to prevent self-absorption;
5 Be committed to an analytic agenda to gain a broader insight in social phenomena
and to refine theoretical understandings of social processes.
Responding to his critics who accuse Anderson - due to his commitment to an
analytic agenda - of a return to an out-of-date realistic ethnography, Anderson
(2006b) acknowledges his realistic aspirations. Anderson prefers ethnography
with practical consequences to build a better world; analytical auto-ethnography
should seek to generalize beyond an individual case. Anderson’s critics fear
that this demand for generalizability may jeopardize their auto-ethnographic
project in which a post-modernistic or anti-foundational orientation should be
leading. However, the premises of auto-ethnography express as mentioned
before a strong anti-foundational orientation.
Taking care of good narratives
Auto-ethnographic researchers care for a good narrative and set standards for
the quality of their narratives. The overview which Denzin (2014) offers exemplifies
that the standards have to do with flesh and blood stories, provided with
tension, a plot, emotions which move and empathize readers. According to
Denzin (2014: 78) valuable narratives:
42