Persona/Impersonare/Personaggio

I mentioned previously that I felt it necessary to attempt, as best a gregarious and loquacious extrovert can, to enter an alternate zone in my day labor endeavors so that I might best focus on observing the situation in the day labor environment with as little impact from my presence as possible.* So what am I doing and how has that worked out?

Well, I am mostly keeping to myself and generally initiating few conversations.  I aim to be pleasant if glanced at but generally am acknowledging with only a non-verbal response.  I am trying to answer briefly and directly when asked a question.  In short, I’m being something quite different than my natural personality.  I didn’t do “Drama Class” in high school so missed out on the practice.  But, to date, it has been working out pretty well.

In the labor hall, I mostly try to read a book I’ve brought along.  On the job, I have limited my working conversation to job-related matters and when breaks/lunch have been given, have sat by myself rather than join the social chatter that naturally occurs around the often-present cigarette circle.

As for the privacy of my person, that has been a bit more difficult.  My real legal name is on the work orders that send us out each day and on the paychecks we are given at the close of each day.  It is not uncommon for my first name to be called aloud as a part of either process.  The fact that I sign-in in the morning with my nickname, and use the nickname on the job with my co-workers, may turn out to be quite insufficient in the end.  Thus, if this endeavor were a true “deep ethnography” project, I think it would be necessary for one to take stronger measures to separate the real identity of the ethnographer from the identity used on the job.

Over time, if I work on multiple occasions with the same persons, I expect this relative anonymity will be harder to pull off.  We’ll see.

* It should go without saying that, when I say “observing the situation in the day labor environment,” I am refering to using my own time, and not the time of my employer or their customer.  But that may not be obvious to all readers.  So let me state it explicitly:  I believe in doing my work excellently, as if it is not merely for myself.  Thus, my time on my employer’s nickel is their time. I work diligently and aim to have a reasonably greater amount of hustle in my step than what is typical of my coworkers.  I don’t make any written notes during paid-for time; but of course, my mind is sometimes active and observing even while my physical body is putting out for my employer.

Revelation, privacy and effectivity

Daniel Solove has written brilliantly on the game-changing effect of digital technology on privacy here and here (ungated, here).  While he identifies both the benefits as well as the problems of the nearly cost-free spread of digital information via the internet, it is the downside to individual privacy that I want to reflect on this evening with respect to my little day labor ethnography project.

I have a profound interest in the day labor phenomenon, and am personally looking forward to participating in it first-hand as well as blogging about it.

As for the individual privacy of any persons I come in contact with that I might later write about on the blog, I anticipate no problems.  This can be easily handled by changing names, or perhaps obscuring any identifying details, of anyone I mention.  These have been standard practices in quality journalism for decades.

But what about the author, the active player in this little ethographic experiment?  There are definite digital privacy implications for me.  I am blogging pseudonymously, which will help.  But I go into this well aware that there exist myriad technological techniques for “outing” a pseudonymous blogger.  I understand that risk, and accept it.

What about privacy in the day labor workplace?  It is conceivable that some future employer to whom I may apply might not be keen on this rather untypical detour to the standard professional career path.  Furthermore, are there as yet unappreciated downside costs?  Likely.  But if they are unknown it is not clear that they can be planned for and worked around.

I phoned a labor services company today to see what the drill is for showing up and joining the pool for potential laborers.  For formal work through them, I will need to bring my ID and social security number.  Nothing much I can do about privacy with respect to the company HR office.  But I may attempt to become known on the job site, and among my coworkers and foremen, by another  pseudonym, a “nickname.”  I’ve never used a nickname before and I’m not sure I can pull it off in this environment — but that is what I think I will try.  It may not fly but I’m okay with that risk too.

Beyond privacy considerations, there is the question of the effectiveness of my little ethnography project.  If, as is likely, some of my day labor coworkers learn of my prior professional career, and if they also know my name where my digital presence can be fully searched ala Solove’s analysis, might this adversely affect whatever I might learn or not learn?  Sort of a Heisenberg uncertainty phenomena in the social sciences?

Well, it might.  And it might do so to some greater extent than if they were not able to search my “digital person.”  But at the end of the day there is only so much I can do about it with the effort I am willing to expend on the matter.  So I’ll just move forward with this idea:  “Day Labor” on the blog; use a nickname on the job site among the workers and foremen; use my real name with the HR department.  I’m sure I will learn a lot as it all works out.  Or doesn’t.