Version 2 2020-04-01, 11:04Version 2 2020-04-01, 11:04
Version 1 2019-10-01, 09:30Version 1 2019-10-01, 09:30
journal contribution
posted on 2020-04-01, 11:04authored byFrancisco Martínez
This research explores the relationship between knowledge production and place by studying
different notions of disciplinary and personal peripherality. In an auto-ethnographic manner,
the author discusses some of the power relations at work and the politics of representation of
an anthropology being done at the margins of European scholarship. By analysing his own
professional trajectory, the author surmises that the question of centre or periphery highly depends on the perspective applied (i.e., methods, labour conditions, institutional support, funding, the scale, access to jobs…) Also, he argues that there is a distinct form of reflexivity at the
margins, as well as a distinct temporal regime — characterised by discontinuity. To contrast
and complement his personal insights, the author invited fifteen scholars working in Estonia to
share their experience of researching ‘at the margins’. Based on their responses, he concludes
by admitting that being at the periphery is relevant, yet circumstantial – something to be aware
of, yet not definitive or a determinant. The article contributes to the discussion on the need to
differentiate, contextualise and problematise the question of the academic marginality, making
this issue more nuanced by putting the ethnographic focus on the conditions of possibility
among practitioners and the state of being peripheral.
History
Citation
ANUAC. Journal of the Italian society of cultural anthropology, 2019 VOL. 8, N° 2, DICEMBRE 2019: 167-188
Author affiliation
/Organisation
Version
VoR (Version of Record)
Published in
ANUAC. Journal of the Italian society of cultural anthropology