The purpose of this paper is to discuss the tests the author faced in her sociolegal fieldwork on Hawaiian cockfighting, and to draw broader lessons from these tests for other ethnographers of illegal organizations.,The author draws on six weeks of in-depth ethnographic fieldwork and interviewing.,Relational work in ethnographic fieldwork requires skills academia does not always impart – including humility, a sense of humor and patience with yourself and other people. Each test we face is a part of the ongoing process of building these relationships.,As ethnographers, it is sometimes considered “taboo” to tell our stories – to explain our internal and external struggles in the field. This taboo makes a certain amount of sense. After all, we are trying to understand society, not reflect on our own development as people. Yet the taboo is also a pity. For one, it is unrealistic to think that we are “mere observers” whose presence in the field does not affect it. “Scrubbing” ourselves from the field necessarily scrubs out some of our data. It also omits parts of the story that other researchers might find interesting or instructive.

中文翻译：

---

了解违法行为：对社会法律实地考察的考验和信任

本文的目的是讨论作者在其针对夏威夷斗鸡的社会法律实地调查中所面临的测试，并从这些测试中为其他非法民族志的民俗学提供更广泛的经验。作者借鉴了六周的深入的民族志实地考察和民族志田野调查中的关系工作需要学术界并不总是传授的技能-包括谦卑，幽默感以及对自己和他人的耐心。我们所面临的每项考验都是建立这些关系的持续过程的一部分。作为民族志学家，有时将其视为讲故事的“禁忌”，以解释我们在该领域的内部和外部斗争。这种禁忌是有一定道理的。毕竟，我们试图理解社会，而不是反思自己作为人的发展。然而，禁忌也是可惜的。一方面，认为我们是“纯粹的观察者”是不现实的，他们在该领域的存在不会对其产生影响。从现场“清理”自己必然会清理掉一些数据。它还忽略了其他研究人员可能会觉得有趣或有启发性的故事部分。