University of Zagreb. Academy of dramatic art. Dramaturgy department.
Abstract
Ovaj rad teži predstaviti nužnost revidiranja zaokreta arhetipskog koncepta terena shvaćenog kao fiksiranog, geografski određenog, singularnog lokaliteta prema konceptu koji sadrži kategorije poznatog i bliskog (i prostorno i iskustveno) no po ulasku žudi za uspostavom vizure koja će analitički zahvatiti i paradoks neponovljivosti iskustva. Procesi lokalizacije i njihov singularitet više nisu dostatni modeli, već se nužno smještaju u geopolitičke kontekste koji postaju nad-tereni te tvore dijalošku situaciju simultano s više terena. Inherentna performativnost samog čina istraživanja repozicionira i samog istraživača koji iznova i iznova izvodi vlastito iskustvo terena pred različitim publikama smještajući se tako između pozicije svjedoka i pozicije nomada. Drugi dio rada fokusira se na problemsko polje koje poziva na raspravu – Tko su „publike“ naznačenih istraživačkih procesa? U kojoj mjeri istraživanje utječe na istraživanu zajednicu? Potvrđuju li istraživanja svoj status samo unutar akademske zajednice? Što se od istraživačkog procesa zapravo „vrati“ samoj istraživanoj zajednici? Potaknuta mišlju kako su gledanje i slušanje prije svega aktivnosti sam koncept partiture postaje pogodnom univerzalnom alatkom koja bi u idealnom slučaju mogla premostiti terminološke i metodološke probleme koji dodatno pospješuju distanciranje i diferenciranje umjetničkog i antropološkog/etnološkog polja istraživanja.This paper tends to present the archetypal concept of the field as fixed, geographically determined, singular site, under the necessity of re-thinking it through categories of spatial and experiential familiarity. After the researcher entered the field of research, there is an urge to form a perspective that would analytically grasp a paradox of singularity of an experience. Processes of localizations are no longer sufficient models, so they are becoming parts of wider geopolitical context in which Über-fields form a dialogical situation simultaneously with several other fields. Inherent performativity of the very act of research also repositions a researcher who repeatedly performs his/hers experience of the field in front of different audiences resulting in the positioning between the role of the witness and the role of the nomad. Second part of this paper focuses on questions about audience of those research processes – To what extent does research affect researched community? Does research processes verify their own status just inside the academic community? How can we “bring back” part of the research to the researched subjects? Understanding processes of observing and listening as activities, concept of a score becomes a potential universal tool with which we can overcome terminological and methodological problems that distance and differentiate field of anthropology/ethnology and field of performance
