, that is, in the spiritual hinterlands.
Erna Brodber ( 1997 : 98) calls
this mode of reclaiming – re-recognizing – your collective self as
‘the hegemony of the spirit’. And she terms the methodology for such
retrieval as ‘celestial ethnography’ (Brodber 1997 : 61). A cartographic practice too, no doubt. Brodber
expounds this methodology in the novel, Louisiana , which she
the intentions, incoherence, purpose and mismanagement of
statebuilding. Accounting for resistance thus requires historicising the everyday,
even if focusing on present everyday activities.
A focus on practices does not automatically mean doing ethnography even
if there has been a close relationship between the two in the liberal peace debates.
Richmond openly calls his work ethnographic, further claiming that this
approach is amenable to an active-research that has an emancipatory aim in
mind (2011a: 129). This ethnography has to be used to study the ‘practices
The difficulty of gathering intent and linking with the debates about motivation was the core of the critiques of Scott that were made within anthropology
studies in the 1980s. Ortner, a primary representative of these critiques, argues
that resistance studies are limited because they lack ethnographic ‘stance’ – a
commitment to grasp the ‘thickness’ and ‘depth’ of complex relations (1995:
174). According to Ortner, ‘[r]esistance studies are thin because they are ethnographically thin: thin on the internal politics of dominated groups, thin on the