Why did the writing culture movement question objectivity in ethnography?

The "writing culture" movement challenged the traditional claim that ethnography could produce objective, neutral accounts of other societies. Instead, it argued that anthropological texts are inherently shaped by the researcher's own position and choices.1

This movement questioned objectivity for several key reasons:

• Researcher Bias: It highlighted that anthropologists bring their own unconscious cultural biases into the field, which inevitably influence their observations and descriptions.12
• Subjective Positioning: The movement pointed out that the anthropologist’s specific positioning in field research—including which voices they choose to listen to and which materials they prioritize—shapes the final ethnographic text.1
• Partiality of Perspective: Influenced by the interpretive turn, proponents argued that because cultural consensus is rare and identities are complex, any ethnographic interpretation is necessarily "partial" rather than a definitive, objective truth.13
• Textual Construction: By viewing ethnographies as "texts interpreting texts," the movement emphasized that the ethnographic product is a constructed narrative rather than a transparent reflection of reality.1

Ultimately, this movement encouraged anthropologists to recognize the limits of objectivity and to move away from the illusion that they could produce a single, normative view of a culture.13