Anthropological fieldwork entails unforeseen details and raises unanticipated issues. My dissertation research in the mid-1970s explored the organization of work among Quechua Andean migrants cultivating coca in the Amazonian forests of eastern Bolivia. I collected too much information to process all that was relevant (omissions) and had to avoid reporting potentially harmful data (silences), especially given the expanding cocaine traffic beyond the community. Beginning in 1993, my next research project in a Costa Rican ceramic artisan community involved less analysis of aggregate data (omissions) and a greater emphasis on individual actors. This required discretion in reporting on conflicts (silences), especially concerning struggles to create an ecomuseum. Throughout long careers, changing anthropological orientations shape our choices about what and what not to pursue in the field and then recount. For me, an initial focus on human ecology expanded to include political economy and later also expressive culture, fostering a more holistic commitment.

中文翻译：

---

自由裁量的民族志：在两个拉丁美洲研究环境中消除个人和政治

人类学田野调查涉及无法预料的细节，并会引发意料之外的问题。我在 1970 年代中期的论文研究探讨了在玻利维亚东部亚马逊森林种植古柯的盖丘亚安第斯移民之间的工作组织。我收集了太多信息来处理所有相关（遗漏）并且不得不避免报告潜在的有害数据（沉默），特别是考虑到社区以外的可卡因流量不断扩大。从 1993 年开始，我在哥斯达黎加陶瓷工匠社区的下一个研究项目涉及较少的汇总数据分析（遗漏），而更多地强调个体参与者。这需要在报道冲突（沉默）时谨慎行事，尤其是关于创建生态博物馆的斗争。在漫长的职业生涯中，不断变化的人类学取向塑造了我们关于在该领域追求什么和不追求什么的选择，然后重新叙述。对我来说，最初对人类生态学的关注扩展到包括政治经济学和后来的表达文化，从而促进了更全面的承诺。