Paper Short Abstract:

In this paper, I will delve into the complex identities of interdisciplinary anthropologists, which, based on my experiences, appear to become more pronounced during the writing phase than during the fieldwork itself. I will analyse anthropological writing as a nomadic and fluid process. Additionally, I will explore the conflicts and shifts among the various scientific languages used by interdisciplinary anthropologists and will attempt to determine whether finding a fixed identity is possible at the end of the research process.

Paper Abstract:

In this paper I will explore the nuanced and often implicit identities of interdisciplinary anthropologists, which, based on my observations, tend to develop more significantly during the phase of writing a text (based on field research) than during the field research itself. I will examine anthropological writing as nomadic and underdetermined, as it not always results in a clear definition of the researcher's identity at the end of the writing process. To illustrate these points, I will reference my research on Wolica, a village that became part of Poland's capital and began experiencing various modernization processes towards the end of the 20th century. I will talk about the transformation of my writing, which has evolved over the past 6 years; from the initial stage, triggered by Herzfeld's “productive discomfort” (1992), to drawing on material collected and evoked the use of tools of research in action (Bloch 2011), historical research (Filipkowski 2005) and autoethnographic endevours (Kacperczyk 2014). I will discuss the conflicts that may arise during the creation of a text and the transitions between the scientific languages from which an interdisciplinary anthropologist can draw.