Since the last report on qualitative methods (Crang, 2005), much has been going on as normal within the practical procedures of doing qualitative research. Human geographers continue to study texts, to conduct interviews, to convene groups and to engage in ethnography. Indeed, it is hard, though perhaps not impossible, to imagine what a radically new form of qualitative research practice might look like. So, for the time being, this suite of methods remains the backbone of qualitative research in human geography. Yet, we would like to contend that whilst these activities continue as before, there are changes in the way they are being conceived and carried out, and related to this, there are transformations in the way these methods are being used to make claims to understanding and intervening in the world. In the first of our three reports on qualitative methods, it is this link between qualitative methodologies and interpretative strategies we would like to reflect on. If looking for a provocative metaphor and some opening arguments, then a good starting point is John Law's methods (anti)textbook After Method: Mess in social science research (Law 2004). From this it is possible to derive elements that describe some, if not encapsulate all, of these impulses. Firstly, and above all, there is rejection of singularity; of the operation of social science research methods simply to generate clarity, precision and reduce uncertainty and ambiguity in our understanding of the world. This is not to argue that existing 3 methodological repertoires are irrelevant, nor that empirical research is futile (though it does raise thorny issues for simplistic approaches to the orthodoxy of triangulation). Rather, there is the suggestion that we need to revise our understanding of what social science investigations achieve as particular ways of framing and interfering with the world. There is commitment to understanding all research as performative; that our methods help enact the real in different situations (Law and Urry, 2004; Makussen, 2005). Thus we have to figure out what it means to engage with the world, both in methodological practice, but also in our choice of interpretative strategy and ethical aspirations (Bennett, 2001). In place of the pursuit of certainty in generating representations of the world, there is recognition that the world is so textured as to exceed our capacity to understand it, and thus to accede that social science methodologies and forms of knowing will be characterised as much by openness, reflexivity and recursivity as by categorisation, conclusion and closure.We explore these issues below through three themes recurring in recent qualitative research in human geography: questions of agency, embodiment and emotion; being within nature; and the performativity of place. Concluding, we reflect briefly on the politics of these forms of qualitative research, raising questions we intend to explore more explicitly in our review next year, perhaps anticipating that practical experimentation and critical dia...