DIGITALSTORYTELLINGASPARTICIPATORYMEDIAPRACTICEFOR
EMPOWERMENT:THECASEOFTHECHINESEIMMIGRANTS
INTHESANGABRIELVALLEY
by
YingLi
ADissertationPresentedtothe
FACULTYOFTHEGRADUATESCHOOL
UNIVERSITYOFSOUTHERNCALIFORNIA
InPartialFulfillmentofthe
RequirementsfortheDegree
DOCTOROFPHILOSOPHY
(COMMUNICATION)
August2007
Copyright2007 YingLi
ii
DEDICATION
Thisdissertationisdedicatedtotheintrepidandinspiringsoulsofthepeopleatthe
AmericanChineseCultureAssociation(ACCA).Theinchofgrassinmyheartisnot
gratitudeenoughforallthesunshineofthespring(只恐寸草心，无以报春晖).
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Agreatmanypeoplesupportedmeinthisproject,somedirectlyinvolved
duringtheresearchandwriting,otherslendingtheirhandsthroughopeningdoors,
whethertheyknewitornot.
Iamgratefultomyadvisor,MichaelCody,whointimesofuncertainty
helpedmeseekthepaththatwasmeaningfulandtruetomyconvictionandinterests.
Thankyouforyourpatience,yourfaith,andyourmagnanimity.
Iwouldliketothankthemembersofmydissertationcommittee:Michael
Cody(chair),LarryGross,andMaryaliceJordan-Marsh.Thankyouforbelievingin
thisprojectatitsinception.Andthankyouforallyourtimeandeffortinhelpingme
sharpenmythinkingandimprovemywriting.IappreciatedLarry’sopeningthe
worldofvisualanthropologytome.Maryalice,yourrichandinsightfulcomments
benefitedthisdissertationimmensely.YouwereaGodsendtothisproject.
IwouldliketothankthepeopleintheAmericanChineseCultureAssociation
(ACCA).Youembracedmelikeafamily,andnurturedmeintellectually,spiritually,
andemotionally.Yourincessantcuriosityandpassionforculture,arts,andlifekept
meatawe.Anditwasyouruninhibitedlove,trust,andcommitmentthatmadethis
dissertationpossible.
Iwouldalsoliketothankmyfriendsandcolleagues.ThankstoTitusLevifor
beingthe“gateopener”tothisdissertationproject,andtomyintellectuallifein
general.ThankstoArulChib,whowastheharshestcriticofthisprojectwhileatthe
iv
sametimebeingthemostreadilyavailablehandymanandtechnicalsupport.Ialso
wouldliketoexpressmygratitudetomyfriendsAnnaKostygina,LuTang,Peter
andPaulinaChow-White,andAramandDuniaSinnreichfortheirsupportduringthe
periodofwritingthisdissertation.
Finally,endlessthankstomyfamily,whoselove,patience,andbeliefinme
keptmemovingforward.Myparents,LiDouandTangHuiying,whowouldnever
beabletoreadthis,arethepeopleIamindebtedthemost.Iamgladwiththis
dissertationImadethemproud.
v
TableofContents
DEDICATION-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------II
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS--------------------------------------------------------------------III
LIST OF FIGURES---------------------------------------------------------------------------VIII
ABSTRACT----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------X
CHAPTER 1: AN INTRODUCTION TO DIGITAL STORYTELLING AND
RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY-------------------------------------------------------------1
1.1.HowtheStudyOriginated------------------------------------------------------------------1
1.2.DigitalStorytelling:theStateoftheArts------------------------------------------------3
1.3.ResearchObjectives-----------------------------------------------------------------------10
1.4.PreviewoftheDissertation---------------------------------------------------------------11
1.4.1.LiteratureReviewandTheoreticalFramework---------------------------------11
1.4.2.ResearchDesignandMethodologies----------------------------------------------12
CHAPTER 2:LITERATURE REVIEW --------------------------------------------------- 13
2.1.Photovoice-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------14
2.2.ParticipatoryVideo------------------------------------------------------------------------17
2.2.1.TheFogoProcessandtheChallengeforChangeProgram-------------------17
2.2.2.ParticipatoryVideoaroundtheWorld--------------------------------------------20
2.2.2.1.CulturalPreservationinBrazil------------------------------------------------20
2.2.2.2.IdentityDeconstructioninColombia----------------------------------------20
2.2.2.3.VideoLettersfromNepal------------------------------------------------------21
2.2.2.4.AnOpenExperimentinVietnam--------------------------------------------22
2.2.2.5.Women’sEmpowermentinIndia--------------------------------------------22
2.2.2.6.ATentativeTypography-------------------------------------------------------23
CHAPTER 3: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK---------------------------------------- 27
3.1.Introduction---------------------------------------------------------------------------------27
3.2.Participation---------------------------------------------------------------------------------28
3.3.Empowerment------------------------------------------------------------------------------33
vi
3.4.DigitalStorytelling-------------------------------------------------------------------------38
3.4.1.TheGenreofDigitalStorytelling–“Biodocudrama”-------------------------38
3.4.2.TheNewTechnologyofDigitalStorytelling–TheRelative“Newness”--42
3.4.3.TheProjectContextofDigitalStorytelling–theComplexityof
Participation-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------45
CHAPTER 4: STUDY DESIGN: FIELDWORK AND METHODOLOGY ------ 50
4.1.Introduction---------------------------------------------------------------------------------50
4.2.ResearchSettings---------------------------------------------------------------------------51
4.3.DataCollectionMethodologyandMethods-------------------------------------------54
4.3.1.ActionResearch-----------------------------------------------------------------------54
4.3.2.FieldworkandEthnographicWriting---------------------------------------------57
4.3.3.CaseStudy-----------------------------------------------------------------------------59
4.4.TypesofDataCollectedandDataAnalysis-------------------------------------------60
4.5.Ethics-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------63
CHAPTER 5: ADOPTING DIGITAL STORYTELLING TO CULTURAL
ACTIVISM IN ACCA-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 68
5.1.TheContextofConductingCulturalExchangeinACCA--------------------------68
5.1.1.TheBiggerPicture--------------------------------------------------------------------69
5.1.2.CulturalActivisminBuildingSub-CulturalCommunity---------------------71
5.1.3.TwoExamplesofACCACulturalExchangePractice-------------------------74
5.2.SettingtheStageforSelf-ConsciousCollectiveRepresentations-----------------79
5.2.1.Pre-productionCarvingOuttheParameters------------------------------------80
5.2.2.Genesis,theWorkshopExperience------------------------------------------------83
5.2.2.1.Changhong------------------------------------------------------------------------84
5.2.2.2.JoeLambertandtheCollaboratingArtsofStorytelling-----------------87
5.2.2.2.3. TheWorkshopModelandCollaboration---------------------------93
CHAPTER 6: THE CHINESE IMMIGRANT DIGITAL STORYTELLING IN
THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY-------------------------------------------------------------- 96
6.1.ACCADigitalStorytelling:ProcessandProduct------------------------------------96
6.1.1.ParticipatoryCommunicationand“CommunicativeAccountability”------98
6.1.2.BiodocudramasandtheNegotiationsofFormandContent-----------------103
6.1.2.1.ThemeOne:“AmericanDreams”,the“Zhiqing”Edition--------------103
6.1.2.1.1.StoryofPersonalTriumph– Up and Fly, the Bird of Happiness 104
vii
6.1.2.1.2.StoryofIndividualAdvocacy–A Little Bit at a Time, Starting
from Me ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------106
6.1.2.1.3.StoryofReconciliation–If I Were Seventeen Years Young;
Choose the Life that Fits You; and My Daughter and I ------------------------108
6.1.2.1.4.StoryofReminiscence–Dream and Soul that Lingers -----------115
6.1.2.1.5.StoryofFate–The Crossing of Borders by Four Generations
of Dreamcatchers; and The Turning Point of My Life in America – When
I Injured My Arm----------------------------------------------------------------------117
6.1.2.2.ThemeTwo:“WethePeople,”Meta-StoryofaCommunity----------119
6.1.2.2.1.StorywithaHistoricalPerspective–The Los Angeles
Chinatown: It’s Past and Present --------------------------------------------------120
6.1.2.2.2.StoryReflectingtheProjectItself–The Story about Storytelling
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------121
6.1.2.2.3.StoryReflectingtheOrganization–Becoming Stars in America 122
6.2.ACCADigitalStorytellingasDiscursiveEmpowerment-------------------------126
6.3.DualStrategiesforPublicityandRefashioningOrganizationIdentity----------128
CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION------------------------------------------------------------ 132
7.1.Introduction--------------------------------------------------------------------------------132
7.2.FromaWorkshopModeltoWorkingintheCommunity--------------------------133
7.3.BiodocudramaGenreHelpsProducingPositiveEmpoweringStories----------134
7.4.ProcessualEmpowermentthroughCo-generativeLearning----------------------135
7.5.DiscursiveEmpowermentthroughCulturalActivismandPublicity------------136
7.6.TheoreticalandMethodologicalImplications---------------------------------------138
7.8.LimitationsofCurrentStudyandFutureResearch---------------------------------142
REFERENCES------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 145
APPENDICES -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 155
AppendixA--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------155
AppendixB--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------164
viii
LISTOFFIGURES
Figure1:ACCAmemberspracticedancingattheirdancestudioinAlhambra,
California.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2
Figure2:Ascreenshotfromthevideo-editingsoftwareusedinthisstudy,
PinnacleStudio.------------------------------------------------------------------------------5
Figure3:Ivideotapedallthemeetingsconductedforthestudy.-----------------------61
Figure4:AcollageofsomeoftheactivitiesACCAengagesin.-----------------------71
Figure5:ThelastsceneinChanghong'sstory.Thesubtitlesays:"SowhoamI,
andwheredoIbelong?"-----------------------------------------------------------------83
Figure6:ThefinalDVDwithallthestoriesfromtheChineseImmigrants
MultimediaStorytellingintheSanGabrielValleyexhibit.Thesequence
ofthestoriesontheDVDfollowsachronologicalorder.-------------------------97
Figure7:OneoftheframesfromJirong'sstory.------------------------------------------104
Figure8:OneoftheframesfromAllen'sstory.Thesubtitlesays:"Except
consuminglessoil,italsoreducesairpollution."----------------------------------106
Figure9:OneoftheframesfromShirley'sstory.Inthebubbles,itsays
respectively:"Takingadegree?","Goingoutforanewjob?",
"Orbecomingahousewife?".----------------------------------------------------------110
Figure10:OneoftheframesfromSong'sstory.------------------------------------------111
Figure11:Oneoftheframesfromthestory"Seventeen."------------------------------113
Figure12:OneoftheframesfromLing'sstory.------------------------------------------115
Figure13:OneoftheframesfromBenyang'sstory.Thesubtitlesays:"Iwalked
acrossthefamousLuohuBridgeoverShenzhenRiver,arrivedin
HongKong."------------------------------------------------------------------------------117
Figure14:OneoftheframesfromMing'sstory.ItwasnarratedinCantonese,a
southerndialectinChina.Therefore,weusedtwosubtitles.---------------------118
Figure15:OneoftheframesfromDavidWu'sstory.-----------------------------------120
ix
Figure16:OneoftheframesfromDavidLin'sstory.-----------------------------------121
Figure17:Oneoftheframesfromthestory"BecomingStarsinAmerica."--------122
Figure18:TheoreticalframeworkforDigitalStorytellingasparticipatory
mediapractice.----------------------------------------------------------------------------139
x
ABSTRACT
Thisdissertationdocumentsthecollaborationbetweentheauthorandalocal
activistorganizationinordertoexaminethepotentialofDigitalStorytellingto
promoteindividualandcommunitychange.TheChineseAmericanCulture
Association(ACCA)isafirstgenerationChineseimmigrantsorganizationlocatedin
theSanGabrielValley.AftersecuringfinancialsupportfromtheCaliforniaCouncil
fortheHumanities(CCH),theauthorandmembersofACCAcreated,producedand
exhibited12DigitalStoriesdesignedtopromoteculturalunderstandingand
exchangeinethnicallydiverseurbancommunities.ThestudyexaminedhowDigital
Storytelling“captureslives”and“createscommunity”asitsinventorproclaims,in
thetheoreticaltraditionofparticipatorycommunication,theanthropologyofvisual
communication,andnarrativeempowermenttheory.
TheauthorarguesthatDigitalStorytellingshouldbeviewedasaninnovative
participatorymediapracticethatempowersthoseinvolvedbothasaprocess anda
product.Creatingone’sindividualandcommunitystoriesisanempoweringprocess
asitreframespastexperienceswithnewmeanings.Thedialogicprocessesofco-producingthestoriesbetweentheauthorandtheparticipantsalsobringnew
understandingandnewinterpretiveframeworksthatenablemutuallearninganda
senseofaffinityandpersonalcommitment.Asaproduct,thestoriesbelongto
particulargenretheauthortermsas“biodocudrama”thatenablesthestorytellersto
usedramatizednarrativestosearchforandarticulatepositive,transformative,
empoweringmeanings.Inscribingthestoriesintolocalpublicspacethroughexhibit,
xi
screenings,theInternet,anddonationtopubliceducationalinstitutionsintheSan
GabrielValleygaveagreatersenseofprideandcollectiveefficacytothe
storytellers.ThestorytellingpracticealsorefashionedthediscoursearoundACCA’s
organizationalidentityanditsplaceofbelonging.
Thestudycontributestothefieldofpurposefuluseofmediaand
communicationforsocialchange(particularlyapproachesbasedongrassrootsmedia
productionorsubjectgeneratedcontent)byexploringhowDigitalStorytelling,a
newtypeofparticipatorymediapractice,empowersthestorytellersasagentsof
changeintheirownlivesandintheircommunity.
1
Chapter1:AnIntroductiontoDigitalStorytellingandRationalefortheStudy
1.1.HowtheStudyOriginated
Thisdissertationprojectisanethnographicstudyofaparticipatoryaction
research(PAR)projectusingDigitalStorytellingtoadvanceculturalactivism.It
focusesonaparticulargenerationofChineseimmigrants,the“zhiqing”(“Educated
Youth”1)generation,livingintheSanGabrielValley,California.Thisgenerationof
Chineseimmigrantswasbornbetween1950and1955,andcametotheUnitedStates
inthe1980sand1990s.Theyshareacommon,andunique,experienceduringtheir
formativestagesasyoungadults:thetumultuousyearsofthe“CulturalRevolution.”
Asteenagers,theyweresweptupintotheradicalismspanning1966to1976,and
became“hongweibing”,theso-called“RedGuards.”Later,theyparticipatedinthe
“Going-downtotheCountryside”campaignandbecameknownas“zhiqing”,the
“EducatedYouth.”TodaytheyliveinLosAngeles’newerChinesecommunitiesin
theSanGabrielValley,wheresomeofthemhaveformedtheAmericanChinese
CultureAssociation(ACCA)inordertofostercross-culturalawarenessand
understanding.
IhavebeenaparticipatoryresearcherinACCAfortwoyears(2005-2007).
ACCAisanonprofit,grassroots,first-generationChineseimmigrantcommunity
organization.ItsadministrativeofficeislocatedinArcadia,anditsmemberslive
throughouttheSanGabrielValley.ACCAwasformallyestablishedasacommunity
groupinJanuary2005andtodayithasmorethan120members.Mostofthe
1Sometimeszhiqing istranslatedinto“KnowledgeableYouth”or“Sent-downYouth”.
2
membersareloversofartsandculture.Ithasarenownedwaist-drumteamthatisthe
largestinSouthernCalifornia;anArtsEnsemble;agroupofpassionate
photographers;andasmallstudiocrewspecializinginaudioandvisualproduction.
Italsopublishesayearlymagazinecalled“American and Chinese Cultures”anda
monthlynewsletter.
Figure1:ACCAmemberspracticedancingattheirdancestudioinAlhambra,California.
TwoimportantcharacteristicsofACCAareitsmembersandtheparticular
visionsharedbymembers.ManysimilarChineseimmigrantorganizationsarebased
onthegeographicregionsinChinafromwhichmembersmigrated.Othersare
professionallybasedorarepoliticallyorientedoraffiliatedtoparticularreligious
institutions.MostofACCA’smembers,however,participate(orhaveparticipated)
inotherorganizations.However,ACCAistheonlyChineseimmigrantorganization
thatgoesbeyondtheusualorganizationalarticulation–itboldlydesignatesitselfthe
roleofpromotingculturalexchangeandculturalunderstanding.Moreover,its
3
leadershipisnotsatisfiedwithaone-dimensionalculturalshowcasesinfestivals
commonlyheldduringethnicorculturalholidays.ACCAactivelyparticipatesin
thesefestivalsandhasachievedasolidreputationforofferinghighqualitycultural
presentations.Butitseekstodomorethancelebrateholidays.Thevisionheldby
ACCAistoinstitutionalizeamechanismthathelpsconnectrealpeople,buildreal
networks,andfosterharmonyandsolidarity.ACCA,thus,shouldserveasanideal
socialactiongroupwithwhichtopursuestorytellingtoinitiatesocialchange.
Iproposetoexaminethecollaborativeprocessthatoccursbetweenmy
researchparticipantsandIinproducingandpromotingDigitalStories,andthis
dissertationdocumentsthiscollaborativeprocess.Thefirstandprimarygoalofthis
dissertationistoinvestigateifDigitalStorytellingcanfostercommunity
participationandempowermentandhow.Secondly,itexplorestheimportanceofa
holisticmediaanalysisbyassessingtheprocessofchange,therelationamong
representation,agency,action,andthefacilitator-participantrelations.Asa
corollary,thedissertationanalyzestherelationshipbetweendigitaltechnologyand
communityexpressioninviewofthedebatesovernarrativeidentity,authenticityin
mediarepresentations,andgrassrootsculturalactivism.
1.2.DigitalStorytelling:theStateoftheArts
Therapiddevelopmentofmultimediaandhypermediatechnologieshas
providednewavenuesformakingstoriesoncomputers.Multimediasystems,
images,soundandanimationcanbebroughttogetherwithtexts,providinga
4
platformforavarietyofstoryformatscombiningliteraryandvideoelements.This
typeofmediapracticeiscalledDigitalStorytelling2.
