At Work with Practice Theory, ‘Failed’ Fieldwork, or How to See International Politics in An Empty Chair

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Standard

At Work with Practice Theory, ‘Failed’ Fieldwork, or How to See International Politics in An Empty Chair. / Eggeling, Kristin Anabel.

I: Millennium: Journal of International Studies, Bind 50, Nr. 1, 22.12.2021, s. 149-173.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Harvard

Eggeling, KA 2021, 'At Work with Practice Theory, ‘Failed’ Fieldwork, or How to See International Politics in An Empty Chair', Millennium: Journal of International Studies, bind 50, nr. 1, s. 149-173. https://doi.org/10.1177/03058298211055217

APA

Eggeling, K. A. (2021). At Work with Practice Theory, ‘Failed’ Fieldwork, or How to See International Politics in An Empty Chair. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 50(1), 149-173. https://doi.org/10.1177/03058298211055217

Vancouver

Eggeling KA. At Work with Practice Theory, ‘Failed’ Fieldwork, or How to See International Politics in An Empty Chair. Millennium: Journal of International Studies. 2021 dec. 22;50(1):149-173. https://doi.org/10.1177/03058298211055217

Author

Eggeling, Kristin Anabel. / At Work with Practice Theory, ‘Failed’ Fieldwork, or How to See International Politics in An Empty Chair. I: Millennium: Journal of International Studies. 2021 ; Bind 50, Nr. 1. s. 149-173.

Bibtex

@article{d6b4a5929bc44c1b92bba2fd874de3d5,
title = "At Work with Practice Theory, {\textquoteleft}Failed{\textquoteright} Fieldwork, or How to See International Politics in An Empty Chair",
abstract = "IR practice theorists advocate studying international relations through its manifold practices. On the question of methodology, they thus promote a simple slogan: start with practices! But how do we first capture an international practice? Surprisingly, this crucial question often remains abstract or hidden in methodological metaphors like {\textquoteleft}leaving the armchair{\textquoteright}. Reflecting on a supposedly failed fieldwork experiment, I introduce two heuristics in this article on how to make this hidden work transparent. In particular, I argue that capturing practice happens through abductive movements between site, scrap, screen, and seminar work that is similarly enabled and constrained by practical, epistemic, professional, and political positionalities. Using this vocabulary will advance IR practice research in three ways: first, pedagogically, in transferring a more accurate impression of what the approach entails; second, normatively, in accounting for where our arguments come from; and third, epistemically, to avoid only seeing what we were looking for.",
author = "Eggeling, {Kristin Anabel}",
year = "2021",
month = dec,
day = "22",
doi = "10.1177/03058298211055217",
language = "English",
volume = "50",
pages = "149--173",
journal = "Millennium: Journal of International Studies",
issn = "0305-8298",
publisher = "Sage Journals",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - At Work with Practice Theory, ‘Failed’ Fieldwork, or How to See International Politics in An Empty Chair

AU - Eggeling, Kristin Anabel

PY - 2021/12/22

Y1 - 2021/12/22

N2 - IR practice theorists advocate studying international relations through its manifold practices. On the question of methodology, they thus promote a simple slogan: start with practices! But how do we first capture an international practice? Surprisingly, this crucial question often remains abstract or hidden in methodological metaphors like ‘leaving the armchair’. Reflecting on a supposedly failed fieldwork experiment, I introduce two heuristics in this article on how to make this hidden work transparent. In particular, I argue that capturing practice happens through abductive movements between site, scrap, screen, and seminar work that is similarly enabled and constrained by practical, epistemic, professional, and political positionalities. Using this vocabulary will advance IR practice research in three ways: first, pedagogically, in transferring a more accurate impression of what the approach entails; second, normatively, in accounting for where our arguments come from; and third, epistemically, to avoid only seeing what we were looking for.

AB - IR practice theorists advocate studying international relations through its manifold practices. On the question of methodology, they thus promote a simple slogan: start with practices! But how do we first capture an international practice? Surprisingly, this crucial question often remains abstract or hidden in methodological metaphors like ‘leaving the armchair’. Reflecting on a supposedly failed fieldwork experiment, I introduce two heuristics in this article on how to make this hidden work transparent. In particular, I argue that capturing practice happens through abductive movements between site, scrap, screen, and seminar work that is similarly enabled and constrained by practical, epistemic, professional, and political positionalities. Using this vocabulary will advance IR practice research in three ways: first, pedagogically, in transferring a more accurate impression of what the approach entails; second, normatively, in accounting for where our arguments come from; and third, epistemically, to avoid only seeing what we were looking for.

U2 - 10.1177/03058298211055217

DO - 10.1177/03058298211055217

M3 - Journal article

VL - 50

SP - 149

EP - 173

JO - Millennium: Journal of International Studies

JF - Millennium: Journal of International Studies

SN - 0305-8298

IS - 1

ER -

ID: 287824955