Elli Katajala
” NOT QUITE EAST, NOT QUITE WEST”
Identity conceptions of Hungarian young adults
Elli Katajala University of Eastern Finland Faculty of Social Sciences and Business Studies Master’s Thesis in Sociology Border Crossings Master’s Degree Programme
October 2019
Abstract
UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND
Faculty
Faculty of Social Sciences and Business Studies
Department
Department of Social Sciences Author
Elli Katajala
Supervisor Laura Assmuth Title
“Not quite East, Not quite West” Identity conceptions of Hungarian young adults Main subject
Sociology
Level
Master’s thesis
Date 25.10.2019
Number of pages 71+2
Hungary has a complex history with drastically changing borders and various political systems. The current political development of the country has raised questions related to the declining of democracy and the country’s international relationships, especially with the European Union.
This master’s thesis examines young Hungarian adults, more specifically their conceptions of their own identity in globalized world. The study aims to understand, how they construct their own cultural identity as Hungarians. It addresses a question; how do they define being inside or outside the group?
In addition, the thesis focuses on their conceptions of mobility, internationality and Hungary’s complex relationship to the EU.
The data of this study was collected by interviewing ten informants, aged 19–26, studying at Eötvös Loránd Tudományegyetem (university), located in Budapest. The inform-ants belong to a generation grown up after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Thus, they have grown up in a different world and Hungary than the previous generations. The approach of the study is transnational. Therefore, identities are understood as constantly changing and negotiable. This enables examining identity as a globally connected phenomenon that includes both global and local aspects. The thesis is also connected to the tradition of generational research.
Based on the results of this study, it can be concluded, that despite the similarities the informants share (age, education etc.) their identity conceptions are diverse. The interviewees highlight different factors, when narrating their identities. Although they all have grown up in a more mobile world and Hungary with open borders, their attitude towards globalization and internationality issues vary. Nevertheless, for all of them, internationality appears as natural part of modern globalized life.
Key words: Identity, Hungary, the European Union, globalization, borders, re-bordering, de-border- ing, generational studies, young adults, post-socialist
Tiivistelmä
ITÄ-SUOMEN YLIOPISTO
Tiedekunta
Yhteiskuntatieteiden ja kauppatieteiden tiedekunta
Yksikkö
Yhteiskuntatieteiden laitos Tekijä
Elli Katajala
Ohjaaja
Laura Assmuth Työn nimi
”Ei ihan itää, ei ihan länttä” Unkarilaisten nuorten aikuisten identiteettikäsityksiä Pääaine
Sosiologia
Työn laji Pro gradu -työ
Aika 25.10.2019
Sivuja 71+2
Unkarilla on pitkä ja monimuotoinen historia, johon sisältyy useita maantieteellisten rajojen muutoksia ja poliittisia järjestelmiä. Maan viimeaikainen kehitys on nostanut esille mm. demo- kratiaan ja liikkuvuuteen liittyviä kysymyksiä. Unkarin kansainväliset suhteet ovat olleet tape- tilla etenkin Europan Unioniin liittyvissä kysymyksissä.
Tämä Pro gradu -tutkielma tarkastelee unkarilaisten nuorten aikuisten käsityksiä omasta (kult- tuuri)identiteetistään. Tutkimuksen tarkoituksena on selvittää, kuinka nämä nuoret ai-kuiset määrittelevät unkarilaisuuden ja millaisia asioita he liittävät siihen. Tähän liittyy myös kysymys siitä, kenet he määrittelevät kuuluvaksi ryhmän (unkarilaiset) sisä- ja ulkopuolelle.
Tutkimuksen aineisto on kerätty Budapestissä keväällä 2016, ja se koostuu kymmenestä henki- löhaastattelusta. Haastateltavat ovat 19–26 vuotiaita opiskelijoita Budapestissä sijaitsevassa Eötvös Lorándin yliopistossa. Yhteistä haastateltavilla on myös se, että he ovat osa sukupolvea, joka on kasvanut sosialismin jälkeisessä Unkarissa. Täten heidän kokemuksensa esimerkiksi kansainvälisyydestä ja liikkuvuudesta ovat erilaisia, kuin edellisten sukupolvien.
Tutkimuksen ote on transnationaalinen. Täten ymmärrän työssäni identiteetit alati muuttuvina ja narratiivisina. Tämä mahdollistaa niiden tarkastelun globaaleina ilmiöinä. Tutkimus kiinnit- tyy osaltaan myös sukupolvitutkimukseen.
Tutkimustulosten perusteella voidaan todeta, että vaikka informanteilla on paljon yhteisiä teki- jöitä, esimerkiksi koulutustaso ja samaan sukupolveen kuuluminen, ovat heidän identiteettikä- sityksensä itsestään unkarilaisina hyvin vaihtelevia. Yhteistä heille on kuitenkin se, että sekä kansainvälisyys, että liikkuvuus näyttäytyvät heille luonnollisena osana elämää modernissa ja globaalissa yhteiskunnassa.
Avainsanat: Identiteetti, Unkari, Europan Unioni, globalisaatio, rajat, nuoret aikuiset. suku- polvitutkimus, post-sosialismi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1. Research question 1
1.2. Earlier research and the relevance of the study 2
1.3. Research process and ethical questions 4
2. BACKGROUND
2.1. A brief look at Hungary’s history and development 6 2.2. Hungary and the European Union – a complex relationship 10
2.3. Finno-Ugric ties 13
3. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 15
3.1. Discursive cultural, ethnic and national identities 15
3.2. Area -based identity and “Europeanization” 17
3.3. Rebordering, debordering and transnationalism 18
3.4. Generational research 22
4. ANALYSIS 25
4.1. Being local 26
4.1.1. “It is a very big question”. Who is Hungarian? 26 4.1.2. “Our way of doing things, talking, thinking” – Traditions and traditional culture 33 4.1.3. “We have a language; no other language can be similar to”
– Significance of mother tongue 39
4.1.4. Finno-Ugric relationship – a kinship or a possibility for internationality? 43
4.2. Being global 46
4.2.1. “Not quite east, not quite west” – A country between East and West? 46 4.2.2. Hungary as a part of Europe and the European Union 48
4.2.3. Future abroad – a mobile generation? 55
5. CONCLUSION 64
REFERENCES
ATTACHMENT
1 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Research question
This master’s thesis examines Hungarian young adults in globalized world. More specifically, the it focuses on their conceptions of their own cultural identity in constantly changing society.
The aim of the study is to understand the way they construct and narrate their identity as Hungarians. This includes a question; how do these young adults define being inside or outside the group? Thus, I also analyze the ways they position themselves in globalized world. I also ask, if they see themselves more as Hungarians or cosmopolitan citizens of the European Union, and how they perceive Hungary’s EU-membership. The interest towards the research topic arise from my personal experiences. I have stayed in Hungary for longer periods for studies, work and leisure. In addition, I have studied Hungarian language and culture for a year as a part of my Bachelor of Arts at the University of Turku. During the time I spent in Hungary, my wish to gain deeper understanding of the country, its people, culture and politics, became apparent.
