Paper short abstract:

Based on my previous research experience in Turkey, Armenia and 'elsewhere,' in this paper I speculate on ways to challenge community based approaches and analytical categories of social analysis in research design and post-research writing-up.

Paper long abstract:

It is often the case that anthropologists need to revise their research plans and improvise during fieldwork. It is even more often the case that data collected is ethnographically - as well as theoretically - 're-framed' in writing-up. During my research on contemporary Armenian identity issues in Turkey, Armenia and 'elsewhere,' 'ethnic community' based approaches were proven to be not only extremely limited but also impossible due to the specific context of research.

At one level, this paper specifically focuses on the ways through which fieldwork practicalities - or the anthropologist's first recognition of the failure of the research design? - could lead to substantial changes in relation two major issues: (a) 're-framing' of ethnographic data and 're-clustering' of informants, and (b) 're-consideration' of the theoretical agenda of the entire research project. At another level, this paper is intended to trigger a discussion on how contemporary anthropology could still function as a science of critique despite hidden positivisms within the discipline and its seemingly ongoing reliance on a variety of units of analyses and variables.