Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
James McMurray
(University of Sussex)
Santiago Ripoll (University of Sussex)
Matthew Doyle (University of Southampton)
Send message to Convenors
- Stream:
- Who Speaks and for Whom?
- Sessions:
- Wednesday 31 March, -
Time zone: Europe/London
Short Abstract:
Anthropology's perpetual concern with ethical reflexivity often leaves the value of the discipline in itself implicit and assumed. This panel will explore notions of that value, our responsibility to it, and how it might be weighed against other goods.
Long Abstract:
The discipline of anthropology is unique, amongst the social sciences, in its ethical reflexivity. Inter alia, its scandals, military complicity, colonial history, activist practitioners, and - in particular - its formal ethical guidelines are persistent focuses of debate and analysis. Balanced against the various ethical positions that inform these discussions is the assumed, and often implicit, value of anthropological research.
This panel will explore notions of what that value is and what responsibility we, as practitioners, have to it. Does anthropology have an 'internal' good (MacIntyre, 1981) which is distinct and exclusive to it, and - if so - how can it be weighed against the other goods to which anthropologists are responsible, such as those of our participants, institutions, or hosts? The panel welcomes both theoretical and ethnographic papers exploring these questions.
Accepted papers:
Session 1 Wednesday 31 March, 2021, -Paper short abstract:
This paper refers to the production of the ethnographic film ‘Now I Am Dead’. It considers the evaluation of anthropology’s history in relation to the filmic encounter. How important are reflections on the discipline’s ethical conundrums to collaborators in the field?
Paper long abstract:
In 2018, I revisited my PhD fieldsite in Ghana for the third time, bringing with me a collaborator from Germany in order to make an ethnographic film based on my research on funerary practices in the town of Peki. The film was intended to address the encounter that is vital to the production of ethnographic knowledge, ultimately making ethnography and the discipline of anthropology its subject. In order to capture this encounter, I as the ethnographer had to be part of the picture, leading the viewer’s gaze and the camera as interface or guide. Ultimately, through a twist of fate which could not be foreseen, I was able to partially ‘switch sides’ and make use of local practices that I had studied for mourning my grandfather.
Now I Am Dead (2018) addresses questions of representation whilst yet being limited to a certain perspective. This paper refers to the production and planning of the film and considers the evaluation of anthropology’s history and moral obligation in relation to the encounter as captured on film. How important are reflections on the discipline’s ethical conundrums and historical shortcomings to collaborators in the field, in tangible situations of encounter? Where are implied ethical discourses limiting people from picking up new concepts or roles from the field, in the moment of encounter? The paper reflects on these questions and proposes approaches that may help to go beyond what de Castro has described as a narcissistic cul de sac.
Paper short abstract:
By deriving insights from my ethnographic research and activist experience with working class communities, I argue that neither anthropology nor activism should be absorbed by another. They should maintain their distinct values and territories for a mutually productive engagement.
Paper long abstract:
The role of the anthropologist who works with disadvantaged groups is an uneasy one. Activist researchers can project their own moral norms and ideals onto the communities they work with and expect them to conform to these values. Self-reflexive anthropological research may relativise these norms and remind the absence of an authentic unified subaltern voice to be romanticised and represented. On the other hand, the complexity anthropology aims to grasp with a longer view may fall short of exigencies of activist campaigns obliged to negotiate certain issues over others so as to fulfill their ethical responsibility to enact more urgent positive change. Despite and perhaps thanks to those tensions, anthropology and activism can still inform each other through productive engagements, by blurring, yet still maintaining the boundaries between their distinct territories. In this paper I make this argument by deriving insights from my own experience as an activist and researcher. I explore the ways in which I navigated some of these tensions during ethnographic research with working class communities. I situate my narrative within the broader debates on anthropology and activism.
Paper short abstract:
This paper aims at presenting anthropology as an exercise of love. As a face to face kind of understanding that promotes heart to heart conversations in post ontological turn worlds
Paper long abstract:
In the light of our recent 'ontological turn' (Holbraad and Pedersen, 2017), which set alterity in motion, and the field's long history with 'the other', I would like to propose that we imagine anthropologies:
1. in terms of love;
2. with Levinas and his ideas of 'face' and 'uniqueness' (Ibid.,1991);
3. exemplified in the way Clastres (1977) helped us imagine our neighbours' faces - and therefore made it possible for us to love them if we want.
4. and beyond us/them divisions.
More than our ethnographic methods and the much needed ethical reflections, what makes anthropologies anthropology is our beautiful intention to create dialogues, to look people in the eye and to tell stories that bring proximity.
The good of what we do lies not only in the plurals and empathy we make possible, but also in the attention and love needed to make sure we don't forget the faces, the people, the other, and what has been shared. The same love is also needed to remember them as neighbours, as equals.
What follows is a very modest, yet very passionate, attempt to imagine possible anthropologies that invite us to 'see heart to heart'.