First and third person encounters: Ecquid Novi, theoretical lances and research methodology

Abstract

A number of epistemological skirmishes illustrating the nature of debate, and which comment on broader, often antagonistic, assumptions held by communication science vis-à-vis cultural studies, are discussed with regard to the author's own relationship with Ecquid Novi. The intention is to create a space for culturalist and ethnographic approaches vis-à-vis disciplinary journals known to be cautious with regard to submissions applying unconventional (i.e., from the humanities, or what it calls “subjective”) approaches in comparison to what it holds to be “objective” science. This study examines how productive debate can occur from paradigmatic engagement. The two approaches discussed are communication science and culturalism. Autoethnography is discussed in relation to science, research and questions of what constitutes data, and it is argued that this method applied within culturalism facilitates an “objective” analysis of a “subjective” perspective. This article is not about Ecquid Novi per se, but is about memories of an epistemological relationship between the author and the editor of Ecquid Novi, as well as a particular reading of the journal in a particular historical context.

Keywords:

• Apartheid
• autoethnography
• culturalism
• cultural studies
• communication science
• Ecquid Novi
• natural science