AleadingfigureinthedevelopmentandspreadofDigitalStorytellingisJoe
Lambert(2002;2006).HeandafewothersdevelopedtheDigitalStorytelling
WorkshopinCaliforniainthe1990’s,andhecurrentlyco-directstheCenterfor
DigitalStorytelling(CDS)inBerkeley,California.Theworkshopshavebeen
operatinginmanyvenuesaroundtheworld,engagingcommunityactivists,health
careprofessionals,educationalinstitutionsandevencorporations.
TheemergenceofthisapproachisdescribedinthebookDigital Storytelling:
Capturing Lives and Creating Community (Lambert,2006).Theoriginofthiswork
datestothecollaborationofLambert’sactivitiesinradicalcommunitytheaterand
hisfriendDinaAtchley’sdesiretoconstructawayofperformingthestoryofDina’s
life,Next Exit, whichreflectedtwentyyearsoftouringAmericawithastory-based
roadshow.ThesuccessofthevideopresentationofNext Exit motivatedothersto
takeaction,whichresultedinthecreationoftheDigitalStorytellingWorkshop
(Lambert,2006).
Theworkshophasevolvedintoathree-dayeventinwhichparticipantsare
coachedtodiscovertheirstory,toscriptandstoryboardit,andtoproduceiton
commonlyusedcomputers.Thereisasetofguidingprinciplesforstory
composition.Participantsareaskedtoconsidersevenelementswhenconstructing
2Theterm“DigitalStorytelling”hasmanyinterpretations.Thebroadestdefinitioncanbefoundinthe
taxonomyofDigitalStorytellingdevelopedbyNoraPaulandChristinaFiebichfromtheInstitutefor
NewMediaStudiesintheUniversityofMinnesota(http://www.inms.umn.edu/elements/).Inthis
researchproject,theuseofthetermislimitedtothenewgenreofstorytellingformfacilitatedby
multimediaandtheorganizationsbehinditsinceptionandgrowth.
5
theirstory:pointofview,dramaticquestion,emotionalcontent,voiceover,
soundtrack,economyandpacing.ThoughLambertassertsthatstorycoachingisa
dynamicandcollaborativeartofsomesort,hisapproachprescribesaparticularvein
ofstorytellingasindividualperformance.Themajorityofstoriesproducedareshort,
linear,personal,andusuallyendwithasharppunchline.
Figure2:Ascreenshotfromthevideo-editingsoftwareusedinthisstudy,PinnacleStudio.
Inasense,Lambert’smethodisastimulatingmixofradicaltheater,roadside
Americana,individualperformance,participation,andnewtechnology.Thereisa
senseofvisionandevenevangelicalisminLambert’swork:
Icametounderstandthatthemixofdigitalphotographyandnon-linear
editingareatremendousplayspaceforpeople.Theycanexperimentand
realizetransformationsofthesefamiliarobjects,thephotos,themovies,the
artifacts,inawaywhichenliventheirrelationshiptotheobjects.Becausethis
creativeplayisgroundedinimportantstoriestheworkshopsparticipants
wanttotell,itcanbecomeatranscendentexperience(Lambert,2006,p.10-
11)
6
TheCenterforDigitalStorytelling(CDS)alsoprovidesabaseandnetwork
forsupportingandlinkingDigitalStorytellingprojectsaroundtheworld.Capture
Wales atBBCWales(Meadows,2003)connectedtheBBCmorecloselyto
communitiesinWalesthroughDigitalStorytelling.StoriesaremadeinCapture
Wales workshopshostedincommunityvenues,andcollectedonawebsite
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/capturewales).Meadowsdescribedtheprocessinthese
words:
Capture Wales workshopstypicallyrunforfivedaysoverathree-week
period.Thefirsttwodaysareaboutscriptconstructionandimagecapture.
Theintensivethree-dayproductionworkshopcomesattheend.Theteamof
trainersincludesaprojectmanager,ascriptexpert,avideoeditor,ITsupport
andacreativedirector(that’sme).WealsohaveWelsh-speakingexperts.
Thisteamdeliverstheskillstoagroupofparticipantswhowillhave
presentedthemselvesforaworkshopeitherthroughattendingoneofour
publicmeetingsorbyfillinganapplicationonthewebsite(p.190).
Hegivessomedetailofthestorymakingprocessintheseworkshops,inwhich
AdobePremiereisusedasthevideo-editingpackage.Reflectingonthewiderimpact
andimplicationsoftheproject,hecommentsthatthe
DigitalStorytellingprojecthastriedtodevelopitselfinarobustlysustainable
fashion.Wearenotjustavisitingroadshow.Bybeingpartofawiderdigi-nationproject,
Capture Wales participantscanvisitoneofgrowingnumber
ofBBCcommunitystudiosandcontinuetomakefilmslongaftertheinitial
workshopisover.Itistrue,though,thatinthelongrun,asweattemptto
nurturethisnewformofculturalexperience,wewillneedtomakemore
communitypartnerships.Iftherevolutionistomeananything,Digital
Storytellingmustbeproperlysustainable(p.193).
Thecreatorsclaimthattheworkshopapproachiseffectiveinmobilizing
individualsinproducingcoherentstoriesofindividuals’lives.Thereisanefficient
enrollingprocess,andconsistencyisguaranteedbytheworkshopschedulingandby
maintainingfocusonstoryconstructionandproduction.Yet,itisfairtosaythatthe
7
workshopsdonot,inthemselves,mobilizethecommunityeitherimmediatelyafterit
orinthelongterm.Thekeyfocusismaintainedontheindividualstoryandtheshort,
clearlydefinednatureandpurposeoftheworkshop.Also,thetraineesofthe
workshopscomefromdifferentwalksoflifeanddonotnecessarilyshareasenseof
communitypriortotheworkshop.IntheCapture Wales case,theBBCisa
significantactorstabilizingandcoloringthedirectionoftheoverallproject.Inthe
parentCaliforniaproject,theCDSoccupiesasimilarstabilizingpositionforthe
longer-termcontinuationofthewiderproject.However,inbothcases,thereisno
realindicationoftheindividualstorieshavinganyconnectionsorcontinuitywithin
thebroaderstorytellingproject.Thestoriesareindividualizedproductsofthe
workshops.
Nevertheless,theworkshopexperiencecanbeadoptedtowardbuildinga
senseofcommunityamongparticipants.TheThirdWorldMajority(TWM)isanon-profitnewmediatrainingandproductionresourcecenterbasedinLosAngeles,
California.ItalsoprovidesworkshopsforDigitalStorytelling,especiallyfocusingon
communitiesofcolor.Itsapproach“integratesaspectsofpopulareducation,creative
writing,oralhistory,facilitativefilmmaking,anddigitalmediamanipulationtoassist
peopleintellingtheirstoriesasthree-to-fiveminutedigitalvideosbasedonthe
foundmaterialsintheirlives”(www.cultureisaweapon.org).Thenmozhi
Soundararajan,oneofthefoundersoftheTWM,wasalsothefounderanddirectorof
theCDS’sNationalCommunityPrograms(Lambert,2006).InformedbyThird
WorldCinemaandpoliticalorganizing,sheandhercolleaguesatTWM (allwomen
ofcolor)havebeenworkingonafacilitativemodelof“communityDigital
8
Storytelling”thatbringsDigitalStorytellingtrainingtocommunityorganizations,
notjustindividuals.Shedescribesthat
Storyisthecriticalconnectionbetweenpersonalsubjectiveexperienceand
largerpoliticalaction,betweenindividualandcollectiveaction… Ultimately
eachcommunityagencyisitsownhubofexperience.Theywouldusethe
storiesnotjustforexternalcommunicationsandcoalitionbuilding,butasa
waythattheymaintaintheirhistory,theirstory,withinthevaluesand
parametersthatdefinewhotheyare.Theycanuseittoaccesspastmoments
toinformcurrentstruggles(Lambert,2006,p.137).
SheattributesthepowerofDigitalStorytellingtotheprocessofbecoming“fully
connectedto[people’s]cultureandvalues”(p.138)bytheparticipantsduringthe
producingandviewingofthedigitalstories.AdoptingMalcomX’sfamousquote
that“Cultureisourultimateweapon,”Soundararajanfindsinherworkthatitisthe
“Culturalproducts”(p.129,capitalizationintheoriginal)–thestories–participants
“translatingandreshapinginadigitalmedium”(p.130)thatbuildthecommunity.
Technologyadoptedinthecontextofempowermentandsocialchangeisviewedasa
toolandatoolonly.Peopleandcommunitiesthataremarginalizedorpoorin
resourcescancometoseetechnologyassomethingnecessaryforthemtoengage,
but“[they]areengagedwithanexitstrategyinmind”(Lambert,2006,p.136).
Soundararajanwarnsfellowmediafacilitatorsthatthisattitudetowardtechnology
hastobesharedbyboththefacilitatorandtheparticipants,inorder“toavoid
perpetuatingtheattitudeofinferiorityanddisengagedcompliancetowardadopting
technologyamongoppressedcommunities,whichleadstothecontinuationofhostile
mistrust,isnotcompleterejection,ofthosetechnologies”(Soundararajan,citedin
Lambert,2006,p.136).
9
AnotherpopularapplicationofDigitalStorytellingpracticesisinthe
classroom.Benmayor(Weis,Benmayor,O'leary,&Eynon,2002)teachesa“Latina
LifeStories”classwhereDSisusedtoletthestudentstellidentitystoriesand
“theorize”thosestoriesalongthelineofChicanastudies.Thestudentsfeel
“authorizedtoinscribetheirvoicesandcreatetheirowndigitaltexts”that
contributestothe“testimonialliteratureonculturalidentity”(p.159).Sheclaims
DigitalStorytelling“producestransformationalstoriesthatengagehistoriesof
resistance,struggle,andsurvival,andaffirmnewconsciousnessinthemaking”
(Weisetal.,2002,p.158).
Paull(2002)investigatedthepowerandpurposesofDigitalStorytellingseen
throughandexperiencedbyadultstudents.Hearguesthatcreatingdigitalstories
helpre-conceiveandreframeindividualexperienceinthepast,whichenablesthe
digitalstorytellersto“createnewpersonaldefinitions,newspacesasvalidated,
empoweredsubjectsoftheirlifestories”(p.217).This“digitalauthorialstance”
towardsonesexperienceturnsmorecreative,enjoyable,andempoweringthantext-basedstorytellingeverhad,
partlyowingtothesenseof“funandplay”(p.221),
partlyowingtoheightenedsenseofthescopeofpossibleaudiencereachedthrough
multimediaproductionanddissemination.Paull(2002)concludes:
Imaginingaudiencewasintegraltothereflectiveandexpressiveprocess,and
inchoosingtoaddresscertainaudiencesandincorporatemediameaningfulto
certaincommunities,thestorytellersweredefiningthemselvesaccordingto
chosensocialalignments(p.229).
Headdsthatthisimaginingofcommunitiesbythestorytellerssuggests“areal
potentialforcommunitybuilding”(p.230).
10
1.3.ResearchObjectives
ThecurrentstudyfacilitatesDigitalStorytellingtechniquestoACCA
membersinordertocreateaudio-visualstoriesthatareusedtopromotecultural
understandingandculturalexchangeswithinandamongdiverseurbancommunities
livingintheSanGabrielValleyarea.Thegoalofthestudyistwofold.
First,itaimstoexploreandtodescribethecontext,theprocesses,andthe
outcomeofmakingaudio-visualnarrativesusingdigitaltechnologyamong
participantsofaculturegroupintheSanGabrielValley.
a.TodocumenttheprocessesofimplementingDigitalStorytelling
methodologyoutsidetheCenterforDigitalStorytelling’s
workshops.
b.Tolookforcommonthemesaswellasdivergenceinthe
presentationofselfandcommunity.
c.Todiscussthemethodologicalimplicationsoftheparticipant-observer’sroleinfacilitatingtheDigitalStorytellingpractice.
Second,itintendstodescribeandexplaintheconstraintsandenablementin
usingDigitalStorytellingtechniquestopromoteculturalexchangeinculturally
diverseurbancommunities.
d.Toprovideanemicviewofpractitionersoftheculturalexchange
enterprise.
e.ToexaminetheintegrationofusingDigitalStorytellingto
promoteculturalexchange.
11
f. Toreflectontheincreasinginstitutionalizationofstorytellingasa
communicationstrategyforsocialchange.
Owingtothefactthatthisstudyisanethnographicstudyonanaction
researchproject,itdoesnothavepre-determinedhypotheses.Instead,ithasthree
researchquestions:
RQ1.HowDigitalStorytellingispracticed?Howdocommunitymembers
negotiatetheuseofDigitalStorytellingtofulfilltheirindividualandorganizational
goals?
RQ2.Whatdoessuchnegotiationtellusabouttheprocess,theproduct,the
audience,andthetechnologyofDigitalStorytelling?
RQ3.HowdowemakesenseoftheDigitalStorytellingmethodologyasa
participativetooltopromotesocialchangeinthecommunity?Whatarethe
theoreticalandmethodologicalimplicationsoftheresearcher/facilitator’sroleinthe
process?
1.4.PreviewoftheDissertation
1.4.1.LiteratureReviewandTheoreticalFramework
DigitalStorytellingasanalternativegrassrootsmediapracticeismultifaceted
tosaytheleast.SinceresearchonDigitalStorytellingisstillatitsinitialstage,and
itspotentialsforsocialchangewaitingtobeexploitedandexamined,onewayto
makesenseofthisnewmediaphenomenon,andperhapsshapeitsfuturetrajectory,
istorelateittoamoreestablishedmediapractice.Focusingitsrelevancein
communicationresearch,theliteraturereviewchapterdealswithtwokindsof
12
participatoryvisualpractice:photovoiceandparticipatoryvideo,bothofwhichthe
studyconcerningthisdissertationbearsconsiderableaffinity.
Afterthereview,atheoreticalframeworkisconstructedforthestudywhere
thetraditionofparticipatorycommunicationtheoriesareconjoinedwiththeories
aboutculturalproducersinvisualanthropology,withthehelpoftheconceptual
frameworkofthenarrativeempowermenttheory(Rappaport,1995).Nowa
theoreticaldiscourseforthestudyofparticipationandempowermentinDigital
Storytellingisformed.
1.4.2.ResearchDesignandMethodologies
DigitalStorytelling,asauniquemethodologyofaudio-visualstorytelling,has
notbeensubjecttoethnographicinvestigationseitherfollowingtheoriginal
theoreticalconcernoftheNavajoProject,orthemoreprocess-orientedanalyseson
grassrootsmedia/culturalproducers.Ontopofthese,istheissueoffacilitator-participantrelations,
asDigitalStorytellingfollowingtheCenterforDigital
Storytellingmodel,ofteninvolvesco-productionbetweenthefacilitatorandthe
participants,whichmighthaveimplicationsonanyclaimsofculturalauthenticity
andempowerment.OwingtotheparticipatoryandactionnatureofDigital
Storytellingpractice,itcouldbewellarguedthatparticipatoryactionresearch(PAR)
offersasuitableparadigmforthiscollaborativeventure,whereitistermedas“co-generativedialogue,”
emphasizingthevalueofparticipationandtheconfluenceof
twotypesofknowledgeandexpertise:thatofthefacilitatorandoftheparticipants
(Elden&Levin,1991).
13
Themethodologicalgoalsofthisstudyweretodevelopandarticulate
theoriesregardingDigitalStorytellinginamannerthatprivilegedtheideasofthe
peoplewhoareinvolvedintheprocessofthisparticularkindofparticipatorymedia
production.Specificprocedures,discussedinthischapter,wereadoptedtoachieve
theseoverarchingmethodologicalgoals.Inshort,Ifollowedtheactionresearchor
sometimesinterchangeablytermedparticipatoryactionresearch(PAR)paradigmin
designingthestudy,andadialogicparadigminguidingmyfieldworkandmy
ethnographicwriting.Individualcasestudiesofseveralstorytellers/participantsand
theirstorieswereanotherpartofthedatacollection.
Chapter2:LiteratureReview
DigitalStorytellingisanewandinnovativepractice,anditspotentialfor
producingandmaintainingindividualandsocialchangeislargelyunexplored.One
waytomakesenseofthisnewmediaphenomenon,andperhapsshapeitsfuture
trajectory,istorelateittoamoreestablishedmediapractice.Focusingitsrelevance
incommunicationresearch,themajorityoftheliteraturereviewedheredealswith
twokindsofparticipatoryvisualproduction:photovoiceandparticipatoryvideo.
Thisdissertationbuildsonthegrowingliteratureinthesetwotypesofmedia
practice,whichareprecursorstothenewerDigitalStorytellingformat.Theliterature
searchcoveredmajorelectronicdatabasessuchasERIC,JSTOR,ProQuest,
PsycINFO,WorldCat,FirstSearchandDissertationAbstract.Keywordsincluded
participatorycommunication,alternativemedia,photovoice,participatoryvideo,
digitalstorytelling,narrative,andempowerment.
14
2.1.Photovoice
Photovoicehasemergedasapopularstrategyforsocialresearchandsocial
actionpromotedbybothacademicsandactivistsalike.Itfeaturestheuseofcameras
bypeoplewhoareusuallytheobjectsoftheethnographicgaze–ruralwomen,
peoplelivingwithHIV/AIDS,thehomeless,refugees,orstreetworkingchildrenetc.
–totellstoriesoftheirneeds,theirdesires,andtheirrealities.Thesephotosarethen
organizedintobooksorexhibitionsthatreachamuchlarger,sometimesaglobal
audience.Withdifferentresearchand/orsocialgoals,acrossdifferentdisciplines,and
scatteredaroundvariouslocalesoftheglobe,theseprojectsentertheacademic
discoursesandmakeupasmallbodyofliteratureworthnotingbycommunication
scholars.
