Interviewing is one of the most common techniques used to conduct qualitative research in the social sciences and humanities. As a result of globalization, researchers increasingly conduct interviews cross-, inter- and intra-nationally. This raises important questions about how differences and sameness are understood and negotiated within the interview situation, as well as the power structures at play within qualitative research, and the role that reflexivity plays in mediating these. What does it mean to interview Black women as a Black woman? How is ethnicity negotiated across various qualitative research encounters? How are differences bridged or asserted in feminist interviewing? These are just some of the questions explored in the chapters in this volume. Drawing on their recent research, the contributors detail their experiences of engaging in qualitative interviewing and examine how they negotiated the various dilemmas they encountered. The contributions challenge some of the assumptions made in early feminist work on interviewing, providing nuanced accounts of actual research experiences. This volume explores the practice and implications of conducting cross-, inter- and intra-cultural interviewing, bringing together researchers from a range of disciplines and countries to describe and analyse both its vicissitudes and its advantages.

Nation building has been a ubiquitous component of American foreign policy during the last century. The United States has attempted to create and sustain nation-states that advance its interests and embody its ideals in places ranging from the Philippines to Vietnam to Iraq. At no time did Washington engage in nation building more intensively than during the Cold War. The United States deemed capturing the loyalties of the vast regions of the globe emerging from colonialism as crucial to the struggle against Communism. To achieve this end it launched vast efforts to carve diverse parts of Asia, Africa, and Latin America into reliable ''Free World'' allies. U.S. officials believed that, by providing the right kinds of resources, they could stimulate economic development and democratization in regions where neither of these phenomena had made significant inroads. This book examines one of the most extensive, costly, and arguably successful of these efforts - South Korea.... Throughout these chapters, I have sought to demonstrate the agency of South Koreans in determining the ultimate impact of the United States on their society. To the extent that the U.S. influence could be called hegemonic, American hegemony was a dialectical process that Koreans played a significant role in shaping. To emphasize this point, I have approached the process of nation building from both sides through the use of American and Korean sources. This analysis makes it clear that the evolution of the South Korea we know today did not entirely reflect the will of Americans or Koreans. It was achieved only through constant negotiation between the two. ----Preface.