Alcance del tema

One of the main challenges of any research is how to gain entry and be accepted by stakeholders and community power-brokers in the social settings the fieldwork is conducted (Moser and MacIliwaine 2004; Singleton, Straits and Straits 1993). Gaining entry into the field is a question of managing one’s impressions; a question of self- presentation (Neuman 2000). I disclosed my status as the starting point of negotiating for permission and acceptance to participate in community meetings and activities (as an observer). This was particularly important under circumstances where community meetings were a major source of information.

Social research contexts may have gate-keepers. This means that a series of negotiations and compromises may take place before adequate access to the field is gained. I grappled with gate-keeping at the individual, group or organisational levels. Being accepted in meetings of community organisations required some negotiation with those running those organisations. In the same vein, securing appointments was a process of negotiation and renegotiation, sometimes with no success. Research is therefore a political process of a series of negotiations, and gaining access is never a once off thing (Neuman 2000). Writing about the complexities of negotiating access in public entities, Burgess claims:

“Finally, there are public settings such as towns, football matches, church services, school assemblies and parents’ evenings when access cannot be successfully negotiated with all participants. In each instance, there is no opportunity for the researcher to have full permission to observe for research purposes in such settings. Indeed, even if formal announcements are made or negotiations conducted with town councils, football managers, the clergy or head teachers it still leaves vast numbers of people outside the research bargain. Negotiating directly with those on whom researchers intend to focus

89

their studies is a difficult requirement to fulfil in public settings” (Burgess 1984: 49).

Nurturing and maintaining social relationships with participants is integral to negotiation for (maintenance of) access and sometimes one has to make do with denial of access. An example in which full access was denied was the attendance of YCPF executive meetings. YCPF executive meetings are those in which executive members do strategic deliberations and make tactical decisions. In a conversation with the YCPF secretary general, I asked if I could be allowed to attend YCPF executive meetings and this was his response:

“No, you won’t be allowed. The executive will be strategising and they wouldn’t want you to attend as they strategise” (Conversation, Zweli [YCPF Secretary]: 06/11/2010).

I pleaded with him and he agreed to negotiate with the rest of the executive on my behalf so that I could be allowed to attend this meeting. This, however, ultimately failed. One day, before in a YCPF public meeting, for which I had come earlier, the YCPF executive guys had a small caucus meeting. I attended this meeting by default. In the meeting, one YCPF member, acting on my behalf, asked the YCPF chairperson to allow me to attend YCPF executive meetings. He responded:

“He is not welcome here. He has already attended now. He has eaten the butter already. He can attend the CPF broader meeting, CPF public meetings and Sector meetings, but not our executive meeting” (Conversation, Lehlohonolo [YCPF Chairperson]: 06/11/2010).

Following this statement, Zweli re-negotiated on my behalf and then the chairperson and his deputy chairperson Bongani agreed that I can attend. Bongani said: “You can attend, but you keep quite. You don’t contribute anything”. Despite this, they later on reneged, completely blocking my access to this meeting.

So, there was some censoring of what kind of information I could access directly from the YCPF executive. In another case, in an interview, the chairperson of the YCPF preferred to read out information from a strategic plan document, rather than give me a copy which I had asked for. Perhaps the reading of the document was selective and was meant to ensure the censoring of information perceived to be too sensitive to be shared with me.

90

The challenges of gaining access to participants or research settings are further underscored by the incident in which one of my research assistants was attacked and nearly got beaten by the husband of a woman he was interviewing. The research assistant reported:

“When I saw the respondent, she was relaxed and basking outside along the pavement in Muller Street together with her children who were also playing outside. As I interviewed the woman the interview was disturbed towards the end as the husband came in and told me to get away and started beating up the wife. He also wanted to attack me but I was very fortunate as the woman during the interview kept on mentioning a member of the CPF who stays across the street and during the interview he was sitting in his car and everything that was taking place was in his view, hence I had to run to him for safety. The member of the CPF managed to handle the situation with ease as he somehow commanded respect and also knew the husband and the wife, he also knew about the research which made it easy for him to come to my aid. That also confirmed the information that the woman gave during the interview to be correct and truthful” (Opinion and attitude survey: participant TB12, 2011).

This experience shows the cultural complexities of male researchers conducting interviews with women, especially within an androcentric setting in which men as husbands, fathers or brothers take guardianship of women and girls. This particular case demonstrates that accessing a (female) respondent requires payment of attention to the cultural or situational setting. Here the researcher got himself into trouble by not accessing the woman for interview with the approval of the husband. Again, the beating of the woman by her husband is a matter of ethical concern, yet what is relieving is that a YCPF member stopped the husband from beating his wife.

Sometimes gaining and maintaining access was enabled by key informants who treated me as a friend and eased my welcome into their organisations; making it easier for me to converse with their colleagues. For instance, in a conversation after a YCPF broader meeting,Mr. Thabangintroduced me to some participant:

“You see this gentleman. He must the properly introduced in these meetings. Do you know that he will be called doctor soon? In simple terms, I can say he is doing a PhD in CPFs and community safety. He needs to be properly introduced” (Conversation, Thabang: 09/04/2011).

This statement was said after I had spent nine months in the field. One would hope that I would be known by most local people participating in community meetings, but that was not the case. In Mr. Thabang’s view, there was still a need for me to be

91

“introduced properly”. This confirms the fact that entering the research field is a process of continuous negotiation and renegotiation given the complex nature of social groups.

I managed, in one way or another, to consolidate myself within the complex socio- political context of my study area. I felt freer to engage with my research participants, both South African and non-South African. As a non-South African researcher I felt at home because, at least in rhetoric, leaders of community based organisations welcomed non-South African Blacks participating in their activities. Most local activists and leaders frequently spoke about the importance of having non-South Africans participating in their activities, citing that Yeoville was a pan-African community and ought to be inclusive.

Some research participants hinted, in various ways, that they expected to benefit from having me hang around them. There was subtle, but mounting pressure, for me to engage with the participants in ways that made them benefit from my presence. During an interview a leader of the YCF asked for a favour:

“We are looking for lawyers to assist us in our fight against hijackers of buildings in Yeoville. Can you assist us get some Lawyers” (Zondi: 10/08/2010).

I did not promise to get them a lawyer, but he kept on, over the days, asking me how far I had gone in that endeavour. So this is a task I got for hanging around a community organisation as a researcher. My research participants, in cases such as this, treated me as an important contact - a friend and advisor. One therefore inevitably assumes political positioning amongst the communities he conducts fieldwork.

5.3.2. “Subjective” socio-political positioning acknowledged

As a researcher, I was positioned in the scientific field and the social field at once; inevitably being a socio-political being (Bourdieu 1991b; Bourdieu 2003). I took positions in these two fields and had to juggle the associated contradictions.

In attempting to understand my positioning in some of the power fields in Yeoville, I narrate here my first stokes of emotions such as fear and excitement, amongst others.

92

When I came to Johannesburg to stay and conduct research, I initially worried continuously. This was because of the horrible stories I had heard about crime and violence in the city of Johannesburg, more so in the innercity and townships. Places such as Hillbrow, Johannesburg CBD, Yeoville, Diepsloot and Alexandra, as I had heard about them were havens of violence and crime; places abound with blazing guns and glittering or blood-dripping knives. My research was to focus on one or more of these areas.

As if it was a self-fulfilling prophesy, my first experience as I entered Johannesburg was horrible. As I arrived at Park Station, coming by bus from Harare, I was robbed of my money. This happened as I was making a phone call at a public telephone booth to get a friend to come and pick me up. While making the telephone call, a man who appeared to be under the influence of drugs or alcohol, came to me and asked “ngiceli imali” (give me money). He was speaking Zulu, a language I barely understood at the time. All I realised was that I was in danger. Having realised that I could not speak Zulu, he spoke in English:

“Man, give me money. Be fast. If you do anything stupid, my friends will come here and you won’t like it. They are watching right now” (Robber [Park Station - Johannesburg]: 16/01/2010).

I tried to pretend not to hear or understand him. The man then stretched his hands towards my pocket, presumably in search of valuables. Before he reached my phone, I handed him R50 and he left me instantly. This was a scary experience. I wondered what kind of life I was to live in Johannesburg. I got worried about how I was to successfully conduct a study on urban violence and crime in such a city. Such was my introduction to the city of Johannesburg.

Being present in meetings organised and led by South Africans was not always an easy experience. This is because in community meetings, there was a constant affirmation of the discourse that most community problems in Yeoville were a result of the presence of African immigrants concentrated in the area. Apparently, Zimbabweans, Nigerians and Congolese were commonly regarded as the most problematic groups.At one point I had to abort my participation at a YCF meeting when an invited speaker uttered xenophobic statements much to the ululation of the participating crowd:

93

“Some foreign nationals are coming here running away from dictators. Some of them engage in serious criminal activities here. We have more than three million Zimbabweans here in South Africa. They should go back home and solve their problems. They should go and vote out the dictator, simple” (Majola, YCF Meeting: 26/08/2010).

I left the meeting fearing for my safety, although I also found the encounter amusing. I left because I had introduced myself to the members of the forum and I was sure that most of them knew I am Zimbabwean. One of the leading members of the forum constantly looked at me as this man uttered his statements about Zimbabwean nationals in South Africa. This issue was linked to the need by members of this forum to deal with cases of hijacked houses and illegal collection of rent from tenants, which they alleged, was an enterprise dominated by Zimbabwean nationals. The ambiguity of my position is further illustrated by the fact that some leaders of community organisation insisted on wanting me to attend all their meetings. This, in a way, made me feel obliged to attend their forums. At some point leaders of YCF registered displeasure if I missed their meetings and this was both positive and straining in terms of time and being able to delineate my role as a researcher. There was a time I consecutively missed four meetings of the YCF and when I met one of the YCF leaders we had the following conversation (Box 2).

Box 2: “Why are you not coming to our meetings ...?”

Zondi: Why are you not coming to our meetings these days? Are you confused or something?

Me: I have not been in town in a long time, but now that I am back, I will resume attendance.

Zondi. Things have been happening man. There has been a split in the forum. Our secretary and deputy chairperson have abandoned the forum.

Me: Ah! Why did they leave?

Zondi: I am sure they have been influenced by those people who dislike this forum. Date of conversation: 30/11/2010

Following the conversation on Box 2, I observe that the insistence on me to attend meetings could have been a sign that the YCF leader considered me to be of utility to him and his organisation. This brings forth the idea that the field researcher can be an asset to the community, individuals or places where he conducts his research.

94

5.3.3. Field research and community politics: profit-seeking, manipulation…