Analysing Identities in Discourse
Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture (DAPSAC) The editors invite contributions that investigate political, social and cultural processes from a linguistic/discourse-analytic point of view. The aim is to publish monographs and edited volumes which combine language-based approaches with disciplines concerned essentially with human interaction – disciplines such as political science, international relations, social psychology, social anthropology, sociology, economics, and gender studies.
General Editors Ruth Wodak and Greg Myers University of Lancaster
Editorial address: Ruth Wodak, Bowland College, Department of Linguistics and English Language, University of Lancaster University, LANCASTER LA1 4YT, UK
[email protected] and
[email protected]
Advisory Board Hayward Alker†
University of Southern California (USC), Los Angeles
Irène Bellier
Maison des Sciences de l’Homme, Paris, France
Michael Billig
Loughborough University
Jan Blommaert
Tilburg University
Paul Chilton
University of Lancaster
J.W. Downes
University of East Anglia
Teun A. van Dijk
Jacob L. Mey
Konrad Ehlich
Christina Schäffner
Mikhail V. Ilyin
Ron Scollon Louis de Saussure
Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona Ludwig-Maximilians Universität, Munich Polis, Moscow
Andreas H. Jucker
University of Zurich
J.R. Martin
University of Sydney
Luisa Martín Rojo
Universidad Autonoma de Madrid
Volume 28 Analysing Identities in Discourse Edited by Rosana Dolón and Júlia Todolí
University of Southern Denmark Aston University
University of Genève
Analysing Identities in Discourse
Edited by
Rosana Dolón Júlia Todolí Universidad de Valencia
John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam / Philadelphia
8
TM
The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences – Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ansi z39.48-1984.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Analysing identities in discourse / edited by Rosana Dolón, Júlia Todolí. p. cm. -- (Discourse approaches to politics, society and culture, ISSN 1569-9463 ; v. 28) Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Discourse analysis--Political aspects. 2. Ethnicity. 3. Nationalism. 4. Identity (Psychology) I. Dolón, Rosana. II. Todolí, Júlia. P302.77.A55 2008 401'.41--dc22 isbn 978 90 272 2719 5 (Hb; alk. paper)
2007046496
© 2008 – John Benjamins B.V. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publisher. John Benjamins Publishing Co. · P.O. Box 36224 · 1020 me Amsterdam · The Netherlands John Benjamins North America · P.O. Box 27519 · Philadelphia pa 19118-0519 · usa
Table of contents
Preface Rosana Dolón and Júlia Todolí
vii
Part 1. Introduction Identities in discourse: An integrative view Héctor Grad & Luisa Martín Rojo
3
Part 2. Discursive construction of identity in educational contexts Imposing and resisting ethnic categorization in multicultural classrooms Luisa Martín Rojo
31
The construction of patriotic discourse in Chinese basal readers Yongbing Liu
57
The denial of Palestinian national and territorial identity in Israeli schoolbooks of history and geography 1996–2003 Nurit Peled-Elhanan
77
Part 3. National and cultural identity The discursive building of European identity: Diverse articulations of compatibility between European and national identities in Spain and the UK 111 Hector Grad 9–11 Response(s): Three Arab-American groups respond discursively to the attacks of September 11, 2001 Lutfi M. Hussein
131
Analysing Identities in Discourse
Part 4. Identity construction and human suffering Sexual assault trials, discursive identities and institutional change Susan Ehrlich
159
The representation of PLWHAs and the dangerous ‘other’ Lean, Mei Li & Lee, Stella Meng Hui
179
Index
201
Preface Rosana Dolón and Júlia Todolí
The motivation for the conception of this monographic volume was twofold: in the first place, we were aware of a social, cultural and anthropological need for research into the discursive construction of identity that considers the individual’s dynamic exposure and participation in the current life scenario – a need eloquently illustrated by Triandafyllidou & Wodak (2003: 208): “Today more than before, identity is dynamic and constantly in evolution as people are more exposed to new stimuli and challenges and perhaps more in need of an identity/a set of collective identities that may provide important “anchors” in a world that is constantly in flux.” The second factor was our belief that this research very clearly demands a critical approach. When Wetherell (2001: 187) noted that identity is understood as “a set of culturally available performances sanctioned through power relations”, she was emphasising the fact that power and domination not only restrict the individual’s performances, but that the discursive construction of identity is often under the control of the dominant forces and therefore it is often the result of forms of manipulation and abuse. This concern was apparent in the celebration of our First International Conference on CDA, held in Valencia in 2004. The conference was attended by over three hundred academics who contributed to debates and critically engaged in discussions on a variety of topics, subjecting their findings from different contexts to their own analysis and, perhaps most importantly, to the critical lens of the other participants. The seven articles included in this volume have been carefully selected from the colloquium. The aim of this issue is to focus on specific contexts where the discursive construction of identity is circumscribed by various forms of power abuse and domination. The contextual orientation is by no means random; there were two main criteria involved: firstly, we chose those areas that were most representative of the conference in that they occupied most intellectual attention. Secondly, the selec-
Analysing Identities in Discourse
tion was based on those areas of human experience that are especially in need of a critical analysis. The introduction attempts to make this need clear and evident. The papers presented here share the framework of Critical Discourse Analysis, where critical means not just setting out to unravel linguistic and textual traces – the so-called ‘proof ’ of dominance and power abuse; it begins with a specific research attitude which necessarily integrates the reflexive reader. Critical analysis does not assume or take anything for granted, it unwinds or rather rewinds, generating new questions where the answers are apparently given and accepted, problematising in an endeavour to engender compromise and commitment (see the introduction by Martín Rojo & Grad). Our objective is to encourage this reflexive attitude in the scholar in particular, and the discourse reader in general. We would also like this book to serve another purpose: When Habermas (1984), Freire & Macedo (1987) put forward the concept of emancipatory discourse (with the meaning of what could be defined as counter-ideological representations acting and articulating interests in transformative ways), they anticipated what Luke (2002) explicitly claimed to be a need: the need to go beyond ideological critique and to develop a powerful thesis about the productive uses of power, a thesis which would capture an affirmative character of culture, with discourse being used aesthetically and for emancipatory purposes. We attempt to base ourselves on Luke’s reflection, whilst not specifically placing research in the productive, aesthetic use of discourse, we would like the critical studies in this volume to trigger and encourage social responses and forms of social comprehension which could eventually result in social change. This is where the commitment of the critical analyst should lead us. We hope that this selection of articles will encourage the consciousness of the reader to move in that direction as well. Contents of this issue This volume is made up of three, interlinked sections: the first deals with the discursive construction of identity in educational contexts, and includes the papers authored by Luisa Martín Rojo, Yongbing Liu and Nurit Peled-Elhanan; the second section presents articles by Héctor Grad and Lutfi Hussein, and considers the construction of national and cultural identity, while the third part is devoted to identity construction and human suffering with contributions from Susan Ehrlich and Mei Li Lean & Stella M.H. Lee Martín Rojo’s study represents a critical analysis of the discursive construction of social identities (class, national and ethnic identity). The author explores the link between identity construction in discourse and processes of domination, where domination is seen as enacted by the imposition of social categories, repre-
Preface
sentations, roles and their internalisation. Though domination relationships imply power asymmetries, these may be challenged by processes of resistance and more specifically, the production of identitarian counter-discourses. The author focuses on both the social implications and conflicts between imposed and conquered identities, concentrating on the imposition of and resistance to ethnic categorization and prejudices. Her corpus comprises ethnographic fieldwork studies in multicultural schools in Madrid. Liu, on the other hand, has investigated discursive practice as a construction of selected versions of China for child readers, who are positioned in terms of loyal citizens to manipulated ideological forces. To combat what is described as “a profound identity crisis”, the cultural elites have begun to construct a new version of Chinese nationalism that also serves to legitimatise the status quo in an increasingly divided society. Thus, instead of embodying a patriotic discourse by promoting sustainable economic development or by solving social problems, the Chinese government portrays Chinese people as living happily in a unique and beautiful land, by means of metaphors, specific lexical choices and grammatical categories. The corpus has been retrieved from standardised textbooks aimed at basal Chinese language readers. Peled-Elhanan, relying on the concepts of hypertext, hypotext (Genette), elite racism (Reisigle and Wodak) and representation of social actors (vanLeeuwen and Kress), examines the ways in which Israeli schoolbooks represent the Palestinian citizens of Israel and the Palestinian inhabitants of the occupied territories of the West Bank. The paper does not only examine texts but also the use of visuals and the special function of captions to reveal that Israeli schoolbooks’ discourse responds to all the criteria of a racist discourse, as it uses strategies of passivation, objectivation, categorisation, assimilation and exclusion when referring to Palestinians. Her corpus relies on a multimodal analysis of history and geography textbooks. Section two opens with Grad’s analysis of the discursive construction of European identity and its compatibility or conflict with national identities in the UK and Spain from the perspective of social psychology. His research reveals Cartesian (automatic) and subjective (non-automatic) construction mechanisms of compatibility and contradiction between European and national identities. The implications for classical Social Identity Theory (Brewer 1991, Tajfel 1978 and Turner et al. 1987) are discussed, as well as the implications for identification with the European Union as an imagined community, and identification with this social category. The corpus used by the author contains in-depth interviews with young adults. The data were obtained from the ‘Youth and European Identity’ project, funded by the European Commission. Hussein has studied the case of Arabs that have lived in the USA for decades and how they negotiate their political, religious and ethnic/racial identities. As an
Analysing Identities in Discourse
indication of how this issue took on particular relevance post September 11, the group, in an attempt to ‘engage’ with the American people, began to express itself via the World Wide Web. The author discusses the role played by the web in the discursive group construction of Arabs living in the USA in the aftermath of September 11th. He pays special attention to identities constructed by ‘The American Arab Anti Discrimination Committee’, the ‘Site for the Gay and Lesbian Arab Society’ and the ‘Arab Women’s Solidarity Association’. The analysis of these “heterogeneous and intertextual discourses” is guided by Fairclough’s three-level framework (i.e. description, interpretation and explanation). The corpus is based on specific websites which centre on the Arab community. In the third section, Ehrlich examines the extremely limited interpretive repertoires of judges in terms of the language deployed when referring to non-stranger rape. The difficulty that the legal system and our culture in general have in dealing with sexual violence of the non-stranger variety is in part a discursive problem, blocking the construction of a differentiated specific identity and conjuring up an image of affectionate, consensual sex. The paper explores lawyers’ formulations and questions taken from the Canadian courtroom discourse to uncover the presuppositions embodied in lexical and grammatical choices, shedding light on how lawyers recontextualise the complaint’s version of events into an alternative discourse in order to represent and understand non-stranger sexual violence against women. The corpus has been obtained from Canadian courtroom discourse of sexual assault/rape trials. Lean & Lee explore the fundamental role that the print media play in shaping the way we view people living with HIV/AIDS and the group of people associated with the disease. The study looks at how the paradigmatic shift from medical to media discourse when dealing with AIDS topics has created new forms of subjectivity and how this recontextualisation of scientific discourse brings about a new representation of the victims of HIV. The first part of the analysis explores the way that people suffering from AIDS are represented as ‘Innocent’ or ‘Guilty’ victims; the second deals with two groups: people suffering from AIDS and people associated with the disease, looking into the polarisation that occurs between ‘us’ and ‘them’, leading to the representation of ‘We are Good’ and ‘They are Bad’. The analysis draws on the work of vanLeeuwen (1996), employing his taxonomy of strategies for the representation of social actors. It also uses other CDA tools as proposed by Fairclough (1992, 1995). The corpus is made up of articles from the ‘Time’ magazine.
Preface
Quoted references Freire, P. & Macedo, D. (1987). Literacy: Reading the World and the World. Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey Publishers. Habermas, J. (1984). A Theory of Communicative Action. Boston: Beacon Press. Luke, A. (2002). “Beyond science and ideological critique: developments in critical discourse analysis.” Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 22: 96–110. Triandafyllidou, A. & Wodak, R. (2003). “Conceptual and methodological questions in the study of collective identities. An introduction.” Journal of Language and Politics 2(2): 205–223. Wetherell, M. (2001). “Introduction”. In: Wetherell, M., Taylor, S. & S. J. Yates (2001). Discourse Theory and Practice. A Reader. London: Sage Publications, pp. 284–293.
part 1
Introduction
Identities in discourse An integrative view Héctor Grad & Luisa Martín Rojo
A brief introduction to the concept of identity Different theoretical approaches have generated a diversity of definitions of the concept of identity which circulate independently in the literature interacting with the ‘natural’ conceptions of folk and lay theories of the self. Identity has become a central concept in social science and humanities. Philosophy, sociology, social psychology, anthropology, and discourse studies have provided different approaches, definitions and research tools for identity. These approaches are diverse in the questions they address, in the aspects and levels of identity they focus on, in the view of the building processes of the identity, etc. (see for, instance, the analyses by Brubaker & Cooper, 2000; Hall & Du Gay, 1996; Jenkins, 1996; Roseneil & Seymour, 1999; Williams, 2000). Interdisciplinary research has sometimes tried to build integration by drawing upon or borrowing concepts from different approaches and disciplines. The limitations of this work produced an uneasy coexistence among different concepts of identity in research. In fact, the concept of identity has been overused and sometimes abused to the extent that Brubaker and Cooper (2000) considered that the concept ‘identity’ is being stretched to the point of meaninglessness by a wide range of current uses within social science. This practice has led, through overexposure, to its treatment as a familiar, habitual notion in lay self-theories. Identity is a word recognized as part of our core vocabulary, early learnt, promptly used and often devoid of meaning. Its definition and even existence is often taken for granted (Jenkins, 1996). The concurrence of this use and the open multi-disciplinary debate led to some vagueness in the concept of identity. Sharing the assumption that human identity is above all social, and that identity is about the creation of meaning, we may agree on considering identity as a
Héctor Grad & Luisa Martín Rojo
unifying framework of research about the individual’s processes of creation of meaning whilst participating as a social actor in all spheres of social activity (see Fairclough & Wodak, 1997). As this volume shows, discourse studies may contribute to the current theoretical debate on identity by helping to elucidate the mechanisms of production and use of the concept. These mechanisms deal with the building, maintenance, and transformation of identity. Furthermore, identities sometimes are developed though processes of imposition and resistance in discourse, on which critical approaches in discourse studies are mainly focused. In this regard, discourse studies draw on the recognition of the discourse’s constitutive force in the formation of identity and subject positions (Foucault, 1972). In this regard, critical discourse analysis may contribute through the problematization of identity, by observing both questions raised at particular times and in particular places, and the answers given, and by reformulating these questions. According to Foucault, problematization is a matter of transforming assumptions into problems for which a number of solutions have been put forward.1 This problematization would help to show the links between the building of identity and social mechanisms of control, domination and conflict by disclosing the underlying means of control and exercising of power and domination that work in specific situations and socio-cultural orders and that may affect the intersubjective construction of identities. In this introductory chapter we will discuss how different definitions and approaches to the concept of identity are reflected in discourse studies. We will also discuss the contributions from discourse analysis to the study of the diverse conceptions, structures, building processes and functioning models of identity. Debates on the concept of identity Although it may be an oversimplification, a starting review of the definitions and uses of the concept ‘identity’ could make a distinction between ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ versions of this concept. According to Brubaker and Cooper (2000), the ‘strong’ versions of identity take on a fundamental and durable sense of selfhood, while ‘weak’ versions stress the fluidity, impermanence, complexity and context sensitivity of identities rather than identity. ‘Weak’ versions integrate postmodern critiques 1. Shortly before his death, in an interview with François Ewald, Foucault characterizes his current work as ‘problematization’ (Foucault, 1994, p. 18). Problematization means to disclose “the ensemble of discursive and nondiscursive practices that make something enter into the play of the true and the false and constitute it as an object of thought (whether in the form of moral reflection, scientific knowledge, political analysis or the like) (Foucault, 1994, p. 667).
Identities in discourse
of general meta explanations and the ‘cultural turn’. This turn implies a shift from the emphasis on the explanatory power of social structures to an emphasis on the building processes of power in cultural signifiers and discourse. Nevertheless, this distinction between “strong” and “weak” conceptions of identity encompasses a great diversity of questions: identity as the core of the self vs. the multiplicity and hibridity of identities, continuity vs. change and fluidity, structural determinism vs. creativity and agency in building identities, among others. This plurality is also reflected in discourse studies. Socio-constructivist positions emphasize the active process of the production of discourses and their potential production and transformation of social realities (the world “…is constituted in one way or another as people talk it, write it, and argue it”, Potter, 1996, p. 98). Multiplicity and changes of identities are emphasized in these analyses. This view coexists with more balanced positions, which recognise this generative power of discourse as well as that discourses are socio-historically shaped, and their production is affected by many extrinsic elements and agents. However, the process by which social structures constrain discourses is not conceived in simplistic or deterministic terms. No single element (like economic, normative, legal practices, etc.) could determine the emergence of a discourse. Instead, discourses arise from the relations between these elements which are, in turn, established within discourse. According to this approach, the production, circulation, and reception of discourses are embedded in relations of power. Thus, the diversity of identities is constrained while processes like imposition, assumption and resistance are underscored in identity building. Critical perspectives in discourse analysis focus, precisely, on the relation between discourse, power, and knowledge (Foucault, 1972; see also Chouliaraki and Fairclough, 1999, Ch 2; and Martín Rojo, 2001). We will now move on to present some of the topics that have shaped this debate and show its correlate in the discourse studies. The main topics of this presentation shall thus be: monism, multiplicity and hybridity; continuity, change and fluidity; assimilation and differentiation; and structure and agency in identity theories. Monism, hybridity and multiplicity Current conceptions of identity stress the fluidity, complexity and context sensitivity of identities. Individuals are thought to have multiple identities and even within one setting may appeal to a range of identities. Nevertheless, a range of competing views regarding stability and fluidity persist. Some theories maintain an individual core identity and others stress that identities are not something people ‘have’ or ‘are’ but a resource that people ‘use’, ‘do’ or ‘claim’. The symbolic interactionist concept of ‘the self ’ (Mead, 1934) implies that people have not only one self but many aspects of self-identity. As Goffman (1969),
Héctor Grad & Luisa Martín Rojo
Strauss (1969), and Berger and Luckmann (1966) classically documented, humans sometimes consciously and sometimes unconsciously present different faces to others in social interaction. This can be experienced and interpreted as a deliberate self-presentation mask or as playing up an authentic aspect of the self. Role theory and the dramaturgical approach (e.g. Goffman, 1961, 1969) stressed that the meaning of social actions stems from the interactions in structured social scenarios. Identities are the outcome of the role-playing in these social interactions – where people negotiate and adopt roles and are treated as if these performances represented the “real” person. Our sense of self is derived from the image of our self that others reflect back to us in interaction (Cooley, 1902). Self-beliefs are thus validated by the reactions of others and identities are negotiated in these social interactions. In this context, one’s personal identity is the result of the subjectivation of the repertoire of roles performed in interaction with the partners in the social scenarios. Goffman also shows that people are constantly giving off verbal and non-verbal messages about themselves as they try to manage a positive presentation of the self. Therefore, identity is more a situational performance than a stable trait or a sense of subjective continuity. Consequently, multiple identities arise reflecting the different social relationships underlying these roles, and different identities maybe invoked depending on the situation. What may be going on is an attempt to negotiate a version of the self that has not been the subject of previous interactions with others or, even previous dialogue with the self. It is a matter of debate whether the term ‘identities’ should be used to encompass statements about the self that only occur in some social contexts and are ephemeral performances rather than established facets of the self. Certainly for some authors, identities need not be experienced as a constantly defining characteristic of the self, although some identities may be experienced in this way. The discursive construction of identity also corresponds to an activity of representation or how we project or present ourselves (or are projected and presented) in the interactional process, which has been studied by sociolinguistics. Specifically, studies on linguistic politeness stem from Goffman’s consideration that face is one of a person’s most valuable resources, from which safety and pleasure are derived. Yet face is always threatened by interaction. Verbal politeness theories develop from this idea that any speech act is a face-threatening act, which may be neutralised or attenuated by politeness (see, Brown and Levinson, 1987, classical work, and all reviews, criticism and subsequent developments). The concept of footing (Goffman 1981) and how it is involved in invoking and, more importantly, constituting and negotiating particular identities, has been studied by interactional analysis. Footing is the stance or positioning that an individual takes within an interaction in relation to the discourse produced (“animators”, “authors”, and “principals”, in Goffman 1981, p. 144). Goffman shows how
Identities in discourse
changes in purpose, context, and participant role are common in interaction and how they are correlated with changes in footing. These changes are signalled in subtle ways, by shifts in intonation, timing, rhythm, lexical, grammatical and code or register choices (Goffman, 1981, p. 128). Sociolinguistic and discourse analysis focus precisely on how language varieties and linguistic resources provide a repertoire that allows speakers to signal changing stances (see, for example, Blommaert, 2005; Matoesian, 2001; Lin, 1990). Interactional sociolinguistics studies how identities are negotiated, mobilizing different resources, like code-switching to index social and ethnic identities. Social identities are, in consequence, seen as fluid and constructed in linguistic and social interaction (Gumperz, 1982). Along these lines, changes in speakers’ positioning indicate the ways by which discursive practices fragment, multiply and de-centre the self. Laclau & Mouffe (1987) argue that the individual subject becomes de-centred inasmuch as he or she is not the author of his or her own discursive activity. Furthermore, participants show signals of ‘role embracement’ (Goffman, 1961) in their performance of social activity, i.e. they conform to or resist the roles that are situationally available to them. Capitalizing on these distinctions by Goffman, Scollon (1993) differentiates between discursive changes in footing, enactment (for instance, when teachers act as a native reader in class), and social roles (teacher, parent, immigrant, and so on), depending on the degree of permanence in discourse of the aspects of identities taken by speakers. If every different message about the self were to be labelled as a separate identity, then identities would be very many indeed. Furthermore, in contemporary sociological literature, some authors use the term ‘identity claims’ (Bechhofer et al., 1999; Kiely et al., 2000, 2001; McCrone et al., 1998) to characterize statements about the self. The phrase ‘identity claim’ leaves the nature of the subjective experience open, i.e. whether it is authentic or consciously false, deeply felt or playful. The work of these sociologists has focused not on inner psychological states but on the social contexts in which identity claims are made. It seeks the context of specific rules that make some claims possible and liable to succeed and others impossible or liable to be challenged. Sometimes the distinction between ‘personal identity’ and ‘collective identities’ aims to capture the dynamic between a subjective sense of a solid, complete and continuing self and many other subjectively partial identities that derive from situational roles and more continuing membership in social groups.2 For Social Identity Theory (Tajfel, 1978a, 1982), both personal identity and collective identity mean relatively context specific and changing aspects of sense of self. The former 2. Sometimes the term ‘social identity’ is preferred to ‘collective identity’ but these terms usually mean the same.
Héctor Grad & Luisa Martín Rojo
refers to the sense of one’s own uniqueness and the latter to the sense of sharing something with others. It is clear that, when the terms ‘personal identity’, ‘social identity’ and ‘collective identity’ are used in these ways, all three are in fact social in the sense that they are shaped by social interaction. Discourse analysis has shown how personal and social identities are shaped in social interactions, and how they are created, reproduced, negotiated, imposed, or even resisted through discourse. Much of the analyses done from a critical perspective focus on the discursive representation of social collectives, and how people enact or attribute identities in discourse. These analyses, which abound in this volume, show the bias that these discursive constructions and attributions impose on the perception and evaluation of individuals and groups, and how stereotypical views are constructed and validated through them. Thus, some of the hegemonic discursive representations analysed in this volume (such as gender, students, immigrants, Arabs and Europeans and so forth) conceal the diversity of these collectives, bias their perception by others and themselves, and intervene in their (and others’) identity building processes. From this standpoint, monism and homogeneity may be seen as an outcome of imposition and domination. Finally, postmodern critique widens this position and stresses that individuals have multiple or hybrid identities and even within one setting may appeal to a range of identities. Moreover, it has become common to emphasize the process of making and claiming identities; identities are not attributes that people ‘have’ or ‘are’ but resources that people ‘use’, something they ‘do’ (Hall, 1996). Discourse studies from a rhetoric perspective have examined this facet of identity as a ‘claim’. Billig (1996) showed the significance of the rhetorical mechanisms that underlie the production of discourses of identity. This perspective emphasises the active process of the production of discourses and their potential of production and transformation of social realities, while playing down the deterministic role of social structures. As a result, the study focuses on the formation of interpretative repertoires and speakers’ ideological dilemmas. These repertoires and dilemmas play a significant role in the formation and negotiation of identities through the situated flow of discourse. These interpretative repertoires are defined as culturally familiar and habitual lines of recognisable themes, common places and tropes (Potter & Wetherell, 1987; Wetherell & Potter, 1988, 1992; Wetherell et al., 1987). For Brubaker & Cooper there are more conceptually helpful ways of describing the relevant aspects of ‘what people do’ by way of constructing, locating and presenting themselves rather than collapsing all into what they describe as the ‘flattening rubric of identity’ (2000, p. 9). They suggest that it is better to disaggregate processes such as the categorization and identification of self and others, the building of self-understanding and the construction of feelings of ‘groupness’ or belonging with others. Even the processes of identification with others can be
Identities in discourse
further broken down according to whether they involve classifying self or others by a taxonomy that does not imply knowing others in the category (for example, white, European, working-class, woman, teacher), or identifying self or others by a living relationship or web of relationships (friend, colleague, lover). Both categorization and identification help develop self-understanding and sense of belonging with others. Brubaker and Cooper argue that neither a person’s cognitive and emotional sense of who they are and how they are socially located, nor their sense of connection to others or of belonging to a distinctive bound group, can be reduced to a single process. Continuity, change, and fluidity Alternative views on unity and multiplicity partially overlap debates on the continuity and change of identities. Some traditions in social sciences emphasize the continuity of identity as based on an essentialist view of self and on conceptions of identity as reflecting structural, enduring, social positions of individuals. Other traditions emphasize the variation of identity claims within and across settings. The claim of fluidity raises the question of self-continuity. Many theoretical traditions within sociology and social psychology offer accounts of identity that itemize a package of processes. Moreover, authors who theoretically stress the fluidity of identity often also acknowledge and attempt to explain everyday common sense perception of continuity of self, and a not unusual sense that many people have of always being ‘much the same’. It remains widely taken for granted that some sense of continuity of self, the anticipation of a future and a memory of the past, is intrinsic to the human condition and this is often implicit, if not openly acknowledged in much social theory. A combination of diversity and fluidity on the one hand and of core and continuity on the other is not a paradox for traditions that discuss the social construction of ‘the self ’. For symbolic interactionists and social constructionists, identities are produced as well as maintained through social interaction. They are thus always open to challenge and renegotiation in social interaction. Nevertheless, different approaches in these traditions endorse distinct positions on identity continuity and fluidity. For Blumer (1969), the self, like the action, is variable and situational. Furthermore, Bauman (1992, p. 695) argues that ‘the urge for mobility, built into the structure of contemporary life, prevents the arousal of strong affections for any of the places; places we occupy are no more than temporary stations’. For Stryker (1980, 1997), individuals are both constrained by their position in social structure and able to perform social roles creatively. Social identities are just the internalization of roles. For Kuhn (1964), the history of interactions with significant others
Héctor Grad & Luisa Martín Rojo
together with internalized roles produce a nuclear self. This nuclear self constrains the interpretation of situations thereby reinforcing the consistency of action and thus a sense of identity continuity. Berger and Luckmann (1966) claim that some aspects of self may become more primary, that is more core or fixed than others along the path of individuals’ biographies. They lend particular weight to interactions with ‘significant others’, emotionally important, ‘close’, others (like parents, friends or intimate partners), in terms of the work of building a primary sense of identity in childhood and maintaining identity in adult life. For instance, gender identities, views of self as a particular sort of masculine or feminine, are both particularly emotionally charged and involve a significant accumulation of unconscious practices. Parental figures invariably praise and scold infants as ‘girls’ or ‘boys’ from the earliest ages in ways that help instil particular sorts of masculinity and femininity with emotional resonance. Stocks of tacit knowledge about appropriate gendered bodily practices and gendered behaviour accumulate from the earliest ages and may therefore be particularly profoundly taken for granted and resistant to change in later life. Discourse studies may shed light on this debate, showing why fluidity does not call continuity into question. Several authors have pointed to identity’s biographic and narrative dimensions (i.e. Gergen, 1998; Giddens, 1991; Holstein & Gubrium, 2000; Ricoeur, 1990, 1991). For Giddens (1991), identity refers not to the possession of distinctive traits, but rather to the capacity to construct a reflexive narration of the self. Biographical discourse shows how biographical and socio-historic sameness and continuity can be maintained in time and space (cf. Erikson, 1994; Goffman, 1963; Habermas, 1987; de Levita, 1977), without this entailing a single, monolithic version of the self, but rather a polyphonic conception (cf. Hermans & Kempel, 1993) depending on the context (Goffman, 1963). Thus, the process of developing and building identity over time is emphasized against more essentialist positions. In this way, our identity gets a narrative configuration that we are forced to revise and rewrite (Polkinghorne, 1988). In this regard, some of the most influential contributions to discourse studies come from Paul Ricoeur (1990, 1991), for whom identity is built by narratives and therefore has all of the elements that a narration does (a plot, a time sequence, characters and a situation). The narratives that make up the identity are shaped both by the person her or himself and by others, and even by social discourses since, for instance, an immigrant’s identity includes the discourses on immigration that affect how he or she perceives him/herself or is perceived by others. Thus, identity comprises lots of narratives that the person constructs for him or herself and for others. In these narratives, which may vary across occasions, people do an interpretation of themselves, attempting to give meaning to their lives and
Identities in discourse
construct a socially recognisable self. In short, autobiographical narratives do not only represent or express the self, but rather constitute it. For Ricoeur (1990), identity thus takes on the dynamism of the story told. The person is like a character, always inserted in a plot. It is the identity of the story that makes the character’s identity, which we can call his or her narrative identity (p.147). This narrative identity transcends the concept of identity as stemming from the situated role maintained by Goffman because, for Ricoeur, stories are interdependent (i.e. the role of the “jailed person” in the story of “cops and robbers” affects how the role of the “father” is played in the story of the “family”). The fact that the person represents different roles does not mean that he or she has various identities, but rather that it is this ensemble of roles played that shapes his or her particular identity. Identity is thus constructed as a coherent story, where changes are part of the continuity and a host of narratives of being in the past, present and future are interwoven. In other words, these narratives create continuity and coherence between what the narrator was and what he or she is today. Narration thus mediates between the past, present and future, between past experiences and the meaning they have now taken on for the narrator vis-à-vis future projects. Applications of Ricoeur’s work in discourse analysis have shown its full potential for explaining not only individual identity, but rather the narrative construction of collective identity (de la Garza, 2007; Ochs et al., 1992). This is how both synchronic and diachronic approaches to identity are integrated encompassing both the biographization of the self (Büchner, 1995) and the construction of a reflexive project (cf. Giddens, 1991). And this leads us to other debates that have been opened on structure versus identity. As Giddens indicates (1991): Self-identity is not a distinctive trait, or even a collection of traits, possessed by the individual. It is the self as reflexively understood by the person in terms of her or his biography. Identity here still presumes continuity across time and space: but self-identity is such continuity as interpreted reflexively by the agent (p. 53).
