Paper short abstract:

The process of anthropological knowledge production is frustrating because our research agendas are rightly imposed upon by the ethnographic realities we encounter in the field. These unanticipated and unplanned for frustrations can become the most productive spaces of our research if we let them.

Paper long abstract:

The relationship between the messy practicalities of fieldwork and the final production of anthropological knowledge is one that I was optimistic but naive about when I set out for the Papuan highlands. Although there is a significant literature on fieldwork practicalities and on the process of writing ethnography, the ways they relate to each other are rarely front and centre for students preparing for fieldwork. This paper explicitly examines that relationship by focusing in on "messy moments" in my fieldwork, the frustrations they engendered and the productive spaces that wouldn't have come about without them. Instead of tidying up the tale, I use specific examples from my research to explore how the frustrations came about, why they occurred and how they led to specific results. I question whether they could, or even should, have been avoided, and present their results - the ethnographic data that would not have existed if I had been able to stick to my original research plan. Situating my approach as ethnographic determinism (Sillitoe, 2003, 2010) I argue that the realities of fieldwork are such that our research agendas should be imposed upon by life in the field and that the consequent frustrations can be productive. The more we can be explicit about these realities, the better prepared students will be to face and deal with them in the field. In conclusion, this paper, by examining rather than hiding the "messy moments" of my fieldwork, sheds light on the ways that anthropological knowledge production is frustrating, but powerfully so.