Case study informants

In the next phase of my research, I conducted ethnographic fieldwork in Brussels and Berlin to explore more in-depth the multidimensional precarity and more complex issues the survey findings revealed. In order to do this properly, I spend one year observing, participating and following seven case study informants in the Brussels contemporary dance scene. Thereafter, I moved to Berlin to do exactly the same. In the process of selecting case study informants, I constructed profiles for each survey participant who indicated to be willing to partake in the qualitative study. The significant variables, or criteria, for the construction of these profiles were meant as instruments of control over the width of the sample, thus avoiding over- or underrepresentation. Together with Katharina Pewny and Rudi Laermans, I selected a total of fourteen informants on the basis of theoretical criteria (based on the aforementioned studies) and my quantitative data:

firstly, I decided that the gender balance should reflect the slight surplus of women represented in the survey sample in both cities. Hence, I selected three male and four female informants in Brussels and two male and five female informants in Berlin. Age and work experience were a crucial variable: I attempted to create a balance between recently graduated and already well-established informants, but simultaneously I avoided the extremes. My youngest informant was 28 at the start of my fieldwork and my oldest 47.

The majority of my informants were in their mid-thirties, which responds to the average ages as indicated by the survey findings in both cities.

Relatedly, an important question within the selection process inquired into their career status or trajectory: at which point in their career were the possible informants?

What were their work-related plans during the period of fieldwork? Had they received subsidies in the past or were they currently applying for funding? To answer these questions, I had to contact the possible informants personally to inquire further. In addition, I consulted their online biographies and compared. Thus, I was able to find a balance in the degree of work between my case study informants: several had rather empty agendas, some had several dispersed plans and others were quite occupied. I also sought a balance within the type of work the informants would be involved in: would they be working on their own projects, on other people’s projects, on commissions, or for a company? While my focus within this research is put on project-based work, I decided to omit exclusively company-based dance artists, but select those who largely work on a project basis, whether or not linked to the subsidy system, and, whether or not as a dancer and/or a choreographer. I was confident to take this route while there were hardly any exclusively company-based dance artists among my survey participants. In any case, some of the informants had been company-dancers in the past or they sporadically still

dance for a company on a project-basis, which also points to the scarcity of long-term contracts within dance companies (which I pointed out earlier, see also: Menger 2014, 136). Many survey participants (and also case study informants) seem to combine dancing for/with a company with other projects. Furthermore, family and children were two essential selection variables to take into account as they may greatly affect one’s socio-economic position: it was my aim to include a variety of cases in terms of marital status, living situation, and parenthood. Six Brussels-based informants were living with their partners (of which all but one work in the arts sector). One informant lived with roommates, but developed a love relationship throughout the fieldwork. In comparison, six Berlin-based informants had a partner during the time of research, however, not all of them lived together with that partner. Again, only one of those six informants had a partner who worked outside the arts sector. The remaining seventh informant did not have a steady partner during my fieldwork. None of the Berlin-based informants were married. The Brussels sample included one married female with two school-bound children, one married male, and one married female with one child who had not yet reached compulsory school age. In Berlin, I was able to involve one male dance artist with two children who had not reached school age yet. In fact, one of which was born just before the fieldwork started. Next, I attempted to maintain a healthy balance in terms of education level and background: the Brussels sample included three informants educated in P.A.R.T.S., whereas the others had backgrounds in contemporary dance (and ballet) in London, United States and elsewhere in Belgium. The Berlin sample contained one informant with a P.A.R.T.S.-background, although this was only one among many art and dance-related diplomas. Two Berlin-based informants were educated in HZT, while others had studied elsewhere in Germany, Amsterdam, or Israel. Listing these backgrounds brings me to another relevant selection criterion, which is nationality.

The inclusion of at least one Belgian, one European and one non-European informant in the Brussels sample and one German, one European and one non-European in the Berlin sample was essential for tracking down legality issues (in terms of paperwork) in a transnational work environment. This resulted in the selection of three American, one Belgian, one Swedish, one Icelandic, and one South-African informant in the Belgian sample and three German, two American, one Belgian, and one Israeli informant in the Berlin sample. Moreover, I took into account the level of mobility of the informant during the fieldwork: it had to remain feasible for me to actually get a chance to follow the informant. Nonetheless, I conducted one Skype-interview due to mobility issues, which, however, turned out to be quite useful as I was able to reach the informant in the middle of a residency process. Furthermore, other selection criteria included multiple jobholding, social security and benefits, and their income levels. I selected informants who combined artistic, para-artistic and non-artistic work activities to a different degree;

some taught more than they created during the period of my fieldwork; some spent much time working side-jobs whereas others avoided them; and so on. In Brussels, I made sure

half of my sample had access to the artist status, in accordance with the survey findings.

Since almost all Berlin-based survey participants were members of the KSK, I decided that I had to include at least one informant who was not a member. Additionally, I selected one informant who explicitly mentioned making use of the living wage benefits (Hartz IV) via the job center. In terms of income levels, I sought a balance between low, medium and relatively high income levels according to the survey results.

First, I selected seven informants in Brussels and only a year later I selected seven complimentary informants in Berlin. I made sure similar features were covered in both samples. After I had selected six informants in Brussels, I decided to add a seventh key informant to the sample. The reason for doing so was to include someone who also works with the issues that inform my research in his/her artistic work or discourse explicitly (i.e. precarity, the socio-economic position of artists, the working conditions in the performing arts sector and late modernity in general, the effects of neoliberalism, and so on). The key informant who would therefore be particularly suitable to exchange thoughts with and bounce ideas off. A year later, I did exactly the same for the Berlin sample. Interestingly, I could verify whether I had selected suitable informants via an indirect snowball effect. In the introductory talks with the selected informants, several informants recommended peers I should talk to, some of whom were already included in my selection – which validated them as suitable informants.

In terms of ethical considerations, I decided from the start that all informants within my fieldwork would remain anonymous. To guarantee the confidentiality of the data, I provided a consent form which explained what was expected of the informants, how the data would be used and who they should contact with questions or complaints (see Annex 3). The form stated that their names would not be published and that anonymity and confidentiality of the data are ensured at each stage of the investigation. However, the informants were made aware of the possibility that some of their peers may recognize them in some of the statements published, even though these statements remain anonymous. While several informants did not have a problem sharing their identities with other informants, I agreed not to do so unless everyone gave consent. As a result, the informants were not informed about their fellow participants, however, they were free to inform others if they wished to do so. While the trajectories of several informants overlapped here and there, it was unavoidable that some informants became aware of each other’s involvement in the case study – which no one seemed to mind. Interestingly, this also allowed a methodological triangulation in a certain sense, since I could double-check narratives about the overlapping trajectories in probing the different perspectives.

It should be noted here that the anonymity guarantee explains why I choose to avoid descriptive specifics about each informant whenever I make use of direct quotations in this book. The inclusion of demographic information would make my informants more recognizable to the reader, while these specifics are mostly not relevant for the points I try to make. Evidently, I do refer to demographic details of an informant whenever this

is necessary for the argument. For example, I do not distinguish Brussels-based or Berlin-based informants unless there is a noteworthy difference and therefore a reason to do so.

Or, as another example, I do not refer to an informant’s age unless I clearly observed an age-effect that I ought to take into account when drawing conclusions.