Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Fieldwork accounts involve a certain amount of self-staging, often intertwined with a self-analytical or reflexive dimension. However, the principle of truthfulness expected from such narratives conflicts with two key imperatives that limit its scope: demonstrating competence and appearing beyond reproach. The degree of reflexivity thus varies depending on the specific situation and characteristics of each researcher at a given time, but also on the political and moral state of society and the academic world. After providing a historical overview of the main existing approaches, I will outline the circumstances that led me to a certain level of self-disclosure, more calculated and misleading than it may seem, regarding investigations with a strong personal involvement: nomadic populations, activists from the National Front, and a dear friend named Martial. I report the rhetorical subterfuges I employed: omitting my homosexuality and its various consequences in the course of the research, keeping quiet about dreams of revenge after a nunchaku attack, and saying nothing either of seduction or desire, or the anxiety of violence. I also show how, with time, age and a more secure professional standing, I have made use of information about myself that was meaningful for analysis, and yet painful to reveal.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Daniel Bizeul (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: