Anthropological research is qualitative, emergent, even intuitive. As Ingold proposes, in this regard, it has much in common with arts practice. Anthropologists often follow ‘foreshadowed problems’, joining in with the mundane, interconnected tasks of people’s daily lives in the communities where they are based. Textiles, like other crafts, fit well here, often bringing in ‘women’s work’, domesticity, stories of everyday life and extending across the traditional, the popular, the modern. What this brings (we hope) is texture, quality, a rich description and the voices of our field companions. Collaboration brings an extending and questioning of the boundaries. Where does standard participant observation end and collaboration and making textiles begin? When does practical engagement constitute an intervention? And does intervening, and thus changing local practices in the field, matter? How can collaboration affect the field-site, the textiles and their limits? Who writes the results, whose voices are heard? In my case, early fieldwork ranged from making felt textiles to mundane domestic tasks such as cooking and washing up. But as collaboration, it expanded into sending letters, making work together, cultural exchanges, even symposia. In this article, I draw on case studies from research in Kyrgyzstan and Scotland to explore how collaborations through textile work may (with rigour) enhance inter-community knowledge and communication and produce growth and cumulative understanding.
Pembelajaran Lingkungan Berbasis Kearifan Lokal dengan Model Experiential Learning