National Identity as a Discursive Normative Process

2. Media Content and Media Institution in Terms of Critical

2.1 National Identity as a Discursive Normative Process

NATIONAL IDENTITY AS A DISCURSIVE PROCESS

In this study, the understanding of the national identity as a discursive process is based on two media-related aspects. I first differentiate between identity stories and master narratives. Secondly, I identify the relationship between identity stories and peoples’ self-identification.

It is rather usual to emphasize the narrative character of the identity where the stories have been pointed out as discrete events interlinked into a meaningful history (Bhabha 1990). As Estonian historian Marek Tamm writes, a narrative template is a very common way to conceptualize national identity, as an essential device for guaranteeing the coherence of the events of the past (Tamm 2008, 502, 505, 510-511). As a result of this process, the ‘master narrative’ as dominant and widely accepted story of the nation can be taken as an example.

However, this study takes a different approach towards the story of us. In order to distinguish between the coherent narrative templates and the contradictory stories characteristic to the media texts, I would call the stories of us as discursive, not narrative, emphasizing the role of the actors as well as potential confrontation between the stories. My aim is not to show how odd things are used to construct meaningful history but to deal with these odd and often contradictory things as part of banal everyday stories. This way, as Jansen (2012, 79) writes, it is possible to show that national identity is often incongruous and frequently tension laden. Furthermore, it also has to be noted that while in relation with narratives, the importance of history and cultural memory are emphasized, in the current study the stories are based on everyday topics and not historical events.

Another point that deserves further attention is the relationship between the identity stories of the media and peoples’ self-identification. Mirca Madianou (2005) criticizes analyzing identities on the basis of the media content as an example of the top-down perspective and textual determinism.

As an alternative approach, she emphasizes the need for a bottom-up perspective that will examine identities as lived, performed and articulated by the people (Madianou 2005, 3, 19, 48, 129, 131). Thus, instead of asking if the media provides ‘social glue’ to bind people together into nation, the actual question is what impact if any media have on the ways people talk about themselves and the nation (Madianou 2005, 2).

Here it has to be noted that Madianou’s understanding and analysis of identity is based on the people’s manifold self-identification that the media may or may not influence, whereas the understanding of national identity as stories of us presumes that identity is constructed in the media texts.

Therefore, these stories can also be analyzed on the basis of the media content

without, however, drawing causal connection between the media content and the self-identification of the people.

Nevertheless, it still has to be noted that the lack of a causal connection cannot be equated to the non-existence of any link. First, I agree with the claim that the media contribute to creating a common communicative space where the majority of people participate and that either include or exclude (Schlesinger 2000 and Madianou 2005, 56, 73-74). In this process, particular phraseology is made available to the people for thinking and talking about the nation. Furthermore, representations about the nation, for example its place in the world and its relationship to Others, are offered in these spaces (Madianou 2005, 19, 129).

Second, I agree with Madianou’s point that it is misleading to assume that people necessarily adopt the views presented in the media since they might contest them (2005, 15, 17, 129). In the current study, this point refers to the views concerning Estonia’s EU accession. The EU accession process and forming of Estonia as a candidate country fits rather well to the claim that the less direct experience individuals have with a given issue area, the more people will rely on the news media (Zucker 1978, 227; see also Suhonen 1994, 47-53).

As d’Haenens and Mattelart (2011, 237) write especially in connection with unfamiliar topics that are far removed from people’s daily lives, media functions as a substitute for the real experiences and constructs the social fabric of people’s lives (see also Vallaste 2013, 65 and Past and Palk 2005, 64).

For example, the vocabulary of the accession process had launched neologisms like ‘Euro negotations’, ‘Euro norms’ etc., that have become familiar through the media and taken into usage by the wider public.

Furthermore, since Estonian accession was decided by a binding referendum, EU related public opinion as well as the media’s role in forming it was continuously surveyed by opinion polls. Therefore, the data obtained from the various opinion polls can be combined with the media analysis to reveal the potential links between these two data sets as common denominators characterizing the whole process (see also Raik 2003).

