Appendix 1
182
fraternity and sense of collectivity (Stewart 1992:146, 1989; see also “formal speech” in
Alexandrakis 2003:78). Stewart explains that true speech occurs when the Roma recount
personal hardships and difficulties, and moreover constitutes a discursive space used to
demonstrate trust. For the anthropologist in the field participating in true speech with
Romani consultants, or even participating in an exchange that approximates true speech,
allows access to intimate experiences, personal opinions, and notably, preservation
strategies as conveyed through, in this case, desired initiatives, concerns, requests, and
recommendations. The aim here is not to infiltrate or trick one’s way into private lives
through aping local communication styles, but rather to be sensitive to internal dialogical
conventions, which are in fact performed openly within Romani compounds. The goal is
to foster productive research relationships, and in this case also constructive relationships.
The fact that I am well known to the community has also facilitated my inclusion
and the inclusion of other MERIA personnel during true speech times. When I first
began research with this Romani group I was not permitted to join in these exchanges as I
had not yet gained the trust of the community nor had I yet effectively demonstrated my
singularity and unbiased positioning (non-Athenian and non-Romani, therefore neutral).
Once my identity was known, I began to participate in increasingly important instances of
true speech where individuals with “fresh wounds” would seek solace and where
individuals would strengthen their sense of connection to the Romani collective
following symbolic and actual separations from the group (like time in jail, military
service, invasive hospital treatment, and the like). Rarely do the MERIA meetings
operate at these levels of cultural significance (for example, NGO personnel are not
invited to join the strengthening of the Roma collective); however, having experienced