Mobility of the "other" in combination with increasing globalization leads us to re-evaluate the definition of fieldwork. Mobilization and globalization change the concept of the "other".

Amit introduces the discussion of doing fieldwork at "home". If the ethnographer is at "home", then what constitutes the "field"? He introduces the question of whether fieldwork remains to be fieldwork if the ethnographer is "home"? I think that anthropology is based somewhat on interpretation and with this in mind, it becomes difficult to set boundaries. We need boundaries to be able to recognize anthropology as anthropology, however these boundaries might be thought to threaten the very essence of interpretation...I think this will be something that will be continually debated within discussions surrounding the definition of ethnography.