NATIONAL IDENTITY AS A PROCESS OF CONSTRUCTING US

The discursivity of national identity clarifies the importance of the media in relation to national identity stories, whereas in this section I will deal with the question, of how and on the basis of what is identity constructed. Even though Billig’s (1995) notion of banal nationalism enables us to understand identity as a discursive process that takes place on a daily basis in the media texts, his keys for scrutinizing how it is done, are not applicable to the current study. For instance, the weather forecasts and sporting sections analyzed by Billig are out of the scope of the current study.

In principle, I could focus on the usage of us and here in the media texts that would probably lead to the conclusions that in Postimees, the word us refers widely to the nation but probably also to some other community(ies)

(see Rosie et al. 2006). Nevertheless, such a simple analysis does not say much about how Estonian national identity in relation to the EU is constructed in Postimees.

One way to solve this problem would be to focus on what can be characterized as aspects of Estonian national identity in the media texts. The aspects can be defined by combining the legacy of Tönnies’ Gemeinschaft ([1887]2001) as a community that resembles the Herderian concept of Kulturnation to that of Gesellschaft. The last one is a complex and interpersonal society built on socially established bonds of belonging under the same authority and common territory as the basis for membership (Tönnies [1887]2001; see also Jenkins and Sofos 1996, 11-13 and Smith A. D.

1998, 8-24). Using the categorization of Hans Kohn (1965), Eastern nationalism is based on the ethnic origin, boundaries of language, tribe, or religion, whereas in the Western case, citizenship and state boundaries are seen as a cohesive force (for example Robinson et al. 2001, 963-965).¹⁴

Even though the Gemainschaft-Gesellschaft and Eastern-Western nationalism both aim at explaining the developments in various countries and/or among different nations, they both are also ideal types that rarely exist (see also Jenkins and Sofos 1996, 13). Rather, various mixtures of the ideal types are used to distinguish those who belong to the nation from those who do not (Triandafyllidou 1998, 597, 599; Saukkonen 1999, 144-145; Robinson et al. 2001, 964; Michaels and Stevick 2009, 228). The variety of these mixtures can also be one reason why ‘nation’ as a concept has been criticized for the ambiguity and the lack of a clear meaning (Snead 1990, 231; see also Kivikuru 2004, 20).

For instance, ethno-methodologist Anthony D. Smith has defined nation on the basis of historic territory, common myths and memories, a mass, public culture, common economy and legal rights and duties (Smith 1991, 14). In his latter version of the definition the economy has been removed and legal rights and duties replaced by common laws and customs (Smith 2002, 15; see also Guibernau 2004, 127). Concerning Estonians, language, education, traditional culture, secularity, being democratic and peaceful, rural and maritime, homogenous, and always lived in their current territory have been mapped as crucial aspects (Pääbo 2011, 87-96; see also Berg 2002, 111-113 and Mole 2007b, 160-161).

Nevertheless, in connection with the media analysis, the aspects also raise new questions. First, the analysis based on the ready-made aspects of identity in the media texts is not in accordance with the idea of banal nationalism.

Indeed, the whole idea of ‘banality’ emphasized by Billig (1995) refers to the

14 The division into cultural and civic nation should not be confused with the understanding of cultural identity, separate from national identity. As Ullamaija Kivikuru (2004, 26) explains there are usually a multitude of cultural identities in society since the community is stronger if it allows many flowers to flourish. However, cultural identity as well as the more detailed difference between the cultural and national one remain out of the scope of interest of this study.

inconspicuousness of the national identity instead of any explicit exposure in the media content.

Second, by looking for the ready-made aspects from the texts makes the position of the EU as the Other a rather ceremonial one, since replacing the Other would not have any effect on us. Therefore, instead of studying identity as a process, focus would be on a static picture of us.

Third, from the methodological perspective it is rather problematic to make qualitative analysis by applying the ready-made categories to the empirical data. Nevertheless, the problem cannot be solved by choosing a quantitative methodology, since the aspects of national identity mentioned by Pääbo (2011) might not be available in the media texts in the same form. On that basis, the research could lead to conclusions that the articles deal with a lot of other things apart from these aspects, and not all the aspects are necessarily present in the media content. Thus, the question arises if, on the basis of analyzing

‘only the media’, any conclusions about the identity could be drawn.

To overcome this problem, I claim that it is necessary to start from the question how identity is constructed. The question of what it is made of, is secondary. Some of the above mentioned national aspects might still have an important role in the process, however, not as static elements but as norms used for constructing the identity as a daily chronology.

NATIONAL IDENTITY AS A NORMATIVE PROCESS

Citrin et al. (2001, 72-76) distinguish between three dimensions of national identity. Two of these are elements of social identity theory (Tajfel 1978): the cognitive dimension (identification as) and the affective dimension (identification with). The third is the normative dimension, which refers to the particular set of ideas about what makes the nation distinctive. More concretely, the normative dimension contains notions about its members, their core values and goals, the territories they ought to occupy, and their relations to other nations as constitutive norms (Citrin et al. 2001, 75-76;

Abdelal et al. 2009, 19; see also Robins and Morley 1993, 390).

On the basis of this dimension, us can be defined as unique and homogeneous in relation to both the internal as well as the external Others.

Nevertheless, as a dark side of this process, a sense of superiority to the other nations/countries has been depicted by scholars (see Section 1.2, also Billig 1995, 81; Sullivan et al. 1992; Citrin et al. 2001, 74; Riegert 2004, 11 and Kivikuru 2004, 24).

In order to analyze this normative process, the logic of Brubaker and Cooper (2000, 4-6) can be used to distinguish between identity as a category of practice and a category of analysis (see Section 1.1). In the category of practice, the question is about making sense of ourselves, of our activities, of what we share with, and how we differ from Others. Following the logic of Foucault, the process can be seen as an interrelationship between power, knowledge and truth. For Foucault ([1976]1980) power is not a restrictive, but

a productive society-wide network that offers tools for shaping reality. Thus, power constructs its field of knowledge as a truth and there is no knowledge outside the power relations (Foucault [1976]1980, 59, 89, 93-94 and Foucault [1975]1979, 27-28). As a result, certain discourses lose their conditional nature and get a dominant position of truth, i.e. ‘how things really are’ (Foucault [1969]1972, 153-154; see also Rantanen 1997, 20).

Due to the power of discourse, the construction process remains unnoticed, self-evident and hidden. On that basis, the category of analysis is necessary for scrutinizing how these ‘truths’ are constructed in the discourses. Particularly, how discourses systematically form the objects of which they speak (Foucault [1969]1972, 49) and reproduce the positions of subjects in social relations (Raik 2003, 26).

Mother tongues connected to national identity can be taken as examples.

While the category of practice recognizes and accepts the importance of the mother tongue for the people, the category of analysis neither aims at measuring its importance nor tries to answer the question of who ‘really’

belongs together on the basis of mother tongue. Rather, the question is how this position has been acquired, but more importantly what are the consequences from the perspective of mapping us and distinguishing us from Others in the discourses. Thus, the issue of how the relationship between us and the Other (external but also internal) is constructed as a consequence of the normative process, as opposed to the norms of Estonian national identity, deserves the main attention.

OLD AND NEW COMMUNITY: FORMATION AND MAINTENANCE

National identity as a research object also raises the question about the community. Since the newspaper articles selected for the empirical analysis deal with the relationship between the EU and Estonia presumably ‘Estonia’

stands for a state, not a nation. However, before drawing the conclusion that instead of national identity, state identity should be scrutinized on the basis of the media content, certain characteristics of the media deserve further elaboration.

Even though various terms are used in media texts daily, only a fraction of these is defined in connection with the usage. Thus, the term ‘Estonia’ allows the paper to refer to Estonia as a state, Estonian society, Estonian people or a mixture of all these. In the current study, however, one more aspect can be added, namely Estonia as a candidate country. Even though the term

‘candidate country’ refers to the state level, I assume that the public discussion dealing with the candidate country as a community includes all the above mentioned levels: nation, society and state. Furthermore, I assume that even though no explicit distinction between Estonia and Estonia as a candidate country is made in the media content, analytically one can still deal with these as two partly distinct communities. Therefore, in addition to the daily maintenance of Estonia as a community that has taken place in the content of

Postimees both before and after the accession process, forming Estonia as a candidate country can be depicted in the current case.

At this point further clarification is needed on how forming a community that commonly refers to the emergence of the nations, is understood in relation to the candidate country. Due to the constructivist basis, I distance myself from a primordial understanding of nations that can be ‘woken up’

when the right time comes, and understand nations as modern communities.

Therefore also ‘national’ is defined as a modernist concept in connection to modernization as a wide umbrella concept that can be divided into the understanding of economic, political and cultural modernists emphasizing different aspects of modernization. An example of the cultural modernists, who are most relevant to this study is Ernest Gellner and the opinion that modern society is held together above all by a shared, standardized high culture (Gellner 1983, 57; Gellner 1996, 106-107, 109; see also Edensor 2002, 2-4)¹⁵.

Alternatively to modernists, ethno-methodologist Anthony D. Smith claims that even though nation is based on modernist phenomena, it cannot be created/invented out of nowhere but is based on the myths, historical memories, values, symbols and ethnic identities that have their roots in pre-modernist history (Smith 1998, 190-198; Smith 1995, 189-194; Pakkasvirta and Saukkonen 2005, 36-37 and Remy 2005, 54-55).

In the context of Estonia, scholars have noted that nationalism and the idea of nation was emerging before the creation of own state (for example Hroch 1985; see also Pakkasvirta and Saukkonen 2005, 9 and Remy 2005, 67).

Therefore, Western European experiences of the states waiting for the creation of the nation are not automatically applicable to the emergence of the nation in Estonia.

The same can be said about forming the candidate country. Instead of a ready-made state waiting for the nation, we are dealing with the re-formation of the whole society and state into a candidate country. In Estonia’s case, this re-formation has meant transformation that was mostly targeted towards the political and economic sector of the country. On this basis, we can ask if, as a byproduct of this process, a candidate country identity emerged. However, a clear difference between forming a nation and a candidate country can be found in the temporal aspect. Nations are formed permanently whereas in the case of the candidate country, the question is about a temporary community aiming at EU membership. Thus, we have a schizophrenic situation, where in an ideal case, the formed community ceases to exist as soon as possible.

In order to meld the formation of a community with the construction of identity, it is necessary to come back to the role of the media in this process.

On the basis of Madianou’s (2005) division between the studies that focus on

15 On the other hand, Sabina Mihelj categorises Gellner on the basis of the emphasis he gives to economic processes. In connection with the culture centered approach to the nationalism as a modern phenomenon she mentions Elie Kedourie, Benedict Anderson and Eric Hobsbawm (Mihelj 2011, 71-74).

the role of the media in nation formation and the ones that deal with the maintenance and reproduction of the nation (see also Edensor 2002, 10-11) the current study includes both sides. From the perspective of analysis this means analyzing formation of the candidate country simultaneously with the maintenance of Estonia in a situation where the newspaper does not make a clear distinction between these two processes. Therefore, a perspective on the media in the process of ‘imagining communities’ is needed.

The term “imagined communities” was coined by Benedict Anderson who sees national communities as imagined because, as he claims “the members of even the smallest nation will never know most of their fellow-members, meet them, or even hear of them, yet in the minds of each lives the image of their communion” (Anderson [1983]2006, 6). In this way, Anderson argues, all communities larger than primordial villages of face-to-face contact are mediated and therefore imagined ([1983]2006, 6). Anderson focuses on the establishment of the nations at a macro level by emphasizing two processes:

the development of the print technology and the economy of capitalism that enabled the mass production of books and newspapers ([1983]2006, 33-34, 46; see also Madianou 2005, 15). Consequently, written languages started to develop bringing about the spread of newspapers and novels as simultaneous mediated communication to the masses (Anderson [1983]2006, 33-35). Thus, as Madianou (2005, 15) explains, for Anderson the print media made the nation possible, since people reading the same papers recognize themselves as part of an imagined community.

Paradoxically, as Mihelj (2011, 14-15) points out, references to Anderson’s legacy have mostly focused on the eloquent metaphor of ‘imagined communities’ and thus the media content, whereas the material and institutional basis of the media has received less attention. While Anderson did not elaborate any further as to how exactly the discursive ‘imagining’ of the communities takes place, De Cillia et al. (1999) argue that the idea of an

In document Normative Stories of the Formative Moment : Construction of Estonian National Identity in Postimees during the EU Accession Process (Page 27-34)