Anthropologist or primatologist ?

Abstract

Drawing on two research projects on human-orangutan relationships, I reflect on how methods beyond single-sited ethnography might facilitate research on relationships between humans and other primates (alloprimates). The first project, which examined keeper-orangutan relationships in a zoo, illustrates how combining ethnography and ethology can highlight how humans’ interpretations and narrations of animal behaviour depend on their unique position and concerns, such as their role as caregivers. Examining both species’ daily lives can also make the research focus more symbolically equitable—though methodological equality remains difficult. The second project used interviews with orangutan conservation practitioners and site visits to examine debates about orangutan rehabilitation and reintroduction (R&R). This multi-sited approach revealed insights that may not have arisen in a single-sited ethnography, such as fundamental methodological and ethical differences between R&R projects. Furthermore, acting as “quasi-primatologists” – through practising ethology, or taking seriously the views of alloprimate advocates – might positively change how social anthropologists are perceived by participants, thereby facilitating access.