This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Marcus, G. E. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

From Rapport Under Erasure to Theaters of Complicit Reflexivity

Rice University

This article offers a sketch of the past uses of the concept of rapport in anthropological discussions of its core identifying method of fieldwork. The trope of collaboration, emphasized in the 1980s critiques of ethnographic authority, failed to displace the rhetorical power of rapport in defining the ethos of fieldwork. Only the changing conditions of many contemporary fieldwork projects have dislodged the naturalness and symbolic strength of the concept in anthropology's professional culture, but without offering any alternative. Instead, the complicities of fieldwork relations emerge in the shadow of rapport "under erasure" as a focus for reimagining the elements of the classic, regulative ideals of fieldwork.

Key Words: reflexivity • complicity • fieldwork • nobility • Portugal • rapport

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. J. Pitts and M. Miller-Day Upward turning points and positive rapport-development across time in researcher--participant relationships Qualitative Research, May 1, 2007; 7(2): 177 - 201. [Abstract] [PDF]

				I. Stronach, D. Garratt, C. Pearce, and H. Piper Reflexivity, the Picturing of Selves, the Forging of Method Qualitative Inquiry, March 1, 2007; 13(2): 179 - 203. [Abstract] [PDF]