Hungary’s long and complex history includes drastically shifting borders and many different political systems. The country’s history in relation to the its current political situation forms a fertile ground for this study. Hungarian young adults were chosen as the target group to exam- ine, since it can be presumed, that their conceptions of their identity as Hungarians is an inter- esting mix of traditional and modern, global and local. Also, as Heino Nyyssönen exclaims in his most recent book (published in 2017) “Tasavallan loppu? Unkarin demokratian romahdus”
(“The end of the republic? The fall of democracy in Hungary”), the issues Hungary is facing, are not only national, but also interesting from a broader European point of view. (Nyyssönen 2017: 14.)
The data of this study consists of 10 interviews conducted in Budapest during the spring 2016.
During the time interviews were made, the informants were aged 19–26, and students at the University of Eötvös Loránd (Eötvös Loránd Tudományegyetem in Hungarian, referred later in this thesis as ELTE). The subjects the interviewees studied varied, but they were all studying Finno-Ugric studies either as their major or minor at the Faculty of Humanities. Another com- mon facet all the informants share, is that they are all grown in the world after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and after the socialist era ended in Hungary. This element connects this study into the tradition of generational studies.
2
It is fascinating to examine the identity conceptions of Hungarian young adults during these turbulent times, since this generation has grown up in different world than the previous ones.
Young Hungarians might want to identify themselves as cosmopolitan EU-citizens, rather than Hungarians, and thus be part of the cultural de-bordering. On the other hand, it seems that in Hungary it is trending to emphasize the country’s own culture and cultural heritage, and thus streghten their own cultural identity by excluding others. In addition, the current bordering pro- cesses in Hungary make the research topic of this thesis relevant. It can be said that Hungary has expressed a desire to close its borders from for example migrants, but on the other hand the country also wants to be a part of “borderless” Europe. This contradiction generates a fertile starting point for this study.
The approach of this study is transnational. Global flows are topical in Europe and Hungary nowadays, and the current migration crisis has made the questions related to inclusion and ex- clusion even more topical than before. In this thesis, identities are understood as constantly changing and negotiable. Stuart Hall (1999: 250) has argued that in modern world, identities are no longer consistent, but that they form from multiple discourses, conventions and positions.
Likewise, the transnational approach understands people’s identities and lives as constantly changing, and therefore it enables studying identities as globally connected things.
1.2. Earlier research and relevance of the study
Transnationality and identities have been studied quite largely before. One of the classic writ- ings of ethnic research, is Ethnic Groups and Boundaries edited by Fredrik Barth (1969). It focuses on boundaries of ethnic groups, and the way ethnic identities are constructed and re- newed in everyday lives. Also, Thomas Hylland Eriksen (i.e. 1993, 2002.) has studied transna- tionalism widely. As the mobility has increased, also the cultural, sociological and anthropo- logical research has focused more on people’s experiences in modern, changing societies. Thus, there has been a growing amount of research considering for example multiculturalism and transnational identities. (Pöysä & Timonen 2004: 241.)
This exact study is relevant, since Hungary’s history and the current development form an in- teresting ground for studying identities in globalized world. Also, as stated before, choosing Hungarian young adults as a group to study brings a new, relevant aspect to my research. There is a wide range of master’s theses, alone in Finland, that examine the identity of young adults.
3
Nora Tarmio from university of Turku (2013), has studied the identity conceptions of Finnish young adults with Bosnian roots. Hanna Vesamäki (2016), from University of Jyväskylä, ex- amines the experiences of Finnish young adults who were raised in between two cultures in her master’s thesis.
Young Hungarians have been examined for example by Virginia Lam (2017) from University of East London. She focuses on Hungarian adolescents, aged 13–18, and their conceptions of national identity. As she points out, “Although there is an extensive literature on children’s national identities and attitudes, relatively less research in this area has come from beyond Western Europe.” (Lam: 2017.) Thus, she recognizes the need for academic research consider- ing young Hungarians. Hungary’s development to the current situation has recently been brought up broadly in newspapers and to some extend in academic research. Finnish scholar, Heino Nyyssönen, has studied Hungary extensively for over two decades, and in his most recent book, Tasavallan loppu? (2017), he examines Hungary´s current situation, and especially Hun- gary´s complex political situation, also related to the EU.
Tuuli Lähdesmäki (2014) has studied the identity politics of European capitals of culture. In her dissertation for the department of Social Sciences and Business Studies at the University of Eastern Finland, she examines the production of area-based identities in three capitals of cul- ture, including Hungarian town Pécs. Lähdesmäki’s dissertation will be useful for my study, since it examines many themes also relevant for my thesis, such as local, regional and European identities. Topics related to European identity are examined in multiple academic studies. As an example, “European identity and culture: narratives of transnational belonging” (Friedman
& Thiel: 2012), includes articles that consider the meaning and composing European identity.
Austro-Hungarian academic Karl Mannheim is often considered as the most influential theorist in defining generations in present-day social sciences, and there is a wide range of sociological research about generations, based on his theories (See for example Woodman: 2016). Saara Koikkalainen (2013) has examined well-educated Finnish expats, who have relocated in the EU for work. Her study focuses on similar phenomenon with my thesis, such as certain generation’s experiences of mobility and internationality within the EU. Approaches to culture theory, vol- ume 5, Generations in Estonia: Contemporary Perspectives on Turbulent Times, focuses on 20th century Generational identities in Estonia. Similar to my thesis, some of its articles focus on Post-Soviet generations. (Nugin, Kannike & Raudsepp 2016.)
4
The research topic of my study is very researchable, due to my personal connections to Hun- gary, and the fact that data is already collected. In addition, identity is a topic that has been largely researched before, and thus there is a long tradition, in which this study can be con- nected. However, the angle of this study makes it fresh, and due to the topical nature of the study, there will be a wide range of material. This aspect also creates challenges, since the situation is changing all the time. Conducting fieldwork in Budapest proved to be a success. All necessary data was collected and there was interaction with locals. In addition, some new aca- demic connections and friendships were created.
1.3. Research process and ethical questions
As stated before, the data for this study was collected in Budapest during spring 2016. The interviews were conducted in ELTE, and there were 10 interviews in total. The interviewees were volunteers, and thus they were not paid for their participation. However, many of them expressed interest in receiving a copy of completed thesis, and I promised them to send it. The research process proceeded mainly smoothly, although there were minor difficulties in finding interviewees. However, once I got few people interested, the word started to get around, and the students were eager to participate. My trip to Budapest to conduct the interviews was self- funded. Thus, it can be said, that funding was a minor difficulty I faced during the research process.
