Abstract
When writing, ethnographers are faced with the hermeneutic task of interweaving their dialogues with scholars and their dialogues with their interlocutors in the field. This article is a critique of a long-standing tendency in anthropology to conflate social analysis in texts with social analysis on the ground. I am taking issue with a tendency to compare social theorists such as Heidegger or Bakhtin with the social analysts met during fieldwork. In this intellectual thought exercise, I compare structural functionalists with Samoan migrants to explore some of the differences between writing and practicing social analysis.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
