Latino Urban Ethnography and the Work of Elena Padilla

Chapter Two

Chapter two Methods The materials used in this study were obtained by three different methods: (1) field work, (2) consultation of unpublished documents, and (3) consultation of the published literature. Field Work The material on the Puerto Rican immigrants in Chicago was obtained in the field through observation, participation, and the recording of verbalizations. Formal and informal interviews were an important aspect of this part of the research. In relation to the field work, a point to be discussed is that of the native investigator.The field material was collected by a native Puerto Rican who had lived in Chicago for about two years. This point seems important insofar as the field worker, since the beginning of the study, was aware of the fact that the rapport established with the informants would be very much influenced by this circumstance, as also would be the data obtained.The field worker knew some of the informants quite intimately for a period of about a year before this research was planned. These individuals were visited and informed about the research, and nevertheless, they did not seem to accept the field worker in this role, but persisted in continuing their relationship with her on a friendly level. This situation seems to have operated in two ways in relation to the data obtained from these individuals: (1) they tried to impress the field worker with their success and socio-economic status in Chicago and in Puerto Rico, and (2) they resisted giving information on subjects they would consider a negation of the above, i.e., actual incomes, unsuccessful relationships with Americans, etc. It must be pointed out that the above observations are particularly noticeable in light-skinned Puerto Ricans who speak English relatively well and who are engaged either in business or in the professions. Formal interviews with these individuals were highly unsuccessful. It proved better to“exploit” their interest in impressing the field worker, and informal conversations were very useful in this inquiry. The data were checked and more important information obtained from their Puerto Rican acquaintances in the city.Those Puerto Ricans who knew each other gossiped about their countrymen. A different type of experience occurred with those informants the field worker did not know before the study was planned. These Puerto Rican informants, at the beginning of their relationship with the field worker, took her in this role, although they dropped it very soon, either in the first or second interview. Conversations and interviews were conducted in Spanish with members of the first generation of Puerto Ricans. Usually words and phrases were said in English whenever it was easier for either the field worker or the informant to express themselves in this language. Words like “subway,” “streetcar,”“drinks,”“nice,”“show,” etc., were always said in English. Conversations with members of the second generation of Puerto Ricans or with members of the first generation whose spouses were unable to speak in Spanish were conducted in English most of the time, with the exception of those members of the second generation who were able to speak and understand Spanish. The fact that the field worker had known or heard about some of their relatives or friends or their home towns, or just said something about Puerto Rico was very helpful in establishing rapport.The use of mixed Spanish and English in the conversations was also of much help insofar as it avoided embarrassments due to a certain inability of expression in using just one of the two languages throughout all of the conversations. Data on the recent Puerto Rican migration to the Chicago area were obtained during informal conversations and from written statements or verbalizations from the migrants.1 To summarize: there are some advantages as well as disadvantages in being taken for a member of a group investigated. The main advantages lie in the fact that the investigator is in a better position than a stranger is to identify in a shorter period of time certain types of attitudes and overt behavior, namely, those that are individualities and those that are to a greater extent common to a larger number of members of the group. The main disadvantage of being a native investigator lies in the fact that biases are very difficult to check, and that the personal equation is probably greater than in the cases when the investigator is quite familiarized with the subject 48 elena padilla matter of his...