This chapter was aimed at exposing the reader to the complex debate on ethnicity and to clarify some of the concepts and the approach used in the study. The two sections allowed the reader to see the interplay between theory and practice. The section serves as a foundation to the subsequent empirical chapters and also to the concluding chapter. Of particular importance was the controversies surrounding ethnicity; the “dominant discourse”, presenting groups as
„givens‟, and the pragmatic approach pioneered by Barth (1969), which looks at ethnicity as a situational and a conscious effort of group members in response to social, economic and political pressures, as well as basis for social action. I have stressed that there are multiple, interlocking or overlapping collective identities. However, the chapter has also shown how the Kamba and the Maasai make sense of their ethnic identity and distinctiveness, a theme that is pursued in greater detail in chapters three and four.
The readers were introduced to the concept of „coexistence‟ and its discursive dimensions.
This chapter has shown that „ethnic coexistence‟ is a contested concept. However, it has emerged that coexistence is about difference, juxtaposition of seemingly incompatible groups and antagonism as well as interactions between groups, the possibility of switching identities and external influence. The various dimensions contained in this provisional definition are expounded in the empirical chapters, with a succinct synthesis in the final chapter.
The process of data assembling has shown how the researcher entered the field and how he was recruited into the life worlds of the researched and how interaction with various groups shaped the „methods‟ of research and the content of what was assembled. The fieldwork
71 See Bourdieu (1990: 82).
60
experience provides preliminary ideas on how the Kamba and the Maasai „coexist‟ and how the researcher acted like a point of convergence for the actors who made sense of their own identity and difference. I acted like a mediator of peaceful coexistence. The challenges experienced during fieldwork, and the need for flexibility, underscore the subjectivity of the research process. The „rejection‟ I often experienced among „my own people‟ and the warm reception I got from the Maasai, partly confirm why difference plays a complimentary role in coexistence relationships as I will be arguing in chapter five.
In the next two chapters, I examine emic notions of ethnic difference based on common depictions that often present ethnic groups as unchanging entities. The aim will be to define the actors, how they make sense of ethnic difference and how this distinctiveness is an important dimension of coexistence.
61
CHAPTER THREE: THE ACTORS: ETHNIC DEPICTIONS, DIFFERENCE AND COEXISTENCE (PART ONE)
I have already noted that the Kamba and the Maasai are distinct but interacting groups.
Chapters three and four seek to deepen this understanding by addressing one of the basic tasks of any study on interactions, that is, identifying the actors or parties and their attributes, and how these influence how they relate with one another. These chapters take up the debate in chapter two, to show how groups oscillate between primordial and constructivist ideals to make sense of their identities and interactions in their daily struggles. My argument in these two chapters is that to say ethnic groups „coexist‟, means that they are „distinct‟. In other words, I consider distinctiveness as one of the most basic requirements in a coexistence relationship. I shall discuss this distinctiveness and ethnic difference by presenting and analysing the rich body of Kamba-Maasai ethnic depictions. From Horowitz (1985), we know that ethnic groups that share physical space have myths about their relative values and stereotypes about one another (see also Barth, 1969: 19). This study however goes a step further and shows how ethnic stereotypes define difference and therefore how depictions become relevant in discussing coexistence. But stereotypes, particularly negative ones, do not just expose difference but also antagonism and rivalry, aspects that are an integral part of interethnic coexistence.
I have to point out however that in as much as „coexistence‟ is about difference, antagonism and rivalry, it is also about cross-ethnic transactions, sharing and commonalities. Whereas the bulk of these exchanges are discussed in chapter five, I will highlight the contradictions in ethnic depictions. By „contradictions‟, I mean that although actors present other groups with whom they live together as if they were separate and unconnected to them, observation of everyday practices reveals a different story. Observing everyday practices involves delineating the “critical interfaces” that show the points of contradiction and discontinuity between the different and often incompatible lifeworlds of the actors. This allows us to understand the production of the heterogeneous cultural phenomena and outcomes of cross-ethnic interaction and discursive domains (see Long, 1997: 34). Using an entirely emic approach, I show who the Maasai are from the eyes and lived experiences of the Kamba (chapter three) and vice versa (chapter four). In each case, I also present the logic and meaning behind ethnic depictions,72 as well as the group‟s response on how it is portrayed.
The discussion is not simply limited to ethnic stereotypes per se, but goes beyond these
72 Ethnic depictions here mean generalisations, stereotypes, representations and portrayals. The concepts are used interchangeably in the study. In fact, Torstrick calls them “popular understandings” (2000: 36).
62
popular representations to discuss issues around which these depictions revolve, namely the modes of subsistence, cultural practices, disparities in social transformation and the access and deployment of resources within and across the two ethnic groups.
3.1 Kamba ethnic depictions of the Maasai