InaphotovoiceprojectcarriedoutinYunnan,China,aparticipatoryaction
research(PAR)projectaimedatadvocacyforpolicychangewasconductedin
collaborationwithlocalwomenonwomen’sreproductivehealthneedsinapoverty
strickenarea.Sixty-twowomenofdifferentethnicitiesandvillagestookphotosof
theirdailylives,andgroupdiscussionswerefacilitatedtoencourageparticipantsto
examinecriticallythesocialenvironmentthatdeterminestheirhealthstatus(Wanget
al.1996).Amongthephotostaken,onepresentedababygirllyingaloneatthefield
whilehermotherisharvestingarduously.Otherphotographsincludedanolder
toddlerfeedinghisyoungerbrotherintheopen,whiletheirparentsworkedunseenin
thefields.Ayoungschool-agedgirlisshownstayingathometakingcareofher
brother,missingschooltime.Thephotoswereexhibitedinlocalcountiesandlater
reachedprovincialpolicymakersandnationalinstitutionsincludingtheAll-China
15
Women’sFederation.Thewomen’scollectiveeffortshelpedinassessingthehealth
needsthroughtheperspectiveofthegrassroots.Mostimportantly,thosewomen’s
pictureswerepresentedtolocalcommunity,journalists,andpolicymakersinthe
province.Intheend,threepolicyinitiativesconcerningdaycarefortoddlers,
trainingprogramsformidwivesandeducationalscholarshipsforgirlswere
implemented.AsWangetal.(1996,p.1393)concluded:“Acountrywoman
normallycouldnothopetohaveanaudiencewithapolicymakerresponsiblefor
governingtheruralarea,butherphotoscan.”
Wang’sinnovativeintegrationofdocumentaryphotographywithPARwas
furtherdevelopedthroughaseriesofphotovoiceprojects,mainlyusedfor
documentingcommunityassetsandconcernsthroughphotographs.Itwasusedby
peoplewithmentalillness(Bowers,1999ascitedinWang&Redwood-Jones,2001),
bydifferentgenerationsofhomelesswomeninDetroit(Killion&Wang,2000)
wherethesharingofphotographsrevealscommonalitiesandestablishessolidarity
amongwomenofdifferentlifeexperiences,andbylocalcommunitiesinContra
Costa,California,tohelphealthprofessionalstoexpandhealthprogrampriorities
withagrassrootsperspectiveonmaternalandchildhealthneeds(Wang&Pies,
2004).AnothervaluableprojectfocusedonpooreryouthsofFlintMichigan(Wang
&Redwood-Jones,2001;Wang,Morrel-Samuels,Hutchinson,Bell&Pestronk,
2004).
OthergroupsofresearchersalsoappliedWang’smethodologytohealth
relatedprojects.Inruralpost-civilwarGuatemala,photographswereusedtotellthe
storyoftheviolenceinflictedonwomen,aspartofthetruth-recoveryprocessof
16
humanrightsviolationtestimony(Lykes,Blanche,&Hamber,2003;Mateo,Sanchez,
&Lykes,2000).Throughphotos,interviewsandgroup-analyses,womenwereable
to“re-story”(Lykesetal.,p.82)themassacre,displacement,death,anddestruction
theyexperiencedduringthecivilwar.Theprojectalsohadalong-termimpactonthe
communityasparticipantsalsolearnedskillstolaunchneweconomic,educational,
andhealth-relatedinitiativesinthelocalcommunity.
Mostrecently,McAllister,Wilson,GreenandBaldwin(2005)used
photovoicemethodologywithlow-incomeandminorityparentsintheUStostudy
children’sschool-readiness.Investigatorsfoundparentsattachedspecialimportance
tosocialandemotionalhealthoftheirchildrenwhenevaluatingthechild’sreadiness
tobeginschool.Thisisacriticalfindingpreviousresearchignored,accordingto
GreenandBaldwin(2005).Photovoicewasalsousedwithteachersandcommunity
healthcareworkersinSouthAfricaninordertoimproveHIV/AIDSserviceforlocal
youth(Mitchell,DeLange,Moletsane,Stuart,&Buthelezi,2005).
In2000aformalorganizationcalled“PhotoVoice”wascreatedasanon-profitorganizationintheUnitedKingdom.
Itnowhasastrongonlinepresence
(www.photovoice.org)andpromotesphotovoiceprojectsaroundtheworld.For
example,youngBhutaneserefugeeslivinginNepal,streetchildrenandworking
childreninVietnam,andthehomelesslivinginLondon,haveallparticipatedin
PhotoVoiceprojects.Thepeopleinvolvedalsolearnthecraftofphotographyand
receivefinancialbenefitsiftheirphotosaresold.Onthegloballevel,thephotosare
intendedtoraiseconsciousnessinaglobalaudienceaboutpeoplewhoarenormally
17
voicelesslivingonthefringeofsociety.Overall,PhotoVoiceprojectsuniformly
followthebasicconcernwithself-representationandempowerment.
Unfortunately,nophotovoiceprojecthasbeenseenascommunication
researchprograms.EventhoughProjectsconnectedtoPhotoVoice.orgprovidesa
largepoolofcasesforquantitativeresearchtodiscovermetathemesandpatterns,
researchonithasbeensparse.Fewphotovoiceprojectsgaveusdetailedqualitative
analysisonitsimpactfromparticipantobservationoftheparticipatoryprocessesor
fromconductingaudiencereceptionstudies.Also,atthisstage,photovoiceisoften
usedasamethodologyforvariouskindsofapplicationsindifferentfields.The
theoreticalunderpinningsofphotovoiceshouldbeexploredtobetterunderstandhow
photovoiceachievesitsempoweringeffectsandunderwhatcircumstancesitdoesor
doesnot.
2.2.ParticipatoryVideo
2.2.1.TheFogoProcessandtheChallengeforChangeProgram
ParticipatoryvideoresearchusuallycanbetracedbacktotheChallengefor
ChangeprogramlaunchedinCanadain1967.TheCanadianNationalFilmBoard
(NFB)wasactivelyinvolvedinmediaeducation,exploringthepowerofeducating
ordinarypeopleaboutthepowerofmedia.Itrealizedthatfilmandvideoproduction
couldofferpossibilitiesforpeopleinmarginalizedcommunities.ThecaseofFogo
Islandwasoneoftheearliestandmostfrequentlycitedexamples.Thisexemplar
projectmarkedadeparturefromtraditionalvisualanthropologicalresearchand
providedamodelofdevelopmentcommunicationpracticethatwasfaraheadofits
time.ThoughtheChallengeforChangeprogramdidnotcontinueafter1975,its
18
newsletterhelpeddisseminatingprogressintheuseofparticipatoryvideoallaround
theworld,influencingawholenewgenerationofproducersinterestedinusingvideo
forsocialchange.Thissectiongivesareviewonparticipatoryvideo,inanattemptto
characterizeandcategorizethevariouskindsofpractice.
The“FogoProcess”projectevolvedoutofaseriesofeventsin1967onFogo
Island,asmallislandfishingcommunityofftheEasterncoastofNewfoundland,
Canada(Burch,1997;Riano,1994;White,2003).NBFfilmmakerColinLow,the
“philosophicalfather”oftheChallengeforChangeprogram(Stoney,citedby
Sturken,1984)andDonaldSnowden,acommunitydevelopmentworkerfromthe
MemorialUniversityofNewfoundland,wereinstrumentalinchoosingFogoIsland
asthesiteoftheirproject.Withthehelpofalocalcommunitydevelopmentofficer
or“socialanimator”(Crocker,2003,p.127)FredEarle,LowandSnowden
conductedinterviewswithislandresidentsregardinggovernmentplanstoresettle
themonthemainlandwhenfishingindustrywentintodeclineandresidentsofthe
islandcouldnolongermakeasufficientincome.Snowdenwasconvincedthatthe
typeofisolationandlackofinformationororganizationamongthecommunitiesin
theislandwereindicatorsofpoverty.Theprojectintendedtohelppeoplerealizethat
theysharedcommonproblemsandonlythroughbuildingcooperationtheycan
preservetheirwayoflife.
Lowproducedmorethan25shortfilmsonFogoIsland,andheld35separate
screenings,andreachedatotalnumberof3,000viewers.Communityfeedbackand
controlovertheimagebecameahallmarkofthe“FogoProcess.”Eventuallya
“feedbackloop”betweenthecommunitiesandgovernmentadministratorswereadd
19
totheprocess,thoughinafortuitousway(Crocker,2003).TheMinisterofFisheries
hadhiscommentariesfilmedandshownbacktothecommunities.Thecommunities
eventuallywereabletosecurefinancialassistancetostartanewboat-building
companyandreactivatedthefishingindustry.Inthemeantime,thefilmscreatedan
awarenessandself-confidencethatallowedpeople-leddevelopmenttooccur.
AstheChallengeforChangeprogramdeveloped,responsibilityforthefilm
productionwasputincreasinglyintothehandsofcommunitymembers,whoboth
filmedeventsandhadasayintheeditingofthefilms,throughadvancingscreenings
openonlytothosewhowerethesubjectsofthefilms.Theprogramcorresponded
withtheintroductionofthevideo“portapak”(portable),whichmadevideo
inexpensiveandaccessiblealternativetofilm(McLellan,1987).ThevideoVTR-St.
Jacques (1969)wasthefirstexperimentwherecommunitymembersweretrainedto
usevideotobetterrepresenttheirstruggleforaffordableandaccessiblehealthcare.
Assuccessfulasthevideoprojectswere,GeorgeStoney,executiveproducerofthe
ChallengeforChangeprogrambetween1968-1970,cautionedthecost-effectiveness
ofusingvideoforsocialchange(Sturken,1984).Inthiscase,thecostofthe
equipment,theprolongedproductiontime,theextraattentionitrequiredofthe
communitymembersweresomeofthecaveatsheaddedtothepowerofusingvideo
asatool.StoneyalsopointedouttheChallengeforChangeprogramwasdistinctly
Canadianinthatitssuccessrestedontimelygovernmentalresponsestotheissues
raisedinthefilmsandvideos.
20
2.2.2.ParticipatoryVideoaroundtheWorld
DuringthetwodecadesaftertheFogoProcess,projectsaroundtheworld
wereundertakentocreateplatformsforthepeople’svoicetobeheard.Manyofthe
projectswereinsufficientlydocumented,operatingonsmallscalewithsmall
budgets,andundertheimprovisationsoftheprojectdesigners.Ontheotherhand,
somevideopractitionersarguedthatparticipatoryvideohastobeflexibleand
sensitivetoculturaldifferences,therefore,invalidatinguniform,deterministicrules
ofperformance.Thefollowingreviewdescribesafewparticipatoryvideoprojects
worldwidetoillustratethediversityinparticipatoryvideopractice.
2.2.2.1.CulturalPreservationinBrazil
Ogan(1989)givesaccountsoftheKayapoIndiansofBrazil,whohaveused
videotopreservetheirculturaltraditionsforsucceedinggenerations.Triggeredbya
fewanthropologicalstudiesusingvideotodocumenttheKayapocultureinthe
middleofthe1980s,theKayapo,however,realizedthattheycouldusevideofor
theirownpurpose,too.Astheelderlyfearedtheirlocalknowledgewouldbelost,
theyborrowedvideoequipmentfromtheanthropologistsandstartedbuildingan
electroniclibraryontheirown.Theyfoundthatvideowasaconvenientmediumto
preservetheircustomsandknowledgeforfuturegeneration,evenwhentheliteracy
ratewasverylowamongtheKayapos.
2.2.2.2.IdentityDeconstructioninColombia
Itcanbesaidthatprobablythemostparticipatoryvideoprojectshavetaken
placeinLatinAmerica(Riano,1994).InspiredbythecriticalpedagogyofPaulo
Freire(Freire,1970,1993)agreatmanygrassrootsmediainitiativeshavedeveloped
21
intoarejectiontostate-controlledmassmedia(Rodriguez,1994).Forexample,
Rodriguez(1994)describeshowColombianwomenproducedvideostories.For
thesewomenlivinginmarginalareasofBogotathefirstobstacletheyencountered
wastofindoutthatmakingvideodidnotmeanrepeatingwhattheysawondaily
television.Rodriguezquotesonewoman’sstatementvividlydescribingtheinitial
uneasiness:“Butwearenotpretty;howcanwebetelevisionactresses?”(p.155).
Onlyafterawhiledidthewomengraspthattheycouldusevideotopresenttheir
ownreality,theirhouses,families,friends,theirowncity,etc.andnotsomeone
else’sreality.Thevideofosteredaprocessofdeconstructingmassmediated
representationofwomenandreconstructionoftheirindividualandcollective
identity.Thesharingoftheirviewslaterinspiredcollectiveactionamongthe
women.
2.2.2.3.VideoLettersfromNepal
InNepal,avideoprojectwasimplementedtoimprovecommunication
betweenwomeninaremoteruralvillageandthecentrallylocateddevelopmentand
governmentalorganizations(Ogan,1989).Questionsconcerninglegalproblems
relatedtodomesticviolenceordivorcewererecordedbyvillagewomen,andthen
weresenttotheWomen’sLegalServiceProjectinthecapital,Kathmandu.From
Kathmanduvideotapedsolutionsweresentbackinreturn.Inthatwayvideohelped
womentoobtaininformationontheirlegalpositionandmobilizedthemtoprotect
theirrights.Inlaterdevelopmentoftheprojectthewomenwereinspiredand
empoweredbythevideproductionexperienceandfaughtforaplaceinthemale-dominatedcommunitymeetings,
wheremanylegalissuesweredealtwith.
22
2.2.2.4.AnOpenExperimentinVietnam
In1995,anOxfamfundedparticipatoryvideoprogramwascarriedout
amongvillagersinKyAnhtotestthevalueofusingvideofortheretrievaland
representationofinformationbylocalfarmersinVietnam(Braden&Huong,1998).
Theprojectleftopenthecontent/focusasitwastobedeterminedbytheparticipating
villagers,withthehopethatvideowouldenablethevillagerstospeakandrepresent
theircommunityconcernsdirectly.Inashortdurationoftendays,theproject
producedfourvideosandheldscreeningsinthevillageandtothelocalgovernment.
Thelatteryieldencouragingsolutionstotheissuesraisedinthevideos.Latervisits
bythestaffmembersrevealedthatthevideoprojectsuccessfullysolvedthelocal
problemswiththeschools,whilemoreresource-relatedissueswereleftunsolved.
However,thevideobecamevaluablelobbyingmaterialforsolicitingexternal
funding.BradenandHuongalsodiscoveredthelackoftransparencyintheprogram
thatentailedtoohighanexpectationonthepartoftheparticipants.Theunique
culturalsettingsalsorevealedtheWesternbiasregardingparticipation.
2.2.2.5.Women’sEmpowermentinIndia
VideoSEWA(Stuart,1989)isamongthemostoftencitedexamplesinthe
participatoryvideoliterature.Establishedin1972,SEWA(Self-EmployedWomen
Association)aimsatorganizingpoorandself-employedurbanwomenintotrade
unionsandco-operatives,improvingwomen’sentrepreneurship,andsupporting
legalprotectionofwomen,etc.In1984,MarthaStuart,aparticipatoryvideopioneer,
heldavideoproductionworkshopatSEWA.Manyilliteratewomenwhoattended
theworkshophadneverseenavideocamera,buttheywheredeeplyimpressedand
23
formedVideoSEWA.Asidefromusingvideotospreadinformation,raiseawareness
aboutsocialandeconomicissues,theyalsousevideotosetupamockcourtto
rehearsecross-examinationforthewomenwhohadtotestifyoncourt.
2.2.2.6.ATentativeTypography
Itisnotthisdissertation’sintentiontopresentanexhaustedreviewof
participatoryvideointheworld.Yetitisfairetosaythatparticipatoryvideoprojects
havepursueddifferentgoalsgloballyinproducingsocialchangesaccordingtolocal
circumstances.Theseprojectsdosouniquelybyfosteringacollaborativeeffort
amongcommunitymembersandadvocatesinordertoidentifyneedstobeaddressed
fromthebottomup,oftenprovidingavoicetothosewhotypicallyhavenovoice.
Yetgreatdiversityexistsinthissmallacademicliterature.Generallyspeaking,there
arethreemajortypesofparticipatoryvideo,thetherapeutic,theactivism-based,and
theempowering.
ShawandRobertson(1997)describestheconceptoftherapyinparticipatory
videoas:
… asocialandcommunity-basedtoolforindividualandgroupdevelopment.
Usedinthisway,videocanbeapowerfulaidinthecultivationand
realizationofpeople’sabilityandpotential.Itisagroup-basedactivitythat
revolvesaroundtheneedsoftheparticipants.Videoisusedtodeveloptheir
confidenceandself-esteem,toencouragethemtoexpressthemselves
creatively,todevelopacriticalawarenessandtoprovideameansforthemto
communicatewithothers.
Inthistype,participatoryvideoisprincipallyusedwiththose“disadvantaged,”beit
physical,attitudinal,educational,socialoreconomic.Theyusuallyoperatethe
equipmentjustforthemselves,withthemainobjectivebethedevelopmentoftheir
controlovertheirwork(p.11).Thistherapeuticconceptionofparticipatoryvideo
24
hasaclearfocusonprocess.Kawaja(1994)describesparticipatoryvideoprojects
withminoritywomeninCanadathatarebestclassifiedastherapy.Thepurposeof
those“processvideo”projects,astheywerelabeled,wastoallowwomento
investigatetheirownreality.Womenformulatedtheirindividualandcollective
historiesintheformofstoriesortheatreandrecordedthemonvideo.Watchingthese
historiesonvideoenabledthemtoseethemselvesasthroughamirror;theylearned
howtheywereperceivedbyothers.Kawajastates,“Associalintervention,process
videoisbiasedtowardsreflexivityratherthantowarddirectpoliticalactionor
intervention”(p.142).Thusoptionsforsocialchangearenotdirectlyaddressedin
therapeuticparticipatoryvideoprojects,althoughthereflexiveexperiencecanof
coursebeempoweringandmotivatedforpoliticalaction.
Ingeneral,thetherapeuticvideoproducedisonlyvaluablefortheproject
participantsthemselves,notforotherpeople.Thetapes“playaroleinaprocess
ratherthanstandingontheirownas‘product.’Theendproductinandofitselfdoes
notconfermeaning”(p.144).Consequentlythedistributionoftherapy-oriented
videosonalargerscaleisusuallynotintended.Thethrillofholdingacamerais
anotherimportantaspectofthiskindofparticipatoryvideo.Attainingcontrolovera
creative,prestigioustoollikethevideocameraorthecuttingboardhasapositive
therapeuticeffectontheparticipants’self-esteem.Pushedbythatexperience
participantsdecreasetheir“feelingsofpowerlessness”(Shaw&Roberston,1997,p.