Interviews were semi-structured, meaning that while there was a frame for the interview (see attachments), and lasted between 30 to 60 minutes. Discussion was free-flowing, and if the interviewees did feel that some issues were more important to discuss about than others, I let the talk freely. Thus, the interviews did not necessarily always follow the frame of the interview in order but resembled more of a general discussion between two people. However, a frame for the interviews was made in order to receive all necessary information, and to avoid blank mo- ments. At the times I also used my own experiences as examples in order to encourage the informants to talk. This proved successful, since it made the atmosphere of the interviews more relaxed. Thus, the situation did not feel as much like an official interviewing situation, but rather a conversation between acquaintances. Before starting the analyzing process, I transcripted the interviews from word to word. After that, I analyzed them thematically.
5
The research topic of this study is not sensitive topic in a sense that it could cause direct harm to anyone. However, when examining people, there are always ethical questions to take on account. The biggest ethical questions related to my research process are mostly considering the relationship between myself as a researcher and the interviewees. It is necessary to keep in mind that the researcher is not supposed to pressure the interviewees to talk about something they do not want to or lead them on with the questions. In addition, the political situation in Hungary was complex already in Spring 2016, when the data of this thesis was collected, and is even more incendiary in present day. The country’s political situation raises a question, if publishing the interviewees opinions could cause harm to them, in case they differ from Hun- garian government’s official policies. Thus, it is essential to pay attention to the privacy of the interviewees.
One of the most important privacy related questions was, how to refer to the informants during the writing process? At first, I contemplated inventing some alternate names for them, or using the capitals of their names This question was particularly tricky, since some of the informants wished to be recognized and have their voice heard. The faculty of Finno-Ugric Studies at ELTE is not big, and nor is the academic community of Finno-Ugric studies in general. Therefore, it is easy to recognize people, even when using nicknames. In the end, I was able to reach all informants via Facebook or other social media and confirm that all of them agreed with the usage of their forenames.
6 2. BACKGROUND
2.1. A brief look at Hungary’s history and development
Hungary has a long and complex history. As stated before, the country has experienced several different political systems, and the country’s physical borders have changed numerous times.
In this chapter I have chosen to focus on the events that I find most relevant, when it comes to the shaping of Hungarian identity. These events are often repeated as stories when discussing about being Hungarian. It is difficult to define the beginning of the country’s history specifi- cally, but Hungary’s creation has been widely believed to be dated approximately at the end of the 9th century, when Magyars (Hungarians in Hungarian language), Finno-Ugric people, set- tled themselves in their current location, and began occupying the middle central valley of the Danube River. However, archaeologist Gyula László has suggested that Hungary’s formation can be dated even earlier, to 670, when the Late Avars, whom László identifies as Early Mag- yars, arrived at the premises. (Encyclopedia Britannica: 15.10.2019.)
The foundation of Hungary as a state is often dated back to the year 1000 and connected to the crowning of St Stephen. His father converted into Christianity in 974, and thus the time St Stephen rose into power is also considered as the beginning of Christianity in Hungary.
(Nyyssönen 2107: 88.) During that time, the first official borders of the kingdom were also established. (Library of Congress: 1989) The fact that St Stephen received his crown from the Pope, has been repeated as an important part of Hungarian identity, both in stories and political rhetoric. (Nyyssönen 2017: 88.) St Stephen is often referred as the founder of Hungarian king- dom, and thus St Stephen’s day is celebrated in 20th of August in Hungary, as one of the coun- try’s three most important national days.
When Hungary applied for the EU’s membership in 1994, the application stressed the country’s long history along with the to be part of the Western culture and values. This emphasizing was partly based on the story of the thousand-year-old Christian nation, formed by St Stephen.
(Nyyssönen 2017:88.) In addition, the current government has also used historical events, es- pecially the story of St Stephen as a founder of Hungary as Christian nation with Western val- ues, in order to strengthen the national identity. (Nyyssönen 2017: 88.)
In 1526, Hungarian kingdom was divided in to three, as a result of the battle of Mohács between the Kingdom of Hungary, and the Ottoman Empire. Consequently, the Western-Hungary was ruled by the Habsburgs, the other part (approximately the area that today’s Hungary consists
7
of) by the Ottoman Empire, and Transylvania by Hungarian princes, who were basically under the reign of the Ottoman Empire. The situation lasted until the end of 1500th century and re- sulted as a civil war. This era of Hungarian history has also been used in today’s politics as an argument. In 2015, prime minister Orbán defended his standpoint for the ongoing migrant-crisis by highlighting the fact that Hungary has already experienced living together with the Muslim community for 150 years. According to his words, Hungarians are the only nation in Europe, who have this experience. By this, he aimed to make clear that due to this, Hungarians already know that this specific situation does not work. Of course, this statement can be criticized, and not least because the claim that Hungarians are the only Europeans with this experience is quite implausible. (Nyyssönen 2017: 93–96.)
From the end of the 1500th century, the whole Hungary was under the reign of the Habsburgs (Nyyssönen 2017: 100). One of the most repeated stories from the country’s history is the 1848’s revolution. Year 1848 is generally known as the year of revolutions in Europe. The liberalist and nationalist movements strengthened, and contradictions between social classes culminated. This resulted as several uprisings throughout the Europe. (Nyyssönen 2017: 104.) Hungary was no exception. In 15th of March 1848, a call for “free and independent Hungary for its people” was made by “the Dietal youth”, a group of young liberals led by Lajos Kossuth.
(The Hungary Initiatives Foundation: 7.7.2014). They demanded for example freedom of the press, own national bank, equal legal status and own national guard for Hungary. These de- mands have been repeated in Hungarian politics in several occasions, for example during the uprising of 1956, and after winning the elections in 2010, the right-wing party Fidesz used the rhetoric regarding freedom and independency in their political speech. (Nyyssönen 2017: 104–
108.) This can be seen as ironic, when considering the fact that the current right-wing govern- ment has often been accused of limiting democracy and freedom of speech.
The 1848 uprising has affected the shaping of Hungarian identity vastly, and since 1991, 15th of March, the beginning date of the revolution, has been celebrated as the second Hungarian national day. (Nyyssönen 2017: 102–103.) The revolt eventually led into a forming of dual monarchy, when Hungary became an autonomous partner of Austro-Hungarian empire as a result of 1867 compromise. (BBC News: 14.2.2012). The dual monarchy lasted until the end of the first world war, and it was geographically the second biggest country of the Europe of the 1700th century, with 52, 8 million inhabitants. (Nyyssönen 2017: 108).
8
As a result of the World War one, Hungary was declared as an independent republic. During the process, the country lost almost two third from its size, and thus it was geographically re- duced approximately to the area we know as Hungary today. As a result of the re-definition of the borders, millions of Hungarian native speakers left to live outside of the country’s bounda- ries. (BBC News: 14.2.2012). One of the most influential periods was the period of socialism from 1945 to 1989. After the World War two, Hungary was hopeful for the democratic devel- opment to evolve. However, as the cold war emerged, Hungary was quite small and weak coun- try, and consequently it had very little choice but to become dependent from the Soviet Union.
