Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Multimodal Ethnography in/of/as Postcards

2020; Wiley; Volume: 122; Issue: 3 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1111/aman.13435

1548-1433

Mascha Gugganig, Sophie Schor,

Museums and Cultural Heritage

American AnthropologistVolume 122, Issue 3 p. 691-697 MULTIMODAL ANTHROPOLOGIESOpen Access Multimodal Ethnography in/of/as Postcards Mascha Gugganig, Corresponding Author Mascha Gugganig [email protected] Technical University Munich Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorSophie Schor, Sophie Schor University of Massachusetts AmherstSearch for more papers by this author Mascha Gugganig, Corresponding Author Mascha Gugganig [email protected] Technical University Munich Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorSophie Schor, Sophie Schor University of Massachusetts AmherstSearch for more papers by this author First published: 24 August 2020 https://doi.org/10.1111/aman.13435AboutSectionsPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL INTRODUCTION As ephemera, postcards are often dismissed as unworthy objects for scholarship. For anthropologists, historians, and other scholars, they have long been considered "low" culture and insignificant, lacking the effective trendsetting status of newspapers, being an unreliable systematic source of data (due to their dispersive nature), or being written off as a personal and individualized form of communication with no larger social ramifications (Ferguson 2005; Peterson 1985). Yet, this neglected status of postcards has undermined a medium that in fact offers creative openings for ethnographic work. In this essay, we expand upon existing literature on postcards' multimodal virtues (Andriotis and Mavrič 2013; Hall and Gillen 2007; Rogan 2005) in a more systematic way to highlight engagement with a mundane, though no less complex, colonial medium. Bringing together multimodal approaches in anthropology (Collins, Durington, and Gill 2017; Dattatreyan and Marrero-Guillamón 2019; Dicks, Soyinka, and Coffey 2006; Powis 2017) with the idiom of ethnographic work in/of/as open systems (Fortun 2003), we offer a theoretical elaboration on this visual and tactile medium by attending to the focus (of), context (in), and method (as) of postcards (Fortun 2003, 172). Based on an open call for postcards,1 this essay also relates to the online special section "Multimodal Postcards" that presents seven projects using postcards in innovative ways. This special section (Schor and Gugganig 2020) includes contributions by (in alphabetical order): Mascha Gugganig (2020), Anna Harris and colleagues (2020), Charisma K. Lepcha (2020), Nicola Levell (2020), Tony and Gareth Page (2020), Sophie Schor (2020), and Martina Volfová (2020). This essay offers a brief summary of the origin of postcards and their role as research subjects. We go on to elaborate how ethnography in/of/as open systems resonates with multimodal approaches in anthropology. Subsequently, we introduce multimodal ethnography in/of/as postcards and conclude with a discussion of how such approaches may encourage scholars to open up spaces for more experimental formats. ORIGIN OF, AND RESEARCH ON, POSTCARDS Postcards have served many functions over time—as souvenirs, mementos, methods of communication, modes of domination, or avenues of resistance. During the Golden Age of postcards (1900–1914), at the height of their popularity, two hundred billion to three hundred billion postcards were produced and sold, turning into a widely used communication medium before the use of the telephone (see Ferguson 2005, 170; Rogan 2005, 18). In tandem with an emerging global tourism industry, the Golden Age turned the picture postcard into a tool of consumer culture (Goldsworthy 2010; Urry 1990), which also perpetuated exoticizing, and at times racist, depictions of faraway places and people (Albers and James 1988; Alloula 1986; Waitt and Head 2002). Postcards in fact served colonial ends by both providing a physical souvenir that traversed between the colony and the metropole and by disseminating images of the Other as seen by the colonizer. Academics have long held a prejudice against postcards, for two main reasons. First, the postcard was considered a banal