13)whichtheyhavebuiltupthroughrepeatedexperiencesofinferiorityinsociety.
Thesecondtypeisactivistparticipatoryvideo.Hereactivismisbroadly
definedtoinclude“lobbying”,“campaigning”,and“advocacy.”IntheVideo Activist
25
Handbook,Harding(1997)definesavideoactivistassomeonewhousesvideoasa
tacticaltooltobringaboutsocialjusticeandenvironmentalprotection(p.1).A
masterexampleheusesinthebookisthebeatingofRodneyKinginLosAngelesin
1992,whichwasfilmedbyanamateurstandingonabalconynearby.Thefootage
wasbroadcasthundredsoftimeonTVchannelsaroundtheworldandsubsequently
usedincourtsatthetrial3.Inthecontextofthisdiscussion,anotheractivism-oriented
videoHardingpresentsisthecasewhereagroupofresidentscollectedlocal
testimoniesandincludedvideoevidencetheyproducedtoraiseenvironmental
concernsoverthepollutioncausedbyalocalaluminumfactoryinWales,UK.The
videowassentasavideolettertothefactory,todifferentlocalstakeholdersandto
journaliststopressurethefactory.Needlesstosay,thePhotovoiceprojectdeveloped
inChinawasinthissenseactivism-oriented,asitadvocatedchangesregarding
publicpolicyforruralcommunities.
Inthiscategory,wecanalsoincludetheFogoIslandvideoandthevideo
lettersinNepal.WhatworthnotingisthatHarding’srenderingofactivismreifies
individualheroismandgrassrootsspontaneity.Socialandpoliticalactivismcomes
indifferentforms,duration,andeffectiveness.Being“grassroots”andinvolving
activistsdoesnotnecessarilymeanchangesofconsciousnesseruptfromthebottom
solelybythedispossessedorthedisempowered,suggestingspontaneous,
autonomous,pristinelocalorindividualinitiatives.Oftentimes,elites,beitlocal,
3Thevideowasactivism-orientedinthesenseitwasagrassroots,bottom-upenterprisethatprovided
alternativestothetraditionalmassmedia,butitspowerrestedsolelyontheproduct,thetape,andthe
socialconsciousnessofthevideoactivist.Theprocessofproductionbornlittlesignificanceasfaras
the“FogoProcess”wasconcerned.
26
nationalorinter/transnational,fightsidebysidewiththoselivingonthefringeofthe
society,servingascatalysts,facilitatorsandpoliticalspokesperson(SeeGinsburg,
Alvarez,andothersinFox&Starn,1997).Inthiscontext,activism-oriented
participatoryvideoincludescollaborativeendeavorwhereoutside
facilitators/catalysts/animatorsworkwithgroupsofordinarypeoplewhothenengage
inreflectionsovertheirsubordinationormarginalization,andwhofightforjustice
andautonomy.
Iftheabovementionedtwogoalsofparticipatoryvideopracticearesomehow
onacontinuumfrommoreinwardlooking(therapy)goaltomoreoutwardbound
trajectory(activism),thenempoweringparticipatoryvideoprojectsintegratethetwo
approachesbyusingthefullpotentialofboththepeopleandthe
facilitators/catalysts/socialanimators.Theboundariesbetweensubject,producer,and
viewerbecomeblurredwiththisapproach.Everybodyisinvolvedinthethreekey
activities:filming,performing(beingfilmed),andviewingthefilm.Theinvolvement
ofthefacilitators/catalysts/socialanimatorsiscrucialintheprocess,astheydonot
justdirect,butalsohavetocreateenoughspacefortheparticipantstotaketheirown
initiative.Theyareconstantlycaughtinthedilemmaofstructuringandlettingthings
developspontaneouslyandbetweenauthoritariananddialogicalapproach(Kawaja,
1994).Thepeople’sinvolvementisnotmucheasier.Theyneedtogetusedtoanew
technology,becreative,makingafinalproduct,anddistributeit.Sometimesthey
havetoworkoutagoalthemselves,suchastheVietnamprojectmentionedearlier.
Whenallthesedemandsaremet,wecanreasonablybelievethattheparticipants
havebeentrulyempowered.
27
Chapter3:TheoreticalFramework
3.1.Introduction
InthisChapteranumberoftheoreticaltraditionsareintroducedand
integratedtoexplicatetwomostimportanttheoreticalconstructs,participationand
empowerment,inthecontextofparticipatorymediapracticeinvolving
nonprofessionals.Athirdtheoreticalconstructpresentedhereistheideaof
storytelling.DigitalStorytellingpromotedbytheCenterforDigitalStorytelling
(CDS)putsconsiderableemphasisontheformofthestoriesproduced.Therefore,
theoreticaldiscussionsregardingbothformandcontentinvisualpracticeby
nonprofessionalswillalsobeincluded.
Thetheoreticaltraditionsrelevantfordiscussionincludeparticipatory
communicationtheoriesindevelopmentcommunication,especiallytheorieson
participatorymediapractice,andtheoriesaboutculturalproducersinvisual
anthropology,especiallythoserelatedtoappliedvisualanthropologicalresearchin
indigenousvideoproduction.Empowermenttheoriesincommunitypsychology,
healthpromotion,anddevelopmentstudieswillalsobeintegratedinthediscussion.
Althoughthetheoreticaldiscoursesaredifferent,Iargueinthefollowingdiscussion
thatthefirsttwosetsoftheoriesandpracticesoverlapsignificantlyandare
complementarytooneanother.Bothsetsofpracticesalsooftenclaimempowerment
asthemajoroutcome.Empowermenttheoriesandresearch,therefore,helpintegrate
thefirsttowsetsoftheories.Iwillexplainfurther,towardstheendofthissection,
28
howcombiningdifferentperspectivesisbeneficialtoasubjectmatterlikeDigital
Storytelling.
3.2.Participation
Theframeworkswhereparticipationisdiscussedhereincludedevelopment
communication,towhichthediscourseonparticipationisbothphilosophicaland
practical,andtheanthropologicalinvestigationofindigenoususeofaudio-visual
media.
Inthedevelopmentfield,participationislargelyviewedasanorganized
institutionalefforttoincreasedisadvantagedstakeholders’accessandcontrolover
resourcesanddecision-making,withsustainablelivelihoodsastheultimategoal
(FAO,2002).Participatorycommunicationtheoriesemergedasoneofthe
alternativestothedominantparadigmindevelopmentcommunication,andhave
gainedrelativedistinctionincommunicationresearchsincethelate1990s(Melkote
&Steeves,2001).Theepistemologicalandontologicalassumptionsof
modernizationtheorywerechallenged,particularlyontherelationshipbetweenthe
researcherandthelocalcommunities.Thenewconfigurationfortheresearcher-researchedrelationshippositsthatoutsideresearcherstakeasecondaryrolein
developmentprojects,whereaslocalknowledge,experience,andaspirationsofthe
communitymustbeprioritizedinprojectdesign,implementation,andevaluation
(Jacobson,1993;Melkote,1991;Servaes,Jacobson,&White,1996).
NairandWhite(1999)conceptualizedparticipationasatwo-wayinteraction
betweenthegrassroots“targetedgroups”andthe“informationsource”,mediated
throughdevelopmentcommunicators/catalysts.Thevalueofparticipationbetween
29
thesetwocanhelpbuildtowardthehumanaspectsofdevelopment,whichis
“conscientization”(Freire,1970,1993).Conscientizationisaprocessofliberation
andbuildingsocialsolidaritythatdefiesdominantpowerstructures.Thisaspectof
participationisusuallyadvocatedasaroutetoempowerment(seebelow).Asthis
studyconcernstheuseofDigitalStorytellingtoengagelocalrepresentation,weneed
tospecificallydiscusstheconceptofparticipationinparticipatorygrassrootsmedia
experiences.
Gaininginsightsfrommanyyearsofpracticingandresearchparticipatory
video,itisarguedthatparticipatoryaudio-visualproductionisbothaprocess anda
product.Asaprocess,itis
simplyatooltofacilitateinteractionandenableself-expression.Itisnot
intendedtohavealifebeyondtheimmediatecontext.…Theintentisto
promoteself/otherrespect,asenseofbelonging,afeelingofimportance,a
claimtoanidentity.Whenwetalkabouttheprocesswearetalkingaboutthe
totalcontextofexperienceofusingvideoforself-definedpurpose(White,
2003,p.65).
Participatoryaudio-visualpracticeasaproduct,ontheotherhand,placeshighvalue
onthefinaloutcome,beitafilm,atape,aDVD,orasingledigitalstory.Most
audio-visualproductproducedinnon-participatorysettings,inducespassiveand
individualizedviewingactivity.Whenproducedwithaparticipatoryapproach,the
people/producershavecontroloverthemessageandtheaudience.Theproduct
becomes“anartifactofthecommunityandculture,forposterity.Itcanbecataloged,
accessedandarchivedforpresentandfuturegenerations.Thecontenthencebecomes
historicalfact”(White,2003,p.66).
30
Anotherextensiveliteratureonparticipatorymediapracticeisintheareaof
visualanthropology.ThefamousFogoProjectdiscussedinthedevelopmentfieldis
givenadifferenttheoreticalsignificanceinvisualanthropology.Here,participation
isusuallyconceptualizedashoweditorialcontrolcanbesharedandhowlocal
participantscanbecomeactivecollaboratorsinchoosingthesubjectmatter,
producing,viewingandevenanalyzing.StephenLansingcallsthisthe
“decolonizationofethnographicfilm”tomakeareferencetothisreconceptualization
ofparticipationinvisualcommunication(citedinChalfen,1997,p.305).This
participatoryexperiencelaterbecameknownasthe“FogoProcess”–theconsensus
thatbeforethesubjectsofthefilmapproveit,thefilmwouldnotbereleased;andthe
subjectsarealsofreetomakeeditorialdecisionsuchascutsorinserts(Pack,2000).
Anotherparallelcanbedrawnbetweentheepistemologicalandontological
challengetomodernizationtheoryinthedevelopmentfield,andtherevisionist
developmentsinanthropologywheretheunivocalvoiceoftheresearcherwas
challengedasresearchsubjects’“emicviews”begantobeheard;apostmodernist
turnhappenedinmanysocialsciencesandthehumanities.Givingvoicetothe
researchparticipantsraisesnewquestionsregardingtheroleoftheanthropologistor
anthropologically-mindedfacilitator/catalyst,whoinevitablytakesthetaskof
“culturalbrokerage”(Chalfen&Rich,2004).Itsimplicationsonmethodologyare
tremendousandIwillspecificallydiscussinthenextchapter.Forthetimebeing,I
wanttoemphasizethetheoreticalimportanceofadoptinganappliedanthropological
perspectiveforthisstudy.VanWilligen(2002)sumsitupsuccinctly:
31
Increasinglyappliedanthropologistworkwiththosestudiedinacollaborative
orparticipatorymode… Theappliedanthropologistshareshisorherspecial
skillsandknowledgewiththecommunity.Thisservestotransform the
community from object to be known to a subject that can control (p.43,
emphasismine).
ThetheoreticallineagestartedwithSolWorthandJohnAdair’slandmark
studywiththeNavajoIndians.Intriguedbyhowmeaningiscommunicatedthrough
variousmodesandmedia,WorthandAdair(1972)taughtNativeIndiansinNavajo
tomakefilmssothatfilms“makeiteasierforthemtotalktous,”andlaterhecalled
themethodabiodocumentarytechniqueoffilmmaking(Worth,1981,p.4).Hewas
firmlyconvincedthatanywrittenorfilmedrecordspresentedbyanthropologists,or
anyone,areloadedwiththeproducers’ownvaluesandbiases.Forhim,filmor
photographyis“recordof culture”ratherthan“recordabout culture,”fortheimage
maker’svaluesystems,codingpatternsandcognitiveprocessesarebothreflectedin
thedecisionshemakes(bothconsciouslyandunconsciously),andconstrainedbythe
technologysheuses(p.16).RichardChalfendevelopedthebiodocumentary
techniqueintotheconceptof“socio-documentaryfilmmaking”throughhiswork
withculturallydiversegroupsofadolescents,wherehedevelopedWorth’s
individuallyorientedmethodologytoagrouporientedone(Chalfen,1981;Chalfen
&Haley,1971).
Manyappliedvisualanthropologyresearchwereconductedwithindigenous
peoplearoundtheworld(Pink,2004),underthelabel“indigenousmedia.”New
communicationtechnologyfitstheoralandperformativetraditionsofmany
indigenouspeoples.“Mediamissionaries”havebeenworkingasagitatorsand
catalystsforpoliticalactivismsincethe60’s;andindigenouspeoplearoundthe
32
worldalsoquicklyfindthatsmallmediaprovideamediationprocesstoemploy
culturalpoliticstoenhanceindigenousstrugglesforlandrights,culturalautonomy,
andself-representation(Ginsburg,2003a).Participationasatheoreticalconstructis
notprominentlydiscussed.Thefocusgoesfurthertothecomplexityofparticipatory
processesandthechangeentailed.
Onemostprominentshiftinthisstrainofappliedvisualanthropologyisfrom
studyingtheformalqualitiesoffilmtext,theproduct only,towardthestudyingof
process andmediationinthedynamicsoflocalpolitical,socialandcultural
environment.WorkingwiththeindigenousKayapopeopleincentralBrazil,
anthropologistTerenceTurner(1991)hasgivenconsiderableattentiontothe
indigenousvideoproductionprocessintheKayapoculture.Hefindsthevideo
makersoperatewithtraditionalsetofculturalcategoriesandprinciples.Heargues:
“Thepointisthattheuseofvideoandthemeaningofthevideosproduced,cannotbe
conceivedorunderstoodinabstractionfromthesocialandpoliticaldynamicswhich
inevitablyaccompanytheirmaking,showing,andviewing”(p.74).Incentral
Australia,EricMichaels(1986)investigatedtheuseofvideobytheaboriginal
Warlpiriandproposeda“processual”definitionofaboriginalmediathatisbased
“notonthepropertiesofthetextbutontheconditionsofitsproductionanduse”(p.
23).Ginsburg(1997)alsoholdsthatthestudyofindigenousmediashouldnotjust
focusonthemediatext,butweshouldlookatmediaasachannelthroughwhichthe
dynamicsmediationprocesswheresocialrelationsareplayedoutinmedia
production,circulationandconsumption(p.124).Itisthisprocess-oriented,holistic
viewonmediausethatmakesuscapableofunderstandingwhypracticelike
33
photovoiceandparticipatoryvideoareeffectiveinachievingtherapeutic,activist,
andempoweringgoals.
3.3.Empowerment
Surprisingly,thoughempowermenteffectshavebeenclaimedinboth
theoreticaltraditions,nocleardefinitionofempowermenthasemergedineither
participatorycommunicationtheoriesorinthevisualanthropologicaltheories.HereI
introducetwoversionsofempowermenttheoryusedinhealtheducationand
communitypsychologytocrystallizethepathtoempowerment.
Followingthegeneralconceptualizationusedbytheoristsandpractitionersof
thehealtheducationenterprise,empowermentisdefinedasboth“asocial-action
processinwhichindividualsandgroupsacttogainmasteryovertheirlivesinthe
contextofchangingtheirsocialandpoliticalenvironment”(Wallerstein&Bernstein,
1994,p.142),andtheoutcomeofsuchprocess(Bernstein,Wallerstein,Braithwaite,
Gutierrez,Labonte,&Zimmerman,1994).Inthisempowermenttheory,poweris
perceivedasa“continuousvariable”thatconstantlychangesasitisunevenly
distributedamongpeople(Bernsteinetal.,p.286).Empowermentaimsatunleashing
thepowerpotentialsthatpeoplealreadyhave,not“giving”powertothem.
Freire’sradicalhumanismalsorefusestoperceivetheoppressedpowerless.
Inthepedagogyoftheoppressed,Freire(1993)positsthatnooneshallbetreatedas
objectspassivelyreceivingknowledge,butSubjectswhohavetheagencytoengage
inhistoricalstruggleandchange.Alongthisline,understandingofempowermentis
characterizedbyasetofphraseslike“powerto,”“powerwith,”and“powerwithin”
(Robertson&Minkler,1994).Thenemesisistheconceptof“powerover”which
34
impliespatriarchalmaterialdominationorideologicalhegemony(Minkler&
Wallerstein2002).“Powerto”and“powerwith”emphasizethesharingofpower,
demandingthestrengtheningofpeople’sself-worth,analyticalcapacities,
collaborationandleadershipskills,awarenessofrights,andidentityascitizensand
protagonists.Itisinthisdialecticgive-and-takeprocesswhereempowermenttheory
definestherolesprofessionalshavevis-à-vislaypersons,andlargehierarchical
institutionsvis-à-visthecommunities.Intermsofthepowerrelationsbetweenthe
researcherandtheparticipants,theconceptofparticipationsetstheboundariesof
thisdialecticalpowerrelationship.
Communitypsychologistsinterestedinnarrativestudiesofferedanother
definitionofempowermentthatisrelevanttothisstudy.TheyadoptedtheCornell
EmpowermentGroup’sdefinitionofempowerment,whichis“anintentional,
ongoingprocesscenteredinthelocalcommunity,involvingmutualrespect,critical
reflection,caringandgroupparticipation,throughwhichpeoplelackinganequal
shareofvaluedresourcesgaingreateraccesstoandcontroloverthoseresources”
(CornellEmpowermentGroup,1989p.2).Rappaport(1995)highlightsthe
constructionofresourcesinthedefinitionandargues,“Theabilitytotellone’sstory
andtohaveaccesstoandinfluenceovercollectivestories,isapowerfulresource”
(p.803).Heurgesscholars,especiallyscholarswhoseworkdealswithcommunities
(Rappaportisacommunitypsychologist),tocombinethenarrativeframeworkwith
empowermenttheory.Here,heusestheterm“story”torefertoanindividually,
thematically,andtemporallyorganizedcognitiverepresentationorsocial
35
communicationofevents;narrative,ontheotherhand,referstostories“thatarenot
idiosyncratictoindividuals”(p.803).