Assimilation and differentiation Models in philosophy, social psychology, socio-linguistics, and discourse studies point to tension between assimilation and differentiation as a basis for identity construction. People are aware of their individuality and, in this sense, attribute a set of idiosyncratic characteristics to define the content of being their-selves. This sense of what they are is defined also in relational terms through an awareness of what they are with reference to who or what is different from them (see e.g. Gergen, 1994; Tajfel, 1978a, 1982). Identity therefore relies on the comparison to something outside the self, namely another identity. The motivation for differentiation
Héctor Grad & Luisa Martín Rojo
makes us invest in identity positions and leads people to base the identity building on an ‘us’ and ‘them’ dichotomy. For instance, Social Identity Theory (SIT – Tajfel, 1978a, 1981, 1982), and its development in Self Categorization Theory (SCT – Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987), states that the construction of both personal and collective identities is based on processes of social comparison leading to assimilation and differentiation. On one level, personal identity stems from the perception of one’s unique characteristics as an individual. This perception is based on a sense of selfcontinuity and on interpersonal distinction. On another level, social identity is the part of an individual’s self-concept that derives from the knowledge of his or her membership in groups, along with the emotional and the evaluative implications of this membership (Tajfel, 1972, p. 292; 1978b, p. 63). Social identities imply both the perception of features shared with fellows in an ingroup and the accentuation of perceived differences with other groups’ members. According to SIT, there is a functional antagonism between social and personal identities (cf. Oakes, 1987) because the salience of personal identity inhibits the perception of ingroup similarities, while a social identity should inhibit the perception of (ingroup) individual differences as well as the perception of intergroup similarities. Mere self-categorization is the core process in building social identities. Through this process, individuals tend to attribute some characteristics to the group, and to the person as a group member – stereotyping both others and oneself. Tajfel (for instance, Tajfel, Billig, Bundi, & Flament, 1971) shows that the categorization is based on intergroup comparisons that produce the accentuation of ingroup similarity and of intergroup differences in relevant features. The goal of these comparisons is to achieve and maintain a positive and distinct social identity. Social categorization and comparisons lay at the basis of intergroup beliefs and behaviours like prejudices and discrimination (Turner, 1975), though the function of ingroup bias is to positively distinguish the ingroup more than to derogate the outgroup (Brewer, 1999). The belief that the process of identifying the self with a particular group necessarily involves generating some form of antagonism towards those who are not in the group, and that building a sense of self identity will necessarily involve designating some people as ‘others’ who are not only distanced from the self but negatively stereotyped is widespread in social sciences. Beyond the cognitive approach of SIT/SCT, Jenkins (1996) suggested that emphasizing difference from others as well as similarities to others are key aspects of the human business of carving out a self identity. Other authors additionally assume that negative ‘othering’ is a necessary part of this process. For instance, Stuart Hall uses the term ‘Other’ to suggest the negativity of ‘othering’ – “identities are constructed through, not outside, difference …through the relation to the Other” (1996, pp. 4–5) – and Delanty makes
Identities in discourse
this clear by using the term ‘non-self ’ – “all identities are based on some kind of exclusion, as the identity of the self can be defined only by reference to a non-self ” (2000, p. 115). Taking this much further, Zygmunt Bauman (1990, 1992, 1995, 1998), for example, talks of a basic human need to divide ‘strangers’ into friends and enemies and explains the holocaust as an extreme result of the difficulties that large scale and complex societies have with strangers. Symbolic interactionists assume that processes of differentiation of the self from others are basic to developing a sense of self. Yet at the same time, this involves the self-reflexive ability to anticipate the reactions of others to oneself and to imagine oneself in the place of others. The ‘other’ then is neither wholly alien nor necessarily hostile. A wide range of empirical work points towards differentiation without negatively stereotyping. Strangers, even those seen as being very different in terms of how they do things, need not necessarily be enemies. Processes of negative ‘othering’ clearly are common aspects of many societies and social groups, but they are by no means universal and are not built into all theoretical understandings of identity processes. Social Anthropology has a long tradition of examining how boundaries between groups are expressed in social interaction and studying the boundary work involved in socially constructing significant differences between groups. The classic work of Fredrick Barth (1969) on ethnic groups and boundaries put forward an interactionist account of boundary work. Exclusive ethnic groups involve interactions that ascribe significantly different identities to members of their own and other groups. Differences in identity are presumed to flow from their different origins and background: “dichotomization of others as strangers, as members of another ethnic group, implies a recognition of limitations on shared understandings, differences in criteria for judgment of value and performance, and a restriction of interaction to sectors of assumed common understanding and mutual interest” (1969, p. 79). In order for difference to be maintained, very particular social circumstances involving both contact and clear limits to contact must be reproduced. This structuring of contact restricts interaction and protects the culture of each group from potential modification by another group. Barth stresses that not all recognition of difference and distinction involves the coordinated social activity creating a boundary, and that a boundary does not necessarily mean antagonism.3 Discourse analysis has tackled the construction of identity and difference by focusing on bringing out the linguistic resources and discursive strategies used to 3. He cites the work of Tone Bringa (1995) on the ethnic conflict in Bosnia as evidence. Bringa documented the very limited ways in which people defined themselves in terms of ethnicity prior to the period of violent conflict. They were connected by neighbourliness, kinship, love and friendship. These senses of connection and of limited salience of ethnicity were transformed as rumours and experiences of inter-ethnic violence increased, boosting the ‘boundary-based components of people’s identities’ (Barth, 2000, p. 32).
Héctor Grad & Luisa Martín Rojo
construct social categories and their social representation. It also focuses on bringing out self-categorization processes (i.e. assimilation, comparison and boundary work), as well as the polarization between ‘us and them’ and the exogenous attribution to social categories. As is patent in this book, analyses have primarily focused on identity and otherness’ common mechanisms. The first studies focused on the categorisation of groups in interaction, mainly from the standpoint of ethnomethodology and conversation analysis in the tradition of Membership Categorization Analysis (MCA – Antaki & Widdicombe, 1998; Hester & Eglin, 1997), and based on Sacks’ hypothesis (1995) that individuals create and use social categories and identities in their interactions. Sacks (1995) refers to ways in which speakers mobilize a range of discursive resources to design interactionally sensitive descriptions of themselves and others, and this, in turn, positions them within specific categories. According to Antaki et al. (1996), interactants engage simultaneously in three activities: while invoking social identities, they negotiate their features or boundaries and thereby accumulate a record of having those identities. Recently, research in critical discourse analysis has identified several discursive moves intervening in the construction of identity and otherness. Work has been done on the discursive construction of social representations and more specifically of social categorization. Thus, van Leeuwen (1996) developed a ‘sociosemantic inventory’ of categories, focusing on how they are linguistically produced and analyzing their social implications. The strategies studied by van Leeuwen include: exclusion (by suppression and backgrounding); role allocation (activation and passivation); personalisation (determination through nomination and categorisation; the latter can be realised through functionalisation, identification, and appraisement); genericisation and specification in its various forms; impersonalisation (abstraction and objectivation). Also, the attribution of traits and actions through linguistic choice (lexical selection, syntactic structures and semantic functions attribution) intervene in categorisation (see Fowler, 1990; Fowler et al., 1979; and Kress & Hodge, 1993). This categorization leads to ‘us’ versus ‘them’ polarization. Van Dijk’s study of polarization relates syntactic, semantic and rhetorical moves at global and local levels of analysis via social cognition. In his studies on discourse and racism, van Dijk (1987, 1993, 1998) identifies discursive polarization as an exercise of dominance, highlighting their semantic, cognitive and sociopolitical functions. For Wodak, strategic aspects of self- and other- presentation encompasses different discursive resources and strategies at different levels which can be summed up as reference, predication, perspectivation and involvement, intensification or mitigation, and argumentation strategies (Wodak & Reisigl, 1999, p. 25).
Identities in discourse
Besides these strategies of construction of categorization and otherness, researchers in discourse studies have focused on how these representations are naturalized and legitimized in discourse (Martín Rojo & van Dijk, 1997). Finally, the consequences that the internalization of these representations have on the construction of identity have also been examined, particularly in relation to gender and ethnic identities (see, for example, Martín Rojo, 1997b). Martín Rojo (1995) studied how the discursive construction of ‘absolute otherness’, which incarnates all the qualities we reject, such as madness and irrationality, frees us from these qualities thanks to its mere existence. By this expulsion of irrationality, brutality, illness and madness, not only is an illusion created that transforms us into rational, peaceful, healthy, heroes, but the world we live in is also made into the incarnation of goodness. Also, from a sociolinguistic and interactional standpoint, Heller and Mondada, among others, have examined the labelling with which categories are built in interaction. These categories, when referring to a phenomenon or a person(s) with either implicit or manifest authority, may construct the social representation that others will adopt for that phenomenon or person in terms of exclusion or inclusion or in terms of what it means to be a good member of the group. Moreover, through these representations, a given interactional, institutional, and social order is shaped and structured (Heller, 2001, p. 213; Mondada, 2005, p. 51). Critical sociolinguistics, like critical discourse analysis, shows how discursive practices and the negotiation of identity are embedded in power relations and permeated by social inequality. All of these analyses done from a critical perspective concur in showing how identitary categories are built in discourse and linked to situations, to relationships between the participants and to the rhetorical strategies that they adopt based on these relationships. It is certainly true that these analyses, as can be seen in this volume, mainly focus on how socially constructed categories of inequality such as social class, racialised groups and gender emerge in discourse, and this raises the questions studied in the next section. Critical discourse analysis also shows how the social value of discourses varies, (see Fairclough, 1992, 1995, for this economy of discourses; and Martín Rojo, 1997a, for a definition of this concept). Fairclough’s concept of ‘hybridity’ (Fairclough, 1992, 1995; Wodak and Reisigl, 1999) implies, according to Kristeva, “the insertion of history (society) into a text and of this text into history”, and encompasses a multidimensional and dynamic conceptualisation of context. This situates the text and context interpretation depending on the social order (situational context) and the historical text series (intertextual context) in which discourses are embedded. Martín Rojo’s concept of the social order of discourse explains the implementation of the control mechanisms of the production, circulation, and reception of discourse,
Héctor Grad & Luisa Martín Rojo
as noticed by Foucault, by a hierarchical logic of distribution of value in a linguistic and discursive market, which is, as in Bourdieu’s theory, in connection with the social order. Within this discursive market, some discourses are authorised and legitimated while others are not. This unequal value stems from the social position of the speakers, and affects the power of discourses to generate identities. The object of study thus changes, and focuses on how legitimated discourses construct the belonging of others to certain groups from which a given representation emerges. Both the building of the category and the attribution of belonging are tied in this approach to the differences in power, and meaning of which both the imposition and resistance of identities become major objects of study. Structure and agency In their texts on identity, both Robin Williams (2000) and Richard Jenkins (1996) note that social science is partially attracted to the concept of identity because of its role in the debates concerning the relationship between ‘structure’ and ‘agency’; that is, between the belief that individuals are externally controlled, shaped by structural locations, social institutions, classification systems, rules, and arrangements whose existence is independent of any particular individual, and the belief that they have internal control as creative actors shaping their social world. “One of the attractions of the concept of identity – resulting in part from its complex multivalency – is that it seems to promise some way in which important aspects of agency and structure can be adequately integrated, or at least brought into closer and more harmonious alignment” (Williams, 2000, p. 58). For instance, Williams (2000) organizes his text by delineating theoretical traditions in terms of the way that ‘agency’ and ‘structure’ are balanced in conceptualizing identity. He notes that when more emphasis is placed on ‘agency’, identity is viewed as the subjective achievement of rational individual subjects, as “a personal effort to sustain the unity of the self among a multiplicity of potential identities” and when more emphasis is placed on ‘structure’, identity is either “a reflection of individual membership in particular social categories or collectivities” (p. 55) or a product of cultural messages and discursive practices that name, classify, discipline and encourage individuals into specific identities. When primacy is given to neither ‘structure’ nor ‘agency’, identity is “the outcome of intersubjective work in which selves and others are mutually constitutive” (p. 80). This position falls in line with the symbolic interactionist view (for instance, Blumer, 1969; Cooley, 1902; Mead, 1934) which has long discouraged a view of social structure and individuals as independent entities. It suggested instead that individuals and social structures are mutually interdependent because individuals
Identities in discourse
are “both acting subjects and objects of their own and others’ attention” (Williams, 2000, p. 92). The individual action and self are based on his or her attributions of meaning to objects, people, and events by active processes of interpretation in social interactions. Therefore, Williams’ account focuses particularly on narrative theorists, late twentieth century symbolic interactionists, and the radical development of these traditions in the work of ethnomethodology, conversation and discourse analysis, being a proponent of a particular form of the latter. In Britain, variants of discourse analysis that draw heavily on ethnomethodology have been adopted by a number of social psychologists as their preferred approach to the study of identity (Potter & Wetherell, 1987; Edwards & Potter, 1992; Parker, 1990a, 1990b, 1992; Widdicombe, 1992; Widdicombe & Wooffitt, 1995). The failure to acknowledge and theorize on unequal distributions of the material and cultural resources used in identity making is a standard criticism of identity accounts primarily focusing on agency. Symbolic interactionists, such as Peter Berger, acknowledge limits on people’s creative agency but view them primarily in terms of the interactional conformity, i.e. taking things for granted that necessarily flow from being born and socialized into pre-existing ways of doing things, language, customs and systems of ideas preceding the existence of any individual. However, this view does acknowledge the constraints on people’s capacity for identity building imposed by enduring social categories of inequality – such as social class, gender and ethnicity. Some authors with an interest in explaining structural inequality draw eclectically from different theoretical sources. For example, Stuart Hall acknowledges his indebtedness to Althussarian Marxism, and therefore also indirectly to Freud, and to the philosophy of Michel Foucault. While rejecting a notion of a fixed, ‘core’ or ‘real’ identity, Hall recognizes that a sense of identification with others often comes to feel enduring and ‘natural’ rather than ephemeral despite the fact that identification is “a construction, a process never completed – always ‘in process’” (Hall, 1996, p. 2). He clearly remains interested not only in how identities come to feel fixed, but also the way the process of this fixing is involved in the reproduction of social inequality. He refers to Althusser’s account of the effect of ‘ideological state apparatuses’ in his own account of how subjects are ‘hailed’ by discourse and, through their own discursive practices, construct identities that ‘chain’ or ‘suture’ them to particular positions or clusters of meanings in the ‘flow of discourse’ (1996, p. 6). Other analyses concerned with power and inequality have taken a particular interest in whether there are particularly powerful agents or sites of operation that enable some sectors of the population to advance or constrain particular identities among others. In this context, the creative role of individuals in identity constructions is often theorised as being limited by the cumulative effect of both opportunities and choices, and of constraints and lack of opportunity within and across
Héctor Grad & Luisa Martín Rojo
settings. Creative agency and the constraints and opportunities of particular settings frame the identity formation process. Constraints and opportunities have been theorised in various ways as resources within situations, structured by wider social processes, resources brought to situations structured by the biography of the individual prior to the situation and pre-existing cultural narratives or scripts again dependent on wider social processes. Resources can be material, i.e. goods and money, and can also be symbolic capital, as are linguistic and discursive capital. In this regard, the reconceptualisation of social practices in contemporary Sociology (for instance, in Giddens’ and Bourdieu’s proposals) has had a significant impact on discourse analysis. Social practices, and discursive practices as an instance of these practices, become a major focal point in observing the link between social actions and structures. Social practices are understood as a recursive and recurrent production and reproduction of society (social systems, structures, institutions, collective social agents, and individuals). Consequently, this reconceptualisation allows the dualism between actions and structures to be overcome. As Chouliaraki and Fairclough (1999, Ch. 2) remark, this view allows the opposition between ‘interpretativist’ and ‘structuralist’ social science to be resolved, thereby opening an avenue to approach social life both as constrained by social structures and as an active process of production which transforms social structures. Thus, this view also overcomes the opposition between social determinism (where social and discursive practices are constrained by social structures) and socio-constructivism (where social and discursive practices are active processes of production, reproduction and transformation of social structures). This constructivist structuralism (according to the label of Bourdieu and Wacquant, 1992) is in fact the dominant position in critical discourse studies. The simultaneous acknowledgement of both the reproductive and constructive dimensions is also framed by Giddens’ theory of the duality of structure. “…to enquire into the structuration of social practices is to seek to explain how it comes about that structures are constituted through action, and reciprocally how action is constituted structurally” (1987, p. 164). In Bourdieu, the concepts of habitus and field explain this reproductive and creative capacity. A social field is a network of positions defined by a specific distribution of capital, which bestows the field with a particular logic (the way people act within the field is conditioned by the value and the composition of the capital they are endowed with). The habitus is a set of dispositions compelling agents to act and react in particular ways within a field. Thus, dispositions generate practices (perceptions and attitudes) which reproduce social structures, but not mechanically (Bourdieu, 1990b). Bourdieu suggests that the social world exists not only in symbolic systems, but also in objective structures which are independent from the agents’ conscience and will, and which also ‘orient’
Identities in discourse
and ‘constrain’ their actions and representations. At the same time, his approach is based on constructivism which presumes a social genesis of habitus, structures, fields and social groups – social classes. However, this genesis appears as supported by a pre-existent socially constructed reality, which at the same time generates “meaningful practices and meaning-giving perceptions” (Bourdieu, 1984, p. 170). The conditions associated with a particular social position or conditions of existence produce habitus, and then structured structures predisposed to function as structuring structures (Bourdieu, 1990a, p. 53). This, in turn, will ensure that they are at ease with and likely to choose to recreate different distinctive types of social contexts which, for instance, may help to recreate class distinctions. Along these same lines, for example, much feminist research trying to understand the reproduction of gender (see Connell, 1987, for an overview) has looked at how particular powerful and predominantly male sets of actors – governments, state sanctioned experts, managers of global mass media, military-industrial complexes and multinational corporations, for example – have promoted particular versions of femininities and masculinities. In another domain, resources that might be the raw materials of a ‘European’ or, for that matter, a ‘cosmopolitan’ identity are not equally distributed. A European identity might include experience of travel across Europe, command of several European languages, and knowledgeable fluency in discussions of ‘European’ music, art and literature. In some parts of Europe, these are forms of a social and cultural capital that is only available to relatively privileged minorities. In short, people both within and across European states arguably have to negotiate very different constraints and opportunities in order to muster up experiences of ‘being European’. Finally, research on national identities has often paid particularly close attention to the imagery, symbolism and messages about the nation constructed by the state (see, for instance, Billig, 1995; Reicher and Hopkins, 2001; Wodak et al., 1999). However, it is only relatively recently that researchers have attempted to explore how people with similar social capital receive, interpret, work with and make these messages personal (see Cinnirella, 1996; Grad & Ros, 1998; Grad & Martín Rojo, 2003). The acknowledgement of both productive and reproductive dimensions of discourses also gives rise to the analysis of their social implications. What seems to be at stake is to what extent discourse is constrained and determined by social structures but, at the same time, to what extent discourse can contribute to building up, reproducing, maintaining, reinforcing, but also to questioning and challenging a particular status quo, social order, or social relationship. Finally, this conceptualisation of discourse implies the insertion of the agent as a producer of these practices. This insertion could be related to reflexivity. And it is precisely Giddens, who most clearly highlights this relationship, and attributes two basic characteristics to social practices: recursivity and reflexivity. Recursivity
Héctor Grad & Luisa Martín Rojo
implies, according to Giddens, that social practices are continuously recreated by social agents, and they usually express themselves as social actors by the same means (1984, p. 3). This recreation is understood as a routine, but not as a mere mechanical reproduction, and it appears in Giddens’ theory as being closely linked to the agents’ competence and to reflexivity. Reflexivity is understood as a linguistic and conceptual capacity that “in turn is possible only because of the continuity of practices that makes them distinctively ‘the same’ across space and time, and which allows human beings to monitor the ongoing flow of social life” (1984, p. 3; see also, 1987, p. 77).4 Several developments in discourse analysis take into account the agents’ competence and reflexivity. However, while some currents, such as Conversation Ana lysis, are interested in discovering the ‘mutual knowledge’ shared by agents in social practices, other currents, like Interactional Sociolinguistics, Discursive Psychology, and Critical Discourse Analysis, are interested in showing the creative and reproductive power of discursive practices. In this regard, the Social Identity Theory tradition has been criticized as having an essentialist and realist conception of identity. “The concept is essentialist in the sense that identity is taken to be a property of individuals or society: and realist in the sense that it is assumed that there is some kind of correspondence between identity and some aspect of social reality (e.g. the real groups that make up social structures or nations).” (Widdicombe, 1998). Social constructionists, ethnomethodologists and conversation analysts are more concerned with the minutiae of everyday interaction as the sites that reveal how people deploy identities, making themselves and social structure come alive. In Discursive Social Psychology, the dominant position is ‘relativist constructionism’ which emphasises the active process of the production of discourses and their potential for production and transformation of social realities. The generative power of discourse is highlighted in the underpinning of this view in which the production and transformation of social realities are the members’ methods for making sense and managing the speaker’s position in a particular interaction. In addition to this generative power, Foucault’s concept of conditions of possibilities is taken into account – some repertories and some constituents of these repertories become possible in a particular time and place. Certainly, authors often approach this generative power through its relation to ideology, and ideological manipulation. One such example is van Dijk’s discursive approach to social cognition. However, this subjective dimension is specially related to discursive psychology, and to the interpretative repertoires studied by Wetherell. However, in this case, 4. In Giddens’ words: ”setting of action and interaction, distributed across time-space and reproduced in the ‘reversible time’ of day-to-day activities, are integral to the structured form which both social life and language possess” (1987, p. 215).
Identities in discourse
the analysis is not focused on how dominant and disciplining discourses are internalised by individuals, but rather on seeking variability in accounts and formulations. “Tracking the emergence of different and often contradictory or inconsistent versions of people, their characters, motives, states of mind and events in the world- and asking why this (different) formulation at this point in the strip of talk?” (Wetherell, 1998, p. 395). The emphasis on this variability has several effects. While it captures the dynamic, kaleidoscopic and argumentative nature of identity and ideological stances, at the same time, it blurs the interaction between both phenomena and the social position and circumstances. The position close to constructivist structuralism dominant in critical discourse studies explains why many analyses in this volume focus on how socially constructed categories of inequality such as social class, racialised or ethnifised groups, and gender emerge in discourse. But it also explains how they are challenged, problematized and rejected through discourse. A person who knows he or she is categorised as different or deficient will go back to that image that was built around him or her to maintain, reproduce, question or challenge it. The discursive construction of the social order has been analysed in terms of representations, relations and identities from feminist CDA. In Lazar’s words, the “focus is on how gender ideology and gender relations of power are (re)produced, negotiated and contested in representations of social practices, in social relationships between people, and in people’s social and personal identities in text and talk” (2005, p. 11). Two kinds of relationships are studied, the discursive co-constructions of ways of doing and being a woman and a man in particular communities, and the dynamics between forms of masculinity and the constructions of hierarchies of oppression which affect women.” Social class and ethnic relation are studied with a similar concern for social transformation of structures of oppression and symbolic domination. In this volume, analyses also focus on ‘ethnification’, defined by Day (1998) as “processes through which people distinguish an individual or collection of individuals as a member or members respectively of an ethnic group” (p.154). By “linguistic ethnic group categorization”, people ascribe to a particular sort of social group, namely an ethnic group” (p. 155). Also, in this case, ethnic ascription may be accepted, resisted or rejected by interlocutors. Recent analyses problematize hegemonic representations that reproduce colonial difference and domination beyond class and gender conditions. These analyses focus on how theories, political ideologies, and hegemonic discourses reproduce and legitimate colonial inequality and stereotypical representations. Thus, the analytical task has been extended to develop a multicultural approach in which all western intellectual traditions should be enriched and counterbalanced by
Héctor Grad & Luisa Martín Rojo
other philosophical traditions that have so far been underestimated (Shi-Xu, 2005; Shi-Xu, Kienpointner, & Servaes, 2005, among others). From this standpoint, identity is considered to be a socio-historical category that arises with the development and constitution of modern societies. Its concretion depends on the historical and cultural characteristics of each society. (cf. Elias, 1978; Giddens, 1991; Büchner, 1995; and Gergen, 1992). This approach does not imply that identity is produced in the context of a closed structure, but rather that social structures are open and subject to underlying tension between innovation and reproduction (cf. Harré, 1979). In other words, each historical structural configuration contains the mechanisms for its own transformation. Identity is constituted subject to this same dynamic and, as an internalised interaction structure, it contains its own reproduction and transformation mechanisms. The study of conditions of possibility contained in identity entails analysis of this aspect of innovation and transformation in interaction and discourse, that is, in action and representation. This book’s critical approach The adoption of a critical perspective involves relating processes of identity (such as processes of inclusion and exclusion) with social conflicts and struggles that are derived from the particular structure of the social and discursive orders and the ideologies that support them. The question of identity is therefore of special interest as it allows for a better understanding of how processes of the construction of identity in discourse are linked to processes of domination. As could be seen in this book, these processes of domination seem to take place by means of two procedures: a) the imposition of images and identities, and b) their internalisation. The outcomes of both processes are studied in this volume, where, symbolic domination and a certain disciplining effect impacting the understanding of the self, process of identity, and even body experiences are also analysed. Nevertheless, since the possibility of resistance is open, as is the production of new identity discourses which in turn provoke reactions, analysis also focuses on these reactions and highlights the productive power of discourse. Consequently, this book tries to reflect the multiple conflicts between imposed and conquered identities and, in parallel, it problematizes an essentialist view on identity, focusing on multiplicity and fluidity, as well as compatibility and incompatibility among different identities. Finally, as explained previously, the critical perspective pays special attention to the discursive procedures of imposition, among them processes of categorization, contrast, rejection, through discourse. The process of categorization reflects symbolic domination by means of which particular identities are devalued and
Identities in discourse
delegitimized, attributing cultural and personality traits to particular groups, like in the following example: “Moroccan kids are not interested at all in learning, they just learn the basics and they leave school when they are 16“ (see Martín Rojo, 1995; and Grad & Martín Rojo, 2003, for in-depth analyses of these procedures). The papers included in this book focus on the discursive procedures of imposition of identities, as well as of identity resistance, and on the resources used by speakers to challenge dominant discourses about themselves. Different papers underline the discursive move of polyphony as a means used by speakers to reproduce and challenge dominant discourses about themselves (for instance, “women are devoted to their children”) or narratives and autobiographical discourses in which speakers succeed or fail to integrate the multiplicity, discontinuities, and fragmentations in their lives and identities. What underlies the critical perspective is the aim to problematize concepts and representations, to call into question evidence and postulates, to break habits and ways of acting and thinking, to dissipate the familiar and accepted, to retrieve the measure of rules and institutions, to show the techniques of production of knowledge, the techniques of domination and also the techniques of control of discourse. In Foucault’s terms, starting from this (re)problematization, citizens can take part in the formation of a political will (see Foucault, 1994, vol. IV, p. 676–677). References Antaki, C., Condor, S., & Levine, M. (1996). Social identities in talk: speakers’ own orientations. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 473–492. Antaki, C., & Widdicombe, S. (Eds.). (1998). Identities in talk. London: Sage. Barth, F. (1969). Ethnic groups and boundaries. Boston: Little Brown and Co. Barth, F. (2000). Boundaries and connections. In A. P. Cohen (Ed.), Signifying identities: Anthropological perspectives on boundaries and contested values (pp. 17–36). London: Routledge. Bauman, Z. (1990). Modernity and ambivalence. In M. Featherstone (Ed.), Global culture: Nationalism, globalization and modernity (pp. 143–170). London: Sage. Bauman, Z. (1992). Soil, blood and identity. Sociological Review, 40, 675–701. Bauman, Z. (1995). Life in fragments: Essays in postmodern morality. Oxford: Blackwell. Bauman, Z. (1998). Globalization: The human consequences. Cambridge: Polity Press. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books. Bechhofer, F., McCrone, D., Kiely, R., & Stewart, R. (1999). Constructing national identity: Arts and landed elites in Scotland. Sociology, 33, 515–534. Billig, M. (1995). Banal nationalism. London: Sage. Billig, M. (1996). Arguing and thinking. A rhetorical approach to social psychology (New Edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Blommaert, J. (2005). Discourse: A critical introduction (Key Topics in Sociolinguistics Series). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Héctor Grad & Luisa Martín Rojo Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction. A social critique of the judgement of taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [Original publication: La distinction. Critique sociale du jugement. Paris: Les Éditions de Minuit, 1979] Bourdieu, P. (1990a). In other words: Essays towards a reflexive sociology. Cambridge: Polity Press. Bourdieu, P. (1990b). The Logic of practice. Cambridge: Polity Press. Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Cambridge: Polity Press. Brewer, M. (1999). The psychology of prejudice: Ingroup love or outgroup hate? Journal of Social Issues, 55, 429–444. Bringa, T. (1995). Being Muslim in the Bosnian way. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Brubaker, R., & Cooper, F. (2000). Beyond “identity”. Theory and Society, 29, 1–47. Büchner, P. (1995). The impact of social and cultural modernization on the everyday lives of children. Theoretical and methodological framework and first results of an inter-cultural project. In M. Du Bois-Reymond, R. Diekstra, K. Hurrelmann, & E. Peters (Eds.), Childhood and youth in Germany and the Netherlands. Transitions and coping strategies of adolescents (pp. 105–125). Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter. Cinnirella, M. (1996). A social identity perspective on European integration. In G. Breakwell & E. Lyons (Eds.), Changing European identities: Social psychological analysis of social change (pp. 253–274). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Cooley, C. H. (1902). Human nature and the social order. New York: Scribner’s. Connell, R.W. (1987). Gender and power. Cambridge: Polity Press. Chouliaraki, L., & Fairclough, N. (1999). Discourse in late modernity. Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Day, D. (1998). Being ascribed, and resisting membership of an ethnic group. In C. Antaki & S. Widdicombe (Eds.), Identities in talk (pp. 151–170). London: Sage. Delanty, G. (2000). Citizenship in a global age: Society, culture, politics. Buckingham: Open University Press. Edwards, D., & Potter, J. (1992). Discursive psychology. London: Sage. Elias, N. (1978). The civilizing process. New York: Urizen Books. Erikson, E. H. (1994). Identity and the life cycle: Selected papers. New York: Norton. [Original publication: New York: International Universities Press, 1959]. Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Cambridge: Polity Press. Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis. The critical study of language. London: Longman. Fairclough, N., & Wodak, R. (1997). Critical Discourse Analysis. In T. A. Van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as social interaction (Discourse studies: A multidisciplinary introduction, Vol 2, pp. 258–284). London: Sage. Foucault, M. (1972). The archeology of knowledge. London: Routledge. [Original publication: L’Archéologie du Savoir. Paris: Gallimard, 1969.] Foucault, M. (1994). Le souci de la verité. In D. Defert & F. Ewald (Eds.), Dits et écrits (Vol. IV, pp. 668–678). Paris: Gallimard. Fowler, R. (1990). Language in the news. London: Routledge.
