Research of “Closed Communities”: Notes on My Own and Others’ Experience

In this article, the author analyses peculiarities of the fieldwork in so-called "closed communities”; those which differ significantly from the mainstream in their values and lifestyle and, as a result, try to prevent an influx of strangers. Literature on the methodology of closed community ethnography-as well as specific cases of research on this subject - are analyzed in detail. Nevertheless, the author mainly discusses her own practices in her research of Islamic fundamentalist communities in the North Caucasus, which can be considered "closed”. The article is an attempt of self-reflection based on a long experience of fieldwork. Problems such as the initial entry into "closed communities”, the impact of the researcher's positioning in the field on research outcomes, ethical aspects of fieldwork, and difficulties in the presentation of the findings about closed communities are addressed. Some other controversial methodological issues are also discussed, among them: whether a researcher should reflect the position of informants or his/her own ideas; if it is possible to remain unbiased; what to do with the distorted influence of a researcher on a field. Not all the instruments used by the author in the field are universal and can be applied to other contexts. However, specific approaches - such as the application the "ethnography-dialog", the use of multiple identities of the members of closed communities in cities, the widening of the scope of research (increasing the number of research objects) in cases where it is impossible to deepen it (analyzing the limited number of objects in greater detail), and the combination of personal contacts with social media - can be useful for other researchers of complicated fields.

1. Armstrong K. (2013) Battle for God: the history of fundamentalism, Moscow: Al'pina non-fikshn. - in Russ.

2. Bobrovnikov V. (2018) Paradoxes in the Study of Contemporary Islam in Russia. State, Religion and Church in Russia and Worldwide, 36 (1): 310-322. - in Russ. EDN: YWZFRC

3. Venkatesh S. (2018) Gang Leader for a Day: A Rogue Sociologist Takes to the Streets, Moscow: RIPOL-klassik. - in Russ.

4. Makarov D. (2000). Official and Unofficial Islam in Dagestan, Moscow: TsSiPI. - in Russ.

5. Roy O. (2018) Globalized Islam. The Search for a New Ummah, Moscow: Mardjani Fund. - in Russ.

6. Becker H. S. (1967) Whose Side Are We On? Social Problems, 14 (3): 239-247.

7. Behar R. (1996) The Vulnerable Observer. Anthropology That Breaks Your Heart, Boston:Beacon Press.

8. Campos P. (2015) Alice Goffman's Implausible Ethnography. Chronicle of Higher Education, August 21.

9. Chancer L., Jacobson M. (2016) From Darling to Demon: In and Beyond Goffman's On the Run. Sociological Forum, 31 (1): 241-249. 107 Goffman A. (2014) On the Run: Fugitive Life in an American City (Fieldwork Encounters and Discovers), Chicago; London: University of Chicago Press.

10. Jauregui B. (2013) Dirty Anthropology: Epistemologies of Violence and Ethical Entanglements in Police Ethnography. W. Garriott (ed.) Policing and Contemporary Governance: the Anthropology of Police in Practice, N. Y.: Palgrave: 125-156.

11. Jauregui B. (2017) Intimacy: Personal Policing, Ethnographic Kinship, and Critical Empathy (India). D. Fassin (ed.) Writing the World of Policing: The Difference Ethnography Makes, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

12. Jones G. A. (2019) Ethnographies and/of violence. Ethnography, 20 (3): 297-319.

13. Koehler D. (2017) Understanding deradicalization. Methods, tools and programs for countering violent extremism, London; N. Y.: Routledge.

14. Kovats-Bernat J. C. (2002) Negotiating Dangerous Fields: Pragmatic Strategies for Fieldwork amid Violence and Terror. American Anthropologist, 104 (1): 208-222. EDN: GRKQVJ

15. Lubert S. (2014) Ethics on The Run. The New rambler Review, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

16. Lubert S. (2015) Alice Goffman's Denial of Murder Conspiracy Raises Even More Questions. The New Republic, June 3.

17. Malejacq R., Mukhopadhyay D. (2016) The 'Tribal Politics' of Field research: A Reflection on Power and Partiality in 21st Century Warzones. American Political Science association, 14 (4): 1011-1028.

18. Pachirat T. (2018) Among Wolves. Ethnography and the Immersive Study of Power. London;N. Y.: Routledge.

19. Roy O. (1994) The Failure of Political Islam. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

20. Robben A. C., Nordstrom C. (1995) The Anthropology and Ethnography of Violence and Sociopolitical Conflict. C. Nordstrom, A. Robben (eds) Fieldwork under Fire, Berkeley: University of California Press.

21. Sageman M. (2016) The Turn to Political Violence in the West. R. Coolsaet (ed.) Jihadi Terrorism and the Radicalization Challenge: European and American Experiences, London; New York: Routledge: 117-129.

22. Sluka J. (1999) Death Squad: The Anthropology of State Terror, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.