Discussing, analyzing the accounts, experiences, given meanings of crisis lived by researcher provoked by unconventional fieldwork, methodologies, writing strategies, conduct; Exploring interpersonal conflicts(ex.pairs) with institutions, publishers, research subjects,other forms of 'establishment'
Crisis and conflicts are to be explored in several levels of our discipline:
In the fieldwork: the choice of the terrain, the obtained feedback (by the pairs, or research subjects), in the employment, in methodology, in the training.
In the training, in the public image of the discipline, between disciplines within anthropology; in the employment; in accountability of researchers and their institutions; in cumulate knowledge based beyond the trends, fads, and fragmentation of recent decades;
Between laboratories and universities (concurrence); endogenous/exogenous researches; interpersonal and personal relations: between individuals: research subjects, colleagues.
We are interested in individual's- anthropologist's accounts, work, experiences and examples (of their own of fellow researchers) to establish a discussion and analyze how they face critic by their pairs, the institutions they belong, the conflict situation they encounter due to their choices of field, method, or data collecting, etc. The manner of these researches how they represent, imagine themselves, as individuals facing constant struggle; the meaning given to them, the 'public image' in creation. These experiences enter rarely in the written accounts of an anthropologist. The aim is to hear and discuss field notes, findings and experiences putting the researcher in a multidimensional crisis - ethical, professional, methodological, moral, etc. Is the discipline undergo a croissant pressure from the behalf of pairs, institutions, publishers, research 'subjects', competition, scholars from other disciplines, scholar traditions, etc? What is the reasoning employed to cope with these difficulties, conflict situations, what are the temptations one faces?