摘要
田野应当被看作一种埃利亚斯所谓的"局",而非简单的"知识—权力"关系。从实际的田野经历出发,以他者的肩头为坐标,田野工作者的状态可以分为"窥视他者""并肩而立"和"身先他者"三种,不同的参与观察模式有着不同的涉入、参与和共情,但都有机会成就优秀的民族志作品,提出有价值的观点,也都面临着失败的风险。有鉴于此,人类学界近年来泛滥的"田野反思"本身便值得我们反思,其中概化的"知识—权力"模式并不能概括实地研究中复杂的主客关系。田野工作和民族志书写依然拥有丰富的可能性,值得学者们认真对待并投入其中。
The field should be regarded as a kind of"figuration"as Norbert Elias called it,rather than a simple"knowledge-power"relationship.One the basis of the actual field experience and with the Other’s shoulder as the coordinate,the state of people undertaking fieldwork can be divided into three types:"peering at the Other,""standing side by side,"and"going before the Other."Different modes of participant observation have different levels of involvement,participation and empathy,but all have the opportunity to produce excellent ethnographic works and valuable perspectives,and all face the risk of failure.Given this,it is worth reflecting ourselves on the"reflections on field research"that have proliferated in anthropology in recent years.Their overgeneralized"knowledge-power"model does not capture the complex subject-object relationships in field research.Fieldwork and ethnographic writings are still rich in possibilities and deserve to be taken seriously and attract scholarly engagement.
出处
《中国社会科学评价》
CSSCI
2021年第3期97-107,159,共12页
China Social Science Review
基金
中国社会科学院民族学与人类学研究所创新工程课题“人类学视野下的‘传统—现代’转型”阶段性成果,并得到该所铸牢中华民族共同体意识研究基地资助。
