Five limits to current autoethnography : Asking old and new questions of an aspiring mainstream method
(2026) In Current Anthropology 67(3). p.483-501- Abstract
- Autoethnography is no longer a marginal anthropological practice but one that is taught at many universities worldwide. And this approach to empirical knowledge gathering and anthropological analysis forms the basis for hundreds if not thousands of publications, many of which are well cited and widely celebrated. The success of autoethnography is surely a cause for celebration. It is, however, also a cause for concern, especially when we look at more recent developments where autoethnography has changed from its original formulation of an anthropology “at home” to that of an anthropology “as home.” In this article, we revisit previous critiques of autoethnography and offer some new ones of our own. Doing so, we point to five limits to... (More)
- Autoethnography is no longer a marginal anthropological practice but one that is taught at many universities worldwide. And this approach to empirical knowledge gathering and anthropological analysis forms the basis for hundreds if not thousands of publications, many of which are well cited and widely celebrated. The success of autoethnography is surely a cause for celebration. It is, however, also a cause for concern, especially when we look at more recent developments where autoethnography has changed from its original formulation of an anthropology “at home” to that of an anthropology “as home.” In this article, we revisit previous critiques of autoethnography and offer some new ones of our own. Doing so, we point to five limits to current autoethnography—five limitations, old and new, that reveal the disciplinary and wider societal unsustainability of the way in which the method is increasingly perceived and practiced. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/4b600967-aadf-4c94-955e-bfd535ecef7c
- author
- Sausdal, David LU ; Vigh, Henrik and Albris, Kristoffer
- organization
- publishing date
- 2026-06
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- in
- Current Anthropology
- volume
- 67
- issue
- 3
- pages
- 483 - 501
- publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:105040340366
- ISSN
- 1537-5382
- DOI
- 10.1086/741099
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 4b600967-aadf-4c94-955e-bfd535ecef7c
- date added to LUP
- 2023-12-02 09:12:27
- date last changed
- 2026-06-12 04:00:56
@article{4b600967-aadf-4c94-955e-bfd535ecef7c,
abstract = {{Autoethnography is no longer a marginal anthropological practice but one that is taught at many universities worldwide. And this approach to empirical knowledge gathering and anthropological analysis forms the basis for hundreds if not thousands of publications, many of which are well cited and widely celebrated. The success of autoethnography is surely a cause for celebration. It is, however, also a cause for concern, especially when we look at more recent developments where autoethnography has changed from its original formulation of an anthropology “at home” to that of an anthropology “as home.” In this article, we revisit previous critiques of autoethnography and offer some new ones of our own. Doing so, we point to five limits to current autoethnography—five limitations, old and new, that reveal the disciplinary and wider societal unsustainability of the way in which the method is increasingly perceived and practiced.}},
author = {{Sausdal, David and Vigh, Henrik and Albris, Kristoffer}},
issn = {{1537-5382}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{3}},
pages = {{483--501}},
publisher = {{University of Chicago Press}},
series = {{Current Anthropology}},
title = {{Five limits to current autoethnography : Asking old and new questions of an aspiring mainstream method}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/741099}},
doi = {{10.1086/741099}},
volume = {{67}},
year = {{2026}},
}