InaspecialissueintheAmerican Journal of Community Psychology,
Rappaport(1995)argues:
Ifnarrativesareunderstoodasresources,weareabletoseethatwhocontrols
thatresource,thatiswhogivesstoriessocialvalue,isattheheartofatension
betweenfreedomandsocialcontrol,oppressionandliberation,and
empowermentversusdisenfranchisement….Stories are not scarce resource,
but often the stories of people who are “outsiders” are an ignored or
devalued resource. Much of the work of social change, organizational and
community development in the direction of greater personal and collective
empowerment, may be about understanding and creating settings where
people participate in the discovery, creation, and enhancement of their
community narratives and personal stories (p.805,emphasismine).
Largelybasedonresearchintotheacquisitionofindividualsocialidentity,whichis
aprocessof“beingborninto,appropriating,orhelpingtocreatepositivepersonal
storiesandcommunitynarratives”(p.804),Rappapportconcludesthatcreatingnew
personalstories(toestablishpositiveidentities)ononesownisdifficult.Peopleall
needcommunitynarrativestosupporthisorherpersonallifestory;therefore,
“listeningtostoriesandhelpingpeopletocreateplacesthatvalueandsupportboth
theirpersonalstoriesandtheircollectivenarrativesisanempoweringactivity”(p.
805).Researchintoself-helpgroupsandreligiouscommunities(Mankowski&
Rappaport,1995),orneighborhoodartsprograms(Thomas&Rappaport,1996)has
attestedtothisargument.
Tointegratethetwoempowermenttheories,Isumupthefollowing
theoreticalpositions:1)storiesareresourcestoempowerment;2)facilitatinggroups
thatarenormallyexcludefromthedominantpublicspherethetellingoftheirstories
36
isinherentlyempoweringtothegroups;3)andtoempowerSubjectstounleashtheir
powerpotentialispremisedonthecreationofaparticipatory,collaborative
relationshipbetweenthefacilitatingprofessionalsand/orinstitutionsandthe
participatingindividualsand/orcommunities.
Scholars,practitionersandactivistsapproachingdevelopment
communicationthroughparticipatorymediapracticehavelinkedparticipationwith
empowermentthroughboththeoryconstructionandpractice.50casestoriesof
participatorymediaproductionforempowermentinacollectioncalled“Making
Waves: Stories of Participatory Communication for Social Change”(Dagron,2001)
illustratesamodelcalledCommunicationforSocialChange(CFSC),acollaborative
researchprojectfundedbytheRockefellerFoundationsince1997(Gray-Felder&
Dean,1999).CFSCvaluestheprocessof“peoplecomingtogethertodecidewho
they are, what they want and how they will obtain what they want”(Grey-Felder,
2002,p.i,emphasisfromtheoriginal).Theyproposedanewagendaforglobal
developmentthatmandates“communicationthatisempowering,many-to-many
(horizontalvs.top-down),communicationthatgivesvoicetothepreviouslyunheard,
andthathasabiastowardlocalcontentandownership”(Gray-Felder&Dean,1999,
p.4).Whatiscommonamongthecasesofparticipatorymediaproductionpresented
inthecollectionincludes:1)theemphasisontheprocessesofmediaproduction,not
justthefinalproductofproduction;2)theuniquenessofeachproject,withits
intimateandtransientsocialrelationshipanditsownsetofhistoricalandcultural
circumstances;3)theimportanceofdialogueandcooperation,ofrespectandsocial
37
accountability;4)andthesharedconclusionthattherearenofixedwaysto
encourageparticipation,tomeasuresuccess,andtoaffecttheaudiences.
Theemphasisonprocessintheroadtowardsempowermentisalso
predominantlytheorizedintheliteratureinappliedvisualanthropology,especiallyin
thestudyofindigenousmedia.Arguingforabetterunderstandingofindigenous
mediaandtheirproduction,Ginsburg(2003b)identifiestheunderlyingvaluesof
indigenousmediaproductionas“strategicchoice”for“revivifyinglocallanguages,
traditions,andhistoriesandarticulatingcommunityconcerns”(p.297).Suchvalues
underliean“embeddedaesthetics”(p.306)thatisjudgeduponbythemedia
production’s“capacitytoembody,sustain,andevenreviveorcreatecertainsocial
relations”(p.306),relationsthatareatonceuniqueandhybrid;complexand
coherent;stableandevolving.
ThisuniqueviewonaestheticscanbemisunderstoodbydominantWestern
artsinstitutionsasthoseinstitutionsvalorizeindividualartistsandpursueaesthetic
innovationinthemediatext(Leuthold,1998).Indigenousproducerssituatetheir
workasmediatedcollectiveself-representationthatadvocateaconscious
transformativedefenseoftheirculturaltraditions,andalsoadialoguewiththelarger
society,“acontinuumofsocialactionauthorizingaboriginalculturalempowerment”
(Ginsburg,2003a,p.315).Ginsburgevenconsidersherwritingasanextensionof
theinitiativetodevelopa“discursivepractice”thatdemandsAboriginalmedia
productionbejudgedandvaluedinterms“relevanttocontemporaryindigenous
peoplelivinginavarietyofsettings”(p.305).
38
Inasimilarvein,Iargue,inphotovoiceandparticipatoryvideoliterature
photographyandvideoproductionareconceptualizedasbothadiscursivetechnique
of andfor collectivesocialaction.Theempowermentphotovoiceparticipants
experiencecannotbeanalyzedsolelythroughthetexttheyproduced;wehaveto
lookintothesocialdynamicsofmediause.Mediaproductionhereisnotonlya
recordingtechniqueforthemarginalizedgroupstoconstructcollectivememoryand
identity,butalsoadiscursivepracticeforthemtoadvocateandempower
themselves.Thephotographsorvideoproducedthroughparticipatorymediapractice
aremediatedrepresentationofhumanexperiences,includingperceivedobjective
truth/realityandsubjectiveexpression.Participationintheircollectiveself-representationimbuesdiscursivepowertotheindividualsinvolvedinmedia
production.Itisthroughtheprocessofdialoguing,collectivereflection,and
collectivedecision-makingandauthorship,thephotosandvideosthatfostera
collectiveprotagonistexertingcontrolandpowerforcollectivesocialaction.
Throughtheir“collectiveself-production”(Ginsburg,2003b,p.306),the
marginalizedareabletotakecontrolovertheirownstories,whichinandofitself,
empowersthestorytellers.
3.4.DigitalStorytelling
3.4.1.TheGenreofDigitalStorytelling–“Biodocudrama”
DigitalStorytellingistheinventivecombinationofdigitaltechnologywith
theancientartofstorytelling(Lambert&Mullen,1998).Mostlyitisbasedonusing
videoeditingsoftwaretoprocessdigitizedimageryandaudiodatasuchas
photographicstills,filmfootage,musicsoundtrackandvoice-overbridging
39
commentary(Lambert,2002;Meadows,2003).DifferentfromtheNavajoProject,
whereWorthandAdairtriedhardtoteachtheminimumconventionsoffilmmaking
totheNavajoIndians,DigitalStorytellingpracticebasedontheworkshopformatof
theCenterofDigitalStorytelling(CDS)unmistakablypromotes,evenmandates,its
owndistinctgenre/conventions:Essentiallyaconversationalmedium(Lambert,
2006),itistheuseofdigitalphotographyandnon-lineareditingsoftwaretomake
shortandemotionallycompellingpersonalaswellascommunitystories.
Attheworkshop,Lambertgaveoutaparticularsetofguidelinesforstory
compositionthatmakessuccessfultherapeuticandempoweringstories.“Allstories
areresurrectionstories,”hesaid(5/18/06,Fiedlnotes).Thoughtheguidelinesarenot
meanttobeprescriptive,theyaregoodscaffoldingdevicestodealwithnewDigital
Storytellers.FromCDSwebsite,everyonecandownloadthe“DigitalStorytelling
Cookbook”4whichintroducesthe“SevenElementsofDigitalStorytelling,”
essentialsfornarrationanddesign.Belowisabriefaccountofwhattheseven
elementsare:
1)PresentingthePointofViewofthestoryteller.Usuallytoldinthefirst-person,
theDigitalStoriesaresubjective,individualexpressionsoflived
experience.
2)PosingaDramaticQuestiontotheaudience.Followingclassicnarrative
types,thebasic“desire-action-realization”or“tension-resolution-insights”
storystructuresareadoptedfordramaticeffects.
4TheCookbookcanbeaccessedathttp://www.storycenter.org/cookbook.html,lastretrievedonJune,
27,2007.
40
3)ProducingEmotionalContent.DigitalStoriesshallsharethehonestemotions
withtheaudienceinordertocommunicateeffectively.
4)UsingtheGiftofYourVoice.Theuseofthenarrator’sownvoicetogivea
senseofemotionandauthenticity.
5)ExploitingthePoweroftheSoundtrack.Musichelpsproducingcertainmood
thatinfluencestheaudiencebothcognitivelyandemotionally.
6)PracticingtheprincipleofEconomy.DigitalStoriesrangebetween2-5
minutes,withascriptofabout250words.Itistheessentialprinciplefor
integratingmultiplemedia.Implicitormetaphoricaluseofsymbolsand
images,ortheirincongruousjuxtaposition,cansavewordsandcreate
unexpectedeffects.
7)PayingattentiontothePacingofthestory.TheyrhythmofaDigitalStory
dependsonthespeedofimagesmovinginandoutofviewandthe
soundtrack.Pacingcanbepurposefullyarrangedtocuetheaudience’s
cognitiveandemotionalresponse(Lambert,2006).
TheseelementscategorizeDigitalStoriesintoanidealmediagenreIcall
“biodocudrama.”5IuseSolWorth’s“biodumentary”concepttoemphasizetheway
DigitalStorytellingasamethodology,resemblestheinnovativemethodWorthused
asaresearchtooltomaketheNavajoIndianstospeaktootherculturesthroughfilm
5Theterm“biodocudrama”hasoccurred,viaGooglesearch,inafewwebpageswithnoclea-indicated,
letaloneanacademicdefinitiononwhatitmeans.Itcanbearguedtheonlinepopular
discourseon“biodocudrama”isbasedonthepopularunderstandingof“docudrama”,onlythatitis
aboutaperson.Inasense,itseemstorefertoabiographicaldocudrama.Mydefinitionof
“biodocudrama”emphasizesSolWorth’sinnovativemethodof“biodocumentary”,whichcan
producebiographicalmediarepresentationoftheproducer’slife,butnotlimitedtoit.
41
(Gross,1981;Worth,1981;Worth&Adair,1972).Here,byfacilitatingthe
subjectiveexpressionofthestoryteller’sownpointofview,DigitalStorytelling
facilitatorsteachtheparticipantstosearchforthemeaningsheseesinherownworld
throughproducingaDigitalStory.Inthissense,aDigitalStoryisabiodocumentary;
DigitalStorytellingcanalsobeusedasamethod,likebiodocumentary,tofacilitate
theauthenticself-representationofthecultureoftheDigitalStoryteller6.
Ontheotherhand,theemphasisonlivedexperienceandthedramatizationof
it,Iargue,placesDigitalStoriesinthedocudramagenre.Lipkin(2002)definesa
docudramaasanynarrativefilmthatisbasedonhistoricalrealitythatintendsto
recreateanauthenticpresentationofpastevents(p.19).Adocudramaisdifferent
fromadocumentaryinthatitdoesnotclaimtobea“soberdiscourse”butusing
narrativetoprovoke,persuade,andadvocate(p.37).
CombiningWorthandLipkin’sconcepts,wehavesomethingnew.A
biodocudramaintendstopersuadetheaudienceoftheauthenticityoftheaccount
presented,asLipkin(2002)arguesthatadocudramadoes.Worth’sconceptualization
ofbiodocumentaryasreflectingthemaker’sconsciousandunconsciousdecisions
andtechnologicalconstraintsintheirpresentationofreality(Worth,1981)enhances
thesenseofauthenticity.Wong(1997,p.16)summarizesontheissueofauthenticity
that:
6InWorth’sworkshopsforamateurfilmmakersfromotherculturesaftertheNavajoProject,he
recognizedWesterntechnologies“carrywiththemourcodes,ourmythicandnarrativeforms,unless
wealsomakecleartootherculturesthatthesenewmedianeednotbeusedonlyinthewaysofthe…
societiesthatintroducethem”(Finnegan,1988;Paull,2002).Thisstudytakesthe“enabling”(Innis,
1951;McLuhan,1964)ratherthan“deterministic”(Rahman,1985)viewoftechnologytoexamine
whatopportunitiesdigitaltechnologyprovidesthatmayormaynotbeusedbythestorytellers,
dependingonthehistorical,cultural,andorganizationalcontextthestorytellersfindthemin.
42
Adifferentsenseoftruthinrepresentationhasbeenproposedbythosewho
focusonauthenticity,thatis,ontherightsandprivilegeofwitness.This
approachturnsawayfromdocumentarytruthorholisticvisionstoquestions
ofvoiceandhonestyepitomizedinselfpresentation,whetherthismeans
Navajoswithmoviecameras(Worth&Adair,1973)orbellhookswithher
essayfromablackwomen’sviewpoint(1992).
Ontheotherhand,abiodocudramaputsmoreemphasisontheemotional
appealitstrategicallyadopts,somethingabiodocumentarydoesnotnecessarily
embody.Abiodocudramaintendstomaketheaudienceacceptthevalidityofthe
dramatizationandmore,vicariouslyexperiencetheemotionsoftheprotagonist.
Lambert(2006)tracestherootsofDigitalStorytellinginpopulist,cultural
activisttraditionoftheAmerican1960’sandhisownexperiencein“Solo
Performance”theaterinthe1980’s.Healsodrewideasfromfieldslikecreative
writing,dramatictherapy,communityactivismthatempowerpeopleinanemotional,
liberatingway.Biodocudramaasagenreembodiesthedemocratizing,individual
performancebasedstorytellingthatcanbeemotiveandempowering.
Soananthropologicallyinformedinvestigation,especiallyinthe“cultural
activism”frameworkGinsburgandothershaveestablished,wouldexaminehow
Digital Storytelling is being taken up and made meaningful by “native” producers of
a culture.Inthisstudy,Chineseimmigrants’useofDigitalStorytellingforcultural
exchangeistheareawheretheseprocessesarebeingenacted.
3.4.2.TheNewTechnologyofDigitalStorytelling–TheRelative“Newness”
Specialattentionisalsopaidtothetechnologyitself.Paull(2002)has
focusedonthedigitalaspectofDigitalStorytellingashetakesanadulteducation
approachcomparingdigitalauthoringwithtraditionalwriting.Basedonindividual
43
casestudiesofthethreeadultlearnersheworkedwith,hepresentsanemicviewof
thepurposesandpowerofcreatingdigitalstories.Heconcludestheparticipantsfelt
empoweredbymultimediaproductionvis-à-viswriting;asenseoffunandplayin
usingdigitalmultimediakeptthemmotivated;newself-perceptionsweregenerated;
anincreasedsenseofagencycamefromthepotentialbroadaudiencetheycould
reachthroughdigitaldissemination.Hearguesthat“theimaginingofaudiencewas
integraltothereflectiveandexpressiveprocess,andinchoosingtoaddresscertain
audiencesandincorporatemediameaningfultocertaincommunities,thestorytellers
weredefiningthemselvesaccordingtochosensocialalignments”(p.229).
InthecontextoftheChineseimmigrantsengaginginculturalexchange
throughDigitalStorytelling,Iexploreboththeprocess andtheproduct ofmaking
individualandgroupstoriesforthepurposeofstrategicculturalobjectificationfor
culturalawarenessandculturalexchange.BoththeformandcontentofDigital
Storiesinthisstudyareinevitablyconstrainedbythehistoricalandpolitical
circumstancesaroundthemakingofthestories.Yetthecircumstancesaroundthis
studyhassignificantdifferencefrommostoftheliteraturereviewedearlier.Someof
thereoccurringquestionregardingtheuseofmediatechnologiesbyindigenous
participantsorparticipantsinremote,ruralsettingis:Doesthetechnologyservethe
culturalandpoliticalconcernsitsusersintended,oritspresenceinevitably
compromisesthestruggle(Ginsburg,Abu-Lughod,&Larkin,2002),howandwhy?
Thesequestionsareimportanttoexploreasmostoftheparticipatoryvideoprojects
reviewedforthisstudywerecarriedoutincommunitiesthathadnotbeenpreviously
exposedtovideotechnologyorthemassmedia.Actually,Snowden,oneofthe
44
mastermindbehindtheFogoProcess,wasquotedaspointingoutthat“theFogo
Processworksbestincommunitiesthatdonothaveaccesstomassmediaandhave
onlyrestrictedaccesstoimportantexternalinformation”(Crocker,2003,p.133).In
theageofYouTube,whereeveryoneispotentiallyavideoproducerandpublisher,
the“newness”ofthenewmediatechnologylikeDigitalStorytellingisrelatively
newtotheparticipants.AstudyontheformandcontentofDigitalStoriesandtheir
claimstoempowermentcanenrichourunderstandingonusingparticipatorymedia
practicewithurban,technologicallyliterateand/orsavvypopulations.Iusethecase
oftheChineseimmigrants’DigitalStorytellingtoimplicatethisbroaderquestion
regardingmediause,especiallynew,digitalmedia,byminorityormarginalized
subjects.
Inotherwords,thisdissertationisanexploratoryacademicresearchproject
thatisessentiallyaboutsocialinterventionandproblemsolving.Itdefiesthe
distinctionPink(2004)makesbetweenappliedvisualanthropologyandacademic
visualanthropology:
Associalintervention,appliedvisualanthropologyusuallytakestheformof
problemsolvingthatinvolvescollaborationwithinformantsandbringsabout
socialchange.Thischaracteristicsetsitapartfromacademicvisual
anthropologythatmayalsobecollaborativebutisexploratoryratherthan
problemsolving(p.6).
