Centralising lived experience in the field
According to the approach of critical ethnography, the boundary between theory and method can be quite fine because the theory informing the research is also employed as the method (Madison, 2012: 14). As such, the method of analysing how Palestinian women come to be formed as subjects through the Israeli occupation and how women resist that subjectification is informed by Foucault’s theory of power and the analysis itself is operationalised through Foucault’s own ‘methods’ of ‘archaeology’ and ‘genealogy’. I employed critical ethnography as a method in my field research in so far as Madison defines critical ethnography as ‘an ethical responsibility to address processes of unfairness or injustice within a particular lived domain’ (ibid.: 5). In relation to this project, where I embedded my field research in daily life, my commitment to understanding and challenging the daily conditions of life under occupation represents this definition of critical ethnography. I used several ethnographic techniques in my field research, namely the use of narrative interviews and participant observation (Hoggart et al., 2002). Feminist security studies also informed the choice to employ narrative interviews. The second half of this chapter explains this in greater detail.