What did we say they’ve said? Four encounters between theory, method and the production of data

Claudio Ezequiel Benzecry*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Scopus citations

Abstract

Following Reed (2010, 2011), we can think of ethnography as the encounter between two sets of meanings: those of the ethnographer on those of the subjects whose lives are being studied. If we are able to recognize the contested, unfinished, reflexive and complex character of how people think about themselves, we should be able to imagine ourselves in the same terms and go into the field armed with a theoretical helmet with interchangeable lenses, imagining which theoretical concepts would best fit the case. In this paper, I develop how this approach finds a fruitful analogue in psychoanalysis as a practical endeavor that produces a particular kind of truth; what we can learn from that equivalency; how this epistemological approach works in parallel to Reed’s plea for theoretical pluralism; and what are then the consequences of this book for practitioners of cultural ethnography.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)24-34
Number of pages11
JournalEthnography
Volume18
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2017

Keywords

  • cultural sociology
  • epistemology
  • ethnography
  • psychoanalysis
  • structuralism

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cultural Studies
  • Anthropology
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'What did we say they’ve said? Four encounters between theory, method and the production of data'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this