The murky middle ground - when ethnographers engage public health.
This commentary revisits dilemmas of relevance that applied anthropology in the U.S. has long grappled with, no matter the rigor and depth of inquiry. Direct action, collaborative research and active public engagement offer proven alternatives for upping the participatory quotient, but they remain the exception. A third, more common, middle ground may be also discerned, sometimes involving the sort of "dirty work" that seems to lie outside of one's professional remit. Commitment to such work, it turns out, is not simply a matter of character or disciplinary ethics, but of the terms and conditions of anthropological employment. Even without the "second shift" of going public with one's findings, critically positioned research can keep problematic issues that might otherwise slip into the convenient silences of social and economic policy.
Nathan Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research, 140 Old Orangeburg Rd. Orangeburg, NY 10962, USA; Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, 722 W. 168th St., New York, NY 10032, USA. Electronic address: hopper@nki.rfmh.org.
Kim
K
Hopper
D000884:Anthropology, Cultural; D003299:Cooperative Behavior; D006801:Humans; D011634:Public Health; D014481:United States
Applied anthropology; Dirty work; Ethnography; Research relevance; Social change