Abstract
As a socio-legal scholar midway through doctoral-level research on racist hate crime, I struggled with Denzin and Giardina’s Introduction in Qualitative Inquiry and Human Rights for three reasons. Firstly, I was unconvinced by the radical, critical and activist approach advocated and the utopia sought. For example, this volume is premised on a ‘mandate’:
As global citizens, we are no longer called to just interpret the world, which was the mandate of traditional qualitative inquiry. Today, we are called to change the world and to do it in ways that resist injustice while celebrating freedom and full, inclusive, participatory democracy (p.17, emphasis in original).
Such statements left me with only with questions about ‘for whom’ and about ‘representations’ and ‘social responsibilities’ (Fine et al., 2000) and with regard to how change could be achieved. Influenced by current debates in my discipline about the idea of a public criminology (see for example, Loader and Sparks, 2010), I had decided that my work must be policy relevant and that I want to achieve ‘a social science that matters’ (Flyvbjerg, 2007: 166) but in reading the Introduction I realised that I had avoided answering how far ‘along the chain’ (Etzioni, 2005: 375) I am prepared to go, and ‘how public, how active’ (Etzioni, 2005: 376) I am prepared to be. Secondly, I felt patronized. Of course I realise that ‘we must be honest about the role of qualitative research and researchers’ (p.14) and that it is not ‘just about “method” or “technique”’ (p.14). Thirdly, with an eye on my future research career, I am busy proving my knowledge of, and adherence to, conventional thinking on research methods and practice. Yet, Denzin and Giardina’s Introduction prompted me to think about those instances in the field where I had experienced the unexpected in terms of situations and emotions and my struggle to explain and represent those occasions. In hindsight it was the recollection of this unresolved dilemma that led me to adopt a fairly instrumental approach to reading the remainder of this book. I hoped to find a strategy, a blueprint for my thesis.
The now well established publication of plenary or keynote addresses of the International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry, this time the Fifth Congress held in 2009, showcases the work of leading qualitative researchers. Indeed, there is a sense in which it feels like one has just walked in on the end of a conversation and perhaps this is because the five volumes in total have incrementally built the proposed vision. The collection of chapters in this volume, however, creates a broad, deep and thought-provoking contribution to social science research. Different dimensions of what it means to engage in human rights and social justice work are to be found in each of the chapters, and they feel interconnected; often one scholar has been influenced by another or they attend to similar issues but from their own personal and disciplinary perspectives. Also, there is a feeling that the book unfolds, as one reads chapters on theory before moving on to method and then politics before ending with a inspiring coda by Carolyn Ellis and others about ‘meaningful research, aging and positive transformation’.
Given the long history of attention given to the subject of human rights by legal scholars I was curious about the absence of such a contribution. Yet, the book will appeal to those from a broad range of disciplines, and not just those from the same fields as the writers which include: social sciences, education, health care, social services and cultural studies. Space precludes consideration of all the chapters but, for example, as a criminologist I was struck by the parallels in Rail et al’s discussion - of Human Rights and Qualitative Health Inquiry: On Biofacism and the Importance of Parrhesia - and the concepts of governance, governmentality, responsibilization and risk in the criminological literature. Furthermore, as a researcher I learnt much from the experiences and views of all the contributors as they discuss the practical, ethical and personal aspects of their work.
No, Qualitative Inquiry and Human Rights does not provide a strategy or a blueprint for a thesis or for achieving the utopia. Rather it is an invitation and a space to reflect critically on what, how and why we are engaged in qualitative inquiry. It provides an original and stimulating account of the condition of, and potential for, qualitative research and represents a timely contribution of the idea that researchers could - should - contribute to promoting human rights and social justice. It is a rewarding read and a welcome opportunity to hear a range of voices from the research community, all of which remind us that social research cannot stand on the periphery of society.