expression of popular culture (Ferguson 2005). Only in the postmodern era, when (visual) representation became a prime focus of research, did scholars start to pay more attention to postcards' depictions and underlying messages (Ferguson 2005; Moors and Machlin 1987; Peterson 1985). Ever since, scholars have attended to the social (Fraser 1980), colonial (Albers and James 1988), economic (Kohn 2003), linguistic (Östman 2004), aesthetic (Kelly 2004), and cultural (Rogan 2005) cosmos that postcards are both embedded in and reflect. For instance, through a compiled "album" (and critique) of French postcards of Algerian women, highlighting their colonial and gendered gaze, Alloula (1986, 4) illustrates that the colonial postcard "marks out the peregrinations of the tourist, the successive postings of the soldier, the territorial spread of the colonist." Goldsworthy's (2010, 165) postcolonial critique of Moroccan postcards demonstrates how postcards were also spaces of resistance and ambiguity, such as when racist depictions were combined with "anti-colonial messages." Second, and related to this, the postcard gained little interest with its status as an "unclear genre" that seemed difficult to analyze: people's written messages (the content) often did not "match" the postcard image (the visual representations of a place, people, or a subject) (Andriotis and Mavrič 2013, 31; Ferguson 2005; Rogan 2005, 8; Schor 2020). As a result, researchers focused on one modality only, mostly the image, and thereby often mimicked their research subjects' proclivity—for example, postcard collectors—who paid less attention to written messages (Baldwin 1988; Hall and Gillen 2007). Yet even in the Golden Age, postcards were popular exactly because of their enmeshed functions as collectible, ritual communication, and (visual) gift exchange, making them objects entangled in relationships, which formed around these diverse uses (Rogan 2005, 18). In fact, the purportedly messy virtue of postcards—as data, as medium, as dispersed material object, as methodological tool—shows that they are a "meeting place for a variety of cultural phenomena" (Östman 2004, 427). Descriptions of postcards as the "incredible chameleon," with their "chimeric nature" (Ferguson 2005, 168, 183) and "enmeshed functions" (Rogan 2005, 1), indicate a shift in academic research toward an analysis of postcards as documentary image, correspondence, photographic print, advertisement, or ephemera—that is, as "multifaceted objects" (Andriotis and Mavrič 2013, 35). This interplay between printed words and images, handwritten messages, stamps, and the overall context of postcard use as personal communiqués, items shared among collectors, or virtual artifacts (Gillen 2013; Gillen and Hall 2011; Hall and Gillen 2007; Östman 2004) encompasses the rich multifaceted and multimodal dimensions of postcards that this essay expands upon. There have been a few experimental engagements with postcards as research method (Adjin-Tettey et al. 2008; Allen and Rumbold 2004),2 and in another publication (Gugganig and Schor 2020) we detail the pedagogical possibilities of teaching with postcards. In the following, we provide a theoretical and methodological elaboration on the visual and tactile media of postcards by connecting the idiom of ethnographic work in/of/as open systems (Fortun 2003) with multimodal anthropological approaches (Collins, Durington, and Gill 2017; Dattatreyan and Marrero-Guillamón 2019; Powis 2017). MULTIMODAL ETHNOGRAPHY IN/OF/AS OPEN SYSTEMS Taking up the legacy of the reflexive turn in the 1980s (Marcus and Fischer [1986] 1999), Kim Fortun (2003, 172) attests that anthropology is best understood as "operating within an open system, as an open system, and as the study and production of open systems" (emphasis in original), pointing to the context, focus, and method of anthropological work. The ethnographer "recognizes that because she operates in an open system, the experimental system that she designs for her research must itself produce the object of her study. That object, in turn, is not stabilized at the outset. It gathers contours, turns in on itself, mutates into something unexpected" (187; emphasis in original). Anthropology is always situated inside a complex