6 0 0 0 OA マジックマッシュルームとは何か : 公共の言説とせめぎあう使用者の経験
- 著者
- 白松 賢
- 出版者
- 日本教育社会学会
- 雑誌
- 教育社会学研究 (ISSN:03873145)
- 巻号頁・発行日
- vol.74, pp.189-207, 2004-05-20
Recently, many people have come to categorize "drugs" as deviance or a social problem. "Drugs" have been categorized in the public "drug" discourse by the rhetoric of endangerment, unreason, and with "atrocity tales." On the other hand, how is the "drug" discourse concerned with the interpretive activities of drug users, which are carried out locally? This paper discusses the relationship between the public "drug" discourse and the interpretive activities carried out in locally-managed interactive practices by the members. Specifically, using category-analyzed ethnography, this paper describes the process through which magic mushrooms have been categorized as a non-"drug" in the members' interactive practice : "what are magic mushrooms?" Therefore this paper argues about the type of interpretive resources that the public discourse has used in the process. The following conclusions are reached : (1) Through the interaction between the people who consider the ingestion of magic mushrooms to be a "criminal act" or "drug" use, and those who dislike the former, users have categorized magic mushrooms as non-"drug" by using categories such as "legal" and "natural." (2) In everyday discourse, by placing more importance on their experiences than on the public discourse, the users use the public discourse and "atrocity tales" as interpretive resources in order to categorize. (3) Although the categories of "natural" versus "chemical" entails the risk of being disproved, this possibility, which might have shaken the beliefs and local knowledge, has been moved aside by resolve and self-preservation work, using explanations such as these were cases when magic mushrooms were used improperly. Finally, the author cites the methodological possibility of category-analyzed ethnography. For example, there is a lengthy discussion of the experiences of a group of magic mushroom users showing how the "drug" discourse combines with members' folklore into "local cultures." Further arguments are needed by conducting various fieldwork focusing on the everyday discourse of users.
5 0 0 0 OA 閉ざされたフィールドを拓く : エスノグラフィー論(<特集>質的調査の現在)
- 著者
- 白松 賢
- 出版者
- 日本教育社会学会
- 雑誌
- 教育社会学研究 (ISSN:03873145)
- 巻号頁・発行日
- vol.84, pp.49-64, 2009-05-31
This paper attempts to determine a method for making use of the "image of deviation," which we fieldworkers possess and typically regard as a bias contaminating our research, as a resource for interpretation, and by doing so open the door to the field of "deviation." Among qualitative studies of educational sociology, only a handful have focused on the self (involvement, attitude, etc.) expressed in the "image" held by researchers. One of the reasons for this situation seems to be the long-standing perception among quantitative studies in educational sociology that the "image" (involvement and attitude) introduced by the researcher is "a potential contaminant" that should be "separated out, neutralized, minimized, standardized, and controlled" (Fine et al. 2000, p. 108) In this paper, we begin by examining barriers to fieldwork in the area of "deviation" (the problem of fieldworkers being regarded as contamination) and, through research and study in the "narrative mode," offer direction in shifting to a closed field. Secondly, we develop a method of description that transforms the fieldworker's "image" into a resource for research and interpretation. In order to achieve this goal, the "practice of interpretation" must first be described in words, through a transformation of the fieldworker's "image" into a resource for interpretation; the method of description must also be properly set out and organized, in order to avoid becoming trapped in a "dead end of self-reflection." We opt to focus on the "writing mode" and "reading mode" (Emerson et al. 1995, p. 63) as methods of description, and adopt a technique by which we avoid the "dead end of self-reflection." In transforming the "image" into a resource for interpretation, we focus our attention on the distinction between "content" (experience lived and experience described: what is described) and "method" (way of description: how to describe) (Gubrium and Holstein 2000, p. 496). By carefully describing "first person narrative" and "third person narrative," we also explain in this description the process of interaction-based meaning construction. Thirdly, based on results of actual fieldwork (follow-up survey on persons who have experienced taking magic mushrooms), we discuss ways to move toward practical applications in problem solving. (1) The process described in this paper is the same as the "interpretation technique" (process of interpretation practice) of "those who have experienced magic mushrooms," re-emphasizing that this practice may be referred to as a reason why people take magic mushrooms, and offering hints, though limited, toward answering the larger question of "why people take magic mushrooms." (2) Our next step will be in the direction of initiating a dialogue with the findings of previous studies. The dialogue between "cause approach" and "process approach" is important in terms of practical aspects of this research. For example, we can propose that, based on the results of this paper, the concepts of "neutralization" and "drift" can be reconstructed as ideas corresponding to situation-dependent interpretation practice applied to the deviation category.
3 0 0 0 OA マジックマッシュルームとは何か 公共の言説とせめぎあう使用者の経験
- 著者
- 白松 賢
- 出版者
- 日本教育社会学会
- 雑誌
- 教育社会学研究 (ISSN:03873145)
- 巻号頁・発行日
- vol.74, pp.189-207, 2004-05-20 (Released:2011-03-18)
- 参考文献数
- 22
- 被引用文献数
- 5
Recently, many people have come to categorize “drugs” as deviance or a socialproblem. “Drugs” have been categorized in the public “drug” discourse by therhetoric of endangerment, unreason, and with “atrocity tales.” On the otherhand, how is the “drug” discourse concerned with the interpretive activities ofdrug users, which are carried out locally?This paper discusses the relationship between the public “drug” discourseand the interpretive activities carried out in locally-managed interactive practicesby the members. Specifically, using category-analyzed ethnography, thispaper describes the process through which magic mushrooms have been categorizedas a non- “drug” in the members' interactive practice: “what are magicmushrooms?” Therefore this paper argues about the type of interpretiveresources that the public discourse has used in the process.The following conclusions are reached:(1) Through the interaction betweenthe people who consider the ingestion of magic mushrooms to be a “criminal act” or “drug” use, and those who dislike the former, users have categorized magicmushrooms as non- “drug” by using categories such as “legal” and “natural.”(2) In everyday discourse, by placing more importance on their experiences than onthe public discourse, the users use the public discourse and “atrocity tales” asinterpretive resources in order to categorize.(3) Although the categories of “natural” versus “chemical” entails the risk of being disproved, this possibility, which might have shaken the beliefs and local knowledge, has been moved asideby resolve and self-preservation work, using explanations such as these werecases when magic mushrooms were used improperly.Finally, the author cites the methodological possibility of category-analyzedethnography. For example, there is a lengthy discussion of the experiences of agroup of magic mushroom users showing how the “drug” discourse combineswith members' folklore into “local cultures.” Further arguments are needed byconducting various fieldwork focusing on the everyday discourse of users.
