Abstract
In this article, the author discusses the limits of analytical and evocative autoethnography as described by the creators of these concepts and by scholars who embark autoethnographic projects. The author attempts to answer the question of whether it is possible to move freely between the fields of analytic autoethnography and evocative autoethnography. Can rechercher freely combine analytical and evocative motifs within the framework of the autoethnographies he create? What are the fundamental differences between these approaches? What indicates the analyticality or the suggestiveness of the autoethnographic text? For whom and what are such divisions necessary? These considerations correspond to the practical problems appearing in the application of the autoethnographic approach in contemporary social research.
Publisher
Institute of Political Studies - Polish Academy of Sciences
Subject
General Earth and Planetary Sciences,General Engineering,General Environmental Science
Reference77 articles.
1. Abu-Lughod Lila,1993, Writing Women’s World: Bedouin Stories, University of California Press, Berkeley.
2. Adler Patricia A., Adler Peter, 1984, The Carpool: A Socializing Adjunct to the Educational Experience, „Sociology of Education”, t. 57, nr 4, s. 200–210.
3. Adler Patricia A., Adler Peter, 1987, Membership Roles in Field Research, Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
4. Adler Patricia A., Adler Peter, 2001, The Reluctant Respondent w: Jaber F. Gubrium, James A. Holstein (red.), Handbook of Interview Research: Context and Method, Sage, Thousand Oaks–London–New Delhi.
5. Anderson Leon, 2006, On Apples, Oranges, and Autopsies: A Response to Commentators, „Journal of Contemporary Ethnography”, t. 35, nr 450–465.