The communist party rose to power and all the other parties were denied in 1949. (Huotari 2011: 141). The freedom of speech was nonexistent, and the working conditions were getting worse all the time. This raised public resistance, and in October 1956 there was a public upris- ing, which led into bloody fights on the streets of Budapest. The Soviet troops then intervened the uprising, and consequently many people fled the country in fear of death penalty or impris- onment. (Huotari 2011: 142.) Nowadays, 23rd of October is celebrated as a third Hungarian national day, as the Remembrance Day of the 1956 uprising.
One of the major demands is the revolution of 1956 was to restore national sovereignty and re- evaluate the significance of national identity. The failure of this revolution deepened the feeling of national isolation. (Csepeli & Antal 200: 376.) Nevertheless, after the uprising began the period of János Kádár. During this period Hungary became a country that has been described as the freest minded socialist country, at least compared to its Eastern European neighbors.
When the communism started to collapse 1989, Hungary was thought to be one of the first ones to lead the transition to market economy and democracy. However, in 1990 Hungary was una- ble to resolve the dilemma of contradictory political and cultural definitions of the Hungarian nation. These ideological and political conflicts slowed Hungary’s transition. (Huotari 2011:
142.) As explained later, along the years Hungary developed from what was thought to be the
“model child of democracy” into the troublemaker of the EU.
Nevertheless, after the collapsing of the Soviet Union, Hungary was aiming to break the walls and open to Europe. In 1999, the country joined the military alliance North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO, and couple of years later, in 2004 it became part of the EU (BBC News:
14.2.2012). Lately there has been quite an opposite development. Since winning the parliamen- tary election in 2010, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, with his right-wing governing party Fidesz, has carried centralized political authority and denied opposition parties the control of state in- stitutions. Orbán has even built walls into Hungary’s borders in order to keep migrants out.
9
(Case & Palattella: 6.1.2016.). It can be said that there is a rebordering process going on in Hungary, and it has even been suggested, that Europe is once again dividing into East and West.
(See for example Than & Pawlak: 19.1.2016).
As one of the most visible responses for the refugee crisis, Hungary has put up steel fences on its southern borders with Serbia and Croatia to keep refugees from fleeing. In January 2016, Orbán announced that Hungary is ready to build a wall into its Romanian border, as an exten- sion to the previous walls. Not long after, in February 2016, Orbán announced that the wall will be constructed, and it will seal Hungary’s borders completely from the Southern Europe. These barriers have raised concerns and criticism from other EU countries, but some countries, such as Austria and Slovakia have even set up the fences of their own. (Than & Pawlak: 19.1.2016.) This co-operation is intriguing, especially when considering the fact, that many of the countries Hungary is currently collaborating with, are countries that used to belong to the Eastern Bloc.
Thus, the co-operation can be seen as one factor pointing towards the recurring division of the Europe.
In February 2017, it was confirmed, that Hungary will build a second wall into its southern border. The right-wing government said that second wall is needed, because they are expecting a huge number of refugees to reach the country’s borders in year 2017. According to the Hun- garian government, the aim of this second was to keep all the migrants from entering the country without control. (Hindustan times: 27.2.2017.) The wall was completed at the end of the April 2017 and was applauded as an effective measure for not only defend Hungary from unwanted migration, but also the whole EU. (Deutsche Welle: 28.4.2017). One of the most recent deci- sions of the country’s government is to suggest, that all asylum seekers should be held in sepa- rate centers, and until they receive a refugee status, and that they would not be allowed to move inside Hungary’s borders. The process for receiving the decision of refugee status might take several months, and the asylum seekers should spend that time in these centers. The critical voices from Hungary’s EU partners have even compared these planned centers to concentration camps and expressed major disapproval for this plan.
This suggestion is part of Hungary’s changing bordering policies, and thus, it seems, that there is a rebordering process taking place in Hungary. The aim to keep the asylum seekers separate from Hungarians, creates the separation between “us” and “the others”. The message for the country’s citizens is, that if Hungary does not protect its borders, refugees will flee freely, and that the country’s sovereignty is in danger. Walls are a highly visible sign of rebordering.
10
Ironically, Hungary and Hungarians had very restricted mobility for decades, until the collapse of socialism opened the country’s borders fully to Europe. By these new bordering policies, it can be argued, that Hungary is moving back to the past, and once again isolating itself with walls. The late events in relation to Hungary’s colorful history form an interesting starting point for my research.
2.2. Hungary and the European Union – a complex relationship
As stated before, after the collapsing of the Soviet Union, Hungary was considered as some sort of a model country, leading other post-communist countries towards democracy. However, Hungary’s first years in the process towards democracy, and the EU, were not without troubles.
In May 2004, Hungary joined the EU, and nevertheless the problems, the country had a good reputation as an eligible country to join the EU. and build democracy inside the country’s bor- ders. (Nyyssönen 2017: 218.) Thus, it is relevant to examine, how and why did Hungary’s re- lationship with the EU, change. Here I examine briefly the reasons, that changed Hungary from being the “model child” into a troublemaker” of the EU.
During the time Hungary joined the EU, the country had a rather good reputation among its future partner-countries. Nevertheless, it also reserved some criticism right from the start of the membership. According to the EU, Hungary’s politics considering Romans was not ideal, and I addition, reforms considering the country’s healthcare system were inadequate. Government’s role in the country’s media received also major criticism. Hungary’s EU-partners perceived that the country’s government had too much power over the country’s media, and thus it did not meet the standards of the EU. (Nyyssönen 2017: 218.)
It has been suggested that the financial pressure from the EU, together with pressure to increase democracy level, led into a crisis, and thus, the former model child of the EU, has gained a status of a troublemaker. (Nyyssönen 2017: 19). Also, it is quite apparent, that the ongoing migration crisis has worsened Hungary’s relationship with the EU. Hungary is part of the EU Schengen area, which enables its’ citizens to cross internal borders without having border checks. The Schengen also enables the citizens of its member countries to travel, work and live in any EU country without special formalities. (European Commission: 1.7.2013.) Hungary’s recent actions point towards rebordering process, and it can be questioned, if the country is still fully committed to the Schengen agreement.
