III.

Doing ethnographic fieldwork in Bristo Square was an interesting experience. Initial observation was intriguing, but I was apprehensive to involve myself with the people who occupy this space, notably the skateboarders. However through speaking to them, my attitudes towards this space started to change with their openness and also their understanding towards public disruption and female inclusiveness. Public disruption was understood by all the people I spoke to. The skaters know their sport is loud and they understand that sometimes this gives off the impression that they are purposely trying to cause chaos. They are understanding towards this public attitude and accept that they have to remove themselves in specific situations (exams, larger group size, drinking, weed, etc.). However, there is clear resentment for rudeness and lack of respect towards them, leaving them feeling misunderstood. Female inclusiveness was also massively recognised by both the male and female skateboarders in the community. The male skaters recognised the girls group, enjoyed their presence in the space and were supportive of them. The skateboarders believe the real divide between male and female groups is quite heavily based on friendship more than it is on gender divide. 

During this participant observation, there were also specific circumstances that would inevitably impact the research. Bristo Square is both an outdoor and a public space. The Square being outside means that the study was massively weather contingent. Whenever it was raining or lightly snowing, the skaters would not be in the area, posing challenges to our research. Sometimes it was hard to collect evidence because it was difficult to determine when they would be in the area. This also links to the aspect of public space. Skateboarding times run on unofficial hours, which also made research times inconsistent and disjointed. When field study was conducted, public space as a circumstance also created room for awkwardness that is inevitably part of ethnographic work. Public space contrasted with the skateboarders’ personal ownership of the area built an interesting power dynamic that we as researchers had to involve ourselves in. These circumstances created an aura of apprehension in approaching the skateboarders.  

The circumstances of my interview were different. I chose to interview members of a female skateboarding group, ’Skateboobs’ that my group and I found on social media. We discovered that they skate in Bristo and became interested in the way this group may occupy the space differently. I set up an interview after messaging the group on Instagram, however if it weren’t for this social media platform, I would not have known about them. Through my participant observation, I did not see any female skateboarders and only knew about their experience through Instagram and the interview conducted. Furthermore, the circumstances of conducting an interview with people I had never met would also change the nature of conversation. A sense of formality was present during the interview, which had both positive and negative effects. The girls wanted to express information they felt was important for research and may have disclosed other information as a result of this circumstantial interview formality. 

In doing research, positionality was another major point of consideration throughout. Neila Miled’s work considers both the importance of positionality when researching and also how the specific situation of interlocutors must always be considered in fieldwork. Miled is a Muslim woman who explored how school experiences impact Muslim youth identity negotiations and sense of belonging. Her Muslim positionality changes the entire narrative of her study, as there is a sense of closeness between her and her interlocutors. There is also an element of removal from the 'white saviour complex’. In reading this, I started to consider my own positionality in studying the skateboarders. One major aspect of my social and political context is that I am a woman. I understand that as a woman, I may have some bias towards supporting and understanding better the female side of the story. Also from a female outsider going in, I did sometimes feel slightly threatened by the male dominance of the area. There are feelings of getting in the way that surround their symbolic claim over a public area, which was intimidating at times. I felt more comfortable with the female skateboarders and this consequentially changed the focus of the research I collected. 

However, our ethnography group did share a similar age range with our interlocutors, and I feel this slightly took away the ‘outsider’ power dynamics of us as researchers. The skateboarders were open to expressing how they felt misunderstood by peripheral perspective. This misunderstanding is due to both university security as well as the lack of free and available skate areas in Edinburgh. Their expression was perhaps more open because of our similar ages, that would change our research.  

Something Miled also discusses in her text is how despite the fact that some parts of identity are shared with research subjects, there is never going to be one experience. As ethnographers, we are still outsiders with our own influencing narratives that we must be considerate of during the entire research process. My upbringing was one aspect of positionality during research that I did not want to share. Growing up in Singapore has many class and wealth implications that I was afraid would remove me from the skateboarders and them feeling able to share information with me. I understood that some of the skateboarders had not gone to university and an aspect of personal ‘privilege’ may have been brought up, creating a bigger divide between us. I am also removed from skateboarding, as this was not something I grew up with or a community I had ever been part of. These aspects of upbringing do slightly change the research because of interview formality, lack of closeness and class stereotypes that I was not ready to bring to my research just yet.

​