ABSTRACT
The confessional tale (Van Maanen, 2011) – in which researchers reflect on fieldwork and their research findings in ways that illuminate researcher subjectivity – is a popular genre in ethnographic writing. They are “confessional” because the authors open up about lingering concerns relating to analytical decisions, relationships in the field, or the portrayal of participants. They are almost always written in the first person, directing the attention away from the participants and towards the researcher. Confessional tales are important contributions in the pantheon of ethnographic writings because they reveal precisely what more objectivist accounts obfuscate – how frustrating, difficult, and confusing the research process can be, especially when given the benefit of time and reflection. I do not want this chapter to be a confessional tale but I agree with Ramanathan (2011) that it is increasingly crucial for language planning and policy (LPP) scholars to openly question the ethics that motivate our decisions, rendering transparent the typically gauzy façade that shrouds our researching-texting practices. That goal motivates this chapter.