11
In September 2015, the EU decided to relocate 160 000 migrants across Europe. Hungary op- posed this decision, but the plan was approved. (BBC: 24.2.2016.) In February 2016, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán declared, that Hungary will hold a referendum against the EU’s migration quotas. Although the EU-quotas about relocation are binding, Orbán claimed that without asking the opinion of citizens, it is a misuse of power. (The Economist: 26.2.2016.) The referendum was held 2.10.2016, but the result was not valid, because not enough citizens voted. The limit is that at least 50% of the citizens must vote for the result to valid, and only about 43% voted in this case. Those who voted, were almost all pro Orbán’s plans, at least according to his government. Therefore, the deputy of Fidesz, claimed that the referendum was a victory anyway. As he put it: “Today is a sweeping victory for all those who reject the EU’s mandatory, unlimited quotas, it is a sweeping victory for all those who believe that the founda- tions of a strong European Union can only be the strong nation states.” (Kingsley: 2.10.2016) Orbán has even declared that Europe is “in the grip of madness”. He claimed that the migration crisis is not the problem of Europe, but a German problem, and that the wall in Hungary’s border is defending the whole Schengen area. Orbán has also said that Muslim refugees pose a threat to Christian identity of Europe. (Traynor: 3.9.2015.) In this he seems to emphasize the unity of Europe rather than the division, and Hungary as a part of EU.
Hungary does not necessarily see its actions as isolating from the Europe, or at least Orbán claims that his actions are for the security of Europe. Hungary has indeed lately formed alliances especially with former soviet countries. The Visegrád countries, Slovakia, Czech-Republic and Poland, have resisted the migration policies of the EU together. (Nyyssönen 2017: 19). On the other hand, Orbán has declared that the era of multiculturalism is over, and that Hungary should be spared from the costs of it. He defined multiculturalism as “the coexistence of Islam, Asian religions and Christianity, and promised to do everything that is possible to spare Hungary from that. (Dunai: 3.6.2015.) By making these declarations, Orbán divides Hungary from the multi- cultural Europe, and therefore makes a clear statement that the EU’s values of mobility are not the values of Hungary. One might argue that there is a different type of alliance being formed between countries with a right-wing government, especially between former Soviet countries.
Orbán has also suggested that Europe should build a wall together in the border of northern Greece to protect the continent, and that building a wall in Hungary’s borders is only a second- best option after that (Feher: 15.10.2015). This plea indicates Hungary’s wish to be part of
12
united Europe that would protect itself together. However, the real consequences might be just the opposite: Europe might as well split in two over these matters. At least, the relations between Hungary and some of its EU partners will likely continue to get more complex.
The mobility Hungary is promoting seems to be in some extent a one-way policy. The country aims to keep its borders closed for the migrants, but at the same time it aims to keep its borders open to Europe. There are some plans however, that suggest that Hungary, or maybe it is more correct to say Orbán and his parliament, want to restrict the mobility of Hungarian people to keep them from emigrating. There has been a suggestion, that students who get the state schol- arship to study in Hungarian University for free, should stay and work in Hungary for couple of years after they graduate. It is very unlikely, that the EU will accept this sort of law. The population of Hungary has decreased in the recent years, partly because people are moving into other EU-countries in order to achieve a better standard of living, or simply because of job opportunities. The law would ensure that professionals would stay and benefit their home coun- try. This kind of restricted mobility and controlling of the workforce reminds us once again of the socialist era.
Despite that it seems, that the Hungary is saying no to refugees and multiculturalism, there are some people the country still wishes to cross its borders. Firstly, tourism is an important source of livelihood for Hungary, and therefore the country will probably not want to limit the mobility of European tourists. The economic growth of Hungary is very dependent of EU-funding and other EU-countries, such as Germany. Also, Hungary seems to be keen to attract people with Hungarian origins to strengthen their Hungarian identity and language. In 2001 Hungary agreed on Hungarian Status Law, which strengthened the positions of Hungarian kin minorities abroad.
This act targets almost three million people, members of the Hungarian minority groups from Hungarian neighboring states such as Croatia, Serbia, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia and Ukraine. (Udrea 2015: 30–31)
Even though Hungary’s relationship with the EU is complex, it is fair to say that Hungary is greatly benefitting from its membership. Many projects taking place in Hungary currently, are funded by the EU, and even though Hungary is very critical towards the EU, it can be ques- tioned, whether the country would even survive without the membership. It is probably vital for Hungary to remain in good terms with the EU, when it comes to funding, but since the recent events have created a lot of tension between Hungary and the EU, the situation is quite complex.
In fact, there has been a threat to suspend structural funding given to Hungary because of the
13
country’s political actions. In February 2016, Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi said that the EU should cut its funding for Eastern European countries that are unwilling to accept migrants.
(Novak: 18.9.2015.). In 2015, European Commission claimed that EU funding is the only thing that keeps Hungary’s economic growth going. (Novak: 10.11.2015.)
At the same time, Orbán is actively criticizing EU for its actions, not only with the migrant crisis, but also with the economic crisis. In June 2015, Orbán called the EU’s response for the financial crisis “the clumsiest” possible and dismissed the possibility of Hungary to adopt Euro as a currency (Dunai: 3.6.2015). There seems to be a contradiction between Orbán’s actions and pleas from EU. In my thesis, I am particularly interested in, how my informants experience this complex situation. Many of them wished to work abroad, so therefore mobility would be vital for their future. However, there were also informants, who were critical towards the EU and its actions. The interesting question to examine is, how the younger generation experiences this development.
2.3. Finno-Ugric ties
All the informants that were interviewed for this thesis were studying Finno-Ugric studies at ELTE. Thus, I also highlight their conceptions of Finno-Ugric ties and heritage as identity building element. In this chapter I therefore explain briefly, what Finno-Ugric peoples are, and how they are related to each other. There are over 23 million people in the world, that speak Uralic (Finno-Ugric) languages. Most of them live in their own nation states, but in Russia there are around 20 peoples, in total about 3,3 million peoples that live separately from each other.
Culturally and genetically these peoples have very little in common apart from the language.
This study is based on the understanding of Finno-Ugric peoples as different (sub)groups of people forming one ethnolinguistic group by way of sharing one ethnolinguistic collective iden- tity (Laakso 2001: 25–27). This is a constructivist point of view. From this angle, ethnolinguis- tic collective identity as well as collective identities in general, are not biologically or culturally determined. They are rather social constructions, which are never fixed but are open to internal and external changes and influences (Snow: 2001).
These identities are based on the shared conception of “us” among a group of people due to mutual imagined or real features among its members such as culture and language, and thus
14
making a difference from members of other groups (Snow: 2001). When speaking of ethnolin- guistic collective identities, the feeling of “us” is primarily based on real or imagined common attributes such as blood ties, culture, language and history. These attributes contribute to the self-understanding of the members a group as one ethnic group. In addition, speaking the same language is essential for emphasizing the similarities among the members ethnolinguistic group. Common language works as a connecting factor among the various members of the group and separates it from other groups of people speaking another language. (Encyclopedia Britannica: 2017). Therefore, it can be argued, that the ethnolinguistic collective identity of Finno-Ugric peoples is based on the common understanding among its members, how to repre- sent an ethnolinguistic group on basis of their joint history and ancestry. Also, the collective identity is hereby based on the he fact that all their “native languages” belong to the Finno- Ugric language family.
