Types of Research

I don't really know how to answer the prompt for blog two, which is why I have taken forever to post it. I am interested in becoming a professor, but beyond that I haven't developed a good idea of what I want to do. I am interested in teaching, but haven't really considered a specific type of research I might do. Therefore, I don't really know what type of research is relevant to my interests or career goals. I should probably have a better idea of what I want to do by this point, but I don't. I read pretty much every all of the sample essays, but I don't know where to go with this. I feel like everyone else in the class seems to have a solid idea of what they want to do with their education, but I am still in a place where I'm kind of working that out. Bear with me.

I just re-read the Oates essay and realized something - this writer essentially admits that she has done little research for her writing. She didn't do extensive research in the sense that she ought to have as a biographer, she didn't interview anyone that knew her subject or was an expert on her subject. She also admits that "Some of these are rather more playful/caricatured than serious portrayals of 'real people'. So much of Blonde is obviously fiction, to call it 'non-fiction' would be misleading.(I explain in my preface: if you want historical veracity, you must go to the biographies. Even while perhaps not 100% accurate, they are at least predicated upon literal truth, while the novel aspires to a spiritual/poetic truth.)" I suppose the aim of this essay is to prove that research isn't always necessary in writing. The writer has lots of leeway and can write from whatever viewpoint they want. However, is writing a fiction novel based on a real person ethical? Doesn't Oates have a responsibility as a writer to present factual information about a person rather than creating lies? I'm generally not a non-fiction writer, and I do understand that there are genres like "historical fiction", but I feel as though such genres only serve to perpetuate misconceptions that people have about history, so I wouldn't therefore consider them literature. Although Oates isn't claiming to be a nonfiction writer, I feel like it's easy for people to become confused and by writing something that could be nonfiction, she's leaving a lot of room for speculation. I suppose this interview was done as a way to give this information to readers of her novel, and the way that the interviewer asked questions helped the audience to understand Oates' method of writing,

I did really like the example of ethnographic research. Generally, I think of this type of research as more scientific, where the writer gathers statistics and it isn't very personal or interesting. Livingstone is able to write to her audience (perhaps college students or parents of internet-savvy children looking to gain some understanding,) by using the words of the children she is studying, rather than her own words. She uses three specific children as examples of different ways that children/teenagers use the internet, which in all cases proves her point, "Each is treading a careful line between parent-approved and child-favored activities, raising issues of domestic regulation (and its dependence on national regulation), which balance freedom, safety, and privacy, and each is developing valued expertise—'internet literacy,' though they seem more focused on making the interface work rather than on developing the broader and more ambitious critical and creative literacies that internet use affords." I particularly thought it was interesting when Livingstone would describe a scenario involving a family on the internet. She describes each family member's reactions and ideas, and then discusses the situation in relation to her research. In this way, she incorporates the ideas of her identity group, but also of the people surrounding them. I don't know how I would use this research method, but I do think it's much more interesting than some of the others.