world, which demands an ethic of openness: by acting as openly as our social lived-in worlds in order to produce work of that complex world (see also Pandian 2018). There are thus several parallels to scholarship on multimodal anthropology (Collins, Durington, and Gill 2017; Dattatreyan and Marrero-Guillamón 2019). First, there is a recognition that complexity and an ethic of openness condition each other, in that the former demands the latter, and the latter allows for comprehending the former. Despite rigid definitions of ethics, such as institutional settings replete with ethical dilemmas (Collins, Durington, and Gill 2017, 142), or closed publishing infrastructures (Pandian 2018), an ethic of openness in anthropology implies recognizing the complexity of ethnographers' lived-in worlds (Fortun 2003, 172; Pandian 2018). Multimodal approaches capture this ethic of openness by transgressing institutional and discursive boundaries within and beyond academia and (neo)colonial orders. Second, ethnographies in/of/as open systems show that "results" of research studies "can feed back into the larger system within which the study is carried out, provoking shifts and displacements" (Fortun 2003, 176). This resonates with multimodal approaches that focus on the "afterlife of anthropologically intended media [that implicate] the relationships between anthropologists and networked publics formed through dissemination, as well as the discussions and debates the media engender" (Collins, Durington, and Gill 2017, 142). In other words, both concepts recognize the inherent need for open(-ended)ness of ethnographic practice, as is evident in the increase in various media practices by contemporary anthropologists. Finally, there is a recognition that more experimental, inventive, collaborative, and reflexive work is needed. Dattatreyan and Marrero-Guillamón (2019, 222) make clear that multimodality's openness is connected to scholars' willingness to innovate the production of knowledge—that is, the academic text—and to shatter exclusive forms of expertise. Indeed, the linear and singular format of an academic text hardly lends itself to epistemic diversity (for exceptions, see Cerwonka and Malkki 2007; Fischer 1986; Paper Boat Collective 2017). If one thinks of a book as something similar to a newly built house, it is the architect rather than the demolition and construction crew that receives accolades—a professional distinction between end product and process that is inherent to academia, where "architectural" features (the final house/book/article) is given recognition (Gugganig 2011; see also Chio 2017). We see the similarities between multimodality and openness to be an important part of interrogating knowledge-production methods and cultivating an ethnographic sensibility for reflexivity and ethics (see Pachirat 2017). Working with postcards ethnographically presents a material and discursive case for a multimodal anthropology in/of/as open systems (Fortun 2003). THE OPEN SYSTEM IN/OF/AS POSTCARDS Reconfiguring Fortun's quote above, the ethnographer recognizes that because she operates in an open system [of postcards], the experimental [postcard] system that she designs for her research must itself produce the object of her study [the postcard, and resultant postcarding]. That object, in turn, is not stabilized at the outset. It gathers contours, turns in on itself, mutates into something unexpected [e.g., a new postcard/new genre]. (Fortun 2003, 187) The ethnographer may attend to one of these aspects while never losing sight of their interrelatedness: (1) the postcard as a focus of research; (2) the context of the postcard as open system, or the (material and discursive) openness of postcards before they became stabilized objects; and (3) the design or research methods that reflect this openness. Since comprehending a complex world requires acting as openly to produce work of that complex world, we do not suggest that this is a linear process. Contemporary ethnographic engagements with postcards often reflect several of these categories. In the following, we reference the contributions to this special section (Schor and Gugganig 2020) as we elucidate the three parameters by Fortun (2003), which we adapt as ethnography of postcards (focus), ethnography in postcards (context), and ethnography as postcards (method). ETHNOGRAPHY OF POSTCARDS (FOCUS) Postcards have generally served as the focus of academic research, with scholars analyzing the image or the message. One way to engage in this work is by a seemingly simple analysis of postcards as objects. Yet the tactile experience of the multimodal virtues of the postcards—the chosen card, the stamps, the handwriting, the mobility, and the medium—also turns a written correspondence and personal memorabilia into a stage for ethnographic practices. In this way, engagement with postcards mirrors ethnographic work in its wider, open context. For instance, Martina Volfová's (2020) personal essay on her great-grandparents' correspondence is a story of postcards as wartime correspondence, yet it is also a story of a wartime love, a personal connection, and the tactile experience of the multimodal virtues of the postcards. The focus on the postcards provoked other revelations, such as Volfová's connection to her homeland and her role as ethnographer in a distant place, thus exemplifying an ethnography of postcards, and one in postcards, in its wider context. Charisma Lepcha (2020) uses Indian postcards as a source of information, and thereby as an entry point to test the malfunctioning postal system and an opening to larger insights through a colonial analysis. Part of the same open system, the object of research, the postcard, becomes the probing point for understanding its structural context, the postal system; hence, ethnographic research of postcards is often interrelated to ethnographic research in postcards. Her critique of the contingent nature of the postal system is also an important counterpoint to our argument that postcards can be considered legitimate sources for ethnographic work due to their unreliable nature. Lost postcards trouble the linear processes of creation and circulation of knowledge: What happens when something is missing? Here, absence can be just as informative as presence. Such openness also serves as a symbolic reading of ethnographic research, where reliance on and access to data—be it postcards, a lost interview, sacred knowledge—are never a given but are part of the complex terrain of ethnography (see Gugganig 2020). ETHNOGRAPHY IN POSTCARDS (CONTEXT) Ethnography in postcards takes as a starting point the context, such as the postal system, communication practices—what Östman calls "postcarding" (2004)—or the material and discursive "opening up" of postcards by repurposing it for new modes of engagement. Harris et al.'s (2020) collaborative historic-ethnographic project "Making Clinical Sense" (Harris et al. 2019) engaged three ethnographers in different locations where postcards created a "meeting place" (Östman 2004, 427) to exchange reflections on their fieldwork. In a similar collaborative research project stretching over far distances, Endre Dányi, Lucy Suchman, and Laura Watts (forthcoming) created postcards that in later analytical stages formed props for katachresis, forcible juxtapositions of existing themes to generate new insights (n.d.; see also Ojala 2019). Indeed, the parallel between postcards and ethnography is evident in that both carry one world into another (Harris et al. 2020; Pandian and McLean 2017). In a similar way, the postcards that were sent in response to the call for postcards turned into tactile connections to colleagues in the distance, inspirations from conferences, and pieces of decoration (see Figure 1). FIGURE 1Open in figure viewerPowerPoint Gugganig's office table: second postcard from left from a #Colleex workshop, third from left by Charisma Lepcha (see contribution), and postcards by her colleagues Nina Klimburg-Witjes and Nina Frahm from their respective fieldsites (Photograph by Mascha Gugganig). [This figure appears in color in the online issue] Another example of opening up postcards is a correspondence between the brothers Tony and Gareth Page (2020), who send postcards with messages in the dystopian style of English writer J. G. Ballard. In a multimodal sense, they combine the genres of literarature, ethnography, and tourist greetings on conventional postcards. They explore the multimodal nature of postcards by mobilizing touristic