There is wide consensus nowadays, that the ancestral Uralic people of today’s Finno-Ugric people represented one specific group of people speaking one Uralic proto-language and living in the ancestral Uralic homeland located on both sides of the Urals along the rivers Ob, Irtish and Kama in Eastern Europe and Western Siberia between the 6th and the 4th millennium BC (Klima 2004:15–24.) Around 4,000 BC, the Samoyeds belonging to the ancient Uralic people moved south-east to the Ob in the Sajan Mountains resulting in the dissolution of the Uralic language family into currently known two major branches of the Uralic language family, the Finno-Ugric and the Samoyedic (Bereczki 2004). The Finno-Ugric language unity is suggested of having lasted until about 3,000 BC, before splitting into further sub-branches due to migra- tion movements. Today’s Finno-Ugric peoples are all speaking a language belonging to the Finno-Ugric language family, which divides into several sub-branches. (Bereczki 2004: 165).
15 3. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
3.1. Discursive cultural, ethnic and national identities
With the concept of identity, we aim to define, who we are, and it is often divided into subjective and collective identities. Collective identities are basically the way we divide people into “us”
and them”. Thus, collective identity is about belonging into a certain group. (Eriksen 1993: 59–
60.) Subjective identity, one the other hand, refers to the procesess by which we distinguish ourselves from the others as individuals, based on the differences. (Grossberg 1996: 93). It is not always possible to separate collective and subjective identity from each other and neither it is needed. These concepts are artificial, and in real life the procesess are more complex. Thus, certain traits can function as separating and connective factors simultaneously. (Liebkind 1988:
66–67, 70). As an example, being Hungarian can be a connective factor among a group of Hungarians (collective identity). On the other hand, being Hungarian can operate as a distin- guishing element in an international group (subjective identity). The concept of identity is com- plex and multilayered, and thus it is difficult to define. Stuart Hall has argued that a person has a different identity in every group they belong. (Hall 1999: 3.)
The concept of cultural identity emphasizes culture’s role in the construction procesess of iden- tities. This includes for example shared historical experiences and cultural codes. These codes are repeated in communities through cultural myths, narratives and symbols. (Hall 2003: 85.) Cultural and ethnic identity are partly overlapping concepts. Ethnicity or ethnic identity has been defined as individual’s awareness of their own cultural traits. Thus, ethnicity has been viewed as a factor that affects in forming one’s cultural identity. Other factors are for example age, gender, social-class, language and religion. Both cultural and ethnic identity refer to a feel- ing of belonging into a certain group that shares common cultural facets. (Hall 1999: 54, Lieb- kind 1994: 23.)
As stated before, the idea of cultural identity is based on the conception that individual’s iden- tity is greatly affected by ownership of culture, including factors such as language, religion and traditions such as traditional clothing and food. These practices can create a feeling of belonging into a certain group. When we see ourselves as a part of collective system of meanings, we are able to distinguish ourselves from “them” and “others”. Thus, culture can be seen as one of the most vital factors when forming identities. (Hall 2003: 85.)
Cultural identity has also been emphasized as discursive process, meaning that identities are constantly produced and altered. Thus, discursive identities are also expressed, represented and
16
performed in various ways. In modern, globalized world, identities are not permanent, but con- tinuously changing and consist from multiple, even contradictory factors. (Hall 1999: 20–23.) This postmodern approach to identities considers them as narratives. It implies that people are constantly telling stories of themselves, and thus creating their identities. These narratives ex- press the aspects of public and communal identity. Thus, narratives of identities have both sub- jective and collective aspects. These narratives can be powerful, when structuring and renewing cultural meanings. (Lawler 2002: 252.) Thus, also cultural identities are understood as pro- cesses, and are constantly created through negotiation considering sameness and differences.
(Lähdesmäki 2014: 33.) In this study, identities are mainly understood as discursive cultural identities, which the interviewees are constantly negotiating and shaping.
The concept of ethnicity or ethnic identity refers to the awareness of belonging to a group, that shares particular traits. This includes for example territorial, cultural, religious and linguistic charachteristics, and also the perception of us in relationship to others (them). In other words, ethnicity is a socially constructed and relative social phenomenon, which is produced and re- produced in social interaction between the members of the group, or individual’s self-recogni- tion. Ethnicity is also generated by the outgroup adscription, meaning the identity, that is given to a certain group by others. (Eriksen 1993: 4)
Thus, ethnicity is a socially constructed phenomenon, which does not automatically depend on
“objective” charachteristics. In fact, it is possible to separate two major approaches, by which the concept of ethnicity can be approached. The first approach is primordialist, which under- stands ethnicity as a fundamental and permanent trait of human nature. Thus, this approach considers ethnicity as something essential, a characteristic, that is attributed at birth or produced due to the need to adapt to environmental factors and also defined by territorial boundaries.
Therefore, ethnicity depends on cultural traits, which are considered as natural. The other ap- proach can be described constructivist, subjectivist or symbolic, in which ethnicity is consid- ered as a socially constructed phenomenon, instead of something natural and given. (Barth 1969: 9-10).
When approaching the concept of ethnicity or ethnic identity, rather than choosing one of these two perspectives, it is beneficial to understand, that both of them can be useful. Ethnicity is not automatically based on objective facts, but nevertheless it can be supported for example by cultural, religious and territorial premises. (Molina & Rodríguez-García 2018: 3.) In my thesis I understand ethnicity not as given, but constantly changing and negotiable phenomena.
17
However, I also take on account, that factors such as language, history and physical bordering processes have an effect on how people construct their ethnic identity. I also consider, how the informants construct their ethnic identity in relation to “others”.
The concept of ethnicity is closely linked to nationhood and nationalism (the understanding of belonging to a nation as a community or “a people”) (Molina & Rodríguez-García 2018: 3).
The idea of national identity varies in different countries, since they all have different political and historical backgrounds. Like cultural identities, national identities are transformable, con- stantly re-produced and changing. (Lähdesmäki 2014: 37.) National identity can be approached by emphasizing ethnic belonging and unity based on language, common origins, culture and traditions. It can also be defined by stressing the membership of a certain civil society and participation in it. When defining national identity in this manner, the idea of it is quite loose, and national identity can also be quite easily gained or lost. (Smith 1991: 15, Mähönen & Jasin- skaja-Lahti 2013: 256.)
In Hungary’s case, this conception of national identity means, that one identifies themselves as a Hungarian simply due to the membership of Hungarian civil society. However, as my analysis will show, the issue of national identity is more complex, and, in many cases, it is defined through common elements, such as culture and traditions.
3.2. Area -based identity and “Europeanization”
Cultural identities of cities, regions nations and continents can also be referred as area-based identities. Thus, local identities of the people are seen to be constructed by their awareness of a place or a region, and its characteristics. This awareness is combined with a feeling of unity and togetherness among inhabitants of the region. (Paasi 1996: 209.) For example, features of a city or a nation are closely linked to people’s identities. The increased emphasizing of regional identities has also been considered as a part of globalization. Thus, the increased emphasizing of regional identities has also been considered as a part of globalization. (Paasi 2009: 466–467.) Area-based identities are often referred as multilayered identities. This is due to the fact, people are considered to have different identities in different situations, and since it is possible for people to identify themselves based on more than one area. (Lähdesmäki 2014: 34.)
