Etnoloogilised välitööd religioosses kontekstis Komimaa kristlaste näitel

Ethnological Fieldwork in the Context of a Religious Community, Based on the Example of Christians in the Komi Region The article is based on fieldwork conducted in the Kulymdin district of the Komi Republic in the years 2008–2015. In the article, I reflexively discuss my own position as a non-religious researcher conducting fieldwork among evangelical Christians. The salience of the issues I deal with is not limited to work with religious communities, and probably also comes up in conducting various ethnological research. Yet dealing with the religious sphere has its own special characteristics that see the research confronted with certain questions not only from the subjects, but also from colleagues. On one hand, the article deals with my thoughts, experiences and feelings in studying religious people as a non-believer. I also look at the reactions of the believers toward myself, and analyse how my position as a researcher has affected our interactions. I bring out various ideological points of departure and contextual circumstances that form the backdrop to our communication and have shaped our dialogue. In addition to our various personal experiences and attitudes, the specific sociocultural environment in which our interaction took place has also had a role. I also reflect on various motivations that may have led people to take part in interaction and I deal with the difficulties involved in elucidating my own objectives. As an ethnologist, I have a specific goal when I conduct fieldwork, and later, in presenting the gathered material as a scholar, I take a certain authoritative position. At the same time, the subjects in our mutual interaction also have their own reasons and objectives. The subjects’ opinion of what the result of our interaction should be may be significantly different from mine. The ideal in research and presentation of material gathered in fieldwork is generally considered to be an empathetic yet impartial approach, in spite of the fact that difficulties and limitations are acknowledged in achieving an ‘objective’ view. At the same time, a neutral or impartial approach to religious matters is not acceptable for evangelical Christians. As a researcher, I see Christianity as one possible mode of existence in the world and framework for making sense of that world, yet believers would see such a standpoint as mistaken. The fact that I have not converted and have no conscious desire to do so puts limits on our dialogue. Our interactions are thus not functional for believers in what for them is the most important aspect. Yet I have not voiced scepticism in the evangelical world view, either. Although the believers have doubt in my ability as a non-believer to genuinely understand their experiences, there are a number of reasons that they might see a point in communicating with me. Analysing the motivation and strategies of the believers in the communication between us, I identify three angles of approach: the attempt to force their own means of interpretation on outsiders, the making of discursive compromises to close the conceptual gap between the two parties, and the readiness to leave the entire decision-making competence up to ‘scholars’. My goal in bringing out these perspectives is to analyse the ambivalence in researcher–believer interaction. Enquiry into the polysemantic and multidimensional aspect of our interaction helps us to better see and make sense of ways in which the search for and efforts to establish a certain common ground take place between ethnological fieldwork and religious objectives – which are always to some extent irreconcilable. As our ways of understanding and intuiting the world vary, there will inevitably be a certain cognitive distance between us. By acknowledging the fundamental cognitive differences between us, we can still be understanding of each other and be mutually beneficial partners.