The main argument draws on Bakhtin’s pulling forces, but also considers contributions from Jackson (1990), Zeitlyn (2012), Smith (2012), and Captlan (2010). From Jackson and Zeitlyn, the authors frames the relationship between researchers and fieldwork ass ambivalent and liminal (71). Yet, the researcher holds power through the agency throughout the research. Drawing on Smith, the authors points out that many ethnographers are hesitant to archive from a decolonial perspective that “the very act of collection is considered a potential violation and violence, one with a questionable legitimacy of appropriation, capture, extraction, and possession as well as a questionable authority to speak definitely about the objects captured (cf. Smith 2012)” (71). These frames lead the authors to frame in their own work “what type of archive was called for, who had interest and stakes in seeing it become a ‘thing’, and who had the energy and resources to create it” (72). They argue that engaging in an archive can address the issues raised and tap into the potentially transformative opportunities through ethnography and archives.
Analytic (Question)
Everyone can view this content
On