In recent academic discussions, European cities and regions are often seen in relation to Europe, and, on the other hand, the picture of Europe is being constructed through its regions and
18
localities. This process has been referred as “Europeanization of the local”, or in reverse, “lo- calization of Europe”. (See for example Johler 2002: 9.) Through this process, nationalities and nations ate often considered to be losing their previous position, and regions gaining a new meaning. (Lähdesmäki 2014: 36.)
The EU-based funding for cities and regions has produced new possibilities for local actors the EU-level projects in cities and regions have opened new opportunities to re-consider their iden- tities (Lähdesmäki 2014: 36). I argue that the EU-based funding has also created new possibil- ities for Hungarians to re-think their identities. Thus, I will later analyze the informant’s con- ceptions of the EU, and the way it shapes their identities as Hungarians and global citizens.
At the end of the 1900’s, several sociologists, such as Baumann and Maffesol predicted, that nation-states would lose their significance as identity defining element, but nationality, on the other hand, would increase its meaning when defining identities. On the other hand, scholars have at the same time emphasized transnational interaction and globalization. These cultural and societal changes are considered to increase regionalist and nationalist movements, and to activate people to foster their own cultural roots and traditions. (Lähdesmäki 2014: 37.) In Hungary’s case, it is quite evident, that these cultural and societal changes have in fact raised nationalist movements. As my analysis will later show, belonging to the EU can also work as an element, that strengthens person’s national identity as a Hungarian. The fear of losing one’s own cultural features and traditions as a result of globalization can result as a deeper feeling of one’s Hungarianness. On the other hand, the fact, that Hungary belongs to the EU, opens ways to re-think one’s identity. This can create a whole new conception of identity, that is a mix of global and local.
3.3. Rebordering, debordering and transnationalism
Today we live in a world of territorial borders whose main purpose is to mark spatial differ- ences. Our lives have long been spatially ordered by a nested hierarchy of territorial borders neighborhood, city, county, region, state. (Popescu 2012: 10.) Borders are built every day through ideology, discourses, attitudes and political institutions. This process is referred as bor- dering, and physically it appears as concrete borders and visa regimens. It is also visible in public discourse for example related to identity, language rights and immigration. (Scott 2009:
235.) State borders are probably the best-known territorial borders, and they are mostly
19
considered as self- evident. This means that they are usually seen as unquestioned facts, and therefore are rarely challenged, and when they are, it is in order to change them, not to re-move them altogether. (Popescu 2012: 10)
Borders are also geographical depictions of power relations and are reflected in the minds of the people who live with borders. Thus, borders are not only physical, but also social construc- tions. Mentally borders separate people between native and foreign, known and unknown, and therefore also between us and them, and therefore borders point to mental divisions that are constructed among people on each side of the border. (Yndigegn 2011: 48.) Thus, Bordering is a concrete manifestation of reterritorialization, both mentally and physically. (Scott 2009: 235).
At the same time with territorial borders, we also live in a world defined by mobility, and where constant border crossing is necessary. As Gabriel Popescu points out, in a way it is ironic, how people have been busy surrounding themselves with borders, only to realize the need to cross them. (2012: 10). Lately, the meaning of borders has heightened in an era of globalization.
Borders are central in the changes related to globalization. Globalization is creating new ways people and societies relate to the space surrounding them in the twenty-first century. During the early 1990s there was a vision of a borderless world (debordering). Nevertheless, in the early 2000s it became clear that borders were conserving their significance, however in new ways.
(rebordering). Despite the world is now open to various globalization flows, borders are far from disappearing. Instead, they are going through both a qualitative and a quantitative trans- formation. Borders are changing their nature and multiplying in number, but at the same time some linear aspects are diminishing. In addition, borders are at the same time obtaining more regional and network like characteristics. (Popescu 2012: 11.)
Deterritorialization and reterritorialization, as well as debordering and rebordering are spatial demonstrations of these changes in territorial organization and social life. (Popescu 2012: 63).
As stated before, it has been claimed that there is an ongoing rebordering process in Hungary.
On the other hand, the country faced a major debordering process after the Soviet Union col- lapsed. In addition, the fact that today’s Hungary is part of the EU and globalized world creates a process of debordering. Thus, it is relevant in my study to open the concepts of rebordering and debordering, as well as reterritorialization and deterritorialization.
Deterritorialization indicates social relations that are escaping from a traditional conception of state territoriality. This happens mainly by overcoming the role of state territories have played before. Debordering, on the other hand mainly indicates the diminishing role of the border as a
20
barrier or even the disappearing of the border itself. The meaning of debordering is more spe- cific, and it focuses on the geographical actions related to borders, while deterritorialization refers to the wider territory of the State and social relations of the citizens of a State. Neverthe- less, deterritorialization and debordering are not viewed as separate processes since it is difficult to have one without the other. Territories are identified through their borders, and thus, the deterritorialization of social relations indicates the removal of territorial barriers and also the other way around. (Popescu 2012: 63.) Deterritorialization and debordering are usually linked with globalization. Hence, it is often suggested that the pressures of globalization have dimin- ished the meaning of national territories, when it comes to economics, politics and culture. In wider sense this development points into decreasing importance of national territory, thus cre- ating ways of understanding territoriality (i.e. regionalism) in the modern era. (Paasi 2009: 466–
467.)
Like deterritorialization and debordering, reterritorialization and rebordering are inseparable concepts. Reterritorialization basically indicates to the restructuring of modern territorial or- ganization of social life. Rebordering, on the other hand means the reappearance of borders as barriers or the construction of new borders. It is significant to note that rebordering is not only about supporting the existing state borders, but also about various ways of bordering that in- clude new types of borders and new actions related to borders (Walters 2006: 187). When stud- ying the current bordering processes, it must be recognized that nation-state system and territo- rial states as well as borders are affected by globalization and its flows. As global flows meet territorial states, that reterritorialization and rebordering happens. (Popescu 2012: 63.)
It is important to understand deterritorialization, reterritorialization, debordering and reborder- ing as processes that unravel at the same time. Some spaces might be experiencing debordering while some are experiencing rebordering. Likewise, the same space might experience both debordering and rebordering simultaneously. (Popescu 2012: 66.) In present European politics, rebordering and debordering are simultaneously existing processes. From the beginning, when the EU/EEC was formed in 1957, debordering and mobility has been a major European goal.
The Rome Treaty and the four freedoms it enabled people to settle, work and study in other EU countries, and the Schengen agreement, first signed in 1985 removed some of the physical bor- der control between the participating states. These actions have made it easy for citizens in Europe to cross borders. (Yndigegn 2011: 47.)