Identities in discourse
Fowler, R., Hodge, B., Kress, G., Trew, T. (1979). Language and control. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Gergen K. (1992). The saturated self: Dilemmas of identity in contemporary life. New York: Basic Books. Gergen, K. J. (1994). Realities and relationships. Soundings in social construction (Ch. 8: Selfnarration in social life). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Gergen, K. J. (1998). Narrative, moral identity and history consciousness: A social constructionist account. In J. Straub (Ed.), Erzählung, Identität und historisches Bewusstsein (pp.170–202). Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press. Giddens, A. (1987). Structuralism, post-structuralism and the production of culture. In A. Giddens & J. Tuner, Social theory today (pp. 195–223). London: Polity Press. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity. Self and society in the late modern age. Cambridge: Polity Press. Goffman, E. (1961). Asylums: Essays on the social situation of mental patients and other inmates. Nueva York: Doubleday Anchor. Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Goffman, E. (1969). Presentation of self in everyday life. London: Allen Lane. Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Grad, H. M., & Martín Rojo, L. (2003). ‘Civic’ and ‘ethnic’ nationalist discourses in Spanish parliamentary debates. Journal of Language and Politics, 1 (Special Issue on Parliamentary Discourse), 225–267. Grad, H. M., & Ros, M. (1998, August). Value connotations of national identity in three cultural regions of Spain. Paper presented at the XIV Congress of the International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology, Bellingham (Washington, USA), August 2–7, 1998. Habermas, J. (1987). The theory of communicative action (Vol. 2). Cambridge: Polity Press. [Original publication: Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1981]. Hall, S. (1996). Introduction: Who needs identity? In S. Hall & P. du Gay (Eds.). Questions of cultural identity (pp. 1–17). London: Sage. Hall, S., & du Gay, P. (Eds.). (1996). Questions of cultural identity. London: Sage. Harré, R. (1979). Social being. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell. Heller, M. (2001). Undoing the macro/micro dichotomy: Ideology and categorisation in a linguistic minority school. In C. Candlin, N. Coupland, & S. Sarangi (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and Social Theory (pp. 212–234). London: Longman. Hermans, H., & Kempen, H. (1993). The dialogical self. Meaning as movement. London: Academic Press. Hester, S., & Eglin, P. (Eds.). (1997). Culture in action: Studies in Membership Categorization Analysis. Washington, DC: International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis & University Press of America. Holstein, J. A., & Gubrium, J. F. (2000). The self we live by: Narrative identity in a postmodern world. New York: Oxford University Press. Jenkins, R. (1996). Social identity. London: Routledge.
Héctor Grad & Luisa Martín Rojo Kiely, R., McCrone, D., Bechhofer, F., & Stewart, R. (2000). Debatable lands: National and local identity in a border town. Sociological Research Online, 5(2). http://www.socresonline.org. uk/5/2/kely.html. Kiely, R., Bechhofer F., Stewart, R., & McCrone, D. (2001). The markers and rules of Scottish national identity. The Sociological Review, 49, 33–55. Kress, G., & Hodge, R. (1993). Language as ideology (2nd Ed). London: Routledge. Kuhn, M. H. (1964). Major trends in symbolic interaction theory in the last twenty-five years. Sociological Quarterly, 5, 61–84. Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (1987). Hegemony and socialist strategy. London: Verso. Lazar, M. (2005). Feminist critical discourse analysis. Gender, power and ideology in discourse. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. de Levita, D. (1977). El concepto de identidad. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Marymar. Lin, A. M. Y. (1990). Teaching in two tongues: Language alternation in foreign language classrooms. Hong Kong: City Polytechnic of Hong Kong (Department of English Research Report, nº 3). Martín Rojo, L. (1995). Division and rejection: From the personification of the Gulf conflict to the demonisation of Saddam Hussein. Discourse & Society, 6(1), 49–80. Martín Rojo, L. (1997a). El orden social de los discursos, Discurso, 21–22, 1–37. Martín Rojo, L. (1997b). Intertextuality and the construction of a new female identity. In M. Bengoechea & R. Sola Buil (Eds.), Intertextuality /Intertextualidad (pp. 81–98). Alcalá de Henares: Universidad de Alcalá de Henares. Martín Rojo, L. (2001). New developments in Discourse Analysis: Discourse as social practice. Folia Linguistica, XXXV (Special Issue 1–2), 41–78. Martín Rojo, L., & van Dijk, T. A. (1997). There was a problem and it was solved. Legitimating the expulsion of illegal immigrants in Spanish Parliament. Discourse & Society, 8(4), 563–606. Matoesian, G. M. (2001). Law and the language of identity: Discourse in the William Kennedy Smith rape trial. Oxford: Oxford University Press. McCrone, D., Bechhofer, F., Kiely, R., & Stewart, R. (1998). Who are we? Problematising national identity. The Sociological Review, 46, 629–652. Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Mondada, L. (2005). Chercheurs en interaction. Comment émergent les savoirs. Lausanne: Presses Polytechniques et Universitaires Romandes. Oakes, P. J. (1987). The salience of social categories. In J. C. Turner, M. A. Hogg, P. J. Oakes, S. D. Reicher, & M. S. Wetherell (Eds.), Rediscovering the social group: a Self-categorization Theory (pp. 117–141). Oxford: Blackwell. Parker, I. (1990a). Discourse: definitions and contradictions. Philosophical Psychology, 3, 198–204. Parker, I. (1990b). Real things: discourse, context and practice. Philosophical Psychology, 3, 227–233. Parker, I. (1992). Discourse dynamics: Critical analysis for social and individual psychology. London: Routledge. Polkinghorne, D. E. (1988). Narrative knowing and the human sciences. Albany: State University of New York Press. Potter, J. (1996). Representing reality. London: Sage. Potter, J., & Wetherell, M. (1987). Discourse and social psychology: Beyond attitudes and behaviour. London: Sage. Reicher, S., & Hopkins, N. (2001). Self and nation: Categorization, contestation, and mobilization. London: Sage. Ricoeur, P. (1990). Soi-même comme un autre. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.
Identities in discourse
Ricoeur, P. (1991). Narrative identity. Philosophy Today, 35 (Spring), 73–81. Roseneil, S., & Seymour J. (1999). Practising identities: Power and resistance. London & New York: St Martin’s Press & Macmillan. Sacks, H. (1995). Lectures on conversation. Oxford: Blackwell. Scollon, R. (1993). What is plagiarism? A note on intercultural problems of identity in discourse. Perspectives, 5, 1–24. Shi-xu (2005). A cultural approach to discourse. Houndmills, GB: Palgrave Macmillan. Shi-xu, Kienpointner, M., & Servaes, J. (2005). Read the cultural other: Forms of otherness in the discourses of Hong Kong’s decolonization (Language, power, and social process Series, 14). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Strauss, A. (1969). Mirrors and masks: The search for identity. San Francisco: The Sociology Press. Stryker, S. (1980). Symbolic interactionism. A social structural version. Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin & Cummings. Stryker, S. (1997). In the beginning there is society: Lessons from a sociological social psychology. In C. McGarty & S. A. Haslam (Eds.), The message of social psychology: Perspectives on mind in society (pp. 315–327). Cambridge, MA.: Blackwell. Tajfel, H. (1972): La catégorisation sociale (Social categorization). In S. Moscovici (Ed.), Introduction á la psychologie sociale (pp. 272–308). Paris: Larousse. Tajfel, H. (Ed.). (1978a). Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations. London: Academic Press. Tajfel, H. (1978b). Social categorization, social identity and social comparison. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 61–76). London: Academic Press. Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tajfel, H. (Ed.). (1982). Social identity and intergroup relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tajfel, H., Billig, M. G., Bundi, R. P., & Flament, C. (1971). Social categorization and intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1–2, 149–178. Turner, J.C. (1975). Social comparison and social identity: Some prospects for intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 5, 5–34. Turner, J.C., Hogg, M.A., Oakes, P.J., Reicher, S.D., & Wetherell, M.S. (Eds.). (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A Self-categorization Theory. Oxford: Blackwell. van Dijk, T. A. (1987). Communicating racism. London: Sage. van Dijk, T. A. (1993). Discourse and elite racism. London: Sage. van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Ideology. London: Sage. van Leeuwen, T. (1996). The representation of social actors. In C. R. Caldas-Coulthard & M. Coulthard (Eds.), Texts and practice (pp. 32–70). London: Routledge. Wetherell, M. (1998). Positioning and interpretative repertoires: Conversation analysis and post-structuralism in dialogue, Discourse & Society, 9 (3), 387–412. Wetherell, M., & Potter, J. (1988). Discourse analysis and the identification of interpretative repertoires. In C. Antaki (Ed.), Analysing everyday explanation: A casebook of methods (pp. 168–183). London: Sage. Wetherell, M., & Potter, J. (1992). Mapping the language of racism: Discourse and the legitimation of exploitation. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Héctor Grad & Luisa Martín Rojo Wetherell, M., Stiven, H., & Potter, J. (1987). Unequal egalitarianism: A preliminary study of discourse concerning gender and employment opportunities. British Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 59–71. Widdicombe, S. (1992). Subjectivity, power and the practice of psychology. Theory and Psychology, 2, 487–99. Widdicombe, S. (1998). Identity as an analysts and participants’ resource. In C. Antaki & S. Widdicombe (Eds.), Identities in talk. London: Sage. Widdicombe, S., & Wooffitt, R. (1995). The language of youth subcultures: Social identity in action. Hemel Hempstead: Haverster Wheatsheaf. Williams, R. (2000). Making identity matter: Identity, society and social interaction. Durham: Sociologypress. Wodak, R., de Cillia, R., Reisigl, M., & Liebhart, K. (1999). The discursive construction of national identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Wodak, R., & Reisigl, M. (1999). Discourse and racism: European perspectives. Annual Review of Anthropology, 28, 175–199.
part 2
Discursive construction of identity in educational contexts
Imposing and resisting ethnic categorization in multicultural classrooms* Luisa Martín Rojo
Department of Linguistics Universidad Autónoma de Madrid
Discursive construction of identity from a critical perspective There are many studies that have examined the discursive construction of identity. Often, the objective is to analyse the role of discourse in this process – what discursive strategies and moves are involved and what are the resulting configurations of identity (if they are more or less dynamic and fluid). This article seeks to make a contribution to this debate. My objective, however, is more limited, though not less interesting. The aim is to determine what distinguishes a critical approach from other discursive approaches when dealing with the question of the construction of identity. It is therefore necessary to specify exactly what is understood by a ‘critical’ approach, because this article moves away from a not infrequent use of the term that seems to refer to something that is considered as a ‘school of thought’ within the field of discursive studies. In fact, there are many currents within the discipline of discourse analysis that may be considered as ‘critical’ even though they make no
* This article is part of the research project “Análisis socio-pragmático de la comunicación intercultural en las prácticas educativas: hacia la integración en el aula” (BFF 2003-04830), financed by the Plan Nacional de I+D+I (2000-2003) of the Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología, directed by Luisa Martín Rojo. I wish also to acknowledge the support from the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid and the Government of the Autonomous Region of Madrid, through the project “The construction of the interethnic relations in the schools in the context of different national and linguistic policies”.
Luisa Martín Rojo
use of this term1. Simply claiming to be ‘critical’ is not necessarily proof of the fact, and vice versa. As I have studied and seen on other occasions, a ‘critical’ approach does not suppose a task that is equivalent to ‘revealing’ or ‘illuminating’ how the processes of social exclusion or domination function. This aim of ‘revealing’ can lead to a misleading ideological vision which assigns the analysts an asymmetrical stance that when not paternalistic, puts us in a position to be able to liberate and illuminate others. The critical perspective illuminates how policies and practices are shaped by, and shape, ideologies, values, and the social order. Thus, it contributes to show the links between local discourse practices and wider, complex social processes. In order to do so, a ‘critical position’ demands a ‘problematizing process’ (Martín Rojo, 2001): bringing into question familiar, assumed concepts and representations; reopening and transforming the answers into new questions, breaking habits and ways of acting and thinking, retrieving the measurement of rules and institutions, showing the techniques of production of knowledge, the techniques of domination and the techniques of control of discourse. Problematization results in commitment. A critical perspective commits us to making analysis a social practice in itself, studying the social effects of discourses, monitoring the socio-discursive order, opening possibilities for new ways of thinking and of interpreting the social environment. A critical perspective also commits us to acting on the academic world in which we take part, and this means trying to change it – making it more plural and open and opposing exclusion for reasons of gender, social class or ethnicity. Guided by this understanding of problematisation and commitment in the study of the discursive construction of identity, this article analyses an example of notable social relevance: how identities of local and immigrant students are constructed in the multicultural classrooms of Spanish schools. In relation to the first term, the analysis considers processes of categorisation that occur in the classroom 1. In my academic life, I found several examples where a critical perspective has been applied in studies that make no claims to be ‘critical’. For instance, within French tradition in discourse analysis a critical perspective has traditionally being applied, or currently in Mexico very interesting analyses of Zapatist discourse have been done without using this label, but sharing the aim of showing how the production/legitimation of discourse is involved in the imposition and in the resistance to a particular status quo. On the other hand, I found other analyses, claiming to apply a critical perspective, and this immediately creates the illusion of being ‘critical’ - presenting the work as liberal and progressive. Unfortunately, these studies could have the opposite “a-critical” effect. This is particularly true when the authors of critical studies consider this perspective as a “closed” school which despises all previous studies, or when analysts holding a privileged social position in their societies, do not question the role we, as academics, play in reproducing the social order or even contribute to delegitimising some political changes that challenge this position.
Imposing and resisting ethnic categorization in multicultural classrooms
which distinguish between ‘normal students’, and ‘the others’, ‘locals’ and ‘immigrants’, ‘Españoles’ and ‘Marroquíes’ or ‘Latinoamericanos’. Secondly, the analysis questions the contrast that is established by these categories and the basis for their establishment, that is to say, I examine the production of knowledge that is associated with the establishment of these categories and the values and expectations that they generate and reproduce. Thirdly, the paper examines the implications of these discourses, monitoring the socio-discursive order and analysing the impact of this categorisation, the contrast and the accompanying rejection that is often felt by the individual that has an effect on their development. In short, I hope to determine to what extent categorisation contributes to consolidating a process of exclusion and marginalisation in the school. The adoption of a critical perspective involves relating processes of identity, which are built and negotiated in discourse, (such as processes of inclusion and exclusion) with social conflicts and struggles that are derived from the particular structure of the social and discursive orders and the ideologies that support them. The question of identity is therefore of special interest as it allows a better understanding of how processes of the construction of identity in discourse are linked to processes of social domination. As we see later, these processes of domination seem to take place by means of two procedures: a) the imposition of images and identities, and b) their internalisation. The result is a disciplining effect that even affects our bodily experiences. Nevertheless, there is the possibility of resistance, and the production of new identity discourses, which in turn provoke reactions. Consequently, this paper tries to reflect the multiple conflicts between imposed and conquered identities, and in parallel, it problematizes an essentialist view on identity, focusing on multiplicity and fluidity, as well as compatibility and incompatibility among different identities. Finally, I devote special attention to the discursive procedures of imposition, among them: process of categorization, contrast, rejection, through discourse (e.g. “Moroccan kids are not interested at all in learning, they just learn the basics and they leave school when they are 16”); for a deep presentation of these procedures, see for intance, Martín Rojo, 1995; and Grad & Martín Rojo, 2003). In this paper, I also focus on the discursive procedures of resistance, and among them on the discursive move of polyphony, as a means used by speakers to reproduce but also to challenge dominant discourses about themselves (for instance, “women are devoted to their children”); or narratives and autobiographical discourses, in which speakers are successful or failed to integrate the multiplicity and discontinuities in their lives and identities (see, for a detailed presentation of this move as a strategy of resistance, Martín Rojo, 1988).
Luisa Martín Rojo
The socio-political context In the last 15 years, the Regional Community of Madrid, (historically a pole of attraction for migrants from other regions of Spain) has become a preferred destination for workers from other countries, particularly (and in this order) from: Ecuador, Colombia, Rumania, Peru, Morocco, Bolivia, China and the Dominican Republic. According to statistics from the Madrid City Council, foreign school students represent about 15% of the school population, a figure that rises to 34% in inner city areas (see the Plan Madrid de Convivencia Social e Intercultural, 2005). As a consequence, the school population is nowadays much less homogenous – more than 50 different languages can be heard in the classrooms of Spain’s capital city. The situation is very similar in other autonomous communities such as Andalusia, Catalonia, the Basque Country and Valencia. The Spanish state has decentralised responsibility for education to the governments of each Autonomous Regional Community. The conservative government of the Community of Madrid has put forward a series of measures that make its position as to the new ethnic and linguistic diversity very clear. As we have pointed out in other studies (see Martín Rojo et al., 2003), the policy of the Administration states that it aims at integration. Thus, the regional immigration and education plans invoke the principles of normalisation and interculturalism. Nevertheless, the measures and procedures adopted – the Aulas de Compensatoria (Compensatory Classes) amd the Aulas de Enlace (a linguistic immersion programme, called ‘Bridging Classes’) – are both exclusively aimed at students with an immigrant background; in these programmes, the student receives instruction to gain the knowledge (Aulas de Compensatoria), the language (Aulas de enlace) and the values of the majority. The programmes are presented as a transitory measure to ensure that the children reach an acceptable level and are immediately able to integrate themselves in ‘normal’ classes, in which they would not be the object of any special treatment. What is not contemplated or rather, what is postponed sine die, is the implementation of other educational policies aimed at transforming and adapting the school organisation, the attitudes of teachers and students, the teaching materials and teaching-learning strategies. In addition to these programmes, the Madrid Community has a policy of not stopping concentration of students form other countries among state schools, nor among the state schools and the part state-funded schools (centros concertados). As a result, there is an unbalanced distribution of local and immigrant students, which does not reproduce the social distribution of the population outside the school in the different areas of Madrid. The reason invoked by the administration is that intervening and distributing students among these two kinds of schools would impinge on the parents’ right to freely select their children’s place of educa-
Imposing and resisting ethnic categorization in multicultural classrooms
tion. This has resulted in an artificial concentration of foreign students in some schools of up to 80 or even 90%. In some of these schools, classes are only taught to Educación Secundaria Obligatoria (Compulsory Secondary Education) level as it is assumed that the students will not move on to study for the baccalaureate. These situations contravene almost all the principles included in the Regional Education Plans – normalisation, equality, globalism and interculturalism. Taken as a whole, the above measures may seem to have assimilation as their objective but in reality they marginalise; compensatory education in separate groups isolates and restricts possibilities for coexistence and integration and whilst they are (still) supposed to be temporary, they are looking more and more permanent each day: many students pigeonholed in these programmes never manage to join the mainstream classes. It is true that measures are gradually being introduced that incorporate a multicultural orientation that attempts to combat ethnocentricity and illustrate the existence of cultural and linguistic differences2. It is often the case that it is the schools themselves that take these initiatives, such as multicultural festivals, presenting linguistic differences and traditions in publications or reading sessions. Unfortunately, they do not always help integration – as we will see in some of the examples that follow. This is particularly the case when these activities are based on the values of the majority and they may end up stereotyping and having an ethnocentric bias. Given the contradictions and the scarce innovation observed in the discourse and measures taken by the administration, for the teachers themselves, this has become a very controversial issue. Staffrooms are full of debates on the best way to approach multicultural classrooms. The issue is a divisive one among teachers; there are those who reject multiculturalism as they feel that immigration has negative repercussions for schools, including a loss of prestige and quality in state education, and those that aim for innovation, making great, often voluntary, contributions. The question of how diversity should be dealt with in the classroom is directly linked to other correlative questions such as what is considered as legitimate knowledge, who is considered as a ‘normal’ or ‘good’ student and what is the legitimate language of exchange, etc. For example, if the only language considered as legitimate is the local variety, measures will be imposed to ensure and extend its use and 2. The European Union itself recognises that intercultural education is not an extended practice in EU countries (Eurydice, 2004: 71). In fact, EU documents do not clearly define the differential objectives of this educational model; while they affirm a key and essential element for integration is the learning of the language of instruction, when presenting programmes, results and directions, the EU still speaks of “immigrant students”, a category that frequently includes the children of immigrants, in spite of the fact that they were born in the country concerned. This would indicate that just like their parents, they are still considered as long or short term ‘residents’ rather than as citizens as of right and an integrated part of the European Community.
Luisa Martín Rojo
other languages and dialects will not be incorporated into school life. The tendency will therefore be toward homogeneity, not toward the incorporation of differences. Educational practice is in this way accompanied by the generation and circulation of a particular understanding of knowledge, language, behaviour and social groups, which is considered legitimate and adequate in the classroom. This understanding entails the establishment of categories which emerge from the intensive process of labelling that takes place in the classroom: ‘us’ against ‘them’; ‘normal’ against ‘remedial’ education; ‘our students’ and ‘the others’; ‘Españoles’ and ‘Latinos’, ‘Marroquíes’ or ‘Chinos’. These labels form the basis for the teachers’ expectations of their students and have serious repercussions on educational trajectories. The objective of this paper is to show how this categorisation and labelling affects the processes of the discursive construction of identity. This research was carried out by a group of linguists in two phases from 2000 – 2006. We have studied how cultural and linguistic diversity is being dealt with, and if the actions taken encourage integration or are discriminatory. We have explored their effects on the integration of foreign students and on the processes of the construction of identity. The analysis is based on a corpus of 58 filmed or recorded classroom interactions and 37 interviews with students and teachers in four schools in the centre and the outskirts of Madrid. In these daily educational practices, carried out through interaction, a number of processes and relationships are recreated and reproduced: teacher-student; peer group; norms expected to be fulfilled; content thought to be necessary and legitimate; students’ characteristics considered as good, useful, disciplined and everything that is not considered to be so. These practices constitute routines, but they are not mechanical actions; neither are they anonymous, they are produced by real people (Giddens 1984: 3). The members of the educational community are aware of these routines and of their implications. In the interviews carried out in this research, this issue was very much considered, and narratives that attempted to make sense of the situation were produced. Those interviewed explored the position of their vision of society, and compared their experiences with those of others. It may well be the case that some students had previously had different school routines, and when submerged in our routines they were not considered as ‘competent’. This understanding of ‘others’ as not ‘competent’, in an institution that has among its functions the role of assessing the students, is particularly relevant. In the interviews it was very clear that all participants constructed explanations for their own behaviour and the behaviour of others; they make it clear what they think about these behaviours and even challenge them.
Imposing and resisting ethnic categorization in multicultural classrooms
This paper is divided into two parts.3 The first part, based on the analysis of interaction, focuses on the processes of domination linked to categorisation and labelling in asymmetric teacher-student interactions. Given that in the interactions, content and relationships are negotiated, the second part of the study looks at how the students react to the processes and, in particular, the student’s resistance to the teachers’ categorisation that is also present in other sectors of the society in which they live. The analysis of the interviews allows to incorporate the vision that the participants themselves have of the process. The critical perspective entails the problematization of both processes – domination and resistance – and the knowledge from which they emanate. Discourse in practices: imposing ethnic categorizations and group hierarchies Ethnocentric and assimilatory practices In the process of teaching and learning in Madrid’s multicultural classrooms, one of the constants observed is, that in spite of a profound transformation in the nature of the schools, little has been done to adapt to the new situation – neither in the programmes, course content, language of instruction or in classroom teaching methods. This lack of adaptation is especially clear in the schools in which there is a higher, artificial concentration of immigrant students. Of particular interest in this case is the fact that these educational practices do not even contemplate the possibility that the contents, values and beliefs taught are not universal. A repertoire of knowledge that is considered to be legitimate is established in classroom interactions, and it “must be learnt and understood” by every student. The ideology of assimilation that pervades educational practices becomes evident in interactions that do not just contribute to the construction of otherness. This leads to the configuration of ‘us’, as those who share language, knowledge and norms, and ‘them’, as those who don’t. This section approaches the construction of otherness, which is one of the main mechanisms in the definition of identity: firstly, through the conformation to the ‘us’ and its underlying criteria; secondly, through the analysis of the discursive strategies of polarization (‘we’ versus ‘they’). I pay special attention to the discursive 3. This reflection can be understood as a conceptual and linguistic capacity that is only possible due to the repetition of practices that allow them to appear as ‘the same’ through time and space and permit us to monitor the flow of social life (Giddens, 1984: 3; 1987a: 77). In the words of Giddens: “settings of action and interaction, distributed across time-space and reproduced in the ‘reversible time’ of day-to-day activities, are integral to the structured form which both social life and language possess” (1987: 215).
Luisa Martín Rojo
moves that begin with the polarisation strategies: ‘categorization’ and ‘contrast’ (Martín Rojo, 1995; Grad & Martín Rojo, 2003).4 ‘Categorization’ implies establishing an inclusive us and an exclusive them. This categorization implies a field of a homogeneous in-group (us) and a field of a differentiated out-group (them). As we will see below, the contrast and tension between both fields leads to a rejection of the out-group and the development of a negative image of them. The following example is taken from a school in the centre of Madrid where students from an immigrant background make up more than 90% of the student population, something which does not correspond to the demographic reality of the school’s environment. The school therefore conforms to a multicultural reality in which locally born children are a small minority. The school has made attempts to adapt to this situation but it has done so in a peculiar manner; the school only teaches compulsory education up to the age of 16; it is taken for granted that the students will not continue their education beyond this level. The vision that the teachers have of the school is that it should provide compensatory education, not ‘normal education’. Nevertheless, there has been no modification of the curriculum with the objective of ‘compensating’ (i.e. offering knowledge that was not previously acquired but is now demanded). On the contrary, the programmes and text books followed simply correspond to the course year but – and this is the ‘adaptation’ – the contents are summarised, and complex issues are eliminated; in other words, the level is lowered. It is a form of less demanding education and this is coherent with the expectations of the teachers. The following example is taken from a Social Science class, 2nd year ESO (12 -14 year old learners)5. The topic is Al-Andalus (the 7-century period of the spread of Arab culture and power in the Iberian Peninsula). There are 16 pupils in the class: 2 of Spanish origin, 3 of Dominican origin, 1 of Philippine origin, 8 of Ecuadorian origin, 1 of Rumanian. Some could belong to the Evangelical Church (very popular in Latin America and among excluded groups), and perhaps some of them are close to ‘youth gangs’ such as the ‘Latin Kings’.
Example 1 Profesor: ¡LOS MULADÍES! / N/ ¿quiénes son los muladíes? Alumno1: eran los hispanos convertidos/ convertidos al Islam […] Profesor: [luego] qué/ qué tienen que ver con los- / con los Mosul-/ con los mozárabes // ¿se parecen? / o ¿todo lo contrario? Alumno2: (…) (la religión del→)º 4. In line with Social Identity Theory, I have adapted the labels used in Martín Rojo, 1995 ‘division’ and ‘rejection’. 5. These data were collected by Adriana Patiño (UAM) who carried out an ethnographic study of this school.
