Paper short abstract:

This paper addresses the challenge of inclusion in current anthropological theorizing. It proposes that decolonizing its tenets and widening notions of expertise will create spaces for multiple voices and understandings currently marginal to its epistemological repertoire.

Paper long abstract:

This paper enters into critical conversation about diversity, decolonization and inclusion, to reimagine what anthropology could become. It is based on four year's teaching in a widening participation university and the recognition that inclusion means not just more diverse students, but ensuring that diversity is present in the researchers, lecturers, and theorists. Increasing access is not equal to increasing inclusion (Wilson-Strydom 2011); a deconstruction of accepted approaches is needed.

The absence of theoretical interpretation from those who are often the subjects of anthropological inquiry constitutes a form of 'epistemological violence' (Spivak 1988; Teo 2010), where, as Teo argues, researcher interpretation of evidence can be mistaken for knowledge about others. This can re/produce negative impacts, including misrepresentation and the perpetuation of pervasive power structures. Decolonizing in this context means 'a revaluation of the conventions of analytical thought' (Hesse and Hooker, 2017: 445), where analysis isn't based on pre-existing ideas (Hansen, 1997: 8), but explicitly foregrounds previously classified 'others' as theoretical experts with whom we engage. Hall (1996, citing Derrida) notes that this entails an ongoing dialectic between reversal and emergence, of working with the problem explicitly in order to formulate potential transformations. Engaging with actor-determined theoretical, literary and other texts could be one way to enhance this conversation.

This paper offers that the challenge for diversity entails widening and diversifying the practice of anthropology for its own enrichment and to become more widely meaningful through greater epistemological inclusivity.