21
On the other hand, worries related to losing control over local issues, national identity and sov- ereignty have been brought up in European debates more and more. Due to that, we can cur- rently see a phenomenon that could be referred as rebordering of national states within the EU, and also, within the whole EU, a raised demand for more protective borders, for example against irregular immigration. (Scott 2009: 233.) This dualism is also visible in Hungary’s present pol- itics. The country is experiencing both rebordering and debordering processes at the same time.
In addition, there is a debordering process going on outside Hungary’s borders, while the coun- try carries on its own rebordering process, for example by building walls to its borders.
Recently, anthropological, sociological and geographical research has widely addressed glocal- ization as a phenomenon. The term itself is not very commonly used, but nevertheless, scholars have discussed about the theme widely. It has been argued, that although global and local are often separated from each other, in real life, local-level life is often influenced by global-level affairs. Also, these global-level affairs do not exist autonomously without local-level influ- ences. Thus, global and local cannot be separated from each other. Instead, they are understood as connected phenomena, that have effect on each other. (Eriksen 2007:2.) In my thesis, I also understand global and local as connected factors, that influence each other.
The approach of this study is transnational. The transnational approach takes account both global and local aspects, and therefore, in this context, globalization can also be referred as glocalization. In today’s world, an increasing number of people are living in transnational and mixed contexts, and thus blending specific ethnic identifications with worldwide bonds. Due to this development, the societies are currently facing the challenge, how to cope with co-existing processes of globalization and localization, integrity and diversity, assimilation and multicul- turalism. unity and diversity, assimilation and multiculturalism. Thus, in this approach, the con- cepts such as ethnicity, multiculturalism and transnationalism point to a growing understanding of cultural diversity as one of the most essential aspects in globalized world. (Molina &
Rodríguez-García 2018: 1.)
Transnational approach enables studying people’s everyday life as a globally connected pro- cess. The world is global and local at the same time: people have become more global and borderless; on the other hand, they want to emphasize their own culture in comparison to others.
Also, political borders are as relevant as ever in the globalized era; thus, the world is global and local at the same time and not “borderless”, although the distances have diminished, and mo- bility is greater than ever. (Appadurai 1996.) Hence, transnational approach is advantageous for
22
my study. In this thesis, I examine the informant’s identities and local-level everyday lives as globally connected processes. I also understand mobility and other transnational processes as meaningful factors in building their identity.
3.3. Generational research
Generation is one mode of social separation. It categorizes people according to their location in historical time, or in relation to each other (Nugin, Kannike & Raudsepp 2016: 14). Karl Mann- heim defines generation as a cultural phenomenon that can only be understood, when examining it relation to social and historical context. (Mannheim 1952: 290–292). Unlike an age-based categorization, for example young or old, generational classification focuses on external influ- ences in human development (Nugin, Kannike & Raudsepp 2016: 14). Thus, it focuses on the social changes and certain socio-cultural, technological and political circumstances, which in- fluence certain generation. These influences affect generations throughout their lives and reflect in their self-consciousness and their conceptions of other generations. (Nugin, Kannike &
Raudsepp 2016: 14.) Thus, generation can be considered an important, identity defining ele- ment.
One of the most influential theorists in generation studies is Karl Mannheim, and many theorists have based their research on his ideas. Mannheim was the first to make a division between two main approaches to generations. The first approach is referred as “naturalist”, as it defines gen- eration simply by birth cohort, and thus understands generation as something that is given in birth. The second approach highlights the significance of social and historical context, and thus implies that generations emerge from shared experiences and are dependent on changes in so- cieties. (1952: 276.)
However, there are also other approaches in generation studies than Mannheimian. One option is to define generation according to their success in certain social spheres. This approach can be useful when studying for example second generation of immigrants, or the third generation of Soviet people. (Nugin, Kannike & Raudsepp 2016: 16.) This option of defining generation could be useful for my thesis, since I am studying a generation grown after the socialist period in Hungary. However, I have chosen not to approach my research question from this angle, since my study focuses on certain people’s experiences, not a success of their generation. Suc- cess, or their experience of success, is of course relevant, but nevertheless, the focus of my study is different.
23
As stated before, generations can be seen as natural. The naturalist conception of generation is based simply on the year of birth. This approach is used especially in marketing research. Ac- cording to this approach, all members of this generation, regardless of their social, ethnic and other societal differences are the same. It creates a picture of homogenous group of people, based on their location in historical timeline. (Nugin, Kannike & Raudsepp 106: 16–17.) Alt- hough I do define my informants based on their birth year to some extent, in my study I do not see generation as a natural thing, but rather something that emerges from surrounding environ- ment and common experiences. Neither Mannheim views generation as a natural object but produced through common experiences. These common experiences create a shared perspective among the members of a generation. (Yurchak 2006: 30.)
When speaking of generations in the field of social sciences, it is important to keep in mind that the word has a dual meaning. Firstly, it can refer to a certain birth cohort including everyone born in a certain historical period. From the other perspective, generation only includes certain elite, who has societal impact. (Nugin, Kannike & Raudsepp 2016: 14.) In this study, generation is understood as something that includes everyone born in certain historical period, right before the Soviet Union collapsed, or after it. Thus, Mannheim’s first conception of generation is ap- plicable in this study.
On the other hand, Mannheim’s second perception of generations is also relevant for my study.
In this narrower perception of generation, Mannheim defines generation through reflexivity and the ability to create new identities, meaning thought and actions in society. Thus, a generation becomes apparent during major social changes. (Nugin, Kannike & Raudsepp 2016:15.) During these severe social changes, the young are the first to experience and negotiate the new social conditions. Instead of being only objects in social change, these generations become agents that shape the transformation. In this approach, generation is also not homogenous, since they have different experiences, political views and social statuses. (Mannheim 1998: 183). This concep- tion of generation has also been referred as lineage. (Yurchak 2006: 30). Generations are not only shaped by national developments, but also constructed in relation to generational structures in other countries. Global events and processes also have their impact in shaping generations.
(Nugin, Kannike & Raudsepp 2016: 17.)
The two conceptions of generation do not have to be in contradiction with each other. It is possible to understand generation both as a cohort and as a group of people that have shared experiences. The first conception of generation emphasizes the age difference between
24
generations and assumes that people of same age have some things in common with each other.
The latter emphasizes the difference between generations due to their experiences. This con- ception also assumes that there is a bond between children and parents, and the understanding of generation emerges from the differences between them. (Yurchak 2006: 30-31.) I view my informants as a generation that has common experiences due to the surrounding circumstances and although they are categorized by their birth year, the comparison between children and parents is significant.
As my analysis will later show, the informants often understand their own generation in relation to their parent’s generation. Categorization by the birth year is important, since I am examining the experiences of people grown after the Soviet era. However, this brings us back to the un- derstanding generations through common experience of major societal changes. Thus, for my study understanding generations in the terms of latter perception is more relevant than under- standing them merely as a cohort.
