Author:
Boswell John,Corbett Jack
Abstract
Purpose
– Turning laborious ethnographic research into stylized argumentative prose for academic consumption is a painstaking craft. The purpose of this paper is to revisit this perennial issue, and extend a claim the authors have made elsewhere about the inevitably impressionistic, rather than the oft-claimed “systematic”, nature of this task.
Design/methodology/approach
– The authors draw and reflect on their own experiences of conducting and navigating across political science, ethnography and interpretation in order to justify and uphold the benefits of impressionism.
Findings
– The authors argue that the impressionistic account of writing up fieldwork has important implications for these diverse disciplinary terrains.
Originality/value
– The authors develop an argument as to how and why an appreciation of this craft’s impressionistic nature can affect how the authors go about creating, evaluating and ultimately thinking about ethnographic research in foreign disciplines like political science.
Reference52 articles.
1. Bevir, M.
(2011), “Public administration as storytelling”,
Public Administration
, Vol. 89 No. 1, pp. 183-195.
2. Bevir, M.
and
Kedar, A.
(2008), “Concept formation in political science: an anti-naturalist critique of qualitative methodology”,
Perspectives on Politics
, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 503-517.
3. Bevir, M.
and
Rhodes, R.
(2010),
The State as Cultural Practice
, Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York, NY.
4. Boswell, J.
and
Corbett, J.
(2014), “An antipodean history of interpretation”,
Australian Journal of Public Administration
, Vol. 73 No. 3, pp. 296-306.
5. Boswell, J.
and
Corbett, J.
(2015), “Embracing impressionism: revealing the brushstrokes of interpretive research”,
Critical Policy Studies
, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 216-225.
Cited by
15 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献