Insteadofjuxtaposingacademicresearchandappliedresearchasfromtwodifferent
camps,Isuggestthetwobeonacontinuum,andthisstudyparticularlystoodinthe
middle.Itwasbothexploratoryandpracticalinsolvingproblems.Tofurther
explicatethisassertion,Inowturntoprojectaspectofthestudyandmyinsertionof
45
aparticipatorymediapracticemodelfromdevelopmentcommunicationintoanon-developmentsetting.
3.4.3.TheProjectContextofDigitalStorytelling–theComplexityofParticipation
ThisstudyisafundedbytheCaliforniaCouncilfortheHumanities(CCH)to
buildasenseofbelongingandtoencouragecommunityinvolvement.Itincludes
fourmajorcategories,andeachfundstheirownprojects:“CaliforniaStories
Uncovered”,“CaliforniaStoryFund”,“CaliforniaDocumentaryProject”and
“CommunitiesSpeak”.
Bysupportingprojectsthataskpeopletotellandsharetheirstories,we
hopedtoshowthattheseprojectscouldincreaseunderstandingamong
diversegroupsandmovepeopletobecomemoreinvolvedintheir
communities.Wehadahunchaboutwhatstoriescouldaccomplishfromour
decadesofsupportingpublicprogramsandfromapublicpollwe
commissionedearlyin2001thatfoundthatCaliforniansbelievedtellingand
sharingstorieswasagoodwaytoconnectwithfellowcitizens.Now,some
fiveyearslater,wehavesomepromisingevidencethatstoriescanactually
makecommunitiesstronger(Quay,2006,p.5).
CCHusuallyfundspublicperformancesofculturesandidentitiesbygrassroots
organizationsandtheiraffiliatedprofessionals.Theformatsoftheprojectsrange
fromphotography,writing,poetry,artwork,tovideoanddocumentary.The
CaliforniaStoryFund,fromwhichthisprojectisfunded,specificallyaimstounearth
“little-known”storiesofCaliforniacommunitiesforpublicdiscussionofthestories
andtheirmeanings.Overall,IwouldliketoarguethatCCH’sinitiativesarepublic
humanitiesinterventionstowardscommunitydevelopmentandmulticulturalist
nationalbuilding.
FrommyalmostoneyearoffieldworkwithACCA,Ihadacquiredenough
insiderknowledgeaboutthegroupbeforeIbroughtthegrantinformationtoACCA
46
membersinlate2005.IdidhaveadissertationprojectinmindwhenIapproached
ACCAleadershipregardingthegrant.BackthenIhadparticipatedquiteextensively
andintensivelyatACCAasafullmember,andespeciallyacommunicationofficer
whowasdesignatedtosearchforgrantopportunities.Newimmigrantstoriesarenot
wellknowntoeitherthefundingagencyorthelargerdiversecommunitiesinthe
GreaterLosAngelesarea.ItisespeciallysoforthisspecialgenerationofChinese
immigrantsfromthe“CulturalRevolution”era.Ialsowantedtocreateasetting
whereIcouldsystematicallyaccountforthepracticalandoperationalaspectsof
participation.Iwantedtoexplorethe“communicativepraxis”(Waters,2000)
developmentcommunicationscholarshavefoundlackinginliteratureof
participatoryapproachestodevelopmentcommunication.Huesca(1996)andWaters
(2000)pointoutthatmostdiscussionsaboutparticipationtendtobelimitedto
discussionofethics,orthenormativeandprescriptiveaspectsofparticipatory
practice.Fewhaveexploredthecommunicativeproceduresthatoccur,namely,how
participationisactuallyfacilitated,howitisperceivedbytheparticipants,howitis
eventuallyrepresentedtostakeholders.What’smore,researchalsolacksin
explaininghowthepromiseofempowermentandtransformationhappen,ornot,
particularlyinprojectsituationswhereexternalpractitionersandresearcherswork
withlocalcommunitiestosolvedevelopmentproblems.
Itisbeyondthescopeofthisdiscussiontoelaborateonthecontestednature
of“development”tojustifytheuseofparticipatoryapproachtodevelopment
communicationforanon-developmentproject.Developmentitselfhasbeenhighly
debated(Escobar,1995;Melkote,1991;Sachs,1992;Wilkins,2000).Inthemid
47
1970’stheU.S.AgencyforInternationalDevelopment’s(USAID)introducedthe
discourseof“culturaltranslation”and“socialsoundnessanalysis”todevelopment
projects,openingdoorsforactivist-orientedanthropologiststoengageinapplied
workintheThirdWorld(Green,1986).RecentdebatesintheDevelopment
CommunicationDivisionattheInternationalCommunicationAssociationonthe
divisionlistservregardingmergingtheDivisionwithInternationalandIntercultural
CommunicationDivisionisalsotellingofthefermentaswellasanxietyovernew
directionsinthediscipline.Iseethisasthe“culturalturn”indevelopment
communication,whereanthropologicaltheoriesandmethodologieswillbenefitfrom
thestudyofinterventionsinlocalsocial,cultural,andpoliticalpractice,beit
entailingresistanceortransformation,orbeitrelatedtodevelopmentornot,
howeverthetermdevelopmentisdefine.
Itseemstobeself-evidentthatDigitalStorytellingasamediapracticeis
participatorybynature.Thestorytellersaresupposedtocomeupwithscriptsoftheir
ownandworkinfrontofcomputerstovisualizeanddigitallyeditthestories.Yet,
mypersonalexperiencewithCDS’sworkshopinMay2005,readingaboutreports
onconductingDigitalStorytellingworkshops(e.g.,InterviewswithThenmozhi
SoundararajanandAmyHillbyJoeLambertinLambert,2006),andmyown
collaborationprocesswithmystorytellersbegforamorerealisticassessmentofthe
storyteller’scomfortlevelarounddigitaltechnology,especiallywhenworkingwith
peoplewhoarehistoricallyorculturallyalienatedfromcomputers.Ibelieveitis
crucialtodetailtheprocessesofintersubjectiveconstructionofreality,therole
48
powerandauthorityplayinthecreationoftext,andthecommunicativedynamics
involvedintheinteractionsamongtheparticipantsandme,andamongthemselves.
Implicationsformethodologyarediscussedinthenextchapter.Herequoting
someinsightsfrompractitionersinthefieldwillsufficetohighlighttheintrinsically
ambiguousrolewhenanthropologistbecomesanactivistandmediaproducer:
Interveningincomplexpoliticalarenaswheretheconsequencesforthelocal
groupscannotbeforeseenistricky.Assomehavebeenquicktopointout,
participatingintheprocessesofculturalobjectificationthatmediafacilitates
andtheinternalsocialandpoliticaljockeyingthatnewmediaproduction
inevitablyoccasionscanplaceanthropologistsinthepositionofpotentially
transforming,ratherthanobserving,societiesotherthantheirown.Whatare
theconsequences?Finally,advocacyofsubalterngroupsmakescriticism,
publicorotherwise,ofanyaspectsofthesegroups’projectsawkward
(Ginsburg,etal.,2002,p.22).
Justlikemanyanthropologistswhoactedasmediaproductionfacilitators,“onenot
onlybecomespartoftheprocessoneistryingtorecord,butdirectlyaffectsitin
numerousways,someintendedandsomenot”(Turner,1990,p.10).Marcus(1998,
p.22)callssuchaffinitydevelopedbetweentheethnographerandhisorher
informants“complicity”that“arisesfromtheirmutualcuriosityandanxietyabout
theirrelationshiptoa‘third’–notsomuchtheabstractcontextualizingworldsystem
butthespecificsiteselsewherethataffecttheirinteractionsandmakethem
complicit.”
Ifoundtheconcept“complicity”addsmorelayerstothecomplexity
presentedhere.ThisresearchprojectwasexemptedbytheInternalReviewBoard
(IRB)attheUniversityofSouthernCaliforniainSeptember2006,owingtoits
natureasanopen,publicproject.Yet,throughouttheproject,Ihavebeenableto
gainaccesstomyresearchparticipants’socialandpersonallife,theirwork,leisure,
49
andsocialactivism,inevitablyblurringtheboundariesbetweenthepublicandthe
privateIdiligentlybroughttheinformationsheets(seeinAppendixB)requiredfor
IRBexemptedresearchprojectstotheresearchsitesanddistributedtomy
participants.Throughoutthestudyperiodandthewritingofthedissertation,Ihadto
constantlydrawtheethicallineformyself.WhatIfinallysettledindoingwastoask
myselfifwhatIamdoingandwritingservestheinterestofmyresearchparticipants
asindividualsandasanorganization.Thismademeultimatelyan“accomplice”ina
senseallresearcherstryingtodiscoveranemicpointofviewoftheresearch
participantsfallintonowandthen.Thisisespeciallytrueinfacilitatingmedia
productionthatinvolvesculturalobjectification.Theimaginedaudiencesbecamethe
“third”inMarcus’term.IwillfurtherdiscussthisinChapter4onmethodologyand
inChapter6onanalyses.
Tosumup,informedbybothdevelopmentcommunicationtheoriesand
theoriesinvisualanthropology,thisChineseimmigrantsDigitalStorytellingproject
wasdesignedtoexploretheroleofDigitalStorytellingasaparticipatoryand
empoweringtoolforbothrepresentation ofapreviouslyunheard“voice,”and
research intohowcollaborative,sometimesevencomplicit,“culturalbrokerage”
(Chalfen&Rich,2004)amongtheparticipantsandmematerializesand
contextualizes.
50
Chapter4:StudyDesign:FieldworkandMethodology
4.1.Introduction
Inthisproject,myresearchcollaboratorsandIexploredtheconstructionof
individualandcommunitystoriesthroughparticipatoryaudio-visualmedia
production.ItisinspiredbyphotovoiceprojectsandtheworkoftheCenterfor
DigitalStorytelling(DCS),whereordinarypeople,notjournalists,not
anthropologists,notprofessionalphotographers,pickupcameras,camcorders,and
videoeditingsoftwaretomaketheirvoicesheardthroughDigitalStoriestothe
largerworldbeyondtheirowncommunities.
IhaveworkedwithACCAmembersinapplyingforandsubsequentlybeing
awardedagrantfromtheCaliforniaStoryFundsponsoredbytheCaliforniaCouncil
fortheHumanities(CCH).TheCaliforniaStoryFundisoneofthestatewide
initiativesCCHlaunchedovertheyearsto“strengthenCaliforniacommunities
throughstory-basedpublichumanitiesprojects….thatbringtolightcompelling
storiesfromCalifornia’sdiversecommunitiesandprovideopportunitiesfor
collectivereflectionanddiscussion… [inthehope]that[it]willencourage
Californiansfrommanycommunitiestosharetheirstoriesandpromotegreater
understandingandappreciationoftherichnessandcomplexityofourstate.”7The
grantwasawardedtoACCAinJuly2006.
Inthischapter,Ielaboratemyownresearchtrajectoryandmyown
ideologicalbiasesthatletmetothedissertationproject.AlsoIdetailmy
7SeetheCaliforniaCouncilfortheHumanitieswebsite
http://www.calhum.org/guidelines/guidelines_ca_story.htm,lastretrievedon11/7/05
51
involvementwithACCA.Ithenintroducethemethodologyandmethodsindata
collection,thetypesofdatacollectedandthedataanalysisprocedures.
4.2.ResearchSettings
Itisnecessarytoelaboratemyownresearchtrajectorythatledmetothis
dissertationproject.Myresearchfocusplacesanemphasisonthetheoriesand
practicesofusingcommunicationandmediastrategiestopromotesocialchange.On
theonehand,Ifocusonthedynamicsbetweenmedia,cultureandcommunities,
takingacriticalapproachtopeople’sexperiencewiththemediaasculturallyshaped
andsociallyconstitutedandmediated.Iwasparticularlydrawntothegrassroots,
activist,and/orthe“Other’s”ownvisualrepresentationsofgender,race,ethnicity,
andnationalityintheglobalmediascape,throughpoliticalart,publicart,community
media,indigenousmedia,andotheralternativemediapractice.Thedynamicsof
technologies,theencodinganddecodingprocessesintheirsocialandcultural
context,andtheirimplicationsonpeople’ssenseofagencyandpowercontinueto
fascinatemeandmotivatemywork.
Ontheotherhand,Iamnotsatisfiedwithplayingalimitedroleasacritic.
Theurgeto“do”somethingconstructiveledmetoHealthCommunication,
especiallytoEntertainmentEducation(EE)methodologythatIencounteredduring
myearlieryearsinthedoctoralprogram.ComingfromthePeople’sRepublicof
China,wherehealthcommunicationpracticehasbeeninstitutionalizedasatop-down,
state-centeredenterprise,Iwasamazedatthevariousbottom-up,
participatory,andpublicpolicyorientedhealthinterventionscarriedoutaroundthe
52
world,andtheempowermentpotentialstheypossess.Iwantedtogobeyond
observationandresearchbyworkingasapractitionerandadvocateaswell.
Thesetwosetsofinterestledmetostudyahealthadvocacymethodology
called“photovoice,”wheremembersofmarginalizedsocialgroupsusecamerasto
portraytheirneedsanddesires,andtocommunicatethoseneedsanddesiresto
policymakers(Wang,1999;Wang&Burris,1994;Wang,Morrel-Samuels,
Hutchison,Bell,&Petronk,2004).Thesuccessinadvocatingandempoweringthe
participantsofphotovoiceprojectsdemonstratestomethepotentialtoapproach
healthcommunicationthroughaninterdisciplinaryandinnovativeapproach–wecan
designandevaluateproduction-basedinterventionsthataredemocraticallyoperated,
subject-authored,community-basedandcapacityenhancing.Afterbeingexposedto
theDigitalStorytellingtechniquesdevelopedattheDigitalStorytellingCenterin
Berkeley,whichresemblesphotovoiceprojectsbutprovidesmoresophisticated
technologyandcreativepotentials,IknewIfoundtherightconjoiningpointformy
diverseresearchinterestsandexperiences.Icouldobserveanddeepenmy
understandingoftheconfluenceofmediaandsocialinteractionswhileactingto
fomentchangethroughusingthesetools.Thetheoreticalandconceptual
developmentofthetermparticipationandempowermentiswhatconcernsmemost.
Itisalsonecessarytoelaboratealittlemoreaboutmypersonalencounter
withACCA.ImetACCApresidentDavidLininlateFebruary2005,hopingtofind
asubjectpoolformyresearchonimmigrantwomen’shealthpractice.Heexpressed
thedesiretoengagein,withmyhelp,grant-writingactivitiesforACCA’sown
growthandtointegrateintomainstreamAmerica.AsIgraduallylearnedACCA’s
53
routineactivitiesandgottoknowitsmembersbetter,Ibecameamazedatthemany
facetsofthiscommunitygroup.Theirself-declaredmissionaspromotersofcultural
exchangebetweenChinaandtheUnitedStates,theirgenerationalidentityasthe
former“zhiqings”duringthe“CulturalRevolution”inChina,theirspontaneous
sociabilityandtheirlivelyassociationallifestyle,theirmakingofhybridcultures,
theirtransnationalties,andtheirroleinthecommunicationinfrastructureintheSan
GabrielValleyetc.etc.keptmeintriguedandmotivatedmetoemergeintothe
group.Isoonbecameanactivememberofthegroupwhilecraftingaresearchplan.
However,whenIputforwardtheideaofusingphotovoicetoassessthehealthneeds
oftheimmigrantcommunity,theresponsewasnonchalant.
ItthenoccurredtomethatCCHawardsprojectgrantsforstorytelling
throughmultimediapresentation,art,performance,orfestivals,andIonceattended
theirworkshopongrantwriting.SoIproposedthisgrantopportunitytoACCA
membersandreceivedwarmresponses.Peopleinthegroupfeltanurgetotelltheir
uniquelifestoriesandalsotohelptheassociationgrow.Ithenworkedwithafew
leadingmembersofACCAandsubmittedagrantapplicationfortheApril1,2006
deadline.ThedetailsoftheproposedstorytellingprojectcanbefoundinAppendix
A.
InMay,onestoryteller,Ms.ChanghongYu,andIwenttotheCenterof
DigitalStorytellingatBerkeleytoparticipateinalongweekendworkshop.
Subsequently,apilotdigitalstorywasmade.8Itisusedasanexemplartoshow
8AllthestoriescanbefoundintheDVDattachedtothisdissertation.ThelibraryoftheUniversityof
SouthernCaliforniaalsoprovidesalinktoaccesstheDVDonline.
54
ACCAmemberswhatfinaloutcomeoftheprojectwillbelike.Thegrantproposal
wasgivenfundingfromCHHinJuly.
StartingfromSeptember,Istartedfacilitatingtheproductionofdigital
stories,engagedinparticipantobservation,andconductedaseriesofinformal
individualandgroupinterviewsontheproductionprocess.Twelvestorieswere
eventuallybeingmadethrougha5-monthperiodbetweenSeptember2006and
January2007.Thestorytellersheldabout5editorialmeetings.Allmeetingswere
videotapedforanalysis9.
4.3.DataCollectionMethodologyandMethods
4.3.1.ActionResearch
ThestudyonChineseimmigrantsDigitalStorytellingintheSanGabriel
Valleywasdesignedtobeanactionresearch10projectaboutaffectingsocialpractice
whiletryingtounderstandit.ItfollowsthePARtraditionthatisbuiltuponJohn
Dewey’spragmatism:actionresearchis“ameansofbuildingtheoryfrompractice
inthecontextofsocialchange”(Einsiedel,1999p,360).Itisdoingresearchwith,
andoftenby practitioners(Marshall&Rossman,1999,emphasisfromtheoriginal)
thatsolveproblemsandimprovepracticeinanorganization(Patton,2002).Ithasits
originsintheworldofcognitivesocialpsychologistKurtLewin(1946).This
9Ialsopresidedoverthescreeningofsomeofthestoriesinfrontofthreeculturallydifferent
audiencegroupsfromtheneighboringcommunitiesinSanGabrielValley;allscreeningsessionswere
video-taped.Thestorytellersandtheaudienceshadface-to-facedialoguesduringthescreening
sessionsandallthreesessionswerevideotaped.Ididanalyzethevideorecordingsofthescreening
sessionstogeneratethemes.ButIdecidednotousethembecausethepreliminaryanalysisfoundthe
databeingtooone-sided.SeetheChapter7Conclusionforadetailedexplanation.
10Theterm“actionresearch”hereisinterchangeablewith“participatoryactionresearch”or
“participatoryresearch.”Thechoiceofusing“actionresearch”isbasedonRahman’susethat“ation
researchthatisparticipatory,andparticipatoryresearchthatuniteswithactionfor[transforming
reality]”(p.108,ctd.inEinsiedel,1999,p.360).
55
researchprojectaimstounderstandsocialchangemadepossiblethroughgrassroots
culturalinitiatives.Inanactionresearchcontext,anycollaborativeendeavorwhere
groupsofpractitionersengageinreflectionstoimprovetheirpractice,toexploreand
beawareoftheimpactoftheirpractice,ortoincreasetheircontroloverthe
circumstancesinwhichtheirworkresides,isconsideredactionresearch(Brown,
Henry,Henry,&McTaggart,1988).Inthisstudy,aDigitalStorytellingprojectwas
undertakenbythesponsoringorganizationandthestorytellersasanactionprojectto
improvetheirpracticeofpromotingculturalexchangebetweenChinaandtheUnited
States.
Initsstrictsense,actionresearchisdifferentfromappliedresearch.In
general,anappliedresearchprojectisasystemicendeavorthatputsintopractice
principlesdiscoveredbytheoriststodeviseortestatheory.“Whatactionresearch
emphasizesinsteadistheimportanceofpracticalknowledge,theknowledgeofthe
practitionersorthecommunityofindividualswithwhomtheresearcherinteracts,
andtheneedforharnessingthisknowledgetoinformsocialtheoryandtoachieve
socialchange”(Einsiedel,1999,p.361).Thisactionresearchprojectinvestigatedthe
socialpracticeofDigitalStorytellinginthecontextofgrassrootsculturalactivism.
Theemphasishereinanactionresearchstudyisthepracticalknowledgeofthe
practitioners.ACCAmembersareallseasonedpractitionersofculturalexchange.
DigitalStorytellingwasselectedasatooltoconductculturalexchangeinadifferent,
buthopefullybetter,fashion.
Itisworthnotingthatcontemporaryradicalizationofactionresearchhas
aligneditwithformsofcriticalsocialtheory:
56
Actionresearchisaformofcollectiveself-reflectiveinquiryundertakenby
participantsinsocialsituationsinordertoimprovetherationalityandjustice
oftheirownsocialoreducationalpractices,aswellastheirunderstandingof
thesepracticesandthesituationsinwhichthesepracticesarecarriedout
(Kemmis&McTaggart,1988,p.5).
Actionresearchtherefore,becomescloselyrelatedtostandpointmethodologies
(Hartsock,1983,1998;Harding,1998)whereresearchersmaybestudying
themselvesorothersinasimilarsituation,especiallymarginalizedgroups.Morrow
andBrown(1994)emphasizehowsuchinquiries
[m]aybreakwithsomeofthemethodologicalrestrictionsofparticipant
observationbypushingthequestionofparticipationevenfurtherbecausethe
researchernolongerisassumedtobemerelyan“outsider”lookingin.
Standpointmethodologiesthusassumethatresearchersarecapableoffull
membershipinthecommunitytobeobserved,hencefurthererodingthe
expert/subjectdistinction(p.258).
ACCAmembersareallfirstgenerationChineseimmigrantscomingfromChina,a
subgroupoftheChineseimmigrants,whichitselfasubgroupoftheAsian
immigrants.Imyself,adoctoralstudentfromMainlandChina,whojustcametothis
countrysixyearsago,definitelysharethesocialmarginalityofmyresearch
participants.Ithinkthisisalsowhyitbecamesoeasyformetohavemergedintothe
groupandbecameafullmemberinthecommunity.MorrowandBrownalsoposit:
Further,thisassumptioniscoupledwithamoralobligationtoparticipate,
givenawarenessofthelived-experienceofspecificdominatedgroups.This
approach[participatoryactionresearch]hasbeenmostwelldevelopedin
standpointmethodologiesconcernedwiththeunique“experience”ofrace
andgender.Anditisherethat“action”researchcomesintoitsowninthe
dialogueofmethodologicalstrategies,asaspecialcaseofcritical
ethnography(p.258).
Forfurtherdiscussiononthisweturntodoingandwritingethnography.
57
4.3.2.FieldworkandEthnographicWriting
Myroleasaresearcherhereresemblesthatofanethnographerstudying
culturalproducers.Researchintoculturalproducershasadoptedamethodological
standcalled“anactivistmodeofinquiry,”whichhasemergedsincethenew
ethnographymovementinthe1960sandculminatedduringthemid-1980s“crisis
andcritique”ofanthropologyasadiscipline(Clifford&Marcus,1986).Studiesof
culturalproducershaveheightenedattentiontotheroleoftheethnographeras
researcher,analyst,andwriter.Ethnographerscamealongwayfrom“speakingfor,”
to“speakabout,”to“speakwith,”andto“speakalongside”thepeopletheystudy
(Ruby,1991).ThereisnocoincidencebetweenRuby’schoiceofword“speaking”
andtheoverarchingphilosophyincontemporaryethnography–dialogue.Theterm
dialogueacknowledgesthescholar’sroleinconstructingknowledge;thatsuchan
approachundercutsclaimsofobjectivitywhileexposingsubject-objectvulnerability
andthecontingentandintersubjectivenatureofknowledgeproduction(Dwyer,1979;
Freidenberg,1998;Webster,1982).
Infact,asethnographicworkbecamemorereflexive,theintellectualand
moralsupportfororthodoxethnographicmethoddepleted(Pack,2000).
Ethnographicfilmisnolongeraprivilegedvocationforwhitemalesanymore
(Ginsburg,1995).Anthropologistshavelearnedtodevelopwithinformantsakindof
affinitythatisintendedtoleadanthropologiststodevelopactivistorengaged
practicesthatdisplace“pure”research,andraisebothethicalandintellectual
challenges(Michaels,1994;Turner,1991).Somescholarsundertakereflectionson
howtheirowndisciplinarypracticesco-constructmeaningsintothesubjectoftheir
58
study(Marcus,1998);othersconfesstheirpreferencetodevelopacritiqueofthe
contexttheystudythroughtheiranalyticalwork.
Therefore,inthestudy,aPARmethodologywasimplementedin
combinationwithethnographicfieldworkinordertogeneratetheoryonthepractice
promotingculturalexchangethroughparticipatorymediapractice–Digital
Storytelling.Theethnographicfieldworkaimedtodocumentandlateranalyzethe
“practicalknowledge”(Einsiedel,1999,p.361)oftheculturalexchange
practitionersatACCA.Inthemeantime,ACCAstorytellerswerepractitionersof
DigitalStorytellingaswell.Whatthestudyhopedtodiscoverwasanemicviewon
theemploymentofDigitalStorytellinginthesocialpracticeofculturalexchange.In
otherwords,DigitalStorytellingwasviewedasatooltogeneratereflectionsamong
theresearchersandtheparticipants,whichwouldbethenincorporatedintoactionto
improvethepracticeofculturalexchange,hence,promotingsocialchange.
Thereflexiveandactivistmodeofethnographicinquiryadoptedby
anthropologies(Ginsburg,1995;Ruby,1991)studyculturalproducerswasexactly
whatanaction-orientedprojectlikethisoneneeded.Ithelpedtoreinforcetheroleof
theethnographertobesimultaneouslyafacilitatorformediaproductiontechniques
totheparticipantsandaco-producerofknowledge.Inthemeantime,such
ethnographicinquiryalsotransformedtheparticipantsintoanthropologistsor
ethnographicfilmmakerstosomeextend,becauseitengagedtheparticipantstoself-examineandself-
representtheirowninterpretationsoftheirculturetooutsiders.
59
4.3.3.CaseStudy
Thecurrentresearchprojectwasanaction-orientedstudythathappenedin
real-life.Itgeneratedmanymorevariablesofinterestthandatapoints.Therefore,it
isimperativetoadoptacasestudymethodology.Acasestudyis“anempirical
inquirythatinvestigatesacontemporaryphenomenonwithinitsreal-lifecontext,
especiallywhentheboundariesbetweenphenomenonandcontextarenotclearly
evident”(Yin,1994,p.13).Thisdefinitionhighlightsthepertinenceofcontextual
conditionthatisessentialtothephenomenonofstudy.Itassumesthatresearchmust
begininnaturalsettingsandincorporatehistoricalandorganizationalcontexts.This
assumptionentailstheuseofthefullarrayofdatacollectionstrategies,andrequires
avividanddetailedreportingformatnottypicalofmoreanalyticreporting(Marshall
&Rossman,1999).
Comparedtootherresearchstrategies,Yin(1994)positsthatcasestudies
answerthe“how”and“why”questionsthebest,becausethesequestionsaremore
explanatory,requiringtracingtheoperationallinksbackandforthintime.More
quantitativeresearchstrategiesthatmerelytellfrequenciesorincidencearenot
sufficient.Casestudyisalsopreferredforexaminingcontemporaryevents,where
relevantbehaviorscannotbefullymanipulated.Asidefromrelyingonmultiple
sourcesofevidence,convergingandtriangulatingthedata,casestudiesuse
theoreticalpropositionsfrompriorsimilarcasestoguidedatacollectionandanalysis
(Yin,1994).
Inthisstudy,atwo-tieredcaststudymethodwascarriedout.Thefirsttier
dealtwiththewholeDigitalStorytellingprogramanditsprogram-relatedcontext.
60
Thestakeholdersintheprogramwereidentifiedthroughinformalinterviews,
observations,analysesofdocumentsandvideorecordingofmeetingsand
screenings.Thesecondtieriscomposedofmultiplecasestudies,wherestorytellers
andtheirdigitalstorieswereexaminedtogeneratepatternsofparticipationand
characteristicsofempowerment.
4.4.TypesofDataCollectedandDataAnalysis
Thereweredifferentdatasourcesforcollectingevidence.Eventhough
isolateduseofanyofthefollowingdatacollectionsourcesandmethodscanand
havebeenusedincasestudies,thisstudybenefitsfromthetriangulationand
corroborationacrossdifferentdatasources.
1.Documents(includingdocumentsfromthefundingagencyCCH;project
proposals;agendas,announcementsandminutesofmeetings;organizational
archivalrecords;onlinepostingsonACCAwebsite;newspaperclippings
andotherformsofmediacoverageontheproject);
2.Interviewsandfocusgroupdiscussions(includingopen-endedones,those
morefocused,andthosemorestructuredalongthelineofasurveyand
anonymousselfevaluationsreports.Theyareintheformofaudioorvideo
recordings,writtennotesandreports,withdatesandlocationswherethey
wererecorded);
3.Directobservation(includingindividualbehaviors,attitudes,perceptionsas
wellasorganizationalbehaviorsinmeetings,publicperformanceandroad
tripsetc.);
61
4.Participant-observation(observationsgatheredfrommybeingastaff
member,afacilitator,andakeydecisionmakerintheorganizationandin
theresearchproject.Beingaparticipantandplayingdifferentrolesprovide
an“emic”viewpointandgavemetheabilitytomanipulateminorevents
suchascallingameetingetc.Thepotentialbiasesandimplicationsonethics
arediscussedinlatersections);
5.Artifacts(includingaudio-visualDigitalStories;usedandunusedstillphotos
andvideofootagesduringproduction).
Figure3:Ivideotapedallthemeetingsconductedforthestudy.
Items1(documents)and5(artifacts)arewrittenandaudio-visualnarratives
whereasitems2(interviewsandfocusgroupdiscussions),3(directobservation),4
(participantobservation)areethnographicdataincludingfieldnotes,interviewsand
focusgroupdiscussionrecordings.Adifferentgroupingismoretellingintermsof
62
thedataandtheirmethodsofinquiry.Items2(interviewsandfocusgroup
discussions)and5(artifacts)arediscursiveandaudio-visualtextsthatproduce
meaninginthewell-establishedsense–spokendialogueandaudio-visual
representations.Items1(documents),3(directobservation),4(participant
observation),ontheotherhand,arecontextually-presentmaterialinnaturalor
symbolicspaces(Hansen,2006).Thoughinapostmodernsenseeverythingisatext
(Derrida,1976),andcontextisalargertextwhereaspecifictextisembedded,I
adoptedHansen’s(2006)argumentthatcontextissymbolicspaceseparatefromtext
anditincludes“theaesthetic,tacit,orunspokenimplicitfeelingsembeddedin
settings,objects,orsocialinteractions….typicallyexploredanddescribedbytrained
ethnographers”(p.1053).
Myfieldinvestigation,therefore,entailedasynthesisofethnographicand
analyticmodels.Duringthepre-productionperiod,Ifacilitatedgroupdiscussionsfor
mobilizationaswellasforprojectplanning.Intheresearchspace,Isoughtto
cultivateapatternofcollaborationthatwouldfosterparticipationandgroupdecision
makingbyACCAmembersinthestorymakingproject.Idefinedmyownroleasa
facilitator,ratherthanadirector.TheFreireanmodelof“co-production”(Freire,
1970,1993)whichfavorsadialogicproblem-posingmethodwasadoptedtoensure
equalityandmutualrespectbetweenmyparticipantsandme,andamongthe
participantsthemselvesingroupinteraction.Beforethemeetings,Iprepared
handoutswithmajoragendasandopenquestionsonthemtoelicittheparticipants’
analyses,toencouragethemtosharetheirlivedexperiences,andtoaskthemtopose
questionstomeandtothemselves.Inthisperiod,thisfacilitativestyleworkedwell,
63
aspeopleonlyhadavagueimpressiononwhatwewouldbedoingandthey
appreciatedtheopenquestions.Astimewentby,theydemandedmoreofadirective
rolefromme,whichIwillturntoinlatersections.Overall,themethodofcollecting
andanalyzingthedatahasbeenaninterpretive,qualitativeone(Rossman&Rallis,
1998).Guidedbythegeneralprinciplestobothfieldworkandethnographicwriting,
Icompiledfieldnotesafterparticipatinginmeetingsbigorsmall,discussionsformal
orinformal,importantbanquets,shows,andgrouptripsetc.Icollectedsymbolic
artifacts,namelyscripts,photographs,drawings,videos,andrecordedscreening
interactions.Thesemultipleprocedureswereusedasameansofinteractionand
triangulation.
4.5.Ethics
Toagreatextent,thisstudywasconceivedwiththeideatogobeyond
launchingpostmodernorfeministcritiquesonpositivistsocialscienceresearch
projectsonontologicalandepistemologicalground11,critiquesthatare
fundamentallyconcernedwithethics.PARasamethodologywaspurposefully
chosenbecauseitisoneofthefewresearchtraditionsthatalignwithcriticalsocial
theoryandaimtoproduceemancipatoryoutcomes,asdiscussedearlierinthis
chapter.Yetitcomeswithitsownsetsofethicalconcerns,whichnotsurprisingly
havealsotroubledethnographicresearchtherepresentsthecultural“Other.”The
“voyeuristicandexploitativetendencies”insocialresearchhaveovertheyears
heightenedtheawarenessthat“Interventionandtransformationareunavoidable
componentsofresearchactivities;thusitiscriticalthattheinterestsofsocial
11Foracomprehensivediscussion,seeHarding(1998).
64
scientistsbealignedwiththoseofthecommunitiesoftheresearched”(Pilotta,2001
p.6).Here,Pilotta’sprincipleethicalruleofthumbechoesRuby’s(1991)conceptof
“speakingalongside,”andMarcus’(1997)advocacyfor“complicity”betweenthe
researcherandtheresearchparticipants.
Pilotta’sinnovationliesinthespecificstepshelaysoutforadheringtothese
principlesinactionresearch.Whatoneneedstobearinmind,accordingtoPilotta,is
thata)toachievesociallegitimacyinsocialscientificresearch,theresearchermust
respondtotheinterestsoftheconcernedcommunity;b)toachieveavalidresponse
fromthecommunity,theresearcherhastobeactivelyinvolvedinthecommunity;c)
thereforeitisin“aresponsiveandengagedresearch”theresearchercanproduce
knowledgethat“doesnotreifysocialexperience”(p.5).Hecallstheseprinciples“a
researchprocedurepremisedoncommunicativeaccountability”(p.67),which
invokes
aconceptofcommunicativelyconstitutedinterobjectivity… thearticulation
andcriticalanalysisofsharedsocialobjects,intheformofthepremisesand
thereferentsofpossiblesocialaction,astheyareaddressedtoandthought
throughwiththeresearcherthatfurnishesphenomenologicalsocialscientific
researchwithanintersubjectivefocusandwithinterpersonalaccountability
(p.69).
ItriedtoadheretoPilotta’sprinciplesinmyfieldworkandfoundhis
theorizingintuitivetoconductingaction-orientedresearchincommunities.One
examplewouldbehowIwasabletobringaseemingly“alien”ideaintoACCAand
eventuallycarrieditout.Thesecrettosuccessliesinthevoluntary,communalnature
oflifeinsideACCA.Here,socialroles,prestige,andpowerderivefromindividual
andcollectiveactionsthatservethewholegroup. Inotherwords,publictangibleacts
65
ofservicesarehighlyrespected.Thereisapracticalneedforthisorganizing
principleasgrassroots,voluntaryorganizationsnormallyfacefinancialdifficulties.
Infact,thisveryproblemwasonDavidLin’smindwhenIwasfirstintroducedto
himinearly2005.Heexpressedthedesiretoengageingrant-writingtogainfunding
forACCA’swork.MyEnglishlanguageskillsandmyexpertiseasadoctoralstudent
inthesocialscienceswouldbeofgreatassistance.Consequently,Iwasaskedtoget
involvedwiththetwoprojectsmentionedinthelastsection,mainlydoingthe
preliminaryInternetsearchforgeneralinformation,andtranslatingandrefiningthe
finalproposals.
Thevalueplacedon“service”insideACCA’sorganizationalculturebecame
the“premisesandthereferentsofpossiblesocialaction”(p.69).Ilearnedthat
whateverresearchprojectIinitiated,ithadtobenefitthecollectiveinsomeconcrete
wayinordertosecureparticipationandcommitment,inotherwords,toacquire
powerandauthorityIhadtoearnitfirst.Otherwise,Iwouldbeatthemercyofthe
members’conscientiousnessinhelpingproducingpublicknowledgethrough
participatinginmyresearch,ortheirpersonalcommitmentin“helping”ayoung,
strugglingstudent-friendfinishherwork.BothIcannotcountonforanylarge-scale
projectthatinvolveslong,consistentinvolvement.