Imposing and resisting ethnic categorization in multicultural classrooms
Profesor: MOZÁRABE es un cristiano / ES un ¡hisPAno cristiano! que vive en el territorio árabe / y ¿un muladí? Alumno2: es un hispano que = Profesor: = ES UN HISPANO que se ha convertido musulmán / que se ha convertido a la religión de Mahoma y sigue viviendo en / en donde vivía / y sigue viviendo en territorio /¿eh?/ musulmán // entonces / los musulmanes aceptan a todo aquel que se convierta- / a todo aquel que se convierta a su religión /¿eh? / la de Mahoma y entonces ya no tienen que pagar impuestos / entonces tienen el derecho de ciudadanía que llamamos / los mismos derechos que un musulmán porque eso- / se han convertido al musulmán / ¡OJO! / que uno es muy fácil meterse al musulmán / hacerse / convertirse a la religión musulmana pero es mucho más difícil salirse / ¿estamos? / no es que aplique el terrorismo pero ya es más complicado / es igual que entrar en las ¡SECTAS! // ¿vosotros habéis oído hablar de las sectas/ ¿no? // ¿eh? / yo no pregunto a ninguno de vosotros porque no es mi misión / de qué religión sois cada uno Alumno1: (sí)º
Example 1 (1) Teacher: THE MULADIES! / N / who are the muladies? Student 1: they were converted Hispanics / converted to Islam […] Teacher: [then] what / what do they have to do with the / with the Mosul- / with the mozarabs // are they similar? / or just the opposite? Student 2: (…) (the religion of à)º Teacher: mozarab is a Christian / IS a Hispanic Christian! Who lives in Arab territory / and a muladi? Student 2: he is a Hispanic who = Teacher: = HE IS A HISPANIC who has become a Muslim/ who has converted to the religion of Mohammed and continues living where / where he used to live / and continues living in territory / eh? / Muslim // then / the Muslims accept everybody who converts- / everybody who converts to their religion / eh? / the one of Mohammed and then they have not to pay taxes / then they have the right to citizenship that we call today / the same rights of a Muslim because that- / they have become Muslim / WATCH OUT! / that one is really easy to become Muslim / to become / convert to the Muslim religion but it is much more difficult to leave it / alright? / it is not
Luisa Martín Rojo
Student:
that it applies terrorism but it is already more complicated / it is as entering a SECT! // you heard of sects / right? // I don’t ask any of you because that is not my job / which is your religion (yes)º (Ethnographic observation and recording by Patiño Santos)
In this example, there is no attempt to contextualise the information to be presented in order to bring it closer or link it to what this group of students may have learnt in their countries of origin. It is taken for granted that the cultural and social significance of these categories (mozárabe, muladí) in the current Spanish society and the kingdoms of the past (Al-Andalus and the Christian kingdoms), can be generalised to the rest of the world. The teacher does not start the class by attempting to verify if the students share this knowledge, neither is there an attempt to examine what can be learnt from past societies based on the existence of the aforementioned categories. In fact, this subject could have been dealt with in an inclusive manner: linking it, for example, to the coexistence of diversity or how cultural coexistence and fusion have produced periods of cultural splendour throughout history. The teacher’s only attempt at adaptation is a simplification of the content, justified by low expectations (“if I don’t do it, they won’t understand”). In addition, the teacher’s own prejudices and stereotypes are made very clear: the simplification both affects the social categories (“Hispanics” vs. “Muslims”) and the political reality itself, (a discourse on the Spanish state is constructed at a time when the ‘Spanish State’, as a modern and centralised state, did not exist). The teacher’s lack of expectations is also made clear in the way that the past is used only as a pretext to illustrate a content that is relative to the present – the danger of sects when one is susceptible to be influenced by others – despite the fact that the issue is not included in any academic programme or curriculum. It is content that is not formally evaluated and is concerned with the idea of attempting to educate children that “are not going to study” (for the link between low expectations and the educational programme implemented, see Patiño Santos, 2007). Example 2 Profesor: ¡que no pregunto! / ¡no tengo-¡/ ¡no es cuestión mía! / ¡PEro SABER vosotros/ jóvenes!/ que si aceptáis una secta/ os metéis en una determinada secta / generalmente de tipo protestante / entrar parece muy fácil / pero (
) / después salir puede ser muy complicado / ¡PUEDE AMARGARTE la vida!/ ¿estamos?/ ¡puede amargarte muchísimo la vida!/ pero no hoy ni mañana / sino el resto / o sea que- hay que saber lo que uno quiere/ vosotros sois muy jóvenes y a lo mejor no tenéis ideas definidas / ni os han dado una educación muy fuerte en una religión concreta / pero si os metéis
Imposing and resisting ethnic categorization in multicultural classrooms
en sectas/ saber que puede ser muy peligroso / saber lo que hacéis / ¿ESTÁ CLARO? Aulmno3: (si)º Example 2 Teacher: I’m not asking that! / I don’t have-! / it’s not my business! / But you should KNOW this/my young friends/ that if you accept a sect / you join a particular sect / generally of a protestant type / to join seems very easy / but (…) / afterwards to get out may be very difficult / IT MAY EMBITTER YOUR LIFE! / alright? / it may embitter your life completely! / but not today nor tomorrow / but the rest of it / that is one- one has to know what one wants / you are very young and maybe you don’t have fixed ideas yet / nor have you been given a strong education in a particular religion / but if you join a sect / you should know that it may be very dangerous / you should know what you do / IS THAT CLEAR? Student3: (yes)º (Ethnographic observation and recording by Patiño Santos)
The categories raised here make explicit reference to ethnic differences (‘Hispanic’ vs. ‘Muslims’) but there are also other, implicit references. The message seems to be directed at all young people without distinction though it is really directed at those young people that may be susceptible to belong to a ‘protestant’ sect. Given the ethnic composition of the group and the fact that the evangelical church, to which the teacher seems to be alluding, is popular among immigrants (in different parts of the world) and among marginalised minorities (e.g. Spanish gypsies, Chinese immigrants in Canada etc.), the ethnic reference is implicit – the message is directed at Latin-American students who are the majority in this particular class. The discourse is also paternalistic, equating being young with a lack of criteria for making judgements. Social categorisation is made through a lexical selection that is not only chronologically and historically biased but has also a delimiting effect (categorisation and contrast) on various levels, between, for example: (i) religions versus sects (Islam is said to be a religion that behaves like a sect –“it’s very difficult to get out”-; there is later explicit reference to ‘protestant type’ sects, as an alternative to Catholicism which is implicitly understood as a religion); (ii) Hispanic versus Muslim (iii) muladíes versus mozárabes: “Muslims that live in Christian territory” versus “Hispanics that live in Arab territory” (so the criteria that distinguish some is religious, for others it is ethno-political); (iv) “Spain” versus “Arab territory”. This last distinction carries an implicit chronological distortion that is associated to a correlative historical and political distortion. The past is seen from an ethnic and
Luisa Martín Rojo
religious hegemony: from Catholicism and the Spanish state, the “Reconquista” is therefore understood as a defensive act; a regaining of territory lost to the Spanish nation, and not as a territorial conflict among the different communities living in the Iberian Peninsula at that time. The past is used to establish a dichotomy between ‘us’ and ‘them’, as much in the temporal plane of the past as in the present, and involves the subsequent exclusion of ‘them’, invoking rejection (Islamophobia and racism). On the other hand, the fact that a common past is presented from a Catholic and nationalist perspective, not only results in exclusion, it also reproduces and reinforces a nationalist, assimilatory ideology: “OJO! / que uno es muy fácil meterse al musulmán / hacerse / convertirse a la religión musulmana pero es mucho más difícil salirse / ¿estamos?” “(BE CAREFUL / it’s easy to become involved In Islam / to become / to convert to the Muslim religion, but it’s much more difficult to get out/understand?” A sense of otherness is constructed in the way that ‘they’ are associated with lacking criteria, are susceptible to deceit and do not share ‘our’ values and behaviour (those of being Catholic and Spanish). The teacher is supposed to be in possession of the facts while students do not have access to the truth without the teacher’s guidance. Silence and normative transgression show students’ resistance to indoctrination. In educational terms, the management of knowledge is not cooperative in this class; speaking to the students about the dangers of life does not particularly help them obtain better academic results. In terms of identity, exclusion from ‘us’ and the projection of a negative image would have consequences for the students – the perception of rejection might lead to its internalisation, and it could also strengthen and reinforce the idea that they do not belong to the Madrilenian community. In fact, in this school (a rather anomalous example in comparison with the schools studied as part of our research), the assignation of national categories was particularly common: students frequently used labels as the ‘Columbian’ or the ‘Ecuadorian’, etc. when referring to classmates. In fact, at the Christmas party, much was made of the school’s diversity, but there was no integration; instead of a multi-cultural community, all activities referenced the different nation states of origin of the students. This resulted in a ‘United Nations’ style forum with representatives from each country (e.g. “the representative for Rumania”) and the students sang or recited their national anthems. Patiño Santos recorded some students’ narratives and autobiographical discourses which confirm this tendency; the following is from a 14 year old girl, born in Ecuador and living in Spain for four years:
Imposing and resisting ethnic categorization in multicultural classrooms
Example 3 Para mí la anécdota más graciosa y divertida que he tenido es que me peleé con Marivic una filipina asquerosa que me tenía bronca desde hace 1 año. Luego me peleé con la Cindy una colombiana y es que las tres nos odiamos a morir!!!. La pelea fue debido a que ellas dos me enviaron un sms diciendo tonterías. La pelea fue en la tercera planta. Posupuesto las gané a las 2. (Entrevista: Adriana Patiño; Entrevistada: jóven 14 años; lugar de orígen: Ecuador; tiempo en España: 4 años, 2005). Example 3 For me the funniest story that ever happened to me was when I got in a fight with M., a dreadful Philippine girl who had been getting on my nerves for a year. Then I got in a fight with C., a Colombian, and the thing is that the three of us hate each other so much! The fight was because the two of them sent me a nonsense sms. The fight was on the third floor. Of course I beat both of them. (Interviewer: Patiño Santos; Interviwee: 14 years old girl, born in Ecuador; 4 years living in Spain).
In this example we can clearly see the strengthening of national categorisation. In other schools we did not find such evident national differentiation, but there was a clear separation between ‘our students’ and ‘the others’. This labelling presents ‘ours’ as those that normally pass through the system without problems while ‘the others’ are those that are problematic, difficult, etc. Dealing with differences: ‘us’ (Spanish) versus ‘them’ (immigrants). The imposition of ethnic categories and the construction of otherness do not only occur when the classes are organised from ethnocentric positions that ignore cultural differences. There are other behaviours that emphasize otherness that can be equally excluding (as long as what is different is not integrated with ‘us’ but is associated with ‘them’). In the following example, we can see how recognising and respecting differences is not enough to create inclusive and integrating strategies. Differences are recognised but a sense of separation is maintained (‘us’ Spanish versus ‘you’ foreign people), and ethnic categories are also imposed. Example 4 Profesor: no // ehh / ¡cuidado con esto! / ya os he dicho muchas veces/ que tendemos ((a)) simplificar muchísimo / a veces cuando hablamos de las personas que vienen de fuera eeh tenemos la manía / lo hemos comentado más de una vez ya con lo de loss CHInos / a todos los que vemos con rasgos orientales decimos ése ése es chino
Luisa Martín Rojo
/ he estao’ en un restaurante CHIno / he ido a una tienda de todo a 100 / CHIno / he visto uun compañero- tengo un compañero / CHIno / yy nos es igual que sea japonés / que chino / que sea de Camboya / que sea de Vietnam / a todos les llamamos chinos= {Alumno1 se da la vuelta y le vocaliza sin pronunciarlo en alto “pues sí”} Profesor: y os he dicho muchas veces que eso tampoco os gustaría a vosotros que nos llamaran / no sé / polacos / {se oyen murmullos de exclamación} todos somos blancos en Europa / y tenemos unos rasgos muy parecidos / pues si dijéramos ¡vamos todos polacos! // ¡pues a ellos tampoco! {Ibrahim sonríe ante los comentarios del profe y mira a todos sus compañeros, en general todos se sonríen} Profesor: [si Ibra]him es marroquí pues no le gustará que le llamemos / pues yo que sé / tunecino / “no oye/ perdona que yo soy de marruecos” / y además con mucho orgullo¯ / entonces tenemos que tener este cuidado / ¿eh? / que tendemos aa simplificar y llamar a todos por el mismo nombre[luego noo tienen] =Alumna 2: [ e s que profe]• Profesor: = nada que ver con eso (…) Alumna 2: PUES A MÍ no me molestaría que si no saben cómo son los rasgos de mi país(( )) me molestaría• Profesor: pues lo mejor que tienes que hacer espre/gun/tar¯ Alumno 1: de dónde eres? Profesor: de dónde eres / y punto / y de esa forma nos evitamos/ todo esto¯ (…) Example 4 Teacher: no // eh / careful with this! / I’ve already told you many times/ that we simplify a lot / sometimes when we speak about people that come from abroad eh we are obsessed/ we have talked about the this with the Chinese / everyone we see with oriental features we call Chinese / I’ve been to a Chinese restaurant / I’ve been to a cheap Chinese shop / I’ve seen or I’ve got a Chinese mate / and we don’t care if they are Japanese / Chinese / Cambodian / or Vietnamese / we call them all Chinese = {Student 1 turns round and mouths ‘well, they are’} Teacher: and I’ve told you, many times that you wouldn’t like it if they called you / I don’t know / Polish / {there is a murmur of discontent} we
Imposing and resisting ethnic categorization in multicultural classrooms
are all white in Europe / and we have similar features / but if we were all called Polish…. // Well, they don’t like it either! {Ibrahim smiles at this and looks at his classmates, in general they are all smiling} Teacher: [if Ibrahim is Moroccan, he doesn’t like it if we call him / well, I don’t know / Tunisian / we’d hear/ “excuse me I’m from Morocco” / and he’d say it with pride / so we have to be careful with this / eh? / we simplify and call everybody by the same name[and later] = Déborah: [but
.] Teacher: = that’s got nothing to do with it (…) Student 2: WELL I don’t care if they don’t know what people from my country look like(( )) it would bother me….. Teacher: well, the best thing you can do is ask Student 1 Where are you from? Teacher: where are you from / full stop / and then we avoid / all this¯ (…) (Ethnographic observation and recording by Rasskin)
The use of lexical categories and personal pronouns shows how divisions are produced, in this case, between ‘us’ (teacher + local students) and ‘them’ (non-local students). The organisation of interaction is based on ethnic criteria (Spanish people vs. immigrants) not on speakers’ role-play which would be more logical in this case (‘me’, the teacher, versus ‘you’, the students). We can also see a level of indoctrination. The class stops to consider a theme of general interest that affects relationships within it. The objective is to combat prejudices. However, the teacher’s discourse shows that the students that are different are not seen as part of ‘us’ and the very same prejudices that are supposed to be fought are reproduced. Added to this representation of Europeans as white, we have the categorisation of the Spanish as ‘Europeans’ and white – and foreign workers as ‘residents’. In this example, the interactional patterns of participation are asymmetrical (almost as much as in examples 1 and 2), since the teacher: – does not facilitate the participation of the students from an immigrant background: encouraging them to share their experiences and feelings; – does not engage the local students to confirm if they share or oppose these prejudices and to explain their reasons. If the teacher had taken a more participatory approach, perhaps the same prejudices would not have been reproduced and the identification that was necessary for the construction of an integrating ‘us’ might have been possible.
Luisa Martín Rojo
So the recognition of diversity is not, in and of itself, enough. Among its effects we can see how it could magnify differences, presenting them as insurmountable and therefore as obstacles to the creation of a plural society. There are many more examples that illustrate the pressure that is put upon children from immigrant families that have been born or have lived and studied for many years in Madrid, to continue thinking of themselves as ‘foreigners’ and not as ‘Madrileños’. Physical characteristics, accent, pronunciation or family history can be enough to mean that, irrespective of nationality, they are still seen as ‘foreigners’ and even treated as experts on, or representatives of, the country of their parents’ birth. Deleuze and Guattari show how the work of a teacher is shaped by power relationships: “School teachers do not inform when they question a student, in the same way that they do not inform when they teach a grammatical or mathematical rule. They ‘assign’, give orders and commands. The teacher’s orders are not external to what is taught, they are not something added”. (Deleuze and Guattari, 1980: 93). According to these authors, education imposes semiotic coordinates on the child which reproduces all the grammatical dualisms: masculine vs. feminine, substantive vs. verb, utterance subject vs. utterance object. This dualism is reproduced when we find the labelling which results from the categorisation that occurs within the classroom: ‘us’ vs. ‘them’; mainstream vs. compensatory classes; ‘our’ students vs. ‘the others’, ‘Spanish’ and ‘Latinos’ or ‘Moroccans’ and ‘Chinese’. Thus, the experience of these children is frequently understood in a simplistic manner, ignoring its multiplicity and richness, and presenting the experience of being part of or like the majority, as not compatible with the experience of being part of a visible collective whose construction has been based on otherness (immigrants) and the experience of being part of a national or ethnic group (Moroccans, Ecuadorians, Chinese, etc.). Nevertheless, in our research, all the researchers involved found that in the classrooms, in one way or another, the students live in ‘multiple worlds’ and do not understand these experiences as incompatible. In fact, they can use the language of origin, and the knowledge taught in the schools of the countries where they were born as a resource to improve their performance in Spanish schools: for example, by using their first language as a resource to improve communication among themselves in order to achieve better results in classroom exercises (for a study of these strategies of adaptation and resistance, see, among others, Goldstein, 2003; Martín Rojo, in press).
Imposing and resisting ethnic categorization in multicultural classrooms
Discourses in practice: the new (old) stereotypes The interviews conducted with teachers demonstrate how discourses circulate, which confirm this tendency towards ethnicisation, and how they also reproduce old ethnic stereotypes and even create new ones. Ethnicisation is accompanied with an unequal distribution of social value: some groups are well valued, others are less valued, or simply rejected. This hierarchy of value, which the analysis of these interviews reveals as tacit knowledge (implicit, familiar, natural), seems to be shaped by these two axes (my observations confirm Terrén’s findings, 2004): 1) Cultural distance (cultural proximity vs. distance): teachers seem to distinguish between students that are perceived to be less distant and those that are perceived to be further away; a clear example would be attitudes to students coming from Eastern Europe compared to those from China. The more culturally distant they are perceived, the less competent they are considered. 2) Personality and character (specifically related to submissiveness and rebelliousness): teachers distinguish between ‘good’ students and ‘rebellious’ students; this contrast is often exemplified with Ecuadorian versus Moroccan students. The more rebellious or submissive they are, the worse students they are considered. The more neutral their behaviour, the better. In these contrasts and in the categories which emerge from them, we find the generalisations and bias that usually occur in stereotypes and they further transmit an essential view of identity: dichotomy (versus gradual) criteria for belonging. They also lead to a false dilemma: either you belong to one group or to another – ‘ours’ versus ‘those from outside’. In the following examples we can see how these processes are activated. In example 5, we can see how nationalities and ethnic groups are considered relevant in order to explain school performance: Example 5 Hay nacionalidades, ¿sabes? A los niños marroquíes no les interesa nada, los justito por aprender e irse a los 16 años y ya está. Siempre hay excepciones, ¿eh? (...) Pero los chicos... yo sobre todo veo que a los chicos les cuesta mucho adaptarse, integrarse en el grupo, seguir las normas... Entonces ahí hay que ver las nacionalidades, chicos-chicas... sería muy interesante hacer un estudio de eso. Example 5 There are some nationalities, you know? Moroccan kids are not interested at all, they just learn the basics and they leave school when they are 16. There are always some exceptions, eh? (…), but boys … especially the boys I can tell that
Luisa Martín Rojo
boys find it hard to fit in, integrate in the group, follow the rules … So you have to consider nationalities, gender differences … that would be very interesting to study. (Interview by Pérez Milans)
Examples like 5 and 6 show how different characters and cultural values are attributed to these groups. In 6 the same reproduction and reinforcement of stereotypes can be seen, and the same process of ethnicisation, but referring in this case to “Latin” students. Example 6 D: es que no destacan/ puedes tener a uno por sus propias habilidades/ ¿eh?/ pero en matemáticas y en idiomas®/ y en lengua traen poco/// que le guste la tecnología o que sea manitas eso ya es otra cosa// el ordenador les encanta a todos // el ordenador les chifla// ¿eh?/ y eso lo aprenden en seguida todos / ¿eh? // pero/ en general el hispano tiene poco nivel // y lo lo peor es que les importa tres cominos/ les da igual / les da igual// ese es el asunto/ eso es lo malo/ les da igual (…) Example 6 D: they don’t stand out/ you can have a good one/ you know?/ but in mathematics and languages→/ and they bring poor language skills/// they may like technology or may be clever with their hands, that’s a different story// they all love computers// they go crazy about computers // you know?/ and they all learn quickly // but/ in general Hispanic kids have low academic skills // and the worst thing is that they don’t give a damn / they don’t care / they don’t care// that’s the problem/ they don’t care (…) (Interview recorded by Patiño)
Social distance is evoked with Chinese students, in addition to differences in personality and character. Example 7 En cuanto a integración en el sistema educativo y que se relacionen con los demás, yo tengo la sensación que es la [comunidad] china la que tarda más en aceptar que tienes que intentar hablar con los compañeros, que es bueno relacionarte... Example 7 Regarding integration in the educational system and social relations, I have the impression that it takes longer for the Chinese community to accept the fact that you have to try to speak to your classmates, that it is good to be sociable….(Interview recorded by Pérez Milans)
Imposing and resisting ethnic categorization in multicultural classrooms
Cultural proximity seems to be constructed along expectations of assimilation: whether students’ features present them as subject to assimilation. Among these, the language seems to play an important role, although it interacts with others. In this sense, students from Guinea Ecuatorial, who are Spanish speakers, in the schools we have studied, didn’t seem to be considered as close as those coming from Ecuador or Colombia. However, the component that seemed to matter for proximity vs. distance proved to be religion. Islam revealed itself to be one of the most outstanding differentiating characteristics, which accounts for two aspects that could be made salient: on the one hand, in spite of the cultural proximity between Moroccans and Spaniards, their level of assimilation turned out to be the lowest. The research carried out so far has not yet sufficiently shown how cultural distance is built up, but it seems to show that there is a strong tendency for it to be largely dependent on expectations of assimilation. The second element on which cultural distance seems to be built is related to the effort teachers consider they have to invest in class (Terrén, 2004). In fact, teachers show in interviews that they consider that linguistic and curricular differences demand more time and effort from them. As it can be seen in example 8, “it is more difficult to educate” students from a different background. This perception has in turn negative effects on the assessment of students. Frequently, differences are understood as deficits. In example 8, these students are represented as lacking motivation, knowledge and skills. They seem to be interested in and to be good only at working. Example 8 ya / pero es que yo tengo cuatro niños / dice / sonn / marroquíes / dice / yy / son carne de prisión el año que vi- el día de mañana / es que pasan de todo // entonces / por qué no aprenden / porque no les da la gana / porque no están motivados / porque no les apetecee / hablar español // es que hay que mirarlo todo / claro // no es lo mismo un niño que se esfuerce por hablar el español que otro que pase dee / del español // entonces / va a ser más difícil educar // lógico. Example 8 I know / but it’s just that I have four boys/ he says / they are/ Moroccans/ he says/ and/ they are prison material the year that-in the future/ they just don’t care // so / why don’t they learn/ because they don’t give a damn / because they are not motivated / because they don’t feel like / speaking Spanish// You have to look at the whole picture / of course // It is not the same one kid who makes the effort to speak Spanish as one who does not care about speaking Spanish // so / it is going to be more difficult to educate them // it makes sense. (Interview recorded by Pérez Milans, 2004)
Luisa Martín Rojo
The discursive move of comparison between those who want to learn Spanish and those who do not care, does not only establish a contrast among groups of students, but it also orders them in an hierarchy of values that explain the academic success of the student of immigrant origin in terms of attributes regarding their nationality, culture, language or religion. In this hierachy, Moroccan students appear as the most distant ones from the model of the “good student”. While, Eastern Europeans are seen as “brilliant,” “disciplined” and with a “work ethic”, students from less developed South American countries (Bolivian, Ecuadorian) are expected to incorporate to streams oriented towards the job market, due the curricular gaps it is said they bring to schools. Thus, in this cultural framework, Moroccan migrants and their descendents are seen as geographically more remote from “us”, than other groups, when in the case of Morocco, history, land, and cultural productions/outcomes have been shared for centuries. (For a deep analysis of these processes of essentializing and naturalizing culture, and of processes of ethnic hierachization, see Martín Rojo, Relaño y Rasskin, in press). From the interviews with teachers, a great deal of interesting information about students and their communities emerged. There is often an explicit definition of ethnic groups, by means of which ethnic features are attributed. Also, a scale of cultural divergence and tolerable behaviours is fixed. We can see how further knowledge is produced, although it could remain implicit; this particularly concerns knowledge about which classroom norms, teaching/learning procedures, and student/teacher roles are considered normal and adequate. This production and accumulation of knowledge (by means of these categories) yields a multiplication of the effects of power (Foucault 1966, p. 225). Decapitalization and resistance According to Bourdieu, social life is structured around ‘social fields’; understood as a network of positions defined by a specific distribution of capital, which endows that field with its own particular logic. In fact, in schools, cultural and linguistic resources of the students are distributed among students as forms of capitals. And, examples as those analysed in this paper show an unequal distribution of symbolic capital. In the classroom those who are considered “normal” or “good” students, are precisely those who are seen as culturally close and who are familiar with the knowledge and the behaviour which is validated and legitimated in the classroom. Teaching strategies, pedagogical materials, and teachers’ discourses produce and legitimate this knowledge. If the only legitimate language is the local variety, the school policies are, prima facie, excluding other languages and dialects in the classroom. As a result, homogeneity is privileged instead of the incorporation of
Imposing and resisting ethnic categorization in multicultural classrooms
linguistic differences. Similar processes of exclusion prevent immigrant students’ “funds of knowledge”, understood as the historically accumulated and culturally developed knowledge, from being integrated into the curriculum and in assessment, placing these students at risk of failure. Thus, the legitimate knowledge validated in the classroom (mainly curricula knowledge) is that of the receiving country. As a result, students who have been schooled in other countries and who have incorporated other kinds of knowledge are deprived of capital: their languages, and backgrounds are not valued. They will have to make an effort to assimilate new academic content and languages. Madrid’s educational programmes aimed at foreign students, such as the compensatory and bridging classes, in fact, separate the students and establish a different logic than the ‘normal’ classes. Students’ cultural and linguistic resources are presented as deficient or non-existent; and this translates into decapitalization since their languages and knowledge are not recognised as such. This decapitalization has an effect on power relationships between students and also between students and teachers: students are divided between ‘good’ and ‘bad’, ‘competent’ and ‘incompetent’, ‘ours’ (from Spain) and ‘the immigrants’. In the examples analysed, we could see a combination of ethnization (explanation of scholarly behaviour in terms of ethnic origin) ignoring other factors (like age, type of schooling, incividual character traits, etc.), along with the hierarchisation of ethnic groups. The unequal distribution and valuation of this symbolic capital (language, funds of knowledge, academic knowledge) has consequences for the educational process. The negative assessment of students that do not possess the knowledge or language that is considered legitimate, (or those that do not follow the rules) acts as a constraint to their social mobility: if the students only manage to reach the compulsory educational level, their social position will be similar to their parents – immigrant workers that, in general, only have access to jobs that demand no specialisation. In this way, the interactional order and field logic contribute to the reproduction of a social order that assigns immigrant workers and their descendants to a weak social position. Below we have an example taken from a bridging class, in which the development of interaction illustrates the process of decapitalization: Example 9 P: BISBAL // ¿qué es Bisbal? / ¿quién es Bisbal? (2”) (se dirige a X) tú si sabes quién es (señala a F) F: sí P: ¡uh! (se le cae el bolígrafo al suelo) A: cantante
Luisa Martín Rojo
P: ¿no sabes quién es Bisbal? (se dirige a X) (la alumna china pregunta en chino al observador por la palabra arquitecto) F: Bustamante P: ¿Bustamante? (1”) (se dirige a X) dime un cantante ↑ (2”) el nombre / un cantante / dime ↓ X: ¿en chino? P: no no / en español A: (en español)o [risas] X: no ↑ / yo no lo sé ↑ P: ¿no conoces ninguno en español? X: sí ↑ // no lo sé ↑ F: yo mucho ↑ P: a ver // di F: ¿qué? P: Bisbal ↑ // [dime una canción de Bisbal] X: [(( ))] F: [¡ah! / no lo sé] H: [Bulería bulería] Example 9 P: BISBAL // who’s Bisbal? / who’s Bisbal? (2”) (directed at X) you know who he is (points at F) F: yes P: uh! (pen falls to the floor) A: a singer P: don’t you know who Bisbal is? (directed at X) (the Chinese student asks, in Chinese, the observer for the word ‘architect’) ) F: Bustamante? P: Bustamante? (1”) (speaks to X) tell me a singer↑ (2”) the name / a singer / tell me ↓ X: in Chinese? P: no, no / in Spanish A: (in Spanish)o [laughter] X: no ↑ / I don’t know ↑ P: don’t know anything in Spanish? X: yes ↑ // I don’t know ↑
Imposing and resisting ethnic categorization in multicultural classrooms
F: I know loads↑ P: come on then // tell us F: What? P: Bisbal ↑ // [tell me a song by Bisbal] X: [(( ))] F: [ah! / I don’t know]H: [Bulería bulería] (Ethnographic observation and recording by Pérez Milans)
In this linguistic immersion programme, the eradication of the use of the student’s home language not only eliminates a learning and inter-comprehension tool but also (through exclusion), distributes the linguistic capital in a specific way: those that dominate the language of instruction are ‘competent’; those that do not are ‘incompetent’. In addition, the restriction of the cultural references to the local environment (as in the example), without including examples known in the countries of origin, further increases the decapitalization of these students, making them seem ignorant and slow. The students’ resistance to this institutional decapitalization takes many forms and this depends on the way interaction develops and the kind of relationships negotiated among the participants. Example 10 Profesor: ¡shu!, ¡lo tomáis mucho a cachondeo!, pero los países que todavía son muy desa..., sudesarrollados o que tienen escasez de alimentos o que pasan hambre muchos niños... lo veo en la televisión en esos programas de Antena Dos, de... digo... de televisión dos Sandra: Antena Dos [risas] Profesor: sí. Antena Dos. ¿Eh? ¡NO comen más que un plato de patatas al día! Mario: es suficiente Brian: depende del sabor Profesor: ¡sí tú toma el pelo niño!, ¡tenías que irte a Filipinas de donde procedes a ver si viven mejor que aquí para que nos vengas a tomar el pelo! Brian: ya Profesor: tú, eh... comportarte niño (( )) aquí. ¡TOdas estas cosas son historia!, y todas estas cosas aprende ee., atien...,ee hacen entender al joven o a la persona cómo ha ido evolucionando el hombre... (Observación, grabación y transcripción, Adriana Patiño). Example 10 Teacher: shush! you can joke about it, but the countries that are still very devel...., underdeveloped or have food shortages or where children
Luisa Martín Rojo
go hungry... I’ve seen them on television on these programmes on Antena Dos, I mean… television dos Sandra: Antena Dos [laughter] Teacher: Yes. Antena Dos. Eh? They don’t eat more than a plate of chips a day! Mario: it’s enough Brian: it depends on the flavour Teacher: Ok, you can laugh at me!, you should go to the Philippines, where you’re from and see if they live better than here and see if they come here and laugh at us! Brian: yeah Teacher: you, eh... behave yourself son (( )) here. This is all history and all this lear… uh…uh… make young people understand or the person, how man has evolved... (Observation, recording and transcription by Adriana Patiño).
The laughter of the other students is in support of Brian’s insolence. In this instance, as on many occasions, the objective of the joke is to oppose and question the indoctrination of the class and its effect on the students themselves. The response of the teacher (“go back to your own country”), the polarisation and categorisation of the students as ‘underdeveloped’ (“from underdeveloped countries where people go hungry”) is explicit. The students’ resistance is in this sense, an action that neutralises decapitalization. Students laugh at the teacher and question his/her position in the classroom; in addition, this transgression has a unifying effect on the students. A discourse of reconstruction emerges from this behaviour: the students feel stronger after subverting the order of the class. The distribution of capital and the assignment of value to different resources, the categorisation of students as competent or incompetent and polarisation are processes which take place through the production and legitimation of discourses; discourses which produce and spread knowledge that justifies and legitimises these practices. The same thing occurs with resistance: it is accompanied by discourses that question the imposition and delegitimisation of the actions of the institutions themselves. In these examples, the students refuse to ‘play the game’, as is obvious due to: 1) the non-verbal patterns: self-exclusion position; body position and clothing: hat, coat; 2) the limited participation in class; 3) the explicit rejection of participation: silence; lack of answers to questions; 4) the exclusion of the teachers: interruptions, noise, parallel conversations. In the short term, this resistance empowers the students, in the same way as questioning the role of the teacher and neutralising the actions of the institution.