images and highlighting the interrelated effect of different writing tools, stamps, and other material traces of mail delivery (see Gillen 2013). Their postcards can be read like a fragmented yet cohesive novel, perhaps a genre of postcard-fictive ethnography. Creating new genres resonates also with efforts where postcards are used as a site of resistance (see Goldsworthy 2010). In the project "Postcard Protest," a bookstore invited customers to share their thoughts on the current US politics on a postcard to the White House (see Figure 2). Postcards are here "opened up" both in a material sense (the graphic cues of the word "RESISTANCE" that play with a tourist-postcard aesthetic) and in a discursive sense (turning a communication medium for tourists into a citizen tool for political communication). FIGURE 2Open in figure viewerPowerPoint Danielle Gendron participates in the "Postcard Protest" at the Dog Eared Bookstore, San Francisco, December 2017. (Photograph by Mascha Gugganig) [This figure appears in color in the online issue] Elizabeth Egan started a similar project, "@100postcards,"3 where she sent a postcard a day to the White House and posted it on Instagram (Egan 2019). Egan thus makes use of the semi-public ambiguity of the postcard that turns into a multimodal feature; she opens up the medium for conversations among various postcardists (sender, postwoman, etc.) and across other (social) media (see Östman 2004)—not unlike Lepcha's tweets to the India post office and Schor's use of Instagram as a public gallery (2020). ETHNOGRAPHY AS POSTCARDS (METHOD) Using postcards as a methodical tool is another approach that may be used for research dissemination. Levell's (2020), Schor's (2020), and Gugganig's (2020) contributions expand the methodological toolbox by employing postcards as research communication, as fieldnotes, and as community-outreach tool. As open systems and multimodal approaches, the projects were "not stabilized at the outset" (Fortun 2003, 187) but took on meaning through enacted encounters that could not have been foreseen (Dattatreyan and Marrero-Guillamón 2019, 5). Instead of a PowerPoint presentation, Levell created postcards as a research-dissemination tool, which highlighted the postcard's multimodal identity when her audience interpreted both the subject matter and its (postcard) form simultaneously (Levell 2020). Similarly, Gugganig produced twelve postcards for her traveling exhibition "Hawaiʻi beyond the Postcard," based on photographs and interview quotes from her ethnographic research (Gugganig 2020). As conceptual postcolonial critique (Mamiya 1992), she "opened up" the postcard by printing interview quotes on the glossy side and images on the matte side. Visitors were then invited to write classic postcards that she subsequently sent to the next location of the exhibition, which thereby gathered contours along the way, mutating into unexpected dialogues also between visitors that never met. In contrast to an ethnography of postcards, this contribution presents postcards as method, highlighting and using the "openness"—or unreliability—of national postal services and the materiality of postcards themselves. If ethnographic research serves to better understand not only what people say they do but more so what they actually do, then postcarding is a manifestation of this tension between description/representation and praxis. This is best exemplified by the potential for a postcard's "bizarre interpolation" (Adjin-Tettey et al. 2008, 15)—that is, the relationship between image and unfitting message. For example, a 1911 postcard shows a man in an electric chair and bears the sender's message, "I have been gardening all this week" (Moran 2005: 18; see also Kelly 2004). Schor's project "Greetings from the [un]Holy Land" plays with this "bizarre interpolation" between idealized tropes and lived realities, which also reflects ethnographic research practice (Schor 2020). By sending (and posting online) twenty-one postcards from Jerusalem to recipients outside of Israel and Palestine, she questions established narratives in a conflict zone by contradicting romanticized tourist images with written texts that encapsulate daily witnessed violence. The postcards serve as an ethnographic artifact and