This joint paper addresses the methodological and epistemological nuances of conducting memory-focused research in Central and Eastern Europe as a researcher originating either from the region being studied, or outside of it. The authors share their contrasting experiences of researching the memory production of two different countries in relation to their displaced communities: Dr Kay, a Briton, researched the Hungarian national community in Romania, while Dr Venzlauskaitė, a Lithuanian – of the Lithuanian diaspora in the US and Russia. In doing so, they raise questions on the researcher's positionality, cultural competence and confidence, and most importantly, the insider/outsider dilemma. Reflecting on their doctoral research, they question whose stories we find ourselves telling – the communities' or our own?
As a geographical space accommodating states and cultures often converging and clashing over political, sociocultural and historical issues, Central and Eastern Europe can be a challenging site of research on mnemonic landscapes and ethnonationalism. Taking into account the large, mobile diaspora populations creates additional layers of complexity for the individual, collective and cultural memories coming from the communities. This often leaves researchers with much to unpack from the field, but may not leave time to investigate another significant layer of meaning: that of the researcher's own individual and cultural memory.
This paper considers (and invites reflection from the wider scholarly community working with historical and cultural memory) the following: How does our own cultural and mnemonic "baggage" inform our abilities and disabilities to connect with cultural communities and communicate their stories in research? Is an alignment of cultural memories beneficial or detrimental to the way we hear and tell participants' stories? How do our own perceived positionalities (as well as that perceived by our participants) inform our potential to oversee our role as agents voicing and representing our subjects' narratives?
As a component of the production of knowledge, positionality as a researcher has become an essential part of social science research (Gawlewich, 2014, Corlett & Marvin, 2019). The notion of recognized positionality and reflexivity has come to be expected of researchers, especially those situating themselves at the constructivist/interpretivist end of the paradigmatic spectrum (Holmes, 2014). In acknowledging the importance of reflexivity on multiple categories and circumstances, our positionality is in constant flux vis-à-vis repertoires of data collection and analysis. The authors reflect on their experiences both in the field and the qualitative data obtained from it to look at the possible constellations of emic and etic positionality within the research process.