Imposing and resisting ethnic categorization in multicultural classrooms
Nevertheless, in the long term, it justifies the exclusion of the students from the school environment, reinforces their marginalisation and weakens their social position (for a deep analysis of resistance, see Martín Rojo, in press). Conclusions We are undoubtedly a long way from what Freire (1970) meant by “problematized” education – a system which combines education with the life experience of the students and involves them in a reflection on the nature of knowledge, life experience, migratory experience and its socio-economic causes and the sense of education itself. Such a reflection could suppose a revisiting of what is considered as ‘normal’ (as employed in expressions like ‘normal students’ and ‘the others’), ‘inferior’ or ‘superior’ (for example, with judgements about ‘good’ or ‘bad’ schooling), or questioning the repeated separation between ‘us’ and ‘them’ (to such an extent that in the classroom, the traditional distinction between teacher and student is seemingly replaced by ‘us’ – the Spanish and ‘them’ – the immigrants). This paper shows that we still have a long way to go. The schools’ social and cultural configuration has changed, but not the definition and comprehension of the social categories of identification. What is different is still excluded and what is worse is that we continue to see different as deficient. The special programmes directed at students from immigrant backgrounds separate them from the rest of the students and identify them, and this reinforces the process of decapitalization. Decapitalization takes place through a non-equitable assignment of capital in schools, and by a simultaneous process of ethnization through discourse. The examples show how both phenomena are parts of the same process of domination, by means of which images and social identities are imposed. The result is a disciplining effect that affects students’ performance, and selfesteem. The internalisation of these discourses could lead students to understand their world in terms of inter-ethnic relations and inter-ethnic conflict, and see the school as a ‘foreign land’, from which they are excluded. Nevertheless, there is the possibility of resistance, and the production of new identity discourses which, in turn, provoke reactions. Finally, we can say that in this context, resistance can have a paradoxical effect: on the one hand, it can empower, while on the other, it can weaken the ethnic group by reinforcing exclusion from the academic system and generating intergroup conflicts.
Luisa Martín Rojo
References Deleuze, Gilles and Guattari, Felix (1980) Mille Plateaux. París: Minuit. Foucault, Michel (1966) Les Mots et les Choses. Une Archéology des Sciences Humaines. Paris: Gallimard. Giddens, Anthony (1984) The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press. Giddens, Anthony (1987) “Structuralism, post-structuralism and the production of culture”. In: Giddens, Anthony and Jonathan Tuner, Social Theory Today. London: Polity Press, pp. 195–223. Goldstein, Tara (2003) “Contemporary bilingual life at a Canadian High School: choices, risks, tensions and dilemmas.” Sociology of Education, 2003 (7): 247–264. Grad Fuchsel, Héctor & Martín Rojo, Luisa (2003) ““Civic” and “ethic” nationalist discourse in Spanish Parliamentary debates”. Journal of Language and Politics. 2(1): 31–71. Heller, Monica (1999) Linguistic Minorities and Modernity: A Sociolinguistic Ethnography. London: Longman. Martin Rojo, Luisa (1995) “Division and rejection: from the personification of the Gulf conflict to the demonisation of Saddam Hussein”. Discourse & Society 6(1): 49‑79. Martín Rojo, Luisa (1998) “Intertextuality and the construction of a new female identity”. In: Bengoechea, Mercedes & Ricardo Sola Buil, Intertextuality /Intertextualidad. Alcalá de Henares: Universidad de Alcalá de Henares, pp. 81–98. Martín Rojo, Luisa (2001) “New developments in Discourse Analysis: discourse as social practice”. Folia Lingüística XXXV/ 1–2: 42–78. Martín Rojo, Luisa (2003) “Escuela y diversidad lingüística”. In: Martín Rojo, Luisa, et al. (eds.): ¿Asimilar o integrar? Dilema ante el Multilingüismo en las Aulas, Madrid, CIDE/MEC, pp. 17–68. Martín Rojo, Luisa (2007) “Viaje a nuestras aulas”. In: Martín Rojo, Luisa & Laura Mijares (eds.), Voces del Aula. Etnografías de la Escuela Multilingüe. Madrid: CREADE/CIDE, pp. 37–72. Martín Rojo, Luisa (in press) “Disciplining and resisting in multilingual classrooms in Madrid”. In: Martín Rojo, Luisa (ed.) Constructing Inequality in Multilingual Classroom. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Martín Rojo, Luisa, Relaño Pastor, Ana and Rasskin Gutman, Irina (in press) “Who is a “legitimate participant” in multilingual classrooms? Essentializing and naturalizing culture”. In Martín Rojo, Luisa (ed.) Constructing Inequality in Multilingual Classroom. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Terrén Lallana, Eduardo (2004) Incorporación o Asimilación. Madrid: La Catarata. Patiño Santos, A. (2007) “Extraños en las aulas”. In: Martín Rojo, Luisa & Laura Mijares (eds.), Voces del Aula. Etnografías de la Escuela Multilingüe. Madrid: CREADE/CIDE, pp.179–216. Willis, Paul (1981) Learning to Labor. How working class Kids get working class Jobs. Columbia University Press: Morningsid edition (with an introduction by Stanley Aronowitz).
The construction of patriotic discourse in Chinese basal readers Yongbing Liu
Northeast Normal University, China
Introduction Ever since the beginning of the 20th century, national identity has been a continuous discourse that dominates cultural politics in China. Yet the discourse of national identity has been constantly maintained, deconstructed and reconstructed in the form of text presentation, symbolisation and theatrical manifestations as well as in objects and materials (Sautman, 1997). During the years from late 19th century to the end of World War II, Chinese national identity was intimately connected with concrete struggles against colonisation. As a matter of fact, the birth and development of modern Chinese national identity was parallel to the inflow of foreign ideas and the incursion of foreign forces. As a result, high priority was then given to the survival of the Chinese civilization in the discourse of national identity with a strong emphasis on ethnicity, in other words, the Han Chinese. The Han Chinese dominant identity played an important role in mobilising people to oppose foreign imperialism and unifying China (Zheng, 1999). During the years from early 1950s to late 1970s, the discourse of Chinese national identity was reconstructed by the Communist government that was closely related with the cold war ideology. Externally, the United States and the West were constructed as potential threat to the independence of the nation state while internally Marxist concept of class struggle was accepted and used in dealing with domestic affairs (Zheng, 1999). Virtually in that period of time, to be Chinese was to be anti-imperialist. To be anti-imperialist was to be anti-bourgeois and pro-socialist. However, since the beginning of economic reforms in the early 1980s, the dominant discourse of national identity has once again undergone radical changes. Common observations and studies (e.g. Li, 2000; Link, 1994; Tu,1993) show that the economic reforms, have improved the Chinese people’s material lives, and
Yongbing Liu
at the same time, have led to enormous negative social consequences, such as disparities among different regions and social groups, economic corruption, money worship and moral vacuum. Due to many observable social problems, the Chinese people are once again confronted with identity crisis and ideological tensions. To combat what is described as “profound identity crisis” (Tu, 1993: iii) and “at an ideological crossroad” (Link, 1994), the government and the cultural elites have begun to recreate or reconstruct “new discourses” that they believe could fill the moral vacuum. “Patriotism” as a new version of Chinese national identity is one of the new discourses that are constructed to legitimate the government rule and generate popular support in an increasingly divided society (Townsend, 1992; Zheng, 1999). There are many studies (e.g., Townsend, 1992; Zheng, 1999) in the current literature that tried to identify what and how the discourse of national identity has been developed, and with what purpose based on different data sources, such as government documents, public media, academic works and so on. However little research is done on what national identity the government and its cultural elites construct and transmit in the standardised language textbooks to their younger members of the Chinese society in the current transformation from a “socialist” social order to a “capitalist” social order. This article reports part of a study that examines cultural knowledges and ideologies in the basal Chinese language readers, which are currently in use nationwide for primary school students in China (Yuwen bianjishi, 1999). It is axiomatic to study discourse of national identity in officially legitimated textbooks because they embody the official version of dominant cultural knowledges and particular constructions of the social world (Apple, 1999). In the study, first I have identified four major genres: narrative, descriptive, expositive and poetic, and three dominant discourses: national identity, cultural values and beliefs, and pro-science and technology through an intertextual analysis drawn upon critical discourse analysis (Liu, 2005). Then I critically analyse how these genres and discourses are constructed and what ideological forces are manifested in the text corpus. More specifically, I investigate how textual features, such as lexical choices, grammatical elements and generic structures are manipulated in the discourse and genre constructions. This article describes one of the dominant discourses, involving 99 texts that are identified to construct the discourse of national identity. From the outset, I would point out that it is not my aim in this article to engage in a discussion of theories about the crucial concept of identity or “Chinese national identity” (for detailed discussions, refer to Cillia, Reisigl, & Wodak, 1999; Zheng 1999. Instead, I assume a position in line with critical discourse analysis (CDA) that any cultural knowledges or categories are constructed discursively in texts (e.g., Fairclough, 2002; Martin & Wodak, 2003; Van Dijk, 1997) and attempt
The construction of patriotic discourse in Chinese basal readers
to examine what and how discourse of Chinese national identity is constructed and with what ideological intentions in the basal Chinese language readers. I assume, then, that discourse of Chinese national identity, like any other discourses or categories, are socially constructed and understood to mean something that operates as a chaining system of certain description in texts and other symbolic forms that regulates and constitutes social relations, social behaviours and social identity of members in a particular community. As part of the selective tradition, textbooks legitimate and transmit dominant cultural values and beliefs while omitting others (Apple, 1999) in the Chinese context. In what follows, I first briefly discuss the research framework of CDA. Then I use CDA analytic techniques to examine the discourse of national identity constructed in the basal Chinese language readers. Research framework Discourses are viewed by critical discourse analysts (e.g. Fairclough, 1992, 2002; Martin and Wodak, 2003; Van Dijk, 1997) as ways of constructing areas of knowledge, and they consist of recurrent statements and wordings across texts. As a form of social practice, the construction of knowledge is tied to specific historical and sociocultural contexts, and is the means by which existing social relations are produced or contested, and different interests are served. In other words, cultural knowledges are constructed and challenged through texts in the hierarchical society where subjectivity, identity and social relations are constructed and reconstructed constantly through texts. However, whenever certain cultural categories are established in a certain community, they constrain or condition the human subjects to take particular positions in their use of texts (Martin and Wodak, 2003). In this sense, school texts can be regarded as one kind of the most important texts representing the established categories since they are officially selected and legitimated to socialise the younger members of the society. Through these texts, among others, students learn how to recognise and represent the categories such as national identity. Drawing upon the research framework of CDA, my analysis will involve three kinds of analytic techniques: generic, lexical and grammatical analysis. These techniques provide a rich set of topics for discussion (refer to Fairclough, 1992, 2002), but what I present here will necessarily be a selective rather than a full account. Choices of generic devices CDA views genres as having important regulating functions in discourse construction (Fairclough, 2002). A text generally consists of distinct alternating stages that both constitute the text and organise the meanings or messages of the text.
Yongbing Liu
Therefore, through analysing alternating stages in terms of message organisation in texts, we can uncover which part of the message is foregrounded, which is backgrounded, which part is positioned as being of most interest and how to form connections between different parts of the message. Lexical choices The choice of words is important in providing readers with cues for interpreting texts. It can define how events and intentions of texts are perceived and realised, thereby revealing messages text producers intend readers to receive. The choice of words is not neutral, but rather it involves naming or wording the social and natural world ideologically, shaping them for particular purposes and interests (Fairclough, 1992). Of interest here is the examination of the perspectives and intentions expressed by the texts in the corpus. The focus of my analysis will be mainly on “overwording”, the use of “pronouns” and “metaphor”. “Overwording” involves a high frequency of wording; it often includes many words which have similar meanings. Overwording shows over-concern with certain aspects of reality while down-playing or excluding certain other aspects. Through this choice certain texts may build up “particular versions of the world”. In simple terms, for example, certain worlds may be constructed as “beautiful” and “significant” or “ugly” or “insignificant”. By analysing the lexical choice, we can reveal what version(s) of the world is (are) constructed and with what ideological forces in the texts. Analysis of the choice of pronouns is also important because a text producer has at his/her disposal a whole range of options with which to present the interests and power relations of the text (Fairclough, 1992). In the context of the author and reader relationship, the text producer can unite his/her readers into a single interest group by replacing differences in gender, age, and social status with a single “we”. By using the inclusive pronoun “we”, a text may also build up both an authority and solidarity with the reader, thus hiding its ideological intent and positioning the reader to accept the intent of the text as common knowledge. Therefore, by examining the choice of pronouns such as “we” and “you” among others, particular social relations can be revealed between people in general, and between the text producer and the reader in particular. “Metaphor” in the form of metonymy, synecdoche and personification is another means by which certain texts convey their ideological intents. According to Fairclough (1992), metaphor is a way of depicting one facet of an experience in light of another, and different metaphors have different ideological connotations. In a broad sense, metaphor may be used to create “a sameness” between people with the effect of hiding their differences, or particularise different groups of
The construction of patriotic discourse in Chinese basal readers
people as “collective singular” such as “the Chinese people”. In a narrow sense, “happiness” may be presented as owning “material things”, such as TV sets, refrigerators or tall buildings, and so on. In a word, as the meaning of the word metaphor implies, it might be the most effective means to hide the text producer’s intentions. Therefore, an analysis of metaphor is crucial for any linguistic analysis. Grammatical choices In CDA, there is a complicated range of grammatical categories, or a system of “metalanguage”, that is used to describe both forms and meanings of a particular language (Fairclough, 1992). It is unnecessary, and also impossible to examine all the possibilities of grammatical choices. So my focus in this article is limited to analysing “patterns of transitivity”, and the use of “active” and “passive voices”. “Transitivity” specifies different types of processes that are recognised in language and grammatical structures by which they are expressed (Halliday, 1994: 101). Halliday (1994) proposes six major processes or kinds of transitivity: material process, verbal process, mental process, relational process, behavioural process and existential process. To perform a transitivity analysis requires the identification of certain patterns in the use of these processes. By identifying the patterns of transitivity, we can examine which meanings – for example, experiential, relational or expressive – are emphasised more than others (Fairclough, 1992). The most critical variable here has to do with whether or not a process is brought about by an agency. Halliday (1994) defines the participant who undertakes an activity as Medium in certain processes, for example, as the grammatical subject in intransitive sentences or the grammatical object in transitive sentences. The participant who brings about the undertaking is defined as the Agent: a grammatical subject in transitive sentences for example. In a word, “Mediums” act or are acted upon, whereas “Agents” act themselves on Mediums. This dimension of meaning is central to the analysis of inequality and power in discourse construction (Fairclough, 2002). Hence, sentences can be generally divided into transitive and intransitive structures. An intransitive sentence marked by an intransitive verb does not require the identification of the causal relation between participant(s). Therefore, it may be employed to delete the agent that may be responsible for the consequences of the process. In contrast, a transitive sentence usually requires the agent to be mentioned and held responsible for the consequences of the process, unless it is in a passive voice form. As a consequence, it is possible to examine whether or not the choice of transitive or intransitive sentences in certain texts is correlated with the underlying ideology of these texts. In the same manner, it is also possible to study the choice of active and passive sentences for the same purpose, since agents can be deliberately deleted or retained in sentences of passive voice.
Yongbing Liu
If the analysis of lexical and grammatical choices is viewed as a bottom-up approach to texts, the analysis of the message organization or generic devices can be seen as a top-down approach to texts. Of course, they cannot be totally separated because words, grammars and generic structures are always interrelated, even though one may be emphasised over others in some studies. Ideally, using them together yields more coherent results than only employing one approach. The data source The data source of this study is a set of Chinese basal readers that is currently in use for primary school students nationwide in China. It contains 12 volumes and covers 6 grades of primary school, with two volumes for each year or a grade. The Chinese language is one of the core subjects in the national curriculum. It is taught in 9 hours out of 21 total class hours per week, for an average of 40 weeks a year. The textbooks consist of 308 texts that are used from Grade 1 to Grade 6 by children from age seven to thirteen. For this article, I examine a portion of the total curriculum relating to the discourse of national identity, which includes 99 texts, about 32 % of the total. The discursive construction of patriotism A series of texts in the textbooks is designated as having an intertextual relation (Liu, 2005) in terms of theme and orientation, in accordance to the primary concern of the texts, and is assigned to one of the perspectives from which a specific discourse is constructed. These texts form a chaining system that constructs the discourse of national identity from five major perspectives, namely, the desired love of the country, the great culture and people, the natural beauties of the country, the happy life of people in the country, and work or sacrifice for the country. In this intertextual chaining system, the desired love of the country is the central perspective from which the discourse of national identity is constructed. Revolved around it are the other four perspectives that are interrelated to provide the rationale and definitions for the discourse. In the analysis that follows, the perspectives will be discussed separately. Since space is limited within this article, I cannot provide a detailed analysis of intertextual relations of texts within each perspective identified in the study; instead I will analyse texts as examples for each perspective.1 1. To save space, I have translated some texts of the textbooks into English to provide examples. For references, however, the original page numbers and their corresponding volumes are given in brackets at the end of the quoted examples.
The construction of patriotic discourse in Chinese basal readers
The desired love for the country The perspective of “the desired love for the country” is represented through texts that are basically organised as children’s poems characterised by rhyming, parallelism or allusion that enable the texts to be easily recited and memorised. However, these texts are infused with the manifestation of “the love of the country” that is beyond the children’s interests. So at the very early stage of their formal education, Chinese children are exposed to the ideological construction of their political and national identity. They are positioned to identify themselves with “the motherland”. For example,
We love our motherland Flowers like the sun. In the sunshine, flowers are blooming beautifully. Birds like the blue sky. In the blue sky, birds are flying freely. We love our motherland. In our motherland, we are growing up happily. (Yuwen bianjishi, 1999, 2: 10)
In this text, overwording and metaphor are used to emphasise or construct the concept of national identity. The repetitive use of the transitive verb “like” and its synonym “love” sets up a proposition of attachment between “we” and “motherland” with certainty. The metaphoric use of “flowers” and “birds” in relation to “the sun” and “sky”, which are familiar to children, reinforces, and more importantly facilitates child readers’ comprehension of the proposition since metaphor is a way of depicting the unfamiliar experience in the light of a familiar one. In fact, in Chinese culture, children are frequently compared with flowers in terms of “pretty” and “lovely”, and with birds in terms of “lively and free” in everyday conversations. The metaphors also presuppose that since flowers and birds like the sun and the sky which condition their lives, “we”, as human beings, should love our motherland which conditions our lives. While metaphor is used to create a textual coherence of the text, the linguistic device of repetition is used to create an absolute effect-cause sequence: A likes/loves B because B is the condition where A exists. This absolute sequence further positions the reader to conform to the textual authority, “we love our motherland”, allowing no other alternative readings. Through the use of the inclusive pronoun “we” and “us”, the text builds up both an authority and solidarity with the child reader. Compared with “birds” and “flowers”, the child reader is portrayed as “live happily in the country”. Within this schema, the love of the country becomes privileged and inevitable. Together with the use of the positive adverbs, “beautifully”, “freely” and “happily”, the motherland is portrayed indeed as a “paradise” (where there is no class, or poverty, or inequality) that is worthy of love. However, in the increasingly divided society in terms of material distribution, how can the children in the poverty-stricken families be growing up
Yongbing Liu
as “happily” as the children in the newly rich families? Obviously the text represents the ideology to promote the government’s interest rather than reality. The great culture and people After the logic that “we love our country” is established, a series of texts is selected to depict cultural sites of the country in detail. The texts selected range from the cultural symbols such as Beijing, the People’s Hall, the Lugou Bridge, the Zhaozhou Bridge, to Yuanming Garden, Yihe Garden. The focus of all the descriptions is on the “great or unique features” of the selected cultural sites, which are in turn related to the claim that the Chinese people as a whole are great or competent. The claim, therefore, is explicitly and implicitly related with the ideological intent that builds up the sense of national identity. For example, Zhaozhou bridge There is a world famous bridge across the Xiao River in Zhao County, Hebei province. It is a stone arched bridge, called Zhaozhou Bridge. It was built in the Sui Dynasty. It is about more than 1300 years since it was built. The bridge is very magnificent. It is more than 50 metres long and over 9 meters wide. The main road on the bridge is designed for the horses and wagons to pass. On each side of the main road, there are side walks for people…. The bridge is not only strong but also beautiful. On both sides of the bridge there are stone balustrades. The balustrades are carved with fine and beautiful pictures. In one part of the balustrade there are two carved dragons. They are entangled with one another and water is running out of their mouths. In another part, two dragons are flying with their fore claws pushing each other and their heads turning back to look afar. In still another part, there are two dragons that are playing together with a ball. All the dragons are carved as if they are alive, flying in the air. The bridge represents the wisdom and competence of the Chinese people. It is the treasured cultural heritage of our country. (Yuwen bianjishi, 1999, 6: 8–9)
This text identifies the Zhaozhou Bridge as an important cultural site. The generic structure of this text is composed of an identification stage (paragraph 1), followed by one or more stages of feature descriptions (paragraphs 2–3) and a closing stage (Paragraph 4) with judgement of what is described. At the identification stage, four simple sentences are listed to depict what to be described, where it is located, when it was built and why it is worth describing. The texture of the paragraph is mainly realised by means of the repeated use of anaphoric ‘it’ that refers back to the subject “the bridge” of the first existential sentence. This listing does not invoke the logic of
The construction of patriotic discourse in Chinese basal readers
cause and effect, but provides the ‘facts’. However, as can be noted, each paragraph of the description begins with an assertion that is value judgement rather than a ‘fact’. This pattern runs through the other stages or paragraphs of the text. The second stage (Paragraph 2) describes the physical features of the bridge. The third stage (Paragraph 3) is a description of the artistic features of the bridge. The third stage starts with an assertion: “The bridge is not only strong but also beautiful”. The descriptions of the artistic features focus on the carvings of the dragons rather than other artistic forms on the bridge. This focus is not neutral because dragons are an important symbol in the Chinese culture. It generally symbolises “power, unity and wealth”. However, since the 1980s, the belated establishment of the mythological dragon as a totemic animal for all Chinese has been enhanced by the dominant discourse of cultural elites and government to rally patriotic sentiment of the people since the government socialist ideology has lost its persuasive power (Sautman, 1997). The government promotes such a kind of discourse because it serves its purpose to create a sense of belonging and national identity for the Chinese people. For example, to mark the 50th anniversary of the United Nations, the Chinese government presented a tripod carved with 56 dragons, one for each officially designated ethnic group in China, “representing the Chinese nation as descendants of dragons” (Sautman, 1997: 76). Therefore, the detailed description of the carved dragons is mainly to familiarise and position child readers to identify themselves with the cultural symbol. At the closing stage, the beauty and magnificence of the bridge is attributed to the Chinese people’s wisdom and competence as a whole rather than a specific designer or builders. This conclusive generalisation is oriented to generate in child readers a sense of pride in or an identity with the country and its people. This kind of orientation or ideology is manifested in many other descriptive texts of cultural sites or symbols in the textbooks. The natural beauties of the country Another perspective from which the discourse of national identity is constructed is to paint the natural beauties of the country. The major themes of the texts selected from this perspective in the textbooks are mainly involved with descriptions of the beautiful side of China’s landscapes. The texts range from descriptions of the national parks such as Da Xing’anling, Xiao Xing’anling, distinct scenic spots such as Guilin, Qiantang River, Lushan Waterfall to the controversial or sensitive places such as the Sun and Moon Lake in Taiwan, the Xisa Island in the South China sea. The texts have nothing to do with child readers’ immediate living environments or their school life. They are claimed to cultivate child readers’ aesthetic sense and teach them how to read and write descriptive texts that are one essential compo-
Yongbing Liu
nent of literature genre such as novels (State Education Ministry, 2000). However, I view these texts as more than a reflection of that purpose. Rather they provide child readers a biased version of the real world. The purpose is to generate in child readers a sense of pride and an identity with the country. For example, The beautiful Xiao Xing’anling Xiao Xing’anling is located in the northeastern part of our country. The forest contains numerous trees, such as pines, birches and oaks. It runs several hundred square miles like a vast green sea. In the spring, new twigs sprout and fresh leaves grow out of the trees. The snow on the mountain melts into streams that are gurgling down in different directions. Flocks of little deer stroll along the streams. Sometimes they lower their heads to drink water from the streams. Sometimes they tilt their heads to appreciate their shadows reflected in the water. The streams are full of water with wood logs flowing down like different fleets advancing in the sea. In the summer, all the trees grow luxuriantly thick and green. The forest is covered with many layers of dense green leaves… In the autumn, the leaves of birches and oaks turn yellow... In the winter, the snow is flying in the air... The scenery of Xiao Xing’anling is attractive all the year round. It is a beautiful large garden. It is a large treasure land, too. (Yuwen bianjishi, 1999, 5: 85–89)
As can be observed, the generic structure of this text is identical to that of the descriptive texts of cultural sites or symbols. It is composed of an identification stage (paragraph 1), followed by one or more stages of feature descriptions (paragraphs 2–5) and a closing stage (paragraph 6) with judgement of what is described. In the identification stage, the location and the general feature of the forest are provided. The four generic stages of the text in terms of specific feature descriptions are marked by the use of four prepositional phrases with the four seasons (spring, summer, autumn and winter), which establish a temporal order of the descriptions. In each stage, typical phenomenal changes of the forest are described with emphasis in relation to each season in question. The descriptions have captured the beautiful features of the forest in each season. The forest, as well as the description, is indeed beautiful. So the judgement made in the closing stage: The scenery is attractive all the year round” appears to be a “common sense”. However, the description deliberately omits the human interference with the forest. The description betrays its intention by the last sentence of the second paragraph: “The streams are full of water with wood logs flowing down like different fleets advancing in the sea”. The wood logs here are depicted as “beautiful” as “advancing fleets”. The fact is that the forest has been heavily logged out and the coverage of
The construction of patriotic discourse in Chinese basal readers
the forest is no longer “several hundred square miles”. Many experts in China (National Environmental Protection Commission, 1994) have long begun to call upon the government to implement effect measures to save the few remaining forests of the country. Their research shows that many wild animals have already been extinct; the remaining wild animals, such as northeastern tigers, bears, martens are in danger of extinction. The medical herbs such as wild ginseng can no longer be found in the forest. Therefore the text selected does not intend to tell the child reader the fact; instead it is oriented intertextually to other texts to show the beautiful side of the country in order to achieve its purpose for identity construction. The environmental damage and public green discourse are simply selected out. The happy life of the people Another perspective from which the discourse of national identity is constructed is realised through a series of texts that depict “a better life people enjoy” especially after the reform since the early 1980s. The discourse is mainly constructed through a contrast between the society before and after the reform. The pre-reform society is generally portrayed as backward where life was hard, while the society after the reform is presented as advanced, and where life is happy. The government is represented as the agent who has brought about the changes. The contrast is problematic in many aspects. The question why there is the change and what social problems are caused by the change is simply omitted or unsubstantiated. Instead, the focus of the texts is mainly on material things that are supposed to bring happy life to the people. For example, Yesterday, this was a village Life remained the same for ages. Poverty and backwardness was perplexing. Modern civilization was remote and vague. In the early morning, father was laboring in the fields. In a mist of smoke and fog, mother was cooking at the stove. In the piles of straw, boys were rolling about. At the stream, girls were washing. Oh, within a few short years that have passed, changes are beyond our imagination.… The highways have replaced the old muddy roads. The tall buildings have substituted the shabby houses. The happy laughter and beautiful songs have filled the children’s parks. The colorful lights and pretty fountains have decorated the city like a paradise.… With big lorries, people transport cement and steel. With office briefcases, they negotiate establishing factories with their foreign business counterparts.
Yongbing Liu
With the bright lights, they read books in the ocean of knowledge. With beautiful music, they dance and sing songs loudly.… It is the reform and open-door policy that have lent them the wings… (Yuwen bianjishi, 1999, 6: 128–129)
In looking for links and contrasts between the notions of “yesterday” and “today” described in the text, three patterns are identifiable in the presentation of changes of the “village”. One pattern is that the words used to describe or present “yesterday” are portrayed in a negative sense while the words used to describe “today” are portrayed in a positive sense. Consequently, a binary opposition is created, whereby the child reader is positioned to favour “today’s world” over that of “yesterday”. For example, in the fourth paragraph alone, there are seven concrete nouns (highways, buildings, songs, children’s parks, lights, fountains and city) that are employed to signify different things in “today’s world”, and are described with five adjectives (tall, happy, beautiful, colourful and pretty) that have positive connotations. However, in the same paragraph, by contrast, just two concrete nouns (roads and houses) are used to depict something in the past. Despite the small number, the concrete nouns are modified by pejorative adjectives (muddy and shabby), which manifest negative notions of “yesterday”. However, who has brought about the changes from “poverty and backwardness” to “modern civilization”? To answer this question, it is necessary to look at another relevant part of the linguistic use of transitivity. When we consider the role of the participants portrayed in the text, we can see that there are no agentive participants in what happened “yesterday”. The participants are all regulated as Mediums who acted, but the activities are deprived of specific goals (for example,…father was labouring…, …mother was cooking…). The impression we get from these agentless activities is that the participants are aimless, passive, and helpless. In contrast, the participants in what happens “today” are nearly all agentive, acting on different kinds of things (for example, …people transport cement and steel…, …they negotiate establishing factories…). The activities involve not only business, but education and entertainment as well. However, the agent that has brought about the dramatic change is not clear until the sentence that proclaims: “It is the reform and open-door policy that have lent them the wings”. The emphatic structure and metaphor used within the sentence contribute the change from “backwardness” to “modern” to government policy. In this text, the contrast between China before and after the reform, as in other texts identified in this category is designed to get the child reader to understand that without the government, there would be no modern life, and without correct governmental policy, there would be no such dramatic changes from a village of poverty to a modern city.