open up a conversation between images and annotations; they become multivalent fieldnotes. These projects highlight multimodal invention, as they are not about "a pre-existing 'thing,' 'idea,' or 'practice' to be presented" but about "enact[ing] encounters in which the unexpected, the unforeseen, and the otherwise may be coproduced" (Dattatreyan and Marrero-Guillamón 2019, 5). These tensions can prove fruitful footholds for ethnographic methods. CONCLUSION For ethnographic work, postcards are "good to think with" as both ethnography and postcards carry one world into another (Harris et al. 2020; Pandian and McLean 2017). Just as ethnography is an open system, postcards are malleable—and, as such, are reflective of sociocultural realities. They appear in a variety of forms, genres, and discourses—and, as such, offer a multimodal analytical lens. Counter to images of postcards as anachronistic, cliché, or hard to "contain," we argue that it is the postcards' virtue as open, semi-public, and variegated media that makes them conducive to multimodal engagement, inventive forms of analysis, and reflective modes of critical research. We highlight here the (interrelated) dimensions of focus, context, and method of postcards, and thus ways they can be a site for ethnographic engagement as an open system. If we focus on the postcard, it can offer insights, just as when we engage with a specific topic we wish to comprehend ethnographically. The context of postcards invites us to conceive of them as an open system, with its various material and discursive dimensions. Playing with these dimensions bears much potential for creating new methodical approaches, and potentially new genres. Feedback for our works has been overwhelmingly positive, suggesting that people both inside and outside academia are curious about more diverse forms of intellectual engagement and dissemination. Yet, as many other scholars point out (Powis 2017; Willim 2017), the lack of a categorical home for multimodal works like these have left us with a sense that more institutional work is needed to recognize the exclusionary nature of classic knowledge-production formats in academia. This collection of works speaks to an anthropology invested in multidirectional exchanges, and with it to the need to create viable review frameworks for such multimodal work (Chio 2017; Dattatreyan and Marrero-Guillamón 2019, 225). Jenny Chio (2017) rightly attests that multimedia scholarship requires us to ponder on whether the "end product" or intelligibility of a piece of work counts, including emotional labor. Throughout a recent stay in our respective "fields," we sent postcards to each other, capturing reflections into each other's corners of the world that offers a tactile form of collaboration and connection.4 It brought us back to the semi-public virtue of postcards, and the question of whether they should be included here as well. [Fig. 3 & 4] Opting with the private side of the postcard, and thus with not reprinting them here, "[Fig. 3 & 4]" is a reminder that not all postcard projects, or all knowledge for that matter, is inherently destined to be public/published (Fujii 2016; Pachirat 2015). Returning to the deep intelligibility that Chio (2017) speaks of, postcards may provide an opening for issues, concerns, feelings, or preliminary thoughts in ethnographic fieldwork and within an academic system that has long determined norms for what is an acceptable format of research. We thus encourage more engagement with the so far unexplored ethnographic worlds of postcards. Acknowledgments We would like to thank all the contributors to this special section. Mascha Gugganig would also like to thank the #Colleex collective, a collaboratory for ethnographic experimentation, for supporting the Call for Postcards, both on their website and at their conference "Ethnographic Experimentation Fieldwork Devices and Companions" in Lisbon, July 13–15, 2017. She would also like to thank Gregory Gan who created custom-made postcards that in times of the corona pandemic are finally finding use. Notes 1 The call was kindly supported by #Colleex: https://colleex.wordpress.com/colleex-open-formats/postcards-and-ethnography/. Accessed September 22, 2019. 