Successfullysecuringanoutsidegrantmadeallthedifference.Itbrought
financialbenefit–wewenttobuyaprojectorrightawayevenwhentheDigital
Storieswerenotmadeyet.Asanartsandcultureorganization,peopleinACCAlove
toseethemselvesonthescreen.Nowwecouldusetheprojectortoinstantreplaythe
dancepractices,showclipsofACCA’sparticipationinparadesorshows.People
66
wouldalwaysmentionthatitwasdueto“myhardwork”thatwegottheprojector.It
alsobroughtprestige.DuringthemobilizationmeetingsfortheDigitalStorytelling
project,theleadershipofACCAneverforgottomentionthehonorandprestigeI
broughttotheassociation.ItisasignificantmovetowardintegratingtoMainstream
America,everyonewouldsay.Italsobroughtasenseofcontractualobligationto
ACCAmemberstowardsourfundingagency,CCH,andme,theProjectDirector.
Yet,these“intersubjectivefocusandinterpersonalaccountability”mightgo
astrayattimes.Myroleasaresearcherhadbeenanambiguousonesincethe
beginning.ToDavidLinandDavidWu,myresearchinterestwasreassuringtothem
thatIwouldbefullycommittedtothesuccessfulexecutionoftheproject.Bothof
thetwoleadershadintellectualinterestindocumentingtheirgenerationimmigrants’
lifeexperienceforreflectionandposterity.Andtheybothpersonallywouldliketo
seemesucceedinmycareerasmyfriends,ifnotoutofapaternalisticinstinctowing
totheagedifferencebetweenthemandme.Buttheyworriedthatsomeofthe
memberswouldbecomesuspiciousofmymotivesinexecutingtheproject.They
thoughtitwouldbebettertonottomakeitexplicitthatIwouldbewritingmy
dissertationaboutthisproject,atleastnottomostofthemembersintheassociation.
Suchmisgivings,whichturnedtobefalsealarmlater,becameatacitagreement
betweenthethreeofusforthefirstafewmonthsoftheproject.Yet,Istill
consistentlybroughttheinformationsheets(inAppendixB)toeachresearchsites,
eventhoughmostpeoplepaidnoattentiontothematall.Laterwithclose
examination,IrecognizethatIsharedtheirelitistconcern,owingtomyown
American-educated,middleclassidentityandfearsthatIsharewiththeleadershipat
67
ACCA.Yet,thesemisgivingsturnedouttobelesssignificantasthestaketocarry
outtheprojectsuccessfullyandontimewastoohighforACCAmemberstocare
aboutmypersonalacademicgains.
68
Chapter5:AdoptingDigitalStorytellingtoCulturalActivisminACCA
5.1.TheContextofConductingCulturalExchangeinACCA
ToACCAmembers,activismisawordthatwouldrarelysurfaceindaily
conversations,orinthevirtualdialogscarriedonline12.Onereasonmightbehowthe
wordistranslated,sinceword“activism”literallymeans“action-orienteddoctrine”
(xidong zhuyi)or“radicalism””(jijin zhuyi).Neitherofthesetwoexpressions
translateswellintocolloquialChineselanguage.Thesecondmeaningespecially
arousesskepticismordiscomfortamongACCAmemberswhohadwitnessedthe
destructivenatureofradicalismduringthe“CulturalRevolution.”However,what
ACCAdoesasacommunityorganizationindeedamountstoactivismastheyaspire
tobuildingastrongsenseof“culturalcommunity”(Ling,2004)andreachingoutto
the“Others”intherecentsuburbansettlementdubbedasthe“ethnoburb”(Li,1997,
1998,1999).InthissectionIarguethatACCA’ssocialpracticeamountstoactivism
bysituatingACCA’sworkfirstintothechangingracialandethnicdynamicsin
contemporaryurbanethnicsettlementsthatsetsthebackdropforACCA’saspiration
topromotemulticulturalismandChineseculture.IthentracetheoriginofACCA’s
establishmentandhowthedrivetodifferentiateitselffromotherorganizationspartly
fosteredthefocusonakindof“culturalactivism”andoutwardorientation.Lastly,I
brieflymentiontwoattemptsACCAlaunchedtoinsertitselfintothecultural
establishmentintheGreaterLosAngelesarea,andhowthemotivationsbehindthe
12ACCAhasawellmaintainedwebsitewww.accausa.org.ItisallinChinese.Allthecoremembers
ofthegroupcontributetothedifferentforumsonthewebsite,topicsrangingfromChineselanguage
newsstoriesaboutChina,U.S.,andtheChineseAmericancommunity,toessaysonhistoryand
politics,tohealthinformation,andtocreativewriting.Somepostingsareoriginal,othersarecopied
fromotherpopularChinesewebsites.
69
twoattemptsrevealtherationaleforACCA’sculturalexchangeingeneral,and
providingacontextforunderstandingtheDigitalStorytellingprojectinspecific.
5.1.1.TheBiggerPicture
Asavoluntaryorganization,ACCA’spublicmissionstatementdeclaresthat
itisanon-profit,volunteerassociationof“newChineseimmigrants”(xin yimin)
comingfromMainlandChina,wholovetheperformingartsandaredevotedto
cross-culturalresearchandexchangebetweentheUnitedStatesandChina
(www.accausa.org).Itfunctionsto“1)organizeartsandculturalactivitiestoserve
theintellectualandspirituallivesofitsmembers;2)participateandexecutevarious
performingartsactivitiestoenrichtheculturallifeinthecommunity;3)andpromote
US-Chinaculturalexchangetoenhancethemutualunderstandingandfriendship
betweenthetwocountries”(www.accausa.org,translationmine).
Tounderstandthisorganizationalmissionweneedtotakealookatthe
biggerpictureofanewkindofChinesecommunityintheSanGabrielValley.Wei
Li,ageographer,developedan“ethnoburb”(ethnicsuburb)modelofpresentday
ethnicsettlementintheSanGabrielValley(Li,1997).Itcapturesthecharacteristics
ofanewsuburbanethnicconcentrationareawhereclustersofresidentialand
businessdistrictsarepopulatedbymultiracialcommunities.Inthesecommunities,
oneethnicminoritygroupstrategicallyhasasignificantpresence,butnotnecessarily
comprisingamajority.TheChinesecommunityintheSanGabrielValleyclearly
exhibitssuchdeliberatepresenceamongotherAsiancommunitiesandtheLatinand
Caucasiancommunities.Eventhoughtheboundariesforethnoburbsare“fuzzyand
largelyarbitrary”comparedtothosemarkingghettosandenclaves,twoearlier
70
modelsforimmigrantstudies,processesofauniquekindofracializationhave
alwaysaccompaniedtheformationofethnoburbs(p.77).Largelyfocusingonthe
economicdimensionsofethnicity,WeiLi(1999)reviewedaseriesofactions
occurringintheCityofMontereyParkduringthe1980’sand90’swhereChinese
residentsandbusinesseswereseenas“intrudersintothetraditionalturfofwhite
Americans”(p.16).Theirmansion-like“monsterhouses”builtinupscalecitieslike
Arcadiawerevandalized.Chinesestreet-cornermini-mallsweretermedas“ugly
development”(p.19).Chinesepoliticalcandidatesreceived“nativist”animosity
fromlong-termresidentsintheCity.ThebuildingofHisLaiTemple,thelargest
Buddhistlearningandculturalexchangeinstitutionintheentirewesternhemisphere
provokedhugecontroversiesamonglocalresidentsinHaciendaHeights(acityto
thesoutheastoftheCityofMontereyPark).Thelocalgovernmenthassincetaken
differentmeasurestopromoteracialharmonyandethnicdiversity.“Harmony
Week”,“CommunityRoundtables”,“ChineseNewYearParade”became
institutionalized,and“Panethnicity”wereusedtounitedifferentgroupsinfighting
forthesamecause(Li,1999,p.20).
Itisbeyondthescopeofthisdissertationtodetailthestrugglesovercultural
differencesintheSanGabrielValley.Imerelywanttopointoutthatthesekindsof
problemsconcernallofCaliforniaandthenationasawhole.Howtounderstandand
manageculturaldifferences,howtocorrectculturalstereotypesthroughmutual
exchangeandeducation,andhowtorecognizethevalueeachculturalgroupbrings
tolocaleconomic,political,andculturaldevelopment,thesequestionsarerealand
urgenttocommunityorganizationslikeACCA.
71
5.1.2.CulturalActivisminBuildingSub-CulturalCommunity
Figure4:AcollageofsomeoftheactivitiesACCAengagesin.
Throughextendedfieldwork,insiderknowledgerevealstheoriginand
fundingmechanismofthegroupthathelpscontextualizeACCA’sorganizational
identityandmission.Itsoriginalmemberswereaboutadozenmid-lifefriendswho
coalescedaroundMr.DavidLin,thecurrentPresidentofACCA.Theyalldefected
fromanotherassociation,the“Zhiqing AssociationofSouthernCalifornia”(ZQSC)
becauseofinternalpolitics.Thislatterassociationwasestablishedintheearly90’s
bythisuniquegenerationofChineseimmigrantswhoexperiencedthe“Cultural
72
Revolution’intheiryouthandcametotheUSafterChinafirstopenedtotheoutside
worldin1979.SeveralleadingmembersofACCAwereseminalfoundersofZQSC.
Myfieldworkindicatesthattherearemultiplereasonswhypeopleformedthesetwo
voluntaryorganizationsZQSCandACCA:reasonsincludeestablishingand
maintainingasocialnetwork,buildingasenseofbelonging,providingleisureor
recreationalpurposes,andforcreatingpoliticalsolidarity.
EspeciallyasZQSCandACCAarebothbasedongenerationalattributesof
themembersandtheircommonexperiences,theydifferquitesignificantlyfrom
othervoluntaryorganizationsthatmightbaseonfaithorprofessionorissues.For
ZQSCandACCA,thedefiningcharacteristicisaculturalandgenerational
affiliation.Theyexistandgrowtobuildasmallpieceofthelarger“cultural
community”,atermLing(2004)usedrefertoChineseAmericanurbanand
suburbansettlementintheMidwest.Shespecificallytalksaboutsocialandpolitical
institutionssuchaslanguageschools,religiousorganizations,andvarioussocialand
economicassociationsthatmakeupthemeansfordefiningtheethnicpresence.Such
presencegoesbeyondaphysicalethnicconcentrationlikeChinatownsorethnoburbs
inthetwocoastalregions.Iuseitheretorefertothebuildingofa“sub-cultural
community”throughvoluntaryassociationamongthemanydifferentgroupsinside
theChinesecommunity.GrassrootsorganizationslikeZQSCandACCAare
communityorganizationsthatdonotnecessarilyhaveaspecificgeographic,census-trackbased,
neighborhoodoutlook.Theydonotfitintothenarrowdefinitionof
communityorganizationsomescholarsstudyingthecommunicationinfrastructure
andbelongingintheGreaterLosAngelesareahold(SeeWilson,2001andother
73
Metamorphosis'workoncommunityorganizations).Icontendthatsuchadefinition
islimitinginunderstandingthedynamicsbetweenimmigrantorganizationsandlocal
mediaincreatingasenseof“We”inalargegeographicallydefinedlocale.
Broadeningthedefinitionofcommunityorganizationiscrucialinquestioningwhat
communityisbeingbuilt,andwhatkindofbelongingisbeingfostered.
ACCAinheritedfromZQSCmanyofthesameactivitiesandorganizational
principles.YetitalsotriestodistinguishitselffromZQSCandexcelasamore
powerfulandpopulargroup.ZQSCbecamethe“Other”inthemindofACCA
leadership,apointofreferenceforACCA’sowndevelopment.Bothhaveajournal,
awebsite,andbothperforminpublic.ThecleardifferenceisthatACCAclaimsand
internalizestherubricof“culture”.CulturehereisbroadlydefinedastheChinese
civilization,especiallyitsperformingarts,itshistory,language,literature,and
culturalvalues.ACCAembracesbothhighcultureandpopularculture,asdifferent
subgroupsintheassociationwouldengageindifferentactivities.Forexample,the
artsensembleincludesChineseclassicoperasingerswhoperformclassicrepertoire
suchasexcerptsintheliterarygem“Dreams of the Red Mansion”(Hong Lou Meng)
whilealsosinging“Legend of the Red Lamp”(Hong Deng Ji),apopular
revolutionaryoperaduringthe“CulturalRevolution”,aswellasthemore
contemporaryhybridbetweenPekingOperaandpopularmusic,“Peking Opera
Masks”(Jingju Lianpu).Memberswhoarelessperformance-inclinedaremoreinto
studyinghistoryandpolitics,literarystudies,visualartsandphotography.They
wouldorganizepubliclecturesonancientphilosophicalwritingssuchas“The Book
of Change”(Yi Jing),ororganizeaSundayafternoonteapartydiscussinghowto
74
appreciate“KunQu”,aschoolofclassicoperapopularinsouthernChina.Theyare
alsoengagedinpracticalpubliceducationalgatheringsthattouchuponissuesof
localconcern,suchasearthquakeinSouthernCalifornia,orthehealthcaredebatesin
theUS.IntheannualjournalACCAsponsors,articlesalsovaryfrom
autobiographicalstories,insightsonculturaldifferences,commentaryonUSsocial
andpoliticallife,poems,aswellasessaysandcritiquesonissuesintheirown
organizingandinthelargerChineseAmericanorAsianAmericancommunities.
Iftheseculturalpreservingandculturalmakingactivitiesarestillmore
internallyoriented,whichsomewhatresembletheZQSCitstrugglestoeclipse,itis
theirexternallyorientedworkthatdefineACCA’sactivism.DavidLincharacterizes
ZQSCas“theproductofhistory….anorganizationdefinedbycertain‘timeand
space,’whosebasicfunctionsincludereflectinguponhistory,makingfriends,and
organizingone’sownentertainment.ACCAhasgonefurther–weincludepeopleof
differentgenerations,likeyouandyoungerpeople.Andweengageinspreading
cultures”(Dec.2005,Fieldnotes).
5.1.3.TwoExamplesofACCACulturalExchangePractice
UndertherubricofpromotingChinesecultureintheUS,ACCAhasmadea
fewattemptsto“insertthemselvesintotheNorthAmericanrepresentation
machinery”asdefinedbyMcLegan(2002,p.93)(1997;Gingsburg,Abu-Lughod,&
Larkin,2002;McLagan,2002,p.93;2002,p.93).Theystrivetobecomeacross-culturalsocialagentthataimsatwinningculturalrecognitionsfrommainstream
Americaculturalestablishment,fortheculturalChineseingeneralandfordiasporic
ChineseinAmericainspecific.SinceIenteredtheorganization,Ihaveworkedwith
75
thetwomainleadersinACCA,DavidLinandDavidWu,inwritingalettertothe
DeathValleyNationalParkAuthoritypetitioningforestablishingabronzestatueat
theoreminewhereChineselaborersandtheirdonkeyshadtoiledduringthe19th
century,andinapplyingforparticipatinginthe2008RoseParade.Wu,beinga
historianandanauthorofapopularbookaboutearlierChineseimmigrants’history,
wroteinthelettertotheDeathValleyNationalParkAuthority:
InHarmonyBoraxWorks,wereadtheintroductiontotheChineselaborers
whoparticipatedinthispartofAmericanhistory.However,astimepasses
by,theircontributionseemstohavefadedaway.Newgenerationsof
AmericansrarelyknowaboutthestoriesoflaboringChineseimmigrantin
DeathValley.Therefore,itisoursincerehopetore-invokethissignificant
partofCaliforniahistory,inordertoenhanceracialandethnicharmony,and
topromotethefriendshipbetweenpeoplesoftheUnitedStatesandthe
People’sRepublicofChina.
Wewouldliketohumblyrequestyourpermissiontoletusdonatetwo
statuesofChineseimmigrantworkerstothepark.Wewouldreally
appreciateitifyoucouldallowthestatuestobeplacedintheruinof
HarmonyBoraxWorks.
WesincerelybelieveunderthewelcomingclimateofAmerican-
Chinesecooperationandmutualprogress,thisinitiativeisboundtopush
forwardtheculturalexchangebetweenthetwocountries.Inthemeantime,it
willsurebringinmoregood-willedtouristswhomayhelppromotingmutual
understandingbetweentheUnitedStatesandthePeople’sRepublicofChina
(9/26/05,translationmine).
WedidnothearfromtheAuthority,andtheinitiativewasdropped.Thisproject,
however,isemblematicofACCA’s“culturalactivism”inGinsburg’s(1997)
theorizingofindigenousmedia(Ginsburg,Abu-Lughod,&Larkin,2002).Sheposits
thatitisadistinctformofculturalpoliticsmarkedbyconcertedactionsthatare
underpinnedbypoliticaland/orartisticagendas.Inthiscase,donatingbronzestatues
isapurposefulmediationandmobilizationofpartoftheculturalhistoryofearly
Chineseimmigrantstoprojectandreinforceapositiveimageofhardworking
76
Chineseandtheircontributiontothisnation.Suchworkmaynotnecessarilysubvert
thehegemonicrepresentationofChineseimmigrantshistorically;itdoesunderscore
thesenseofpoliticalagencyandculturalinterventiononthepartofACCA’s
members.
Moreover,thisinitiativeisalsorevealingofmultipleimaginedaudiences
ACCAaimstoinfluence:“newgenerationsofAmericans”thatincludemainstream
visitors,secondorthirdgenerationminorityvisitors,olderimmigrants,and“new
immigrants”likemembersinACCA;alsopotentialChinesevisitorscomingfrom
MainlandChina.ThisimaginingofaudiencesisconsistentinmostofACCA’s
publicprojects.
Thisexampleisespeciallysignificantasayearandhalflater,whenmostof
thedigitalstoriesACCAmadewerefinishedandexhibited,thestorytellers
speculatedaboutcontinuingproducingdigitalstoriesthatintroducet