The construction of patriotic discourse in Chinese basal readers
Work and sacrifice for the country Another perspective used to promote or construct the discourse of national identity is about scientists, old revolutionary leaders and heroes who studied, worked hard or sacrificed for the country. Every volume of the language textbooks contains several stories and/or poems that praise or memorise them as models of Chinese people. Most of these texts are accompanied by pictures, helping child readers to familiarise themselves with these models. The texts emphasise the models’ habits of plain living, hard-working, sense of duty and sacrifice for the country. For example: Try to bring credit to the country When he was 28, Tong Dizhou got financial support from his relatives and friends. He went to Belgium to further his study. His research was supervised by a famous professor in Europe. There were some students from other countries. As it was poor and backward, the old China had no status in the world and the Chinese students were despised. However, Tong Dizhou decided at the bottom of his heart that he must bring credit to the country. His professor had been doing an experiment, which required that a membrane be separated from a frog’s egg cell. This operation was very difficult. A very sophisticated skill was needed in addition to patience and concentration. For several years, the professor failed in the experiment. His fellow students didn’t dare to have a try. However, Tong Dizhou worked hard on it. He succeeded at last after repeated failures. The professor was very excited and said: “Tong Dizhou is great!” This achievement shocked the biological world in Europe. Tong Dizhou thought: “I must bring credit to my country. The Chinese are as intelligent as others. We can do what others even find difficult.” (Yuwen bianjishi, 1999, 5: 63–68)
In this story, a famous Chinese biologist, Tong Dizhou is portrayed as a model of Chinese people. The ideological intent of the story is explicitly expressed by the title and the content that follows. What is interesting is that the story is set in the “old China” which is defined as “poor and backward”. Because of being poor and backward, China had no status in the world and its people were despised. The emphasis on the “old China” and its negative consequence sets up the condition on which the hero’s sense of Chinese was aroused or nurtured. The question who has brought about the difference has become obvious. With this implication, the story does not only construct the discourse of Chinese national identity but also justify the government rule. Another significant point to be made is that embedded in the story are the expositions on the attributes of a Chinese model. The attributes of “love for, pride
Yongbing Liu
in and work hard for the country” are illustrated by the linguistic strategies such as “contrast” “explanation”, for example, “The old China had no status…However, Tong Dizhou decided…” “His fellow students did not dare…, but he worked hard…” The linguistic strategies organise an adult construction of the attributes a Chinese model has. The Chinese patriotic model in this text is, therefore, portrayed not only as an idiosyncratic character but the general role category that instantiates the attributes of a Chinese model. In addition to stories about scientists, the language textbooks also contain quite a few texts about old revolutionary heroes who worked or sacrificed their life for the country in war times. These stories emphasise the heroic deeds, life sacrifice for and loyalty to the country or the people. Discussion and conclusion: A desired discourse system of national identity In conclusion, I would like to highlight the findings suggested by my analysis of the discursive construction of Chinese national identity. Presenting discursive sequences in terms of the sub-semantic areas, I have identified five major perspectives from which the discourse is constructed in the textbooks. The examples analysed under each subheading of perspective all underscore the significance and ideology of the sub-semantic areas in the definition of the discourse of Chinese national identity. Natural beauties
Great culture and people
Desired love
Happy life
Figure 1. A desired discourse system of national identity
Work hard and sacrifice
The construction of patriotic discourse in Chinese basal readers
The range of meanings associated with the discourse encompasses: the desired love for the country, the great culture and people, the natural beauties of the country, the happy life of the country and work or sacrifice for the country. These perspectives form an intertextual chain of texts that have built up a particular version of the natural and social world. The intertextual chain can be simplified as Figure 1: In this intertextual chaining system, the bold lines represent the direct relations between the desired love for the country and other four perspectives; that is the desired love for the country is constructed and promoted from the other four perspectives. In other words, by painting a rosy picture of the country from the four perspectives, child readers are positioned to identify themselves with the country. They are persuaded to believe that they live in an imagined world (Anderson, 1991). In this chaining system, child readers are positioned to accept who they are and where they live. In other words, the child reader’s national identity is positioned and placed by the discourse as collectively fixed with where they live. It establishes “a sort of collective one self ” (Hall, 1989: 69) which provides unifying and unchanging points of reference and meaning. By deliberately omitting the racial and class differences, the discourse portrays all Chinese people as living happily in a unique and beautiful land. The imaginary coherence and richness of China, its immense geographical size and symbolic cultural sites are constructed and used to generate in child readers a sense of pride in, and love for, the country. Running through these circular identifications is the logic that if you love the country, you love or support the government. The thin lines represent perceived relations or linkages that set up the boundaries of how the desired love or the identity discourse is constructed. They are important because it is the perception that is imbued with ideological intentions and power relations. As can be argued, an identity discourse can be constructed from different perspectives. For example, to advocate environmental protection can be viewed as a perspective of identity discourse because environmental protection can help to promote sustainable economic development and create a better future for the country and people. To expose social problems can be also regarded as a perspective of identity discourse because social justice can be promoted or achieved only when social problems are clearly identified and dealt with. However, these perspectives and many others are excluded from the textbooks because the perception adopted by the textbooks authorised by the cultural elites and government has restricted their entry into the textbooks. As the word “desired” suggests, the five perspectives identified are the desired perception of the cultural elites and the government. They legitimate the present government rule on the one hand; and on the other hand, try to shape the child reader’s national identity. The legitimation of the government rule and the shaping of the child reader’s identity are
Yongbing Liu
built upon the emphasis on defining China as “superior” in culture, vast and beautiful in geography, “happy” in living and worth loving. The examples I have analysed show that through deliberate choices of lexicon, grammatical structures and macrostructures, subjective descriptions and narrations of the unique natural beauties, symbolic cultural sites and happy life of the people are projected as “common sense”. At the same time, the environmental damage, the widening gap between the rich and the poor, the social problems are all excluded, in order to better serve the construction of the discourse of patriotism. As Nichols (1981: 290) pointed out correctly, though in another different context: To serve the ideology, representations must be made to appear to be other than what they are. Above all, they must appear to lack these very contradictions that informed their production. They must appear as signs of eternal values – harmony, wholeness, and radiance, a natural and ideal world spun from the representations of an existing social order.
In this way, the textbooks legitimate and transmit the government’s and its cultural elites’ version of the world to legitimate their rules and maintain social control. Yet the world constructed in the textbooks is distorted, if not totally different, from the real world. China is now experiencing a rapid transformation from a socialist society to a capitalist society. Along with the transformation, there are many social problems and ideological tensions (e.g., Link, 1994). However, the Chinese national identity discourses construct an imagined beautiful country, requires the child reader to love and be loyal to it, but stops short of acknowledging in any explicit and useful way that social problems and ideological tensions exist. The discourses constructed in the textbooks deliberately disengage and estrange students from a reading of the real world, thus leaving them disempowered in their learning process. Therefore, I suggest that national identity in textbooks should be constructed as open rather than closed discourses. As shown in the analysis, one of the key elements of the textbooks is their effectiveness in selecting certain texts while omitting others in the intertextual chaining system. The producer of the texts links them in this way. This observation implies the possibility of constructing open discourses, and my analysis shows that it is essential to maximize such possibilities in order to engage and empower child readers in the reading and learning process. Open discourses can be constructed by including texts and pictures of situations children encounter in their daily lives. The ideological tensions and competing discourses manifested in these texts should be presented as what they are, rather than being deliberately regulated or excluded. To juxtapose and confront ideological tensions and competing discourses, children as well as teachers can adopt different reading positions and decode the texts based on their own life experiences and background
The construction of patriotic discourse in Chinese basal readers
knowledge. These open discourses would in turn promote a critical understanding of how these texts position the reader and whose interests or values they convey. Through this process of openly negotiating meanings, child readers would be empowered to make their own decisions with regard to how to identify themselves to the nation. This is especially important when we consider that many underprivileged students know from their own experience that the truth of their lives is omitted from the dominant texts and discourses of textbooks in particular, and of society in general. Their social and cultural capital must be recognized and valued in the construction of national identity in the textbooks. By critically reading the competing texts and their own texts, students can learn to reposition themselves as speakers, readers, and writers so that they are not merely consumers of textbook ‘facts’. In this way, I believe, students can be better equipped to face the tensions, conflicts and social problems in the real world. Another key element of the discourses uncovered in this study is the effectiveness of the texts in disguising their ideological bias by their chosen structure, vocabulary and grammar. For example, some texts explicitly claim to describe objectively certain scenic spots or significant cultural values, but implicitly they position the child reader to passively accept the existing unequal social relations. Regarding the possible ideological bias of specific texts, the foregoing analysis has identified some of the textual, rhetorical and semantic devices which render these texts more open to criticism and interpretation in particular contexts and in their general sociocultural context. As Apple (1999) suggests, a critical approach to cultural knowledge requires students and teachers to read texts as a record told from one perspective that can be examined from other perspectives. Fairclough (1992b) proposes that critical language awareness can be extended to an analysis and critique of the power relations affiliated with particular discourses and texts. Through critical readings of texts, students and teachers can negotiate their collective identity in real-world contexts rather than blindly revering what is told in the textbook. Through the critique, students and teachers can reveal the hegemonic power structure and value the discourses of traditionally marginalized groups (Apple, 1992). I believe that in this critical pedagogy, students can empower themselves and actively participate in negotiating meanings or national identities beyond text per se to social practice and actions. At the same time, they will gain greater access to literate practices and discourse resources that require critical reading and conscious selection in social fields and their everyday life, where they are bombarded with competing texts and discourses. In time, they can transfer these resources to the workplace and more successfully negotiate the construction of meanings and ideological dimensions of power relations inherently embedded in all discourses (Luke, 1995).
Yongbing Liu
In conclusion, this analysis has revealed that a selective version of national identity is constructed in a manner congruent with the interest of the Chinese government and its cultural elites, but not with the interest of child readers. I recommend that textbook production and literacy education should focus on promoting open discourses that accommodate social changes and value the student’s voice and life experience. Since a great variety of avenues and opinions are emerging along with the economic changes in China, I anticipate that space for critical discourse analysis and critical pedagogy in Chinese education will be created and negotiated, which in turn will contribute to the improvement of literacy education in China. References Anderson, B. (1991, Revised Ed.) Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. New York: Verso. Apple, M. (1999) Power, meaning, and identity: Essays in critical education studies. New York: Peter Lang. Cillia, R., Reisigl, M. and Wodak, R. (1999) The Discursive construction of national identities, Discourse & Society 10: 149–173. Fairclough, N. (2002) Analyzing discourse: Text analysis for social research. New York: Routledge. Fairclough, N. (1992) Language and social changes. Cambridge: The Polity Press. Halliday, M.A.K. (1994) An introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold. Hall, S. (1989) Cultural identity and cinematic representation, Framework 36: 69–81. Li, C. (2000) Promises and pitfalls of reform: New thinking in post-Deng China. In T. White (Ed.), China Briefing 2000: The continuing transformation: 123–157. New York: M. E. Sharpe. Link, P. (1994) China’s “core” problem. In D. Altschiller (Ed.) China at the crossroad: The Reference shelf: 9–24. New York: H. W. Wilson. Liu, Y. B. (2005) The construction of cultural knowledge and ideology in Chinese language textbooks: A critical discourse analysis, Pedagogy, Culture & Society 13: 233–263. Martin, J. R. and Wodak, R. (Eds.) (2003) Re/reading the past: Critical and functional perspectives on time and value. Amsterdam: Benjamins. National Environmental Protection Commission. (1994) Zhongguo huanjing xingdong jihua (Environmental action plan of China). Beijing: Huanjing kexue chubanshe. Nichols, B. (1981) Ideology and the image. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Sautman, B. (1997) Myths of descent, racial nationalism and ethnic minorities in the People’s Republic of China. In F. Dikotter (Ed.) The construction of racial identities in China and Japan: 75–95. London: Hurst & Co. State Education Ministry (2000) Xiaoxue yuwen jiaoxue dagang (The Chinese language teaching outline for primary schools). Beijing: Renmin jiaoyu chubanshe. Townsend, J. (1992) Chinese nationalism. The Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs 27: 97–130 Tu, W. M. (1993) Introduction: Cultural Perspective. In W. M. Tu (Ed.), China in transition: xixxv. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
The construction of patriotic discourse in Chinese basal readers
Van Dijk, T. A. (1997) Discourse as interaction in society. In T. A.Van Dijk (Ed.) Discourse as social interaction, Vol. 2: 1–37. London: Sage. Yuwen bianjishi. (Eds.) (1999) Yuwen: Jiunian yiwu jiaoyu liunian xiaoxue jiaokeshu (1–12 che) (Chinese language readers: Textbooks for six year primary schools in nine years compulsory education, Vols. 1–12). Beijing: Renmin jiaoyu chubanshe. Zheng, Y. N. (1999) Discovering Chinese nationalism in China: Modernization and international relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
The denial of Palestinian national and territorial identity in Israeli schoolbooks of history and geography 1996–2003 Nurit Peled-Elhanan
Tel-Aviv University and David Yellin Teachers College
The study was sponsored by a Leverhulme Trust at the Institute of Education, London University and the Mofet Institute for Educational Research, Israel. This paper is part of a study which seeks to reveal social and educational ideologies through a multimodal analysis of textbooks. The analysis of ten Geography and History schoolbooks shows that in spite of different ways of teaching the discipline, Israeli schoolbooks share a common ideological ground regarding the perpetuation of Jewish territorial and national identity. This identity relies heavily on the denial of any meaningful life in the Land of Israel or Palestine, other than the Jewish one. The paper analyzes verbal and visual discourse, layout and the use of colour, all of which represent the Palestinians as a problem to be solved, a developmental burden, a demographic danger and a security threat.1
Key words: Multimodal analysis. Discourse. Elite Racism. Identity. Zionism. Social Exclusion. Introduction The sample of schoolbooks was chosen according to the popularity of the books among teachers in mainstream secular Jewish schools, which constitute the 1. I thank the following publishing houses for allowing me to use the visuals appearing in this paper: Mapa –Sifrei Tel-Aviv for using the visuals in The 20th Century and Modern Times II; The Centre for Educational Technology for using the visuals in People in Space, Settlements in Space and Israel-Man and Space; Lilach for using the visuals in The Geography of the Land of Israel . All rights are reserved to the publishers.
Nurit Peled-Elhanan
majority of schools in Israel.2 All books were published between 1996–2003, after the Oslo Peace agreements between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, in 1994. All books are currently used and all claim to reflect the national curriculum. All but one were authorized by the Ministry of Education3. The paper presents examples of the ways Israeli textbooks erase, deny or distort the identity of Palestinians in visual and verbal discourse, and through layout and colour. The analysis of verbal discourse will follow the categories of racist discourse established by Van-Leeuwen (1996, 2000) and developed by Wodak and Reisigl (2001). The visual analysis will follow the work of Kress and Van Leeuwen and will include aspects such as layout, maps, graphs and photographs (Van Leeuwen and Kress 1995, Kress and Van Leeuwen 1996), and the use of colour as a semiotic mode (Kress, G. and Van-Leeuwen, Th. 2002), all with regard to the presentation of Palestinians. The nature of Israeli schoolbooks School and schoolbooks are powerful means by which the state shapes forms of perception, of categorization, of interpretation and of memory, that serve to determine national identity. The discourse of identity is also the discourse of difference, inclusion and exclusion. The construal of identity includes strategies of denying other identities that seem threatening. The Israeli national-territorial identity perpetuated in schoolbooks today is that of the New-Jew, who is described both as the direct descendant of biblical Hebrews and as a Western. This presentation is compatible with the Zionist ideal to establish in Israel “a European reserve in an Asiatic wilderness” (Bar-Gal, 1993a: 168). The Israeli identity is promoted in schoolbooks (Bar-Gal 1993b: 421, 2003), among other ways, through the exclusion and rejection of other ethnic groups – both Jewish and Arab – and by denying their national, territorial or cultural identity. The main rejected group is the Palestinian one, the 1 million citizens of the state and the 3.5 millions who live under military occupation. As Bar-Gal notes, “In the field of Geography the curricula have always emphasized the nationalist goals
2. Israeli schoolbooks are trade books and teachers may choose which book to use. However, they all need to be authorized by the Ministry of education or at least be compatible with the national curriculum. I chose the textbooks that were mostly bought according to bookstore reports. 3. The Geography of the Land of Israel does not have the authorization of the Ministry of Education, though it claims to be written according to the national curriculum and is sold and used in schools.
The denial of Palestinian national and territorial identity in Israeli schoolbooks
as the principal goal” (Bar-Gal, 2000: 169).4 As this paper will show, this is all the more true in History textbooks. Using the terms of G. Genette,(1982: 12–14) schoolbooks are hypertexts both of the dominant socio-political hypotext and of their respective disciplinary hypotexts, hypertextuality being any relation a certain text B has with a previous text A from which it is derived or on which it is “grafted”. Genette explains that this derivation can have many forms: Text B may not even mention text A but cannot exist without it, for it is its transformation. Israeli History and Geography schoolbooks are hypertexts of their respective disciplinary hypotexts and of the hypotext of Zionism (Bar Gal 1993a, 2003, Firer 1985). Israeli educational discourse is shaped by Zionist ideology and its convictions regarding the ‘historic’ Jewish rights on the Land, which make the state of Israel a direct successor of Biblical kingdoms5, the necessity of a Jewish majority in Israel, antiSemitism and Arab hatered and the constant threat Palestinians constitute for Israel. The examples in this paper are taken from different schoolbooks that vary in the ways they teach the discipline but share, as a “common ground” (Fairclough, 2003) the above mentioned convictions or “basic assumptions” (ibid.) upon which Israeli education is carved. All books justify the “lesser democracy” or “ethnic democracy” which prevails in Israel. As Smooha (2002: 475–478) maintains, Israel is “A democracy which is propelled by an ideology or a movement of ethnic nationalism that declares a certain population as a nation sharing a common descent, a common language and a common culture. It also claims ownership of a certain territory that it considers its exclusive homeland.… It is a diminished type of democracy for it takes the ethnic nation, not the citizenry, as the corner-stone of the state[…] In Israel the Jews appropriate the state and make it a tool to advance their national security, demography, public space, culture and interests. At the same time this democracy extends various kinds of [individual] rights to 1 million Palestinian-Arab citizens (16% of the population) who are perceived as a threat.”
Since all the features listed above, such as common territory, common language and common culture, were not available to the modern Jewish nation, they had to be manufactured through education, for the purpose of building a collective homogenous identity to all its Jewish members.
4. Prof. Bar-Gal is the head of the department of Geography and Environmental Studies in Haifa University. 5. Even a recent study by R. Firer of the Truman Institute for peace asserts that ‘the state of Israel was re-established in 1948’. Such a statement is nourished by an ideology that sees the current state of Israel as a direct successor of biblical kingdoms. (Firer, 2004: 22)
Nurit Peled-Elhanan
Methodology The study adopts the theory and tools of Social Semiotics, and relies mainly on the methods of multimodal analysis developed by Kress and Van Leeuwen6, whose basic assumption is, that every sign is motivated and that […] representation is always “engaged”. It is never neutral. That which is represented in sign or sign complexes realizes the interests, perspectives, values and positions of those who make the sign. […] [the sign] must be fit for its role in the social field of communication (Kress, 2003: 44).
The representation of Palestinians in Israeli schoolbooks In a recent study of Israeli textbooks Firer (2004: 75) claims that “as political correctness has reached Israel it is no longer appropriate to use blunt, discriminatory language in textbooks”, and then adds that in the years 1967–1990 “the stereotypes of Arabs and Palestinians almost disappear” (ibid. p. 92). However, examining schoolbooks published in the years 1996–2003, including the ones Firer praises most for political correctness, one cannot but notice that visually and verbally, Palestinians are still represented in a racist stereotypical way, namely as an ‘impersonalized’ or excluded element. In Van Leeuwen ‘s terms, Israeli schoolbooks represent Palestinians “as types rather than as tokens[…] This reality is replacing the reality of naturalism and individualism.” (1992: 56) The Palestinian stereotypes are the caricaturistic racist icon of the ‘Arab’ wearing Kafieh and followed by a camel, ‘Oxfam images’ (Hicks, 1980: 31) of primitive farmers, ‘refugees’ – barefoot and destitute people who carry their baggage on their heads, usually shown from a very long distance, situated in non-places such as unidentified roads or fields – and face-covered terrorists, namely the ‘problems’ or ‘threats’ they constitute for the Israelis: (‘Asiatic’) backwardness, terrorism and the refugee ‘problem’ which ‘stains Israel’s image in the eyes of the world’ and ‘poisons’ its relationships with other nations7. The denial of Palestinian identity can be represented in one of the four categories offered by Thompson (1987): Legitimation: expressions that are designed to immortalize dominance through its presentation as legitimate, i.e. the Jews have historic rights over Israel and Palestine, which are considered as one geographic entity, and are called in the Israeli educational and socio-political discourse The Land of Israel. Within this 6. Van Leeuwen 1992, 2000, 2001; Van Leeuwen and Selander 1995, Van Leeuwen and Kress 1995, Van Leeuwen et al.1996, Kress and Van Leeuwen 1996, Kress 1993, 2000, 2003. 7.
Bar Navi and Nave 2000: Modern Times II: 239; Bar Navi 1999: The 20th Century: 245.
The denial of Palestinian national and territorial identity in Israeli schoolbooks
entity there is a state of Israel, which is presented as incomplete, or on the way to completion. Hence the ‘redemption’ of the whole land is presented as a justified ideal and a practical goal. A recurrent device of legitimation, both in the political and in the educational discourse, is the insertion of (irrefutable) biblical phrases. For instance, The Mediterranean Countries, a geography textbook for the 5th grade, mentions in the chapter One Sea with Many Names (pp. 30–33), only the Hebrew biblical names of the Mediterranean, along with biblical quotes that reiterate the divine promise: “The Mediterranean sea is already mentioned in the bible. Is it also called the Mediterranean in the book of books? Exodus 23/31: And I will set thy bounds from the sea of Suf even to the sea of the Pelishtim, and from the desert to the river: Deuteronomy, 11/24: Every Place whereon the sole of your foot shall tread shall be yours… From the river, the river Prath to the uttermost sea shall be your border. Joshua, 1:4: From the wilderness and this Levanon as far as the great sea…towards the going down of the sun, shall be your border.”
This intertextuality gives a holy stamp to the textbook and its teaching and a scientific stamp to the Bible (Lemke 1998). Dissimulation: presenting events from a single point of view, i.e. the Arabs are a hostile “problematic” element. Palestinian points of view or narratives regarding the land or any historical events which involves them (such as massacres and expulsions) are never mentioned. Fragmentation: separating people from places, namely describing the land while ignoring or concealing the existence of its indigenous population. This is done by changing the names of places or by depicting Palestinian areas as colourless spots defined as “Areas without data”. (Plate no. 4). As Hendrikson maintains, the renamed locations of conquered people or minority groups – create “toponomic silences,[…] “blank spaces, silences of uniformity, of standardization or deliberate exclusion, willful ignorance or even actual repression” (Henrikson, 1994: 59). These “toponomic silences” reinforce the Zionist slogan “A land without people for a people without land”, and justify the policy of occupation and colonization. Reification, presenting events and facts as natural and outside temporal boundaries, i.e. the Arabs are part of the underdeveloped landscape (Bar-Gal 1994: 231) and their misfortunes are a natural “lot”(The 20th Century, p. 195).
Nurit Peled-Elhanan
The importance of this study “Ideologies are representations which can be shown to contribute to social relations of power and domination”(Fairclough, 2003: 9). These representations appear in textbooks. As Hicks notes (1980), even students who may never read a book for pleasure or for general instruction, must read their textbooks in order to pass their matriculation exams. Most Israeli students, being deprived of any meaningful contact with their Palestinian neighbours, are drafted immediately after graduating from high school, and are sent to carry on the Israeli policy in the occupied Palestinian territories. For that reason, a critical reading of their textbooks may have a crucial importance for them and for their teachers, who usually do not look for subtexts, because they do not think subtexts exist (Weinburg 2001: 77), especially in heavily ideological spheres such as the Israeli society. Students normally “overlook or not know how to seek the features that are designed to shape their perceptions or make them view events in a particular way”. They do not interrogate the text, but accept its overt narrative as the ultimate or even ‘divine’ truth (Wineburg 2001: 77–78). Wineburg’s study (2001: 76) shows that “for students, reading history was not a process of puzzling about author’s intentions or situating texts in a social world but of gathering information”. Although, as Jenkins maintains, history “is never said or read innocently for it is always for someone” (Jenkins 1991: 86), teachers and students don’t know that “facts never speak for themselves” and don’t suspect that “History does not correspond to the reality of things in the past”(Jenkins 1991: xiii). They are not aware of what Barthes called “The effect of the real”(1967) or the bias created by writers’ concepts and understandings. These observations about history textbooks are all the more true about geography textbooks, for students expect scientific discourse and visuals to be neutral, and would never suspect that: “The educational system […] less often emphasizes that the map [of Israel] is a distorted model, which sometimes can “lie,” and contain items that are completely different from reality”(Bar-Gal 1996: 69).
In order to know how to read school texts and be empowered by this knowledge, students and teachers need explicit instruction of the ways in which these texts convey their messages; otherwise they are left outside the ideological controversies that engender the texts. Not providing such instruction seems as “wilfully obliterating the communicative needs of the addressees” (Kress 1993: 184). The present study tries to offer an introduction to such an instruction which seems essential in
The denial of Palestinian national and territorial identity in Israeli schoolbooks
multicultural countries such as Israel where the critical reading of the official narrative is still considered unpatriotic if not an act of treason (Firer 2004). Last introductory remarks: since Hebrew is read from right to left, the multimodal analysis will refer to the right side of the page as the “given” and to the left side as “new”. Most titles will appear in abbreviated form, i.e. The Geography of the Land of Israel =GLI. All emphases are mine unless indicated otherwise. Ideological layout The following layout analysis (E. Bar Navi 1998: The 20th century: History of the people of Israel for grades 11–12: Pp. 78–79) is an example of legitimation (plate no.1). It explores the characteristics of the New Jew, or the returning Hebrew who came, towards the end of the 19th century, to inherit the land and master it, and promotes the ideal of an Arab-free land. This double spread presents important aspects of the Zionist perception regarding both Palestinian Arabs and Palestinian Jews in the early years of the 20th century, a perception that is still relevant and inculcated through the political discourse, the free media and Education. It is a part of chapter 12 (p. 78): The triangle of the land of Israel which states “it examines the roots of the national struggle for the domination of Israel and the relationships between the tips of the Israeli triangle: Jews, Arabs, British.” Naming the whole area ‘Israel’ when in fact it was called Palestine, enhances the conviction that it had always been “ours” while distorting historical truth8. “The Land of Israel types” are exclusively Jewish, namely, new-comers, although the term “types” usually refers to the indigenous population of a region. The caption “Land of Israel types” is at the right margin of the page, the very real and given (Kress and Van-Leeuwen 1996). On the left side of the caption, as its “new”, but as the ideal-given of the whole double spread, we see Jewish “land labourers”; On the facing page [p. 79], in the new-real spot of the double spread, namely at the bottom center, there is a photograph of a Jewish patrol guard from the group of Hashomer, which was founded in 1907 as the first Jewish armed force to defend Jewish settlements against robbers and invaders.
8. The Land of Israel was the Zionist name for pre-state Israel during the British rule, when the country was officially called Palestine.
Nurit Peled-Elhanan
Plate no.1. Land of Israel types
The caption Land of Israel Types refers to both poles: the given ideal land labourers who look anticipatingly towards the future (p. 78) and the real-new Jewish guard
The denial of Palestinian national and territorial identity in Israeli schoolbooks
(p. 79), who looks proudly from the top of his Arab horse, to the right bottom of the double-spread, which usually represents the past. These two photographs represent the two most prominent components of the image of the new Zionist Jew, the farmer-soldier. They are strongly connected by a diagonal vector and form one whole complex sign (Kress 1993), which is the most salient part of the crossshaped composition of the double spread and therefore constitutes its main message: the conquering (which is termed “redemption”) of the ancient homeland by its returning sons. The “Land-of Israel types” have already shed their Diaspora Jewish looks, despised by the fist Zionists, and they already resemble the indigenous Palestinians, especially the real-new sun-tanned muscular horseman, wearing an Arab Kafieh on his head, mastering an Arab horse and turning a proud face towards the des pised past, a spot which is occupied by a strongly framed green window with a white title on a red background: “Source: Yitzhak Epstein: A missing question (Hashiloah magazine, 1907)”. As Arnheim emphasises (1988: 55) “the frame defines the picture as […] a centre that exerts its dynamic effects upon its surroundings”. The Window is placed under the photograph of the forward-looking land labourers, at the real-given spot and with a straight horizontal vector to the proud horseman, who is gazing condescendingly at it from the height of his Arab horse. In his article the text explains, “Epstein claimed very harshly and categorically that [the Zionists] must not disregard the Arab inhabitants of the Land of Israel, since it would harm Zionism both politically and morally.” (p. 77). The Window is a fragmented quote form Epstein’s article: “[…] there is in our beloved land an entire nation, which has occupied it for hundreds of years and has never thought to leave it [...] while we feel a deep love for the land of our forefathers, we forgot that […] The Arab, like every man, is tied to his native land with strong bonds.”
Epstein characterizes the Palestinians as: “The people who inhabit the land, its true labourers and masters […] a nation that has no need for a resurrection movement for it has never been dead and has never ceased to live for a moment”
This window is connected by a diagonal vector – which suggests causal links (Kress and Van Leeuwen 1996: 58) – to another window on page 79, which, as students claim, is the least salient before the editorial text: a cream-coloured tiny “Eshnav”, (a small peeping-window), placed at the ideal- new place on a cream background. The window is titled: “Demography of the land of Israel from 1880–1931”. The Window is divided into three columns: Year – Arabs – Jews. The figures show that both populations were increasing at that period although the Jewish population in-
Nurit Peled-Elhanan
creased far more than the Arab one. The position of the window at the ideal-new place may be explained by the caption located in the extreme left margin, that is to say, as the ultimate new ideal: “The demography of the Land of Israel was changing constantly in favour of the Jews. First moderately, and as the conflict has deepened between the two nations the process was accelerated by the immigration of Arabs and the ascendance of Jews. The dramatic turning point would be during the war of independence in 1948 when the collapse of the Arab community would empty the country of most of its Arab inhabitants.”