2 See also the collaborative research project "Relocating Innovation: Places and Material Practices of Future-Making," where three researchers developed thirty-five postcards as mode of exchange. https://sand14.com/archive/relocatinginnovation/download/. 3 https://www.instagram.com/100postcards/. Accessed May 19, 2020. 4 Both authors never met in person, but connected through the call for postcards. REFERENCES CITED Adjin-Tettey, Elizabeth, Gillian Calder, Angela Cameron, Maneesha Deckha, Rebecca Johnson, Hester Lessard, Maureen Maloney, and Margot Young. 2008. "Postcard from the Edge (of Empire)." Social & Legal Studies 17 (1): 5– 38. Albers, Patricia C., and William R. James. 1988. "Travel Photography: A Methodological Approach." Annals of Tourism Research 15 (1): 134– 58. Allen, Jan, and Jean Rumbold. 2004. "Postcard Conversations: A Dialogue about Methodology." Qualitative Research Journal 4 (2): 100– 142. Alloula, Malek. 1986. The Colonial Harem. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Andriotis, Konstantinos, and Mišela Mavrič. 2013. "Postcard Mobility: Going beyond Image and Text." Annals of Tourism Research 40: 18– 39. Baldwin, Brooke. 1988. "On the Verso: Postcard Images as a Key to Popular Prejudices." Journal of Popular Culture 22 (3): 15– 28. Cerwonka, Allaine, and Liisa H. Malkki. 2007. Improvising Theory: Process and Temporality in Ethnographic Fieldwork. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Chio, Jenny. 2017. " Guiding Lines." Cultural Anthropology website, May 2. Accessed September 18, 2019. https://culanth.org/fieldsights/guiding-lines. Collins, Samuel G., Matthew Durington, and Harjant Gill. 2017. "Multimodality: An Invitation." American Anthropologist 119 (1): 142– 46. Dányi, Endre, Lucy Suchman, and Laura Watts. Forthcoming. " Relocating Innovation: Postcards from Three Edges." In Experimenting with Ethnography: A Companion to Analysis, edited by A. Ballestero and B. R. Winthereik. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Dattatreyan, Ethiraj Gabriel, and Isaac Marrero-Guillamón. 2019. "Introduction: Multimodal Anthropology and the Politics of Invention." American Anthropologist 121 (1): 220– 28. Dicks, Bella, Bambo Soyinka, and Amanda Coffey. 2006. "Multimodal Ethnography." Qualitative Research 6 (1): 77– 96. Egan, Elizabeth. 2019. " Pour Your Rage into a Postcard to the President." New York Times, June 22. Ferguson, Sandra. 2005. "'A Murmur of Small Voices': On the Picture Postcard." Academic Research Archivaria Fall JI 60: 167– 84. Fischer, Michael M. J. 1986. " Ethnicity and the Postmodern Arts of Memory." In Writing Culture, edited by J. Clifford and G. Marcus, 194– 233. Berkeley: University of California Press. Fortun, Kim. 2003. "Ethnography in/of/as Open Systems." Reviews in Anthropology 32 (2): 171– 90. Fraser, John. 1980. "Propaganda on the Picture Postcard." Oxford Art Journal 3 (2): 39– 48. Fujii, Lee Ann. 2016. "The Dark side of DA-RT." Comparative Politics Newsletter 26 (1): 25– 28. Gillen, Julia. 2013. "Writing Edwardian Postcards." Journal of Sociolinguistics 17 (4): 488– 521. Gillen, Julia, and Nigel Hall. 2011. " Any Mermaids? Early Postcard Mobilities." In Mobile Methods, edited by M. Büscher, J. Urry, and K. Witchger, 20– 35. London: Routledge. Goldsworthy, Patricia. 2010. "Images, Ideologies, and Commodities: The French Colonial Postcard Industry in Morocco." Early Popular Visual Culture 8 (2): 147– 67. Gugganig, Mascha. 2011. hidden practices. 6 min. Accessed September 29, 2019. https://vimeo.com/24065752. Gugganig, Mascha. 2020. " Traveling Postcards: A Research Exhibition." American Anthropologist website. http://www.americananthropologist.org/postcards/gugganig. Gugganig, Mascha, and Sophie Schor. 2020. "Teaching (with) Postcards: Approaches in the Classroom, the Field, and the Community." Teaching Anthropology 2 (9): 56– 65. Hall, Nigel, and Julia Gillen. 2007. " Purchasing Pre-Packed Words: Complaint and Reproach in Early British Postcards." In Ordinary Writings, Personal Narratives: Writing Practices in 19th and Early 20th-Century Europe, edited by Martyn Lyons, 101– 17. Bern: Peter Lang. Harris, Anna, Andrea Wojcik, Rachel Allison, and John Nott. 2019. " Making Clinical Sense." Accessed September 29, 2019. http://www.makingclinicalsense.com/. Harris, Anna, Andrea Wojcik, Rachel Allison, and John Nott. 2020. "Thumbnail Sketches: Learning the Worlds of Others through Collaborative Imaginative Ethnography." American Anthropologist Website http://www.americananthropologist.org/postcards/harris. Kelly, Veronica. 