AAA on OA, Lorenz on AAA
Alexandre Enkerli
http://www.antropologi.info/blog/anthropology/anthropology.php?title=aaa_open_access_no_realistic_option&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1
Suber's full response is available here:
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2007_05_13_fosblogarchive.html#7372281794902313227
Actually, Suber's post is quite straightforward and it could be a useful summary to send to colleagues who don't grok OA.
As he says, we should just start self-archiving as AAA pubs allow self-archives. Do we now have an ePrints repository for anthro?
One argument I don't hear being made very frequently is that OA is perfect for ethnographers working abroad. Few of the people with whom we collaborate "in the field" have access to AAA pubs but many do have some form of Internet access, even if it is indirectly. OA makes it relatively easy for people with whom we work to look at some of the things we have published "about them."
Of course, the same argument can be made in local communities. But I think it's more forceful a concept when applied to "remote communities."
It might sound too "Crisis of Representation circa 1990" but I personally see benefits to making our writings available to people who can relate to them. After all, such a practise goes well with both the spirit and the letter of our codes of ethics.
For instance, for people in the U.S.: http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/ethstmnt.htm
Thoughts?
--
Alexandre
http://enkerli.wordpress.com/
Kerim Friedman
Thanks for sharing those links.
Yes, encouraging people to set up our own repositories is one of the
founding missions of this e-mail list! Some things are in the works,
but we encourage everyone who can to work on this themselves. Some
list members wasted a lot of breath trying to convince the AAA to set
up single repository that everyone could use, but there is no reason
individual efforts can't succeed. All you need is support from your
university and software like e-prints.
As far as the link between collaborative work and OA, I fully agree
with you. I made a similar point myself in this SM post:
Cheers,
Kerim
jkirk
OA makes it
relatively easy for people with whom we work to look at some of the things we
have published "about them." Of course, the same argument can be made
in local communities. But I think it's more forceful a concept when applied to
"remote communities."
It might sound too "Crisis of Representation circa 1990" but I
personally see benefits to making our writings available to people who can
relate to them. After all, such a practise goes well with both the spirit and
the letter of our codes of ethics.
For instance, for people in the U.S.:
http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/ethstmnt.htm
Thoughts?
I don’t see making our work available to our subjects as automatically invoking their approval—thus, they should be able to post their comments on our work in the same medium.
However, it’s a problematic situation: the freedom scholars are accustomed to having—to organize a research program, and subsequently to interpret findings, is a specific culture not understood as such by some remote or even local cultures. As we know, past instances of respondents getting a hold of someone’s published work has also led to lawsuits. I see this aspect as a definite inhibition of doing ethnography that we were not subject to under earlier colonial circumstances. This is not of course a plea to return to colonialism! It is a warning that business as what-was-usual may no longer be possible with amplified exposure.
Even if we were able to expedite the collaboration with our work of one or two subjects, or a group that gave permission, their collaborations with us could (given certain socio-political situations) put them in a negative position vis a vis their fellows.
More thoughts?
Joanna Kirkpatrick
--
Alexandre
http://enkerli.wordpress.com/
No virus
found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/813 - Release Date: 5/20/2007 7:54
AM
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/813 - Release Date: 5/20/2007 7:54 AM
Alexandre Enkerli
Excellent point. Naïvely, I would think that most ethnographers are dealing with these issues in their own work. At least, it is now common procedure now to consult with people with whom we work before we actually publish anything "about them." Dialogue, inter-subjectivity, merging horizons, asking permission.
In fact, despite many well-known problems, it seems that one of the goals of "Human Subjects Committees" is to prevent cases in which someone could be sued or harmed because of someone else's research.
It's a very tricky issue and one which can cause something of a chilling effect. For instance, while nobody can know exactly what really happened, Guinean anthropologist Youssouf Cissé described the death of his friend and collaborator Wa Kamissoko, along with several knowledge people in the region, in the context of research collaboration (1988:20-21). It seems possible that these people were killed because they had revealed secrets to Cissé. Working in such a context, I often worry about what my writings can do. My solution has been to work mostly on public performance and discourse. And I do stay in touch with people involved, as much as possible. ICT make it easier for me to do so.
What OA makes possible, though, is a mode of collaboration which was impossible in the past. Nothing is hidden and the people with whom we work get a chance to take a look at our work whether or not they belong to an institution which has access to the journals in which we publish. Sure, it might be too late by the time our work is published. And few people are able to respond to our writings through exactly the same medium. But in many cases, there are ways for collaboration to take place efficiently between people in different parts of the world.
Simply put, OA emphasizes dialogue which can help us through those tricky situations.
I'm not saying that OA is a solution to our problems. I just see OA in the context of ethical work.
Alexandre
http://enkerli.wordpress.com/