Coffin (1997) maintains that in History schoolbooks events are appraised according to the change they bring about. Here, “Dramatic turning point” is a positive appraisal, and “emptying the country of its Arabs” is equally positive. As the book specifies in a later chapter (The 20th Century p. 184–195), the ‘emptying’ and ‘collapse’ were caused by the Palestinians’ ‘panicked flight’ following the massacre in the ‘friendly village’ Dir Yassin and other massacres like it. The text specifies that the massacre “did not inaugurate the ‘massive escape’ of the Arabs…but accelerated it greatly”. Both ‘inaugurate’ and ‘accelerated it greatly’ are positive if not festive terms. The book goes on to emphasize that this ‘flight’ was considered, even by ‘moderate’ Zionist leaders such as the first president Haim Weizman, as a ‘miracle’, for it solved “an awesome demographic problem”, which could have been an impediment in the way of “the realization of the dream the Zionist movement fought to realize for more than half a century: the declaration of the state of the Jews”. Given the directionality of Hebrew reading the relationships between the two windows may be that of a question (at the bottom of the right page) and answer (at the top of the left page). The insertion of events-to-come (the “emptying” occurred in 1948), which is typical of fictional writing 9 and which is used by historians as a part of their rhetoric of persuasion (Barthes, 1967; White, 1987), provides the [ideal] answer to Epstein’s [real] question: the welfare of the indigenous population was indeed absent from the dominant Zionist discourse because it was soon to become irrelevant – most of the people whom Epstein called “[the land’s] true labourers and masters”– would disappear as soon as the new “Land-of-Israel types” inherited the land and became its true labourers, defenders and masters in their turn. The double spread ends with a rhetorical question: “Was it possible then to turn the situation upside down and make a pact between Jewish and Arab nationalism?” The answer this layout offers is apparently, no. This has been and still is the official Zionist and Israeli message. As the historian Benny Morris (Righteous Victims, 9. Genette termed this technique Prolepse, meaning: inserting an event posterior to the events that are reported. Figures III, 1972
The denial of Palestinian national and territorial identity in Israeli schoolbooks
p. 252–258) writes “The tone was set by [the first prime minister] Ben-Gurion himself in June 1938, when he said: ‘I support compulsory transfer [of Palestinian population]. I do not see in it anything immoral”. The Palestinians as a demographic threat is constantly discussed in the Israeli media and warned against by politicians to this day10. It is also explicit in Geography schoolbooks such as GLI (P. 240), which explains the need to Jewify the Galilee as a national goal: “[…] to preserve the national land and keep it from illegal invasion of non-Jewish population, to purchase land for development in order to prevent a territorial sequence of non-Jewish settlements, out of fear that an Arab sequence would cause the separation of the Galilee from the state of Israel.”
Visual exclusion in geography schoolbooks “Cartography like politics is a ‘teleological discourse’, reifying power, reinforcing the status quo, and freezing social interaction within charted lines.” (Henrikson, 1994: 60). Israeli Curriculum planners have never resigned to man-made borders that seem to them an “accidental consequence of cease fire commands which paralyzed military momentum”, nor have they given up teaching about the Eretz Israel or the Land of Israel which is “a whole Geographic entity” (Bar-Gal 1993a: 125) and includes Israel, Palestine and parts of Jordan and Syria. The schoolbooks studied here present not “the ‘State of Israel’ which has achieved international legitimation” but “the ‘Land of Israel’ which has divine legitimation”(Bar-Gal 1993b: 430). As plate no. 2 (“Israel following the Oslo Agreements”) demonstrates very vividly, with the two soldiers bursting out of the map toward Syria and Lebanon, international laws and decisions are presented as inapplicable. The white rectangles on the map assure the students that Samaria and Judea (The West Bank) are “in a process of dynamic changes” (right rectangle) but “Gazza strip will remain under Israeli control”(left rectangle). The soldiers are probably meant to reassure them that we have not resigned and will not abide by man-made decisions and borders in the north part of the country either.
10. Ministers keep calling them ‘the enemy from within’ and ‘A demographic threat’ (For instance Netanyahu, among others, on the 17.12.2003 in a conference at the Interdisciplinary Centre in Hertzelia).
Nurit Peled-Elhanan
Plate no. 2. Israel following the Oslo agreements. GLI, p. 17
The denial of Palestinian national and territorial identity in Israeli schoolbooks
Dissimulation, fragmentation and geographic silences Visuals such as maps and graphs can naturalize the effacement of international borders and the exclusion of Palestinians from the Land better than any other genre. Palestinian territories are always presented as part of the state of Israel, but they are usually depicted without their Palestinian inhabitants. The parts that are controlled by the Palestinian Authorities are delimited with broken lines which signify temporariness and are not differentiated in colour from the other parts of Israel. Following some examples from the Geography book Israel- the man and the space (plates no. 3, 4). This political map of Israel (p. 7) omits mixed Jewish-Arab cities such as Acre and Nazareth. Similarly, a map titled ‘Universities in Israel’ (p. 16) depicts Jewish universities in the Palestinian territories, but omits all Palestinian universities. A map of Jerusalem, “The historic capital of the Jewish people”(pp. 174–175) shows no Muslim mosques or public buildings in Jerusalem. Another common way to obliterate Palestinian existence is to present Palestinian areas as “blind spots” or ‘toponomyc silences’. (Plate no. 4) The “Geographic silences” to be sure, do not erase the people, but present them as absent or socially excluded. Their existence is nevertheless assumed (Barthes 1980: 855), as in Lacan’s example of the book which is absent from the shelf but its non-occupied slot proves its existence as a missing book. This exclusion is also expressed in the editorial text (IMS, p. 32): Some of the foreign workers are Palestinians… They are employed in unprofessional jobs and their wages are lower than that of the Israeli citizens who work in the same jobs… This is characteristic of all developed countries.11 This is an example of fragmentation: The Palestinian territories are represented as part of Israel and yet the inhabitants of these same territories are either nonexistent or presented as “foreign” workers. However, readers may not be aware of this peculiarity because the territories are not marked as Palestine.
11. This characterization of developed countries is regarded by researchers as “The other side of western modernity: colonialism, holocaust, slavery, imperialist domination and exploitation.” (Reisigl and Wodak, 2001: 17).
Nurit Peled-Elhanan
Plate no. 3. Israel and its neighbours 2002
The denial of Palestinian national and territorial identity in Israeli schoolbooks
Plate no. 4. Israel-The Man and the Space: Distribution of Arab Population in Israel 2000 (white rectangle framed with a solid line: “Area without data”; White rectangle framed with a broken line: “Areas A controlled by the Palestinian Authorities”).
Nurit Peled-Elhanan
Centre and peripheralness The centre is not always identical to the focus of the map (Kress and Van Leeuwen 1996: 90). This shift is made possible by the use of colour, size and perspective. “One of the unfortunate consequences of colonialism and the condition it engendered, […] is a feeling that the centre is elsewhere.”(Henrikson 1994: 55–56) Arabs and Arab countries are marginalized in Israeli History schoolbooks. In FCP, (p. 269) we learn that, “In the years 1881–1882 thousands of people arrived at Jaffa port: from Russia, from Rumania, from the Balkan and even from far-away Yemen.” Needless to say, Yemen is the closest to Jaffa port, and the question is, why is it mentioned as the most “far away”? The only answer is that the implied centre of the “mental map” of the writers is still Eastern Europe, the spiritual centre of Zionism and the origin of the dominant social group in Israel. As Henrikson explains “mental maps are a critical variable – occasionally the decisive factor – in the making of public policy” (p. 50). Arab areas within Israel are pushed to the margins of consciousness and social reality, as it is well expressed in the following statement from GLI: p. 197 “Factors that inhibit the development of the Arab village …Arab villages are far from the centre, the roads to them are difficult and they have remained out of the process of change and development, they are hardly exposed to modern life and there are difficulties to connect them to the electricity and water networks.”
Most of these “distant” villages are not specified on any map though they are all within the “narrow waistline of Israel” which is equal in breadth to the distance between Manhattan and JFK airport, as emphasized in Israeli maps issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.12 However, Jewish topsites that are built on top of the hills overlooking those villages, and Jewish colonies that are beyond the official borders of Israel, are presented as examples of high standard of living and not as marginal far-away deprived settlements. For instance the topsite Rakefet: “Many people aspire to live in a community settlement like Rakefet, because its inhabitants are privileged with high standard of living expressed in a rustic and serene atmosphere, clean air, houses that are land-ridden and a variety of community activities.” (SIS, p. 66).
As Henrikson writes, “The sensation of peripheralness itself cannot be altered, of course, by simply shifting or reducing the graphic frame of the map”(1994: 56).
12. http:/www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/facts about Israel/Israel in maps#threats&topography. 1.Jan, 2004.
The denial of Palestinian national and territorial identity in Israeli schoolbooks
Racist discourse Genericization Racist discourse always deals with dichotomies (Reisigl and Wodak, 2001: 55–56). In accordance with state policies, all the representations studied here, verbal and visual, use an ethnic division of Israeli citizens into Jews and non-Jews. For instance in SIS p. 55 there is a map titled: Rural habitation in Israel: blue: Jewish villages, red: non-Jewish villages. The “non-Jews” are excluded from developmental graphs as in plate no. 5 from PIS (p. 76): The graph which depicts average marriage age for women as one of the criteria of development, manages to locate Israel as the last one in a line of “Developed Countries” thanks to a minuscule footnote: “The graph refers only to the Jewish population”.
Plate no. 5. Average marital age for women in developed and developing countries 1990 (Israel is marked in red). *note: The Israeli data refer only to the Jewish population.
Nurit Peled-Elhanan
The non-Jews, regardless of their origin and religion, are sometimes called by the generic hyperonym: Arabs.13 For instance: IMS, p. 12- “The Arab Population: Within this group there are several religious groups and several ethnic groups: Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouins and Cirkassians. But since most of them are Arab they shall be referred to henceforth as Arabs.”
Naming a whole population by “a generic name in the plural without the article” (Van Leeuwen 1996: 46) is an example of genericization. Defining people as nonentity is a perfect way to impersonalize them and as Van Dijk puts it: “Dominance, differentiation, diffusion, diversion, impersonalisation, destruction, and daily discrimination […] serve in various ways to legitimate and enact the distinction of the “other” […] by dominating the minority groups, by excluding them from social activities and even by destroying and murdering them”(Quoted in RW 2001: 21).
The Palestinian problem Van-Leeuwen (1996: 60) counts as one of the features of racist discourse, as a subcategory of ‘abstraction’, the reference to humans by an abstract noun that does not include the semantic feature [+ human], and represents “social actors by means of a quality assigned to them”, for instance the quality of being “a problem”. The Palestinian refugees, who were driven out of Israel in 1948 and 1967, are usually called Arab refugees, to emphasize their being members of the big Arab Nation which, according to the political Israeli discourse, is responsible for their relocation. (i.e. PIS p. 153). For Israel they constitute a political “problem” that must be “solved”. For instance, a chapter in The 20th Century (p. 194) titled ‘The Palestinians – from refugees to a nation’, promises to “Explore the Palestinian problem, which stands since the beginning of the Zionist enterprise in the heart of the Middle Eastern conflict, and the attitudes within the Israeli public regarding the problem and the character of its solution”.
This problem has no human face in any of the schoolbooks. Sometimes tt materializes in empty flooded streets (The 20th Century: p. 194; Modern Times II, p. 238), which gives it the appearance of an environmental or ecological problem (plate no.6).
13. VL 2001 describes a similar attitude of the Americans treating all the «others» who were dominated by them as «blacks».
The denial of Palestinian national and territorial identity in Israeli schoolbooks
Plate no. 6. Modern Times II: 239: The Palestinian problem matured in the poverty, the inaction and the frustration that were the lot of the refugees in their pitiful camps
Another way of representing the ‘Palestinian problem’ appears in the Geography book People In Space (p. 110, plate no. 7). Here one sees an aerial photograph of an empty refugee camp. Neither the title nor the caption, nor the editorial text specify who lives there and why. The empty refugee camp is titled “Jaballia – a refugee camp in Gazza strip”(p. 110), and the caption explains it is: “one of the biggest refugee camps whose population is overcrowded and poverty-stricken”, without specifying who this population is. According to Van-Leeuwen, this angle is that of “the pilot who flies too high to be able to see the people on whom he is dropping his bombs… It is the angle of the ‘objective knowledge’ that causes detail (and people) to disappear – and it is the kind of knowledge which education is still primarily concerned to reproduce”. (Van Leeuwen 1992: 49). This representation emphasizes the fact that when dealing with the Palestinian refugees one does not deal with people but with a universal, environmental or a political ‘problem’. This representation is quite different from the other reports included in the same chapter about refugees in other places (i.e. Jewish, Haitian, Rwandan), whose vicissitudes and the causes for their tragedy are explained on maps and photographs depicting their routes of escape.
Nurit Peled-Elhanan
Plate no. 7. ‘Refugee camp Jaballia in the Gaza strip. One of the refugee camps whose overcrowded population is poor and the hygienic conditions are low’
The only information the reader receives about the Palestinian “problem” is that of a sad “lot” and of unfavourable circumstances that are presented in one of the following fashions (Van Leeuwen 1996: 97): 1 In terms of ‘existentialization’ – where action is represented as something that ‘simply exists’: The population in the refugee camps is growing fast and the conditions of life are very hard –the rate of unemployment is high, the houses are crowded and poor and the standard of health services, education and hygiene are low. (PIS:110)
2 In terms of ‘naturalization’ where actions are represented as natural processes by means of abstract material processes: “The ‘Palestinian problem’ matured in the poverty, the inaction and the frustration that were the lot of the refugees in their pitiful camps.” (The 20th Century, p. 194)
The denial of Palestinian national and territorial identity in Israeli schoolbooks
3 Metaphorically, as a self-directed phenomenon, that acts independently of human social actors: “Although Israel came victorious out of the survival-war that was forced upon her, the Palestinian problem would poison for more than a generation the relationships of Israel with the Arab world and with the international community.” (Modern Times II: 239).
In The 20th Century (p. 249), a textbook for 11th-12th grades, the author, who also co-wrote Modern Times II, and is presented on the back-cover as a renowned historian, explains that annexing the west bank would turn Israel into “a bi-national state with an Arab majority – an absurd situation where the Jewish people would become a minority in their own land and the Zionist dream [would turn] into a south-African nightmare”. This book, praised in other studies for being progressive and politically correct (Podeh, 2002, Firer 2004), teaches the students that South Africa today is a nightmare for the white population with whom he equates the Israelis. Neither the problems not the nightmares of the Palestinian refugees themselves are ever mentioned. Classification images and the meta – narrative of ‘development’ Not only the Palestinian refugees are a “problem”. “Israel’s Arabs” as the Palestinian citizens of Israel are called officially, are presented as a demographic “threat” and as a developmental task. The meta-narrative of development in Israeli schoolbooks is what Page defines as “colonialist and Orientalist” (2003: 99). Israel’s Arabs are conceived as a nonwesternized society, underdeveloped as the landscape. (Bar-Gal, 1994). As Hodge and Kress (1993: 63) state, classification is “an instrument of control[…] over the flux of experience of physical and social reality […] and society’s control over conceptions of this reality”. “Classification images”(VL1992: 54) are used to convey development and under-development. They usually represent “meta-narratives” about development and under-development. Current Geographical studies argue that, “Meta-Narratives, such as ‘development’, are to be mistrusted (Page, 2003: 92), [and] ‘Development’ should be questioned. The world with its varieties cannot be understood using only a small number of concepts, the people who get to choose which concepts tend to come from wealthy areas and they describe the world according to their own vision of how it should be and call these concepts universal”. (ibid. 98).
Nurit Peled-Elhanan
Page maintains that “If development is to be regulated it needs to be scrutinized,” and suggests to “Analyze discursive tactics employed by the advocates of development…” stating that, “Current geographical work sets out to disturb the simplicity of development propaganda in order to deepen our understanding of different places…. Development Geography [has] dispensed with the view that anything can be justified as long as it is labelled “progressive” (p. 101).
But Israeli textbooks of Geography haven’t. Israeli schoolbooks never present “Israel’s Arabs” as individual modern people. The Arab way of life is presented as clannish and “traditional” which means backward. When the Arabs progress they become ‘westernized’ for they imitate Western (or Israeli) way of life, whether in construction or in agriculture (plate no. 8), This sort of presentation is compatible with the type of colonialist “Writing about the developing world [where] peoples’ and places’ histories are ignored.” (Page 2003: 99). Thus, tradition is made to seem devoid of reason or order and stands for nothing more than primitiveness.
Plate no. 8. From traditional to modern way of life in the non-Jewish population Captions: right top: Traditional agriculture in the Galilee. Right bottom: Traditional construction in the Arab village of Dir-Hana in the lower Galilee. Top left: Modern agriculture in the village Taybe in the costal plane. Bottom left: Modern construction in the suburb of the Arab city of Um-El-Fahem.
The denial of Palestinian national and territorial identity in Israeli schoolbooks
The use of colour Kress and Van Leeuwen (2002: 345) maintain that, “Colour is a semiotic resource like any other: regular, with signs that are motivated in their constitution by the interests of the makers and not at all arbitrary or anarchic[…]Colours represent ideational, interpersonal and textual meanings (p. 348).”
Ideationally “Colour can denote specific people, places and things as well as classes of people, places and things, and more general ideas”. (p. 347). Israeli settlements, even in the desert part of the country – the Negev – are depicted in western colours: red roofs, green vegetation, colourful cultivated flowers. This, according to ZionistIsraeli ideology, connotes ‘progress’, or the victory of man over nature, achieved for instance by foresting and the much-hailed project of diverting part of the water from the Kineret – the lake (called ‘sea’) of Galilee to the desert in order to “make the wilderness bloom”. In terms of provenance, it is the victory of the West over the Middle East. The colours of uncultivated landscape: brown-red, yellow, grey and olive green, are those of non-development, and connote in Israeli consciousness, backwardness, threat and alienation (Bar-Gal, 2000). Interpersonally, the use of colour acts on people and manipulates them. Colour states a status and a mood (Kress and Van Leeuwen 1996a: 349). The contrast between the two colour schemes represents the relationships of power between the two cultures. As Bar-Gal claims, the presentation of places in Geography textbooks are made in accordance with the perspectives of their authors (2000: 172). The representation of Jewish settlements in post-card photographs shot from a short distance, makes them seem of a higher status. Also, as Van Leeuwen and Selander (1995: 506) note, “Greater sharpness and colour saturation makes the represented object more real”: the victory of the West over the East is what Israeli education wishes to present as the reality of the Land. Arab villages, represented by long-distance shots or aerial photographs, where shapes are blurred, prevent any engagement on the part of the viewer, except for that of “the pilot who flies too high to be able to see the people on whom he is dropping his bombs…” (Van Leeuwen (1992: 49)
Textually, colour and the coordination of colours can create cohesion (Kress and Van Leeuwen 1996a: 349). In terms of cohesion, the two schemes stand in opposition to one another. Red-brown-green is a reference to “progress” and “modernity”, while yellow-olive green and brown-red is a reference to “backwardness” or “nonJewish tradition”.
Nurit Peled-Elhanan
In plate no. 8 Arab ‘progress’ is depicted in ‘Western’ colours and shapes, for instance ‘modern’ fields look much more ‘technological’ and modern houses look more ‘Western’. At the real-given place of the square, one sees a “traditional” Arab village in the Galilee, where the flat-roofed houses that are connected to each other and turn to a common centre, have the colour of the land that surrounds them. At the newreal location there is a “Modern construction in the suburbs of the Arab town Um El Fahem”: scattered individual western-looking houses on an uncultivated slope of a rocky hill, topped with precipitous red tiled roofs, with no roads leading from one to another. Progress means the passage from community life to individual inhabitation, which proves the “absorption of western urban lifestyle” (Bar-Gal 1994: 228). Neither the shapes nor the colours of the modern houses are Middle Eastern. The red precipitous roofs, though decorative, are completely inadequate for the dry hot climate, where precious rain used to be gathered on the flat roofs and directed from them to reservoirs either on the roof itself or under the house. These roofs were and still are used for drying laundry, animal skins and vegetables and for sleeping in hot summer nights. The reader looks at the “modern” houses from a frontal point of view, while at the traditional village she looks from above, and as Van Leeuwen and Selander (1995: 508) point out, “frontal point of view regarding the picture entails involvement while looking from above endows the looker with a position of power.” Racist icons The ‘non-Jewish’ figure of the Arab farmer is the iconic “Oxfam Image” (Hicks 1980) of the third world: It hasn’t any ethnic object-signs (Barthes 1977: 24), such as a kafieh or an “Arab” dress, but a khaki shirt and oversized khaki trousers, which are the usual hand-down to the poor neighbours. Poverty, backwardness and dependence upon Jewish good-will have become the “secondary cultural characteristics” (Cazden 2001) of the ‘non-Jewish’ population and stand for “Arabness” or “non-Jewishness”. This typification as Van-Leeuwen (2000: 97) explains, “serves to legitimate the status quo and the interests of those in power.” The farmer goes from left to right, receding, according to Hebrew directionality, away from the “modern” machine-made human-less field, which is located at the new ideal part (top left), above a caption: “Modern agriculture in Taybe, village in the coastal plane”. Another racist icon used to represent Palestinians is a caricaturistic drawing of a stereotypical “Arab” with a moustache, wearing kefieh and followed by a camel (plate no. 9). Both representations are considered by Van-Leeuwen to be racist icons.
The denial of Palestinian national and territorial identity in Israeli schoolbooks
Plate no. 9. GLI: 303- “Management of land use in the Arab sector: The Arabs refuse to live in high buildings and insist on living in one-storey houses with land”.
Accompanying this statement is a cartoon-like icon of a big foregrounded “Arab” with his camel, standing outside a round-framed multi-storied building which seems receding backwards into the horizon. Arnheim (1988: 52–55) explains that the round frame forms an enclosure, “A closed system which taken as a whole behaves as a centre of energy [and]fences off [its image]from the environment[...]Its function as an enclosure is most uncompromisingly expressed when its shape is circular.” (p. 62).
The ‘Arab’ then, is separated from the modern house in an irreversible way. In this book, the racist icon of the Arab appears whenever Arabs are mentioned. As for the motivation of cartoon-like representation Van-Leeuwen (1992: 56) explains: “Cartoons are general without being abstract. They represent people as types rather than as tokens. All Turks have moustaches and Arabs camels. This reality is replacing the reality of naturalism and individualism.”
This representation is compatible with the verbal texts of the books, for instance: “The Arab society is traditional and objects to changes by its nature, reluctant to adopt novelties […] Modernization seems dangerous to them […] they are unwilling to give anything up for the general good.” (GLI p. 303)
Nurit Peled-Elhanan
Different semantics, impersonalization and functionalization In Israeli textbooks different standards are applied to Jewish and Arab life: In a series of case studies of different forms of rural settlements (3 Jewish and 1 Arab, SIS pp. 59–61) the Jewish settlements are classified both by their religious tendencies, as “religious” versus “secular” and according to their specific way of life (village, moshav, kibbutz etc.). But the village Yama is defined ethnically as “an IsraeliArab village”; not as a sample of the villages of its kind, but of all Arab villages in Israel.14 The title of Yama’s case study is “From Tradition to Modernity”, a dichotomy which is not applied to the Jewish religious village Bnei-Reem, which is praised for combining modern technology with Jewish tradition. This combination was possible in the beginning thanks to “an Arab family who dwelled in the area. This family served as “Sabbath Goy” and would open and close the watering system [on the Sabbath]. Today, modern technology enables them to do it without human touch, with the help of a Sabbath clock which operates the machines” (p. 63). The report about the “Arab family who dwelled in the area” is an example of impersonalisation and functionalisation which are typical of racist discourse (Van Leeuwen 1996: 59). The family has no identity apart from their function as “Shabbath Goy”. Since the book does not mention that the village Bnei Reem was built on the ruins of the Palestinian village al-Masmiyya al-Kabira, whose inhabitants were driven out in 1948, we don’t know why this one family remained after the others were gone or where exactly did they “dwell”. Van Leeuwen mentions (1996: 53) that “in stories…nameless characters fulfil only passing, functional roles, and do not become points of identification for the reader or listener. In press “stories” something similar occurs”. By ‘functionalising’ these people, namely by treating them as if they were a gadget, the book teaches the students that not everyone deserves to have a History or a human identity. Some people only have functions in other people’s story, such as “Sabbath Goy”, and when they are replaced by machines they become non-existent. Had the text mentioned any details about the family it should have also mentioned that the “terrorist infiltrators” who “harassed” the village, frightened the cows, and discouraged the people to the point of leaving (p. 64), were no more than its original inhabitants who came in times of crop for their fruits and for revenge, as specified in the History schoolbook The 20h Century (p. 219). Linguistically, Jewish settlements’ “reforms” and “innovations”, “development” and “cultivation”, are presented in active verbs, which emphasize the active part of the inhabitants in these processes (SIS p. 60, 62). But the processes of Yama’s 14. There are at least 7 different sorts of Arab villages in Israel (Grossman and Katz 1993), each of them justified by topographic conditions, type of land and crops.
The denial of Palestinian national and territorial identity in Israeli schoolbooks
changes are packed in humanless Grammatical metaphors or nominal clauses which emphasize the passivity of the villagers and conceal Israeli responsibility, and present human strife as self-generating processes: “Their lands are diminishing”(p. 58), “infrastructures slowly improve”, “In Yama, like in other [Arab] rural settlements, there are only few services….” (p. 56). Case studies of Jewish settlements offer rich descriptions of their lives, blueprints of the village structure, quotes and testimonies from “the mouth of pioneers” and current inhabitants. Yama case-study neither shows any human face nor quotes any human speech, except for an indirect semi-quote from the “elders” who thank Israel for the “Modern revolution” it brought to their lives, and promise, as a token of their gratitude, to be “a bridge for peace”(p. 59). As we have seen earlier, in Jewish settlements such as Rakefet, land ridden houses are a sign of ‘quality life’ but in Arab villages land-ridden houses are a proof of conservativism and of the unwillingness of the inhabitants to become “modern” and more urban. Although Israeli researchers of textbooks such as Bar Gal (1993) who studied Geography schoolbooks, E. Podeh (2002) and R. Firer (1985, 2004) who studied History schoolbooks, insist that these books’ attitude towards Palestinians is “ethnocentric” and thus differentiated from racism, researchers of racist discourse would not see the difference and for them “Ideological articulations such as racism, nationalism, sexism, ethnicism, verge on one another, are connected and overlap. ” (Reisigl and Wodak 2001: 21) Summary The paper dealt with one aspect of Israeli territorial and national identity promoted in ten History and Geography schoolbooks – the denial of Palestinian identity, which is achieved in a multi-modal fashion. The Palestinian citizens of the state of Israel are always depicted dichotomously as “Israel’s Arabs” vs. the Israelis, or as the “Non-Jewish population” vs. the Jewish one. They are presented stereotypically, in racist vocabulary and racist visuals, as a group which is a threat, a problem to be solved or a developmental burden. The Palestinian occupied territories are depicted as part of the state of Israel but their Palestinian inhabitants are defined as a problem to be solved and are missing from maps, photographs and graphs, which thereby legitimate the conquest and the occupation of these lands, and profess the inapplicability of international laws and decisions. Palestinian “inferiority” is depicted as a natural permanent condition, and their discrimination is represented as their “lot”. Their misfortunes are either a “tragedy” (Modern Times
Nurit Peled-Elhanan
II: 245, Firer 2004) namely an act of fate or a result of their own actions.15 The books suggest, albeit implicitly, the ideal of an Arab-free land as the best solution for the existence of the Jewish state. Besides serving as a tool to instil discriminatory ideas and racist beliefs these representations enhance ignorance, both of the real geopolitical situation and of disciplinary discourse. Assuming that primary and even high school students do not turn to libraries to verify the facts in their schoolbooks, and that most teachers were educated by similar books, one must conclude that the last two generations of Israelis are not aware of the geopolitical reality of their country. Furthermore, today’s politicians are yesterday’s school-children and today’s children are the future politicians. Israeli schoolbooks educate students to hostility and contempt towards their immediate neighbours and environment, and do not prepare them for a peaceful co-existence with their Palestinian co-citizens. They teach that Democracy may segregate citizens according to ethnicity and that human suffering and empathy are race or religion-dependent. These schoolbooks inculcate Jewish superiority and heterophobia and seek to conceal if not erase Palestinian identity and culture. Conclusion My argument is that the schoolbooks studied here are a manifestation of what Reisigl and Wodak (2001: 24) term “elite racism”: ‘Racism reproduced in papers, schoolbooks, academic discourse, political speeches and parliamentary debates – the racism which is then implemented and enacted in other social fields’, such as the army. The paper presented Israeli schoolbooks and Israeli education but this is not an Israeli problem. As other studies prove (Coffin 1997, Van-Leeuwen and Selander 1995), the exclusion of “others” through racist discourse and the construal of national identity against other identities are common in many Western countries, especially those which absorb immigrants. Schoolbooks are not overtly ideological. They have the authority of unbiased truth (Olson 1989, Wineburg 2001) and are presented as objective neutral reports of ‘the bare facts’ and scientific data. However, schoolbooks have been proven to be ideological16, and to obey rules of recontextualization which are dictated by dominant ideologies and the truth of Power. In schoolbooks, as in any other history book,
15. For instance PIS explains that the Palestinian refugees have remained in the refugee camps because of their unwillingness to integrate in Arab countries. (p. 110) 16. Olson, D. (1989); Van-Leewuen, Th. (1992); Luke, A. (1988, 1996); Veel and Coffin (1996).
The denial of Palestinian national and territorial identity in Israeli schoolbooks
‘the choices of plot structure and the choice of paradigms of explanations’ are ‘products of […] an interpretive decision: a moral or ideological decision’ (White, 1978: 67). The interest of the writers and authorizers of schoolbooks, as of historians or educators in general, is to control discourse, to present history and geography as they want it to be (Jenkins 1991: 85). As Coffin (1997) argues, students learn from their history schoolbooks not only the discourse of the discipline but also the discourse of politicians, lawyers and other manipulators of discourses. They learn to present interpretations as facts, to insert personal views into a seemingly neutral presentation, in short they learn the language of power. Schoolbooks that construe a territorial and national Identity, which is largely based on the denial of other identities and on the concealment of what Habermas calls the “lifeworld” of other people, namely of all the informal domains of their social and cultural life, do it by distorting geopolitical and social facts and by effacing all other meaningful life. Such an education promotes hostility and racism. Coffin (1997) maintains that ‘Success in school history is dependent on a student’s control of the lexicogrammatical resources and text structures that realize the arguing genres’, and this paper argues that if teachers and students want to know how to seek the features that are designed to shape their identities, their perceptions, or make them view events in a particular way, they should learn how to interrogate their school texts, and that depends also on their control of multimodal resources and structures. As Jenkins (1991 p. 85–86) argues, History, and one may add Geography and all school ‘subjects’ are ‘fields of force’, namely “a field that variously includes and excludes, centres and marginalizes views […] in ways and in degrees that react to powers of those forwarding them.” And as Jenkins concludes, “knowing this
might empower the knower”. Bibliography Cited schoolbooks:
Aharony. Y. and Sagi T. (2002) The Geography of the Land of Israel – A GeographyTextbook for Grades 11–12. Tel-Aviv. Lilach Publishers. Bar-Navi, E. and Nave, E. (1999) Modern Times Part II – The History of the People of Israel. For grades 10–12. Tel-Aviv. Mapa Publishers. Eldar, Tz. and Yaffe, L. (1998) From Conservatism to Progress: History for 8th Grade. Jerusalem, Israel. Ministry of Education and Maalot Publishers. Fine, Tz., Segev, M. and Lavi, R. (2002) Israel – Man and Space – Selected Chapters in Geography. Tel-Aviv. The Centre for Educational Technologies Publishers. Rap, E. and Fine, Tz. (1994/1998) People in Space – Chapters in the Geography of Population in the World. Tel-Aviv. The Centre for Educational Technologies Publishers.
Nurit Peled-Elhanan Rap, E. and Shilony Tz. (1998) Settlements in Space – Chapters in the Geography of Settlements in the World. Tel-Aviv. The Centre for Educational Technologies Publishers.
General bibliography Arnheim, R. A. (1988) The Power of the Centre: A Study of Composition in the Visual Arts. Berkley. University of California Press. Bar-Gal, Y. (1993a) Homeland and Geography in a Hundred Years of Zionist Education. Tel-Aviv. Am Oved Publishers. Bar-Gal Y. (1993b) ‘Boundaries as a topic in geographic education – The case of Israel.’ In: Political Geography, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 421–435. Bar-Gal Y. (1996) ‘Ideological propaganda in maps and geographical education.’ In: J. van der Schee and H. Trimp, Innovation in Geographical Education, Netherlands Geographical studies, IGU, Commission on Geographical Education. Hague, pp. 67–79. Bar-Gal, Y. (2000) ‘Values and ideologies in place descriptions.’ In: Erdkunde: Archive for Scientific Geography, Bd. 54/2. Verlag Hahnsche Buchhandlung. Bar-Gal, Y. (2003) ‚Geographic politics and geographic education.‘ Conference of the Geographic Society. Bar-Illan University, Tel-Aviv, Israel. Bar-Gal, Y. (2004) ‘Unity-transformation-unity-dissolution metamorphoses in the country’s landscape.’ In: A. Ayal (2004) Our Landscape. Notes on Landscape Painting in Israel. Haifa University, pp. 29–33. Barthes, R. (1967) ‘Le discours de l’histoire.’ In: Le Bruissement de la Langue. Paris. Editions du Seuil, pp. 163–77. Barthes, R. (1977) Image, Music, Text. London. Fontana. Barthes, R. (1967) ‘L’effet du réel.’ In: Le Bruissement de la Langue. Paris. Editions du Seuil, pp. 178–185. Barthes, R. (1980) La Chambre Claire Note sur la Photographie. Paris. Editions du Seuil. Bernstein, B. (1996) Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity: Theory, Research, Critique. London. Taylor and Francis Publishers. Cazden, C. (2001) Classroom Discourse: The Language of Teaching and Learning. Portsmouth, New Hampshire. Heineman Coffin, C. (1997) ‘An investigation into secondary school history.’ In: F. Christie and J.R. Martin Eds. Genres and the Institutions. Open Linguistic Series. London and New York. Continuum. Fairclough, N. (2003) Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London and New York. Routledge. Firer, R. (1985) The Agents of Zionist Education. Tel-Aviv. Hakibutz HaMeuhad and Sifriyat Poalim Publishers. Firer, R. (2004) ‘The presentation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in Israeli history and civics textbooks.’ In: R. Firer and S. Adwan Eds. The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict in Israeli History and Civics Textbooks of Both Nations. Hannover. Georg-Eckert-Institut für Internationale Schulbuchforschung. Verlag Hahnsche Buchhandlung. Genette, G. (1972) Figures III. Collection Poétique. Paris. Editions du Seuil. Genette, G. (1982) Palimpseste: La Littérature au Second Degré. Paris. Editions du Seuil.
The denial of Palestinian national and territorial identity in Israeli schoolbooks
Grossman, D. and Katz, Y. (1993) ‘Patterns of rural settlements in the land of Israel.’ In: I. Salomon and R. Kark Eds. Studies in the Geography of Israel, vol. 14. Israel Exploration Society, The Department of Geography, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Henrikson, A. K. (1994) ‘The power and politics of maps.’ In: G. J. Demko and W. B. Wood Eds. Reordering the World: Geopolitical Perspective on the 21st Century. San Francisco. Westview Press, pp. 50–70. Hicks, D. (1980) ‘Images of the world: an introduction to bias in teaching materials.’ Accidental Paper no. 2. Centre for Multicultural Education. London. UK. Institute of Education. Hodge, R. and Kress, G. (1993) Language as Ideology. London. Routledge. Jenkins, K. (1991) Re-thinking History. London. Routledge. Kress, G. (1993) ‘Against arbitrariness: the social production of the sign as a foundational issue in Critical Discourse Analysis.’ In: Discourse in Society. vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 169–191. Kress, G. (2003) Literacy in the New Media Age. London. Routledge. Kress, G. and Van-Leeuwen, Th. (1995) ‘Critical layout analysis.’ In: Internationale Schulbuch Forschung, vol. 17. Frankfurt. Disturber, pp. 25–43. Kress, G. and Van-Leeuwen, Th. (1996) Reading Image. The Grammar of Visual Design. London, Routledge. Kress, G. and Van-Leeuwen, Th. (2002) ‚Colour as a semiotic mode: notes for the grammar of colour.‘ In: Visual Communication. London. Sage Publications. Lemke, J. (1998) ‘Multiplying meaning: visual and verbal semiotics in scientific text.’ In: J. Martin and R. Veal Eds. Reading Science –Critical and Functional Perspectives on Discourse of Science. New York and London. Routledge, pp. 87–113. Page, B. (2003) ‘Critical geography and the study of development. Showers of blessings?’ In: The Student’s Companion to Geography. London. Blackwell Publishers. Podeh, E. (2002) The Arab Israeli Conflict in Israeli History Textbooks, 1948–2000. London. Bergin and Garvey Publishers. Reisigl, M. and Wodak, R. (2001) Discourse and Discrimination: Rhetorics of Racism and AntiSemitism. London and New York, Routledge. Smooha, S. (1997) ‘Ethnic democracy: Israel as an archetype.’ In: Israel Studies 2. (Fall 1997), pp. 198–241. Indiana. Indiana University Press. Thompson, J.B. (1987) ‚Language and ideology: a framework for analysis.‘ The Sociological Review, vol. 35, pp. 516–535. London. Blackwell Publishing. Van Leeuwen, Th. (1992) ‘The schoolbook as a multimodal text.’ In: International Schulbuch Forschung, vol. 14 (1), pp. 35–58. Frankfurt. Diesterweg. Van Leeuwen Th. and Selander S. (1995) ‚Picturing poor „heritage“ in the pedagogic text: layout and illustrations in an Australian and a Swedish history textbook.‘ In: Journal of Curriculum Studies, vol. 27, no.5, pp. 501–522. Taylor and Francis Ltd. Van Leeuwen, Th. (1996) ‘The representation of social actors.’ In: C. R. Caldas-Coulthard and M. Coulthard Eds. Texts and Practices: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis. London. Routledge. Van Leeuwen, Th. (2000) ‘Visual racism.’ In: M. Reisigl, and R. Wodak Eds. The Semiotics of Racism, pp. 333 -350. Vienna. Passagen Verlag Pulishers. White, H. (1987) The Content of the Form: Narrative Discourse and Historical Representation. Baltimore and London. The John Hopkins University Press. Wineburg, S. (2001) Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts: Charting the Future of Teaching the Past. Philadelphia.Temple University Press.
part 3
National and cultural identity
The discursive building of European identity Diverse articulations of compatibility between European and national identities in Spain and the UK* Hector Grad
Department of Social Anthropology, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain
Introduction The reinforcement of both supra-national entities and ethnoregional nationalisms was an outstanding political feature of globalization in late XX Century. The development of the geopolitical identity related to the European Union poses practical and theoretical questions about the building process of social identities and its implications – especially because this new identity is developed in the complex context of existing state-related national identities (Licata, 2003) and reinforced regional and nationalist local demands and identities (Keating, 2001, McCrone, 1998). For ��������������������������������������������������������������������������� this reason, the present study focuses on the discursive building mechanisms of European identity and its articulation to established national identities in British and Spanish contexts (see McCrone, 1998, and Linz, 1973, for specific analyses of these contexts). Discourse analysis will disclose how national and supra-national categories can be construed as compatible or contradictory by different mechanisms of articulation. Previous studies on the discursive construction of identity aimed to show identities’ diversity and fluidity as well as to identify the discursive strategies and moves involved in their building. Most of these studies focused on a single isolated identity, and did not address the relationships among different identities (as Grad * This research was supported by the 5th Framework Programme of the European Commission, project “Orientations of Young Men and Women to Citizenship and European Identity” (HPSE-CT-2001-00077), co-ordinated by Prof. Lynn Jamieson (University of Edinburgh).
Hector Grad
& Martin Rojo, 2001). This article will make three main contributions in this regard: Firstly, it will show a diversity of identities’ building and articulation in these contexts. Furthermore, comparing two equivalent identities in four different cultural contexts, it will distinguish general and culturally dependent building processes. Finally, by underscoring the diversity in the building and the articulation processes and their relation to social contexts, this article adopts a critical approach which challenges the attribution of fixed, essentialist, identities to social actors. The critical approach in discourse studies maintains that discursive practices have both creative and reproductive power in the performance and the representation of social practices and social actors. In this regard, this research focuses on how discursive practices construct, perpetuate, transform, and dismantle European identity (see Wodak et al., 1999, for an application of discourse analysis to Austrian national identity). Specifically, this analysis will address the linguistic resources and discursive moves involved in the interviewees’ construction of the European category and in its articulation with national identities (corresponding to state or regional political entities) in Spain. The discursive building of European identity From the political point of view, the European citizenship was established by the Maastrich Treaty in 1992 as a “second layer” citizenship, acquired by the integration of states in the European Union. This approach considers existing state sovereignties as the basic source of legitimacy for a subsidiary European citizenship. In terms of social categorization, European citizenship is defined at a superordinate level, which does not replace state-level, and leads to a dual citizenship. Though this approach was maintained by the “Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe”1 (European Communities, 2005), institutional and public debates about the integration process pose the question of whether European citizenship would or should evolve towards a unique, nation-like, “supra-national” sovereignty overcoming established nation-states as basic category for geopolitical identity (see, for instance, Habermas, 1996; and Delanty, 2000). These alternative projects for European integration and citizenship should affect the building of Europe as a social category and the people identification with this category. The influence would stem both from the “objective” political process and from the social beliefs about the European social category. In this regard, since the 1.
Article I-10 “Citizenship of the Union”: 1. Every national of a Member State shall be a citizen of the Union. Citizenship of the Union shall be additional to national citizenship and shall not replace it.
The discursive building of European identity
well-established national identities serve as cognitive anchors for the European identity (Licata, 2003), the development of this identity would be also affected by its articulation with the different national identities in the alternative integration projects. Social psychological research of social identities and their effects is dominated by Social Identity Theory (SIT – Tajfel, 1978) and its development as Selfcategorization Theory (SCT – Turner et al., 1987). In spite of founders’ claims (e.g., Tajfel, 1979; Turner, 1999), classical SIT/SCT research assumes that social identities are related to “objective” and intersubjectively consensual social categories. SIT/SCT framework holds an etic cognitive-structural approach which considers all social identities as equivalent and produced by the same processes of social categorization and inter-group relations. Therefore, the development of social categories and identities, as well as their relationships, is seen as universal. For instance, SIT/SCT research considered national identities as functionally equivalent to other social identities, and this approach was critized because it hides the special significance of this category, and the historical, social and cultural processes in which it is produced (Billig, 1995; Brewer, 2001). Furthermore, dealing with multiple level identities, this framework postulates (cf. Oakes, 1987) that only one identity level can be salient at each time, producing a functional antagonism between categories of different inclusiveness’ level. In this line, the “Optimal distinctiveness model” (Brewer, 1991) postulated that the salience of a level of identity results from the compromise between competing needs of assimilation and differentiation for the person. The model suggests that social categories of intermediate inclusiveness level would satisfy both needs, thus arising maximum salience and identification. Simultaneous identification with social categories of high and low inclusiveness would be, thererefore, contradictory for individuals (cf. Brewer & Roccas, 2001). Thus, the nation would arise as the basic category level (vs. regional or supra-national levels) for geopolitical identities, and the salience of national identity would contradict the identification with regional or European levels.2 This discourse analysis will show how these identity aspects are not stable traits of social cognitive structures nor only related to the objective nesting rela2. This functional antagonism does not necessarily imply that the salience of national against other (ethnic, regional) identities would be only attributed to intra-individual psychological, “natural”-like, mechanisms. As modern nationalism research shows, that antagonism was historically construed by elites’ discourses aiming to convince the masses they belong to a common group, and the imposition by different means of common cultural references which homogenise the national cultural space and provide content to the national identity (Billig, 1995; Breully, 1982; Gellner, 1983, 1987; Hobsbawn, 1990; Smith, 1991). As Cole (1996) suggests, the intraindividual mechanisms are anchored in these sociocultural processes. The complex relationships between cognitive, cultural, and historical processes is beyond the aims of this article.
Hector Grad
tion between these categories but consequences of the specific content, building process, and (social and political) implications of the geopolitical identities. This goal will be accomplished by the analysis of interviews about European and national identities, focusing on the construction, the meaning, the salience, and the relations between these geopolitical categories of different inclusiveness’ levels. The structural assumptions of SIT/SCT were already criticized in social identity and discourse analysis research. For instance, Scheibe (1983) argued that the significance of any single social identity depends on the other social identities in the individuals’ identity repertoire. Also, criticizing the assumption of functional antagonism, Cinnirella (1996) claimed that the study of simultaneous identifications requires an explanation of the “networking” or interconnections between identities – which renders them to be concurrently salient, be perceived as mutually compatible or incompatible and, therefore, be positively, neutrally, or negatively correlated. Nevertheless, Cinnirella (1996) did not suggest any overall model for these relationships. In spite of their contributions, previous research still lacks a systematic account of how the content of European and national identities would condition their compatibility and, therefore, the development of European identity. Previous research failed to acknowledge that, beyond situational variations, European identity may arise from a diversity of underlying building mechanisms. Discourse analysis will make a worthy contribution in this regard by disclosing a diversity of building processes of social identities and their relationships. Though it was left unattended by traditional SIT/SCT approach, this diversity is both significant for the social actors and reflected in their choice of linguistic means and discursive strategies. Some hints in that direction arise from previous discourse analysis research on the relation between European and national identities as well as between national and regional identities. For instance, Cinnirella (1996) showed that, for particular historical reasons3, European identity may be construed as compatible and reinforcing for Italian identity but as incompatible and threatening for British identity. Furthermore, Grad & Martín Rojo (2003) found out that the compatibility of Spanish and regional (Basque, Catalan, & Madrid) identities is related to the Basic Assumptions (civic vs. ethnic – cf. Smith, 1986, 1991) underlying the dominant social representation of the ingroup in the nationalist discourse. Specifically, the emphasis on “civic” discourse allowed for the compatibility between Spanish and Regional-national identifications in Catalonia, while the emphasis on “ethnic” discourse hinders that simultaneous identification in the Basque Country (for this compatibility, see also Grad, 2001, Grad & Ros, 1998). The regional and the hege3. Liu (Liu et al., 2002; Liu & Hilton, 2005) further analyze the role of social representations of history in the building of national and ethnic identities.
The discursive building of European identity
monic Spanish identity are overlapping in Madrid, due to the confusion between them at the capital city of the state (in the same direction, Condor, 1996, highlighted the confusion between English and British as national category for English respondents). Finally, Reicher & Hopkins (2001) showed that the compatibility between Scottish and British identities is built by discursive strategies that are contingent on speakers’ goals supporting or opposing Scottish nationalism. Thus, the compatibility of these social identities would be consequence of the identities’ meaning and discursive building or just an outcome of strategic argumentation. The present study extends the research on the discursive building of social identities to the relation between national and supra-national identities. The analysis focuses on the construction of the European identity and its relation to established national identities in contexts where state-related national identities are contested by regional nationalist demands and identities. Specifically, we will analyze this construction in young adults of central and peripheral regions (according to the state organization) in British (England & Scotland) and Spanish (Madrid & Basque Country) contexts. This cross-cultural comparison will allow us to distinguish particular from general processes of identity compatibility and construction, disclosing the diversity of articulations between national and supranational identities on the building of the European identity. Summing up, this study applies an interdisciplinary approach which integrates social psychological and critical discursive analyses. The social psychological theory provides an analytical framework for the development of social identities. Discourse analysis will help us to show how the European and national categories and their relationships of compatibility or conflict are built in discourse, and how social actors justified and legitimized these relationships. The detailed analysis of the discourses produced by young adults will show, firstly, the variation of these social categories, since changes in their meaning and salience are attested in specific contexts. This analysis will also disclose how national and supra-national categories can be construed as compatible by very different mechanisms of articulation. Data collection The corpus for this study was gathered by interviews of young adults (18–24 years old) in Spain (Madrid and Bilbao) in the framework of the European project “Orientations of Young Men and Women to Citizenship and European Identity”.4 4. Thanks to Lynn Jamieson and Sue Grundy (University of Edinburgh), Susan Condor (University Lancaster), and Maria Ros and Miryam Rodriguez (Universidad Complutense de Madrid) for gently allowing us to use the data gathered in Edinburgh, Manchester, and Madrid.
Hector Grad
Selection of interviewees. Random samples of 400 young adults of each location participated in a large survey on the development of European identity and citizenship. Furthermore, extreme high and low identifiers with Europe (50% female, 50% 18–21 years old) in the survey were selected for further in-depth interview.5 Table 1 presents the number of interviews accomplished at each location: Table 1. Number of interviews by research location and level of identification with Europe European Identification
Madrid
Weak (0–1) Strong (3–4) TOTAL
Spain
UK
TOTAL
Bilbao
Manchester
8 4
7 5
8 9
7 6
30 24
12
12
17
13
54
Edinburgh
Procedure. In the context of a larger interview, interviewees were specifically asked about their national and European identification. When relevant according to the answers, they were further asked about any situation in which they felt specially identified with each category, the meaning of each identity, and their compatibility. The interviews were fully transcribed, and these transcriptions were analyzed following a critical discourse analytical approach in their original language. The basic linguistic analysis paid attention to lexical units, the semantic relations, the syntactic devices, and the argumentative strategies in interviewees’ discourses. Discourse analysis: The compatibility of European and national identity The basic analysis of the corpus suggested four main aspects in the interviewees’ construction of the European identity and its articulation to their national identities: (i) Subject attitude moves; (ii) Strategies of social categorization; (iii) Strategies of articulation of social categories, (iv) and Argumentation schemes. Further analysis of these aspects allowed us to identify regular patterns in the construction of different articulations between national and supranational identities.
5. Participants in the survey were asked for their identification with the nested socio-political categories rating “What is the strength of your feelings about different sorts of identity?”. The question was applied to regional, state-related (“Spanish”, “British”), and European identity in a scale from 0-“No feeling at all” to 4-“Very strong feeling”. Participants were selected for further in-depth interview according to their answer in the survey as extremely weak (0-1) and strong (3-4) feeling of European identity.
The discursive building of European identity
“Subject attitude moves” refer to the interviewees’ position regarding European social category in discourse, including their degree of identification with Europe. The subject attitude is mainly reflected in the use of personal and spatial deixis: antroponimic generic terms (Europeans, British, English, Scottish, Basque, Spanish), and pronouns (the inclusive use of the pronoun “us”), spatial references (toponyms, adverbials, demonstratives), nominal phrases formed by possessive (“our”) or demonstrative (“this”) adjectives + abstract nouns referring to a territory (“land”), social (“people”) or political (“country”) units, as well as attributive structures (“we’re isolated in a little island really”, “we are a separate island”). The subjects’ attitude towards European identity was also reflected in its representation as a voluntarily adopted vs. an imposed category – i.e. in their attribution of European categorization to internal or external factors (“I consider myself European“ vs. “they want you to think of yourself as European”) – and in their enunciative position from within or outside the European category (“they” vs. “we” are Europeans; “they” are Europeans vs. “we” are Spanish [“We wouldn’t class ourselves as Europeans,… we’d still be English”]; “here” vs. “there” in Europe [“They’re in Europe … whereas we’ll ever feel part”]). Besides their attitude towards European identity, interviewees show discursive “Strategies of social categorization” in building Europe as a social category. Social categorization implies building a field of a homogeneous ingroup (us) and a field of a differentiated outgroup (them) establishing an inclusive us and an exclusive them. The contrast and tension between both fields leads to references to topics on which the ingroup is built: the shared history, the opposition to Irak war, etc.. The lack of identification leads speakers to argue with others’ statements supporting identification – for instance, stressing the relationship with the USA, the British insularity, or the lack of knowledge about Europe. �������������������������������������������� The strategies of social categorization comprise discourse moves about the meaning of the European category (interviewees evoked topics like geography, history, ethnicity, culture, economics, citizenship, political project and ideology, sense of belonging, and personal experience like travelling or language skills) as well as about the social identity mechanisms of intergroup comparison (statements about assimilation and differentiation, or homogeneity and heterogeneity, the social groups against which Europe is compared, and the comparison outcomes). The choice of topic not only reflects the content attributed to European category, but also provides a frame justifying the speaker’s position towards European identity as well as explanations of this position. Interviewees also address the question of the compatibility or the incompatibility between the studied social identities. “Strategies of articulation” refer to the way speakers’ “network” (in terms of Cinnirella, 1996) or construct of relationships between European and national categories. This move comprises three basic aspects: Firstly, references to the organization of national and supra-national
Hector Grad
identities in a hierarchy of levels – i.e. whether speakers construct Europe and their nation as a categories of similar or different inclussiveness’ level (“either you feel European or you feel Spanish” vs. “the Basque Country is placed in Spain, and Spain is placed in Europe”). Secondly, references to the underlying logical mechanism of articulation (detachment, logical nesting, and subjective logic). Thirdly, references to the resulting relationship of compatibility or incompatibility between these categories – whether the simultaneous identification with both categories is feasible or not for the interviewees – leading to dual identity or to antonomy. Finally, “Argumentation schemes” refer to the types of argumentation that interviewees raise trying to persuade about the legitimacy of their European identification and its relationship to national identity. Argumentation schemes were analyzed taking into account the discursive markers and the logical relations between arguments (causality, analogy, counter-argumentation, etc.). The analysis of the interviews based on these four aspects of discourse disclosed three main mechanisms of articulation: Lack of identification with Europe, automatic articulation, and non-automatic articulation (leading either to compatibility or incompatibility) between European and national identity. The current analyses will compare automatic and non-automatic articulations which lead to compatibility, which may arise from between European and national identity. Automatic articulation arises when European identity mainly stems from the perception of Europe as a superordinate (geographical rather than political) category. This logical nesting allows for its compatibility with subordinate (national, regional) categories. This type of articulation wil be analyzed in section 4.1. Non-automatic articulation arises when European identity mainly stems from the subjective logic of identification – which may lead to perceptions of either compatibility and incompatibility between European and national identities. This type of articulation wil be analyzed in section 4.2. Automatic articulation The analysis of the interviews has disclosed a discursive articulation in which identities are built up on a logical nesting of European, national and regional categories. This articulation often implies the perception of Europe as a geographical (that is, non-social) category, which facilitates an automatic compatibility of identities “I am X, and X is part of Europe”. The following examples display typical discourses of this configuration: Example 1.1: Sara (Madrid, female interviewee, reported weak EU identification and Spanish national identity)
The discursive building of European identity
P: ¿Tú crees que es posible que una persona se sienta de las tres maneras al mismo tiempo? R: Yo creo que sí. Yo mismamente, al ser madrileña, pues me considero española y como España está dentro de Europa, pues me considero europea. Entonces, me considero madrileña, española y europea.] [I: Do you think it is possible to feel the three ways at the same time? R: I think it is. I myself, on being madrileña, well, I consider myself Spanish, and as Spain is part of Europe, well, I consider myself European. So, I consider myself madrileña, Spanish and European.] Example 1.2: Juan (Bilbao, male interviewee, reported weak EU identification and strong Basque and Spanish identity) Porque yo he nacido en Bilbao, soy vasco por lo tanto, el País Vasco está dentro de España, soy español y España está dentro de la Unión Europea, bueno dentro de Europa, soy europeo. [Because I was born in Bilbao, so I’m Basque, the Basque Country is within Spain, I’m Spanish, and Spain is within the European Union, well, within Europe, so I’m European.]
Besides subject attitude reporting a European identification, the discourses of these examples display a nesting of geopolitical categories of different levels of “objective” inclusiveness (region, state, Europe). This articulation strategy firstly implies a distinction between more and less inclusive categories. Secondly, the use of deictic references denotes that these social and political categories are basically seen as geographical (non-social) entities (“Spain is in Europe”). Thus, these interviewees network the identity levels by an automatic articulation following a Cartesian logic, which facilitates the compatibility between regional, national and European identities. Logical nesting and automatic articulation are built in discourse by means of a ‘cause consequence’ argumentative schema: “I am European because I was born in a region within a country which is placed at the European continent / belongs to the European Union”. The use of connectors like “por lo tanto”/”therefore” and “porque”/”because” shows the strength of this logic in discourse. For the building of the social category, this logic also implies that the identification with categories of higher level is derived from the identification with lowerlevel categories. This identity hierarchy is reflected in a discursive grading, for instance, from the affective nuance in “being from” (the region) to the rational nuance in “considering from” (Spain, Europe) in Example 1.1, and from belonging due to birth to political belonging in Example 1.2. It seems that the lower level categories function as the core source for identity, while higher geopolitical levels have a more peripheral role for identity.
Hector Grad
While the same argumentative schema is used in Example 1.3 (“I do think of myself as obviously being European because we are part of Europe”), this example also depicts “banal” construction of the European identity by drawing the flag (cf. Billig, 1995) and situational variations in the salience of this identity (“…, there have been situations, … that I have said oh yeah that we are part of Europe”). Example 1.3: Belinda (Edinburgh, female interviewee, reported strong EU identification and salient British identity) I: Would you ever say you felt European? R: Yeah. Yeah, I don’t think I’ve actually used that expression. But I do, there have been situations, I can’t remember when and what it was about. But, that I have said oh yeah that we are part of Europe and that. And I always rem- I’ll always remember that we are European. And we are part of Europe because from at school I used to draw the European flag with all the stars and blue. And that’s always reminded me. But it’s something that I tend to, you tend to forget. Like I do tend to not think about. But once I always remind myself, yeah, I do see my, like I definitely see myself as European because we are part eh Europe. So yeah, I mean Euan thought America was European as well. I was like, no! And then I stopped to think, I was like is it? I was like no it’s not! But no, yeah, I would class myself as European as well yeah.
Summing up, the characteristic discursive resources and strategies found in logical nesting and automatic articulation of European identity are: Firstly, the acceptance and internal attribution of European identification: “I consider myself European”. The associate fields evoked are mainly the shared geographical situation, and, to a lower extend, the political institutional membership. Interviewees adopt an strategy of articulation distinguishing different levels – i.e. Europe functions as a hyperomic category which encompasses national categories. This inclusion relation leads to a Cartesian logic, which is expressed by the discursive marker “so”. The compatibility articulation is built on a cause-consequence scheme: e.g. “I am Basque so I am European”. Table 2.1. summarizes the discursive features of automatic compatibilty. Automatic articulation is found in the discourse of 22% (12 of the 54) interviews. It is relatively frequent in Spanish interviews, being the most frequent articulation found in Bilbao: five (42%) of Bilbao interviews, and four (33%) of Madrid interviews vs. one (6%) of Manchester, and two (15%) of Edinburgh interviews and among which reported strong European identification in the pre-interview survey (33% of them vs. 13% of the weak identification interviewees).
The discursive building of European identity
Table 2.1. Construction of Europe as a social category and its articulation with national identity – Summary of discourse analysis: Automatic compatibility TYPE OF ARTICULATION
AUTOMATIC ARTICULATION: COMPATIBILITY
Subject attitude: Identification Attribution
Acceptance Internal
Social Categorization Strategy: Topics
Intergroup Comparison & Outcome Articulation Strategy: Levels’ organization Logical mechanism Relationship Argumentation Schemes:
Geography (continent) [Spain] Array of countries Politics (country membership in EU) Being European because the country [where the S is living or was born] is placed at the continent / belongs to the EU Hierarchy according to inclusiveness level Cartesian logic: Category nesting Compatibility Cause → consequence Acknowledgment of social category
Non-automatic articulation The analysis of interviews uncovers that building and networking of European identity follow subjective self-categorization logic more frequently than the “objective” Cartesian logic, i.e. these processes are based on non-automatic rather than on automatic mechanisms of identity articulation. The building of European identity by a subjective logic renders more elaborate discourses of compatibility between European and national identities. In this discursive building of identity, the attitude of acceptance of the European identity found in the automatic articulation appears associated to a new way of arguing the subject position: the sense of belonging. The interviewees feel they are European, and construct this identification by more elaborate argumentation schemes (as it may be observed in the greater number of recalled topics). Typical discourses of non-automatic articulation of compatibility are illustrated by the following examples: Example 2.1: Pedro (Bilbao, male interviewee, reported strong EU identification and weak Spanish and Basque identification) P: ¿Crees que es posible sentirse vasco, español y Europeo al mismo tiempo?
Hector Grad
R: P: R: P: R:
Sí ¿Por qué? Yo lo siento, o sea queee (risas) ¡Ah!, tú lo sientes (riendo) ¿Por qué?, dame una pequeña explicación así Pues porque, siiiiii paaaa, si todos vamos aaaaa que no haya fronteras y queeee, pues es que da igual sentirse de una cosa que otra. Al final, todo va a ser lo mismo. ¿No?..., a eso queremos llegar. [ I: Do you think it is possible to feel Basque, Spanish and European at the same time? R: Yes I: Why? R: I feel that, so (laughs). I: Ah! You feel that (laughs) Why? Please, give me some explanation. R: So because, if – if we’re all going to… having no borders and stuff… well, it’s all the same whether you feel from one thing or another: In the end, it’ll be all the same. Won’t it?... that’s the goal we want to reach.]
In this example, the feeling of identification stems from the support of a cosmopolitan project of European unification. The articulation of compatibility between European, national, and regional identities is built by a supra-national categorization that weakens and assimilates geopolitical identities of lower inclusiveness. This is, rather, an infrequent strategy of articulation. The following examples depict the more frequent articulation of different identity levels: Example 2.2. shows how the compatible articulation between national and European identities is firstly constructed by a clear distinction between identity levels (“I don’t think the Liverpudlian identity for example is particularly usurped by your Welsh national identity or a bit. And I can see something similar with like Europe.”). This compatibility is further built by argumentative schemes of analogy between the supra-national institutional arrangements of UK and EU institutions in Example 2.3. (“I don’t think [European