Ethnography as Theory
Ethnography: A Theory of Describing
Ethnography is more than a simple description of cultures; it is a theoretical process that aims
to explain human behavior and social systems. Historically, ethnography has been associated
with frameworks such as functionalism, structural-functionalism, and critical theory, making
it a method deeply connected to theory. Unlike mere cataloging, ethnography analyzes
relationships between cultural elements to provide meaningful insights.
One key concept in ethnography is holism, which emphasizes that cultures are interconnected
systems rather than isolated fragments. This approach encourages ethnographers to explore
the larger connections binding different social elements, making their work more comprehensive
and insightful.
Theory and Ethnography
Theoretical frameworks are essential in ethnography, as they guide the analysis of cultural
practices and their meanings. Ethnography functions as a theory of description, assigning
meaning to cultural elements instead of merely recording them. However, ethnographers face
the challenge of distinguishing between how people say they live versus how they actually
live. This ongoing debate underscores the complexity and subjectivity involved in making
ethnography a factual and objective discipline.
Ethnography’s historical trajectory has sparked debates on methodology. Early pioneers like
James Mooney and W.H.R. Rivers differed in their scientific rigor and critical engagement.
Mooney, for example, challenged Western superiority by comparing Native American
movements to European histories. These diverse approaches shaped the discipline, highlighting
its dynamic and evolving nature.
Professionalization and Participant Observation
By the mid-20th century, ethnography became professionalized, with unwritten rules defining
how research should be conducted. These norms often emphasized studying non-Western
societies, treating them as bounded entities, and avoiding discussions about colonial power.
Scholars like Gregory Bateson and Bronislaw Malinowski pushed against these conventions,
advocating for innovation in ethnographic methods.
One of the most influential methods has been participant observation, where anthropologists
immerse themselves in the daily lives of the people they study. This method allows for a deeper
understanding of social systems, often compared to organic metaphors, where each societal
part functions like a living organism. By observing firsthand, ethnographers uncover deeper
cultural truths and complexities.
Political Blind Spots and Colonialism
Ethnography has been criticized for its political blind spots, such as avoiding significant
political issues while studying cultural practices. For instance, Clifford Geertz famously omitted
the mass killings in Indonesia during his study of cockfights in Bali. This apolitical approach
has since been challenged by ethnographers incorporating Marxism, feminism, and critical
theory into their analyses, making their work more comprehensive and politically aware.
Ethnography’s relationship with colonialism is complex, as it has both supported and challenged
colonial narratives. While some anthropologists collaborated with colonial authorities, others,
like James Mooney, defended the rights of the communities they studied. Malinowski’s study of
the Kula ring in the Trobriand Islands revealed intricate trade systems, contradicting colonial
stereotypes of "primitive" societies and challenging the colonial narrative of underdevelopment.
Innovations and Rejections of Norms
Scholars like Reo Fortune rejected colonial norms by legitimizing local beliefs, such as
sorcery, as valid cultural practices. This shift allowed for more authentic representations of
indigenous cultures, breaking down colonial biases. Anthropologists like Max Gluckman and
Edmund Leach further challenged traditional views by rejecting ethnocentric assumptions that
labeled non-Western societies as irrational or inferior.
Leach’s concept of positioned knowledge emphasized that both anthropologists and their
subjects bring biases to their interpretations, making objectivity impossible. This critique
reshaped anthropology by questioning the double standards applied to "modern" and "primitive"
societies.
Impact of Globalization on Ethnography
Globalization has transformed ethnography by shifting its focus from isolated communities to
those embedded in larger global systems. Studies like June Nash’s work on Bolivian miners
and Hugh Gusterson’s research on nuclear weapons workers demonstrate how local cultures
are influenced by global political and economic forces. This interconnectedness requires
ethnographers to explore how global dynamics shape local realities.
Challenges and Criticism of New Ethnography
Recent innovations in ethnography, which aim to place anthropologists and their subjects on
equal footing, have faced criticism for being overly journalistic or lacking analytical depth.
However, these experimental approaches recognize that scientific objectivity is not neutral
and that anthropology, like other sciences, is influenced by politics. These debates highlight the
importance of balancing subjectivity and analysis in ethnographic research.
Conclusion
Ethnography has evolved from a descriptive method to a theoretical process deeply intertwined
with politics, power dynamics, and global influences. By challenging colonial biases and
incorporating frameworks like Marxism and feminism, ethnography has expanded its scope to
explore the interconnectedness of local and global systems. Despite ongoing debates, it
remains a dynamic field that critically analyzes cultural and social systems while recording
human behavior.
