This study develops a more inclusive and reflective approach to ethnographic analysis, challenging conventional practices that often disregard “failed” experiments and partial insights. By doing so, it aims to contribute to a more nuanced understanding of ethnographic methodology beyond traditional linear analytic stories.
We focus on fieldwork conducted in Katavi, Tanzania. By deliberately embracing uncertainties and partial failures encountered during this research trip, the study adopts a reflective methodology that values inconclusive data. This involves analysing the aesthetic expressions of Sukuma herders through what could be considered “wrong” or “failed” ethnography. This perspective values “failed” ethnography and incomplete insights as meaningful contributions to understanding reality.
By recognising incomplete and contradictory findings as valuable, we advocate for an inclusive approach that embraces partial truths and multiple realities, challenging the tendency to reduce the complexity of ethnography into singular narratives. Drawing inspiration from Sukuma healing logic, where something can be both true and false, we propose inclusive disjunctivity as a framework for rethinking the boundaries of ethnographic validity.
The originality of this study lies in its critique of conventional practices that often blackbox scientific processes into singular, linear narratives. By embracing incomplete, contradictory and multi-layered findings, we expand the boundaries of what constitutes valid ethnographic data. This shift in perspective enriches the field of ethnography, encouraging scholars to move beyond the simplification of reality inherent in traditional scientific analysis.
