Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T10:00:38.020Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Good, the Bad or the Ugly: Considerations on Fieldwork and Bronislaw Malinowski

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2015

K. J. Pataki-Schweizer
K. J. Pataki-Schweizer*
Affiliation:
Department of Community Medicine, University of Papua New Guinea
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The activity of fieldwork, that is research conducted with individuals and groups in a real-life and by implication, real-time setting or living environment rather than research under controlled conditions and specific time-frames, continues to draw strong attention and criticisms. Given the plethora of these schools of thought and their critiques over the past decades including relativism in its intense expressions, emphases on quantification as a sine-qua-non, hermeneutics, praxis, semiotics, deconstructionism and essentially “post-modernist” approaches to enduring questions of objectivity, recording behaviour, methodological rigor, meaning and their epistemological references, it is significant that (1) fieldwork still continues and does so in a variety of disciplines, and (2) most criticisms have been directed essentially at issues of validity, viability and reliability in relation to “data”, rather than some grand meta-disciplinary demise.

There are those who would dearly like to throw baby, bathwater and the entire endeavour out, and such critiques are important: in their confabulations, they evoke enduring and profound issues with trenchancy. Nor have political assaults been slow to enter the battle: fieldwork, especially as perceived via an increasingly hapless anthropology, is seen as an enduring colonial tool, an exploiter of the ethnic domain, a servant of capitalism and product of the western will to power.

Type
Articles
Information
South Pacific Journal of Psychology , Volume 8 , 1995 , pp. 44 - 47
Copyright
Copyright © University of Papua New Guinea & the University of Newcastle, Australia 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Hsu, Francis L.K. (1979). The Cultural Problem of the Cultural Anthropologist. American Anthropologist 81(3):517–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langham, Ian. (1981). The Building of British Social Anthropology. Dordrect: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malinowski, Bronislaw. (1967). A Diary in the Strict Sense of the Term. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.Google Scholar
Malinowski, Bronislaw. (1923). Psychoanalysis and Anthropology. Psyche 4:293–322.Google Scholar
Pataki-Schweizer, K.J. (1990). W.H.R. Rivers: Ethnology and Medicine in Papua, 1898. In Burton-Bradley, B.G., ed., A History of Medicine in Papua New Guinea - Vignettes of an Earlier Period. Sydney: Australasian, pp. 269–279.Google Scholar
Saunders, George R. (1993). “Critical Ethnocentrism” and the Ethnology of Ernesto De Martino. American Anthropologist 95(4):875–893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar