“I’m just a paavam[1]small-town wedding shooter, ain’t got no interesting life stories to share with you that’d be worth snappin’ in your camera”,the owner of a photo studio, who also worked as a wedding photographer, jokingly told me during the initial days of my fieldwork, as I went with my small recording camera for interviews. When I mentioned that I wasn’t looking for anything, particularly “interesting” but rather wanted to listen to the everyday, mundane aspects of his work, he went quiet for a moment– and then he stood up and ran a comb through his hair and moustache using a mirror placed beside the photo-taking area of the studio. He then returned to his seat in front of me and remarked, “Well, the thing is, nobody has ever interviewed people like us before. We’re usually the ones clicking pictures, not the ones talking in front of the camera. It’s a whole different ball game standin’ on this side of the lens.”

In recent years, ethnographers have increasingly turned to visual and digital images as well as technologies to research and represent the cultures, lives and experiences of oneself and other people. These new approaches to ethnographic research have made reflexivity, collaboration, and technological ethics essential themes in any text on ethnographic methods, particularly those focused on visual ethnography (Pink, 2001a; Banks, 2001). Compared to previous qualitative approaches, the contemporary participatory visual methodologies directly involve participants, emphasizing their lived experiences and, in turn, leading to transformative social change through collaborative knowledge production (Arku & Bandauko, 2023).

Figure 1: A wedding ceremony in Calicut

Having participated in numerous Hindu weddings in the past, which can be regarded as an informal pilot study for my Master’s Dissertation on Malabar Wedding Videography, my official fieldwork commenced in December 2023 with an unconventional approach—gatecrashing a wedding. While the practice of gatecrashing weddings is not uncommon in Kerala, especially in the Malabar region— renowned for its delicious cuisine, hospitality, and warmth, it is particularly welcoming to uninvited guests. It is even considered a customary gesture to prepare extra food, anticipating the attendance of children from nearby schools and other local people. Despite being familiar with the cultural richness of the region, this was my inaugural experience in gatecrashing a wedding. Instead of carrying a field diary and pen, I arrived at my field site—the wedding hall—with a camera. Having recognized one of the wedding videographers present on the stage, I was introduced to the newly married couple through him. I took the opportunity to explain to them the purpose of my visit, explaining my research intentions. After being introduced to the remaining members of the wedding documentation team,  I spent the rest of the day immersing myself in their world, trying to understand the art of wedding filmmaking. While also maintaining a keen focus on the socio-political backdrop enveloping the wedding stage, recognizing its significance in shaping the narratives captured on film. Throughout this experience in the field, my camera functioned as more than a mere apparatus; it assumed the role of my eyes, serving as both my companion and primary research tool, allowing me to perceive and document the world around me.

Figure 2: A wedding in Malappuram

Furthermore, the presence of the camera in the field, particularly within the male-dominated realm of wedding videography, where I, as a woman, stood among numerous men, sparked curiosity and raised concerns among the wedding attendees. I remember an older woman approaching me, gently grasping my hands, and inquiring, Molum Kalyana photographer aano?[“Are you also a wedding photographer?”] Indeed, as a woman with a video camera on my research site, I found that it served not only as a tool for documenting my thoughts but also underscored the significance of my research topic. It prompted me to question the reasons behind the underrepresentation of women in the profession of wedding videography and to contemplate the potential challenges they might encounter if they did choose to enter this field. The combination of my gender and role as a researcher with a camera became a catalyst for exploring broader socio-cultural dynamics within the context of wedding videography.

Figure 3: A woman in her 80s with her wedding album

Another way through which the camera as an ethnographic tool emerged as a catalyst for my research was during the second phase of fieldwork, which was interviews. Given that the focus is on wedding films, my interviews incorporated the use of archival materials, including old wedding invitation cards, albums, films, VCR cassettes, and similar items. These primary documents served not only to inform my research but also to prompt participants to recall memories of their weddings or those in which they were involved. This elicitation method draws inspiration from the qualitative approach of photo elicitation, which involves using photographs in research interviews (Harper, 2002, p. 13). As Harper (2002) notes, this technique does not necessarily extract more information but rather elicits a different kind of information. This phenomenon was particularly evident during my interviews with older generation women, as I observed the cracks in their voices, the tears in their eyes, or the flow of words whenever they shared pictures from their past. Consequently, photographs emerged as an indispensable component of my research, serving as the link between the past and the present, interconnected through the memories embedded in each image. While most of the videographers I interviewed were men whom I had no prior acquaintance with, the female participants in my research predominantly consisted of my grandmother, mother, aunts, and sisters. Given the close relationship I share with most of them, I consciously had to navigate the complex positions of granddaughter, daughter, cousin, niece, and ethnographer to understand the experiences of women across generations during their wedding day without having biases. Once again, a significant factor aiding in transcending these multifaceted positionalities was the presence of my camera. While I posed questions to my female participants regarding their wedding day experiences as brides, they often responded bashfully, suggesting there was little of note to discuss. However, upon seeking their consent to record the interview, thereby introducing the camera into the interaction, I could distinctly perceive a shift in my role. Instantaneously, from their point of view, I transitioned from the role of a daughter or sibling to that of a researcher. When I questioned my grandmother about her change in demeanour upon the introduction of the camera during our interview, she remarked, “If you’re filming, it’s like one of those proper interviews you see on TV. So I then have to be fully honest with you”. Hence, the presence of the camera assumes pivotal significance. It not only catalyzes the interview process but also heightens its visibility. In other words, the camera functions as a bridge, allowing the researcher to move beyond the intimate connections shared with participants and approach their stories with a greater degree of objectivity, facilitating a more unbiased production of anthropological knowledge.

Figure 4: Image of the author with a camera during fieldwork

In conclusion, this article has delved into my personal experience with photographic fieldwork to discuss how the experience of taking and talking about visual images with my interlocutors formed a basis for what I was later to consider anthropological knowledge. It further recounts how the use of a video camera aided my attempt to gain an insight into the male-dominated world of wedding documentation and reflects on how filming may help the researcher think about how ways of seeing are framed by practice.

References:

Bandauko, E., & Arku, G. (2023). The Power of a Camera: Fieldwork Experiences From Using Participatory Photovoice. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231154437

Banks, M. (2001). Visual Methods in Social Research. London: Sage.

Harper, D. (2002). Talking About Pictures: A Case For Photo Elicitation. Visual Studies, 17(1),  13–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/14725860220137345

Pink, S. (2001). Doing Visual Ethnography: Images, Media, and Representation in Research. London: Sage.

***

Aiswarya P. Raj, a recent postgraduate from IIT Gandhinagar with a Master’s in Society & Culture, is a budding social scientist and visual storyteller. She previously completed her undergraduate studies in English Literature at Hindu College, University of Delhi. With a keen interest in Visual Anthropology and Media Studies, Aiswarya’s research explores the everydayness of photography and the beauty in the mundane. She is interested in documenting the calmness within the chaos of society, with her videos often evoking a sense of nostalgia. Currently, Aiswarya is working as a Project Associate at the Centre for Public Policy Research in Kochi, focusing on film studies.


[1] In colloquial Malayalam, “paavam” is used to refer to someone who is poor, innocent, or naive.

By Jitu

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments