Antípoda. Revista de Antropología y Arqueología

Antipod. Rev. Antropol. Arqueol | eISSN 2011-4273 | ISSN 1900-5407

Límites etnográficos: una aproximación antropológica en tres experimentos creativos

No. 47 (2022-04-01)
  • Francisco Martínez
    Tallinna Ülikool - Eesti Kunstiakadeemia, Estonia
https://doi.org/10.7440/antipoda47.2022.05

Resumen

Los futuros de la etnografía están relacionados con cómo nos acercamos a los límites de la práctica etnográfica y de la disciplina antropológica. Dicho acercamiento se puede lograr al plantear nuevos tipos de preguntas y objetos de estudio, con una aproximación a lo que la ciencia a menudo ha dejado sin mirar o decir. También a través de innovaciones metodológicas, por medio de conectar técnicas para investigar relaciones sociales hasta ahora separadas y de construir dispositivos para intervenir el campo. Este artículo explora esta última opción, al proponer un acercamiento a formas creativas de comprender y experimentar la práctica etnográfica. Presenta una reflexión de alternativas metodológicas a través de tres casos metodológicos: exposición, novela etnográfica e instalación performativa. Interesado en repensar los límites disciplinares, el artículo propone nuevas configuraciones etnográficas y formas de conocimiento antropológico, más allá de las académicas. Concluye que, para ello, es necesario expandir las herramientas epistemológicas y relacionales del trabajo etnográfico, además de reconsiderar cómo nuestro trabajo entra en las discusiones públicas. La aproximación al límite —la epistemología de y en el limen— es, por tanto, un ejercicio metodológico y personal.

Palabras clave: antropología contemporánea, disciplinas académicas, epistemología del límite, etnografía experimental, exposición de campo

Referencias

Awad, Isabel. 2006. “Journalists and Their Sources: Lessons from Anthropology”. Journalism Studies 7 (6): 922-939. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616700600980702

Back, Les y NirmalPuwar, coords. 2013. Live Methods. Oxford: Blackwell.

Behar, Ruth. 1996. The Vulnerable Observer. Boston: Beacon Press.

Bendix, Regina F.2020. “Problems Don’t Care about Disciplinary Boundaries”. Anthropological Journal of European Cultures 29 (2): 97-101. https://doi.org/10.3167/ajec.2020.290207

Bendix, Regina, KillianBizer y DorothyNoyes. 2017. Sustaining Interdisciplinary Collaboration. A Guide for the Academy. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Biagioli, Mario. 2009. “Postdisciplinary Liaisons: Science Studies and the Humanities”. Critical Inquiry 35 (4): 816-833. https://doi.org/10.1086/599586

Bird, Elizabeth. 2010. “The Journalist as Ethnographer?: How Anthropology Can Enrich Journalistic Practice”. En Media Anthropology, editado por Erich W.Rothenbuhler y MihaiComan, 301-308. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

Bloch, Maurice. 2005. “Where did Anthropology Go?: Or the Need for ‘Human Nature’”. En Essays on Cultural Transmission, coordinado por MauriceBloch, 1-20. Oxford: Berg.

Borges, Jorge Luis.1969. “El etnógrafo”. En Elogio de la sombra, por Jorge LuisBorges, 59-61. Buenos Aires: Emecé.

Burawoy, Michael. 1991. “Reconstructing Social Theories”. En Ethnography Unbound. Power and Resistance in the Modern Metropolis, por MichaelBurawoy, AliceBurton, Ann ArnettFerguson, Kathryn J.Fox, JoshuaGamson, NadineGartrell, LeslieHurst, CharlesKurzman, LeslieSalzinger, JosephaSchiffman y ShioriUi, 8-27. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Clifford, James. 1986. “Introduction: Partial Truth”. En Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography, editado por JamesClifford y George E.Marcus, 1-26. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Clifford, James. 1981. “On Ethnographic Surrealism”. Comparative Studies in Society and History 23: 539-564. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0010417500013554

CliffordJames y GeorgeMarcus, eds. 1986. Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Cortázar, Julio. 1963. Rayuela. Buenos Aires: Editorial Sudamericana.

Cortés, Catalina. 2020. “Siena’ga”. Visual and New Media Review, Fieldsights, 17 de marzo. https://culanth.org/fieldsights/sienaga

Ehn, Billy y OrvarLöfgren. 2010. The Secret World of Doing Nothing. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Elhaik, Tarek. 2016. The Incurable-Image: Curating Post-Mexican Film and Media Arts,. Edinburgo: Edinburgh University Press.

Elhaik, Tarek y George E.Marcus. 2020. “Curatorial Designs: Act II”. En The Anthropologist as Curator, editado por RogerSansi, 17-34. Londres: Bloomsbury.

Eriksen, Thomas Hylland. 1994. “The Author as Anthropologist: Some West Indian Lessons about the Relevance of Fiction for Anthropology”. En Exploring the Written: Anthropology and the Multiplicity of Writing, editado por Eduardo A.Archetti, 167-196. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press.

Estalella, Adolfo y TomásSánchez Criado. 2020. “Acompañantes epistémicos: la invención de la colaboración etnográfica”. En Investigaciones en movimiento. Etnografías colaborativas, feministas y decoloniales, editado por AuroraÁlvarez Veinguer, Alberto ArribasLozano y Gunther, 145-174. Buenos Aires: Clacso. http://biblioteca.clacso.edu.ar/clacso/se/20201216092831/Investigaciones-en-movimiento.pdf

Estalella, Adolfo y TomásSánchez Criado. 2019. “DIY Anthropology: Disciplinary Knowledge in Crisis”. Anuac 8 (2): 143-165. https://doi.org/10.7340/anuac2239-625X-3636

Estalella, Adolfo y TomásSánchez Criado, eds. 2018. Experimental Collaborations: Ethnography through Fieldwork Devices. Oxford: Berghahn.

Faubion, James D. y George E.Marcus, eds. 2009. Fieldwork Is not What It Used to Be. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Ferguson, James. 2012. “Novelty and Method: Reflections on Global Fieldwork”. En Multi-Sited Ethnography. Problems and Possibilities in the Translocation of Research Methods. editado por SimonColeman y Paulinevon Hellermann, 194-207. Nueva York: Routledge.

Frederiksen, Martin Demant2017. “Joyful Pessimism. Marginality, Disengagement, and the Doing of Nothing”. Focaal 78: 9-22. https://doi.org/10.3167/fcl.2017.780102

Gieryn, Thomas F.1999. Cultural Boundaries of Science: Credibility on the Line. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Hannerz, Ulf. 2016. “Writing Otherwise”. En The Anthropologist as Writer. Genres and Contexts in the Twenty-First Century, editado por HelenaWulff, 254-270 Oxford: Berghahn.

Hannerz, Ulf. 2004. Foreign News: Exploring the World of Foreign Correspondents. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Holmes, Douglas y George E.Marcus. 2005. “Cultures of Expertise and the Management of Globalization: Toward the Re‐Functioning of Ethnography”. En Global Assemblages: Technology, Politics, and Ethics as Anthropological Problems, editado por AihwaOng y Stephen J.Collier, 235-251. Londres: Routledge.

Ingold, Tim. 2021. “In Praise of Amateurs”. Ethnos 86 (1): 153-172. https://doi.org/10.1080/00141844.2020.1830824

Ingold, Tim. 2014. “That’s Enough About Ethnography!”. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory 4 (1): 383-395. https://doi.org/10.14318/hau4.1.021

Ingold, Tim. 2013. Making: Anthropology, Archaeology, Art and Architecture. Londres: Routledge.

Ingold, Tim. 2007. “Anthropology is Not Ethnography”. En Proceedings of the British Academy, editado por RonJohnston, 154: 69-92. Londres: Oxford University.

Jackson, Michael. 2006. The Accidental Anthropologist. Dunedin: Longacre.

Leach, Edmund. 1982. Social Anthropology. Londres: Fontana.

Lury, Celia y NinaWakeford, eds. 2012. Inventive Methods: The Happening of the Social. Londres: Routledge.

MacClancy, Jeremy. 2013. Anthropology in the Public Arena: Historical and Contemporary Contexts. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

Macdonald, Sharon y PaulBasu, eds. 2007. Exhibition Experiments. Oxford: Blackwell.

Marcus, George y MichaelFischer. 1986. Anthropology as Cultural Critique. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Marcus, George E., ed. 2001. Para-Sites: A Casebook Against Cynical Reason. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Marcus, George E. y JudithOkely. 2007. “How Short Can Fieldwork Be?”. Social Anthropology 15 (3): 353-367. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0964-0282.2007.00025_1.x

Marres, Noortje, MichaelGuggenheim y AlexWilkie. 2018. Inventing the Social. Manchester: Mattering Press.

Martínez, Damián O.2020. “Between Boundary-Work and Cosmopolitan Aspirations. A Historical Genealogy of EASA (and European Anthropology)”. Anthropological Journal of European Cultures 29 (2): 11-30. https://doi.org/10.3167/ajec.2020.290202

Martínez, Francisco. 2021c. Paseo circular. Santiago: Editorial Bifurcaciones.

Martínez, Francisco. 2021b. “Fooled into Fieldwork. Epistemic Detours of an Accidental Anthropologist”. En Peripheral Methodologies: Unlearning, Not-Knowing and Ethnographic Limits, editado por FranciscoMartínez, Lili DiPuppo y Martin DemantFrederiksen, 146-164. Londres: Routledge.

Martínez, Francisco. 2021a. Ethnographic Experiments with Artists, Designers and Boundary Objects: Exhibiting the Field. Londres: UCL Press.

Martínez, Francisco. 2020b. “Antropología periférica: los márgenes académicos como un espacio epistemológico”. Revista Murciana de Antropología 27: 57-72. https://doi.org/10.6018/rmu

Martínez, Francisco. 2020a. “Introduction: On the Usefulness of Boundary Re-Work”. Anthropological Journal of European Cultures 29 (2): 1-10. https://doi.org/10.3167/ajec.2020.290201

Martínez, Francisco. 2019. “Doing Nothing: Anthropology Sits at the Same Table with Contemporary Art in Lisbon and Tbilisi”. Ethnography 20 (4): 541-559. https://doi.org/10.1177/1466138118782549

Martínez, Francisco, Lili DiPuppo y MartinDemant. Frederiksen, eds. 2021. Peripheral Methodologies: Unlearning, Not-Knowing and Ethnographic Limits. Londres: Routledge.

Martínez, Francisco, EevaBerglund, RachelHarkness, DavidJeevendrampillai y MarjorieMurray. 2021. “Far Away, so Close: A Collective Ethnography around Remoteness”. Entanglements 4 (1): 246-283. https://entanglementsjournal.org/far-away-so-close/

Nafus, Dawn. 2008. “Time, Sociability and Postsocialism”. Tesis doctoral, Facultad de Antropología, Sussex College, Sidney. https://dawnnafus.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/nafusphd.pdf

Narayan, Kirin. 2012. Alive in the Writing: Crafting Ethnography in the Company of Chekhov. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Rabinow, Paul, George E.Marcus, JamesFaubion y TobiasRees. 2008. Designs for an Anthropology of the Contemporary. Durham: Duke University Press.

Sansi, Roger, ed. 2020. The Anthropologist as Curator. Londres: Bloomsbury.

Savransky, Martin2016. The Adventure of Relevance. Londres: Palgrave Macmillan.

Shore, Chris y SusannaTrnka, eds. 2013. Up Close and Personal: On Peripheral Perspectives and the Production of Anthropological Knowledge. Oxford: Berghahn.

Ssorin-Chaikov, Nikolai. 2013. “Ethnographic Conceptualism: An Introduction”. Laboratorium 5: 5–18.

Star, Susan Leigh y James R.Griesemer. 1989. “Institutional Ecology, ‘Translations’ and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39”. Social Studies of Science 19 (3): 387-420. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F030631289019003001

Stoller, Paul. 2016. “Writing for the Future”. En The Anthropologist as Writer. Genres and Contexts in the Twenty-First Century, editado por HelenaWulff, 118-128. Oxford: Berghahn.

Strathern, Marilyn. 2004. Commons and Borderlands. Oxford: Sean Kingston Publishing.

Strathern, Marilyn. 1987. “The Limits of Auto-Anthropology”. En Anthropology at Home, editado por AnthonyJackson, 59-67. Londres: Tavistock.

Tyler, Stephen. 1986. “Post-Modern Ethnography: From Document of the Occult to Occult Document”. En Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography, editado por JamesClifford y George E.Marcus, 122-140. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Wells, H. G. 1983 [1897]. The Invisible Man. Nueva York: Bantam.

Wilkie, Alex, MartinSavransky y MarshaRosengarten, eds. 2017. Speculative Research: The Lure of Possible Futures. Londres: Routledge.

Wulff, Helena, ed. 2016. The Anthropologist as Writer. Genres and Contexts in the Twenty-First Century. Oxford: Berghahn.