I have been particularly confronted by the need to use autoethnography in my weekly blog posts. In deciphering my more recent posts in which I feel I have provided my strongest examples, I can begin to discern a methodology of an ‘educated ethnography’ I have employed to better investigate J-Pop.
Autoethnography as discussed by Ellis, Adams and Bochner as a marrying of autobiography and ethnography (2011). Put simply a drawing of comparisons between personal experience and cultural investigation. Ellis et al also discuss the importance of showing vs. telling when performing autoethnography as the author must remain as subjective as possible. As the area of study is completely new to me, for the most part I can only draw comparisons through my personal knowledge of industrial practices in Japan that I have already explored as part of my university degree, areas such as fan interaction with cultural content and the Japanese film and television industry. My personal knowledge of more local music industry practice is very specific and thus is difficult to apply to the larger industrial process that J-Pop represents. The majority of the autoethnographical process I have established relies on this and the developments provided through a processing of recent preceding research into the J-Pop industry. In their overview of autoethnography Ellis et al (2011) discuss the importance of the epiphany, which has guided my understanding of the practice in discussing my constantly evolving understanding of the practices of the industry. It is these epiphanies that prompt me to further investigate the viability of these connections and consequently finding more avenues of exploration.
Ellis, C; Adams T E; Bochner A P 2011 ‘Autoethnography: An Overview’, Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, vol. 12, no. 1 art. 10 http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1589/3095