2004. "Beauty and the Market: Actress Postcards and Their Senders in Early Twentieth-Century Australia." New Theatre Quarterly 20 (2): 99– 116. Kohn, Ayelet. 2003. "Let's Put Our (Post) Cards on the Table." Visual Communication 2 (3): 265– 84. Lepcha, Charisma. 2020. " Postcard Is Not an Accountable Item–Sincerely @Indiapostoffice." American Anthropologist website. http://www.americananthropologist.org/postcards/lepcha. Levell, Nicola. 2020. " Radiating Biographies: In Postcard Form." American Anthropologist website. http://www.americananthropologist.org/postcards/levell. Mamiya, C. J. 1992. "Greetings from Paradise: The Representation of Hawaiian Culture in Postcards." Journal of Communication Inquiry 16 (2): 86– 101. Marcus, George E., and Michael M. J. Fischer. (1986) 1999. " A Crisis of Representation in the Human Sciences." In Anthropology as Cultural Critique: An Experimental Moment in the Human Sciences, edited by G. E. Marcus and M. M. J. Fischer, 7– 16. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Moors, Annelies, and Steven Machlin. 1987. "Postcards of Palestine: Interpreting Images." Critique of Anthropology 7 (2): 61– 77. Moran, Joe. 2005. " Hello, I'm Here and You're There." New Statesman website. Accessed September 18, 2019. https://www.newstatesman.com/node/162713. Ojala, Mace. 2019. " Data Moment, Enacted." Bachelor's thesis, Tampere University. Östman, Jan-Ola. 2004. "The Postcard as Media." Text & Talk—Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse 24 (3): 423– 42. Pachirat, Timothy. 2015. "The Tyranny of Light." Qualitative & Multi-Method Research Newsletter 13 (1): 27– 31. Pachirat, Timothy. 2017. Among Wolves: Ethnography and the Immersive Study of Power. London: Routledge. Page, Tony, and Gareth Page. 2020. " Vacation/Observation/Metafiction: Examples of Postcard Micro-Ethnography." American Anthropologist website. http://www.americananthropologist.org/postcards/page. Pandian, Anand. 2018. " Open Access, Open Minds." Cultural Anthropology website, June 15. Accessed September 18, 2019. https://culanth.org/fieldsights/open-access-open-minds. Anand Pandian, and Stuart J. McLean, eds. 2017. Crumpled Paper Boat: Experiments in Ethnographic Writing. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Paper Boat Collective. 2017. " Introduction: Archipelagos, a Voyage in Writing." In Crumpled Paper Boat: Experiments in Ethnographic Writing, edited by A. Pandian and S. J. McLean, 11– 28. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Peterson, Nicolas. 1985. " The Popular Image." In Seeing the First Australians, edited by Ian Donaldson and Tasmin Donaldson, 164– 80. Sydney: George Allen and Unwin. Powis, Richard. 2017. "Heartened by Iconoclasm: A Few Preliminary Thoughts about Multimodality." American Anthropologist 119 (2): 359– 68. Rogan, Bjarne. 2005. "An Entangled Object: The Picture Postcard as Souvenir and Collectible, Exchange and Ritual Communication." Cultural Analysis 4 (2005): 1– 27. Schor, Sophie. 2020. " Greetings from the [un]Holy Land: A Postcard Project from Israel/Palestine." American Anthropologist website. http://www.americananthropologist.org/postcards/schor. Schor, Sophie, and Mascha Gugganig. 2020. " Special Section on Multimodal Postcards." American Anthropologist website. http://www.americananthropologist.org/postcards/schor-gugganig. Urry, John. 1990. The Tourist Gaze: Leisure and Travel in Contemporary Societies. London: SAGE. Volfová, Martina. 2020. " 'Draze Milovaní. . . . Dearly Loved Ones . . .': Notes from the Front." American Anthropologist website. http://www.americananthropologist.org/postcards/volfova. Waitt, Gordon, and Lesley Head. 2002. "Postcards and Frontier Mythologies: Sustaining Views of the Kimberley as Timeless." Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 20 (3): 319– 44. Willim, Robert. 2017. "Evoking Imaginaries: Art Probing, Ethnography and More-Than-Academic Practice." Sociological Research Online 22 (4): 208– 31. Volume122, Issue3September 2020Pages 691-697 FiguresReferencesRelatedInformation