Misunderstood, misrepresented, contested? Anthropological knowledge production in question

Mosse, David

Abstract

This article draws out some of the implications of the fact that what anthropologists claim to know, or want to say, is unavoidably and in complicated ways bound by the ethics of involvement, detachment, and institutional location. I will first consider the increasingly common practice of circulating the output of anthropological research within the social context of its fieldwork, among the various research participants and interlocutors. Second, I will try to account for the sometimes negative reception of ethnographic accounts, especially where the research has focused on organizations (e.g., NGOs), activists, or others professionally concerned with public representations of their work. Third, I will reconsider the notion of “speaking truth to power” by pointing to the unacknowledged power of ethnographic description. Finally, I will suggest that ethical concerns are generated as much by thetheoretical framing of research as by fieldwork practice, and that these are matters of choice rather than inherent in the ethnographic method.

Citation

Mosse, D. (2015). Misunderstood, misrepresented, contested? Anthropological knowledge production in question. Focaal: Journal of Global and Historical Anthropology, 72, 128-137. https://doi.org/10.3167/fcl.2015.720111

• Journal Article Type: Article
• Publication Date: Jun 1, 2015
• Deposit Date: Nov 5, 2015
• Print ISSN: 0920-1297
• Electronic ISSN: 1558-5263
• Publisher: Berghahn Journals
• Peer Reviewed: Peer Reviewed
• Volume: 72
• Pages: 128-137
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.3167/fcl.2015.720111