关系的解读:实地考察作为边界谈判

IF 0.8 4区 社会学 Q3 ANTHROPOLOGY
L. Lombard
{"title":"关系的解读:实地考察作为边界谈判","authors":"L. Lombard","doi":"10.1177/14661381211069670","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Following critiques of anthropologists’ involvement in colonialism and insufficient attention to power, friendship, solidarity, and closeness have become implicit ideals for fieldwork relationships. But distance is also inherent to respectful fieldwork relationships. I therefore argue for greater attention to boundaries—the ways we are able to mutually understand in the midst of, rather than by dissolving, difference and distance—and the labor and finesse that go into negotiating them. Foregrounding boundary work allows for a greater honesty about fieldwork relationships and facilitates the broadness of spirit that is the discipline’s hallmark. It also helps people who are most engaged in boundary work to grapple with it and not see that work as failure, weakness, or their taking “risks.” And it further helps one avoid imposing one’s own social ideals for egalitarianism or intimacy on one’s interlocutors. Boundaries are not the enemy of mutual understanding and integrity; in fact, boundaries facilitate them.","PeriodicalId":47573,"journal":{"name":"Ethnography","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The interpretation of relationships: Fieldwork as boundary-negotiation\",\"authors\":\"L. Lombard\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14661381211069670\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Following critiques of anthropologists’ involvement in colonialism and insufficient attention to power, friendship, solidarity, and closeness have become implicit ideals for fieldwork relationships. But distance is also inherent to respectful fieldwork relationships. I therefore argue for greater attention to boundaries—the ways we are able to mutually understand in the midst of, rather than by dissolving, difference and distance—and the labor and finesse that go into negotiating them. Foregrounding boundary work allows for a greater honesty about fieldwork relationships and facilitates the broadness of spirit that is the discipline’s hallmark. It also helps people who are most engaged in boundary work to grapple with it and not see that work as failure, weakness, or their taking “risks.” And it further helps one avoid imposing one’s own social ideals for egalitarianism or intimacy on one’s interlocutors. Boundaries are not the enemy of mutual understanding and integrity; in fact, boundaries facilitate them.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47573,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ethnography\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ethnography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14661381211069670\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethnography","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14661381211069670","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

随着对人类学家参与殖民主义和对权力关注不足的批评,友谊、团结和亲密已成为野外工作关系的隐含理想。但距离也是相互尊重的野外工作关系所固有的。因此,我主张更多地关注边界——我们能够在差异和距离中相互理解的方式,而不是通过消解差异和距离——以及谈判这些边界所需要的努力和技巧。前景边界工作允许对实地工作关系更加诚实,并促进了作为该学科标志的精神的广博性。它还可以帮助那些从事边界工作的人与之斗争,而不是将这项工作视为失败、弱点或他们在承担“风险”。它进一步帮助人们避免将自己对平等主义或亲密关系的社会理想强加给对话者。边界不是相互理解和诚信的敌人;事实上,界限有助于他们。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The interpretation of relationships: Fieldwork as boundary-negotiation
Following critiques of anthropologists’ involvement in colonialism and insufficient attention to power, friendship, solidarity, and closeness have become implicit ideals for fieldwork relationships. But distance is also inherent to respectful fieldwork relationships. I therefore argue for greater attention to boundaries—the ways we are able to mutually understand in the midst of, rather than by dissolving, difference and distance—and the labor and finesse that go into negotiating them. Foregrounding boundary work allows for a greater honesty about fieldwork relationships and facilitates the broadness of spirit that is the discipline’s hallmark. It also helps people who are most engaged in boundary work to grapple with it and not see that work as failure, weakness, or their taking “risks.” And it further helps one avoid imposing one’s own social ideals for egalitarianism or intimacy on one’s interlocutors. Boundaries are not the enemy of mutual understanding and integrity; in fact, boundaries facilitate them.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ethnography
Ethnography Multiple-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
8.30%
发文量
60
期刊介绍: A major new international journal successfully launched in 2000 Ethnography is a new international and interdisciplinary journal for the ethnographic study of social and cultural change. Bridging the chasm between sociology and anthropology, it is becoming the leading network for dialogical exchanges between monadic ethnographers and those from all disciplines involved and interested in ethnography and society. It seeks to promote embedded research that fuses close-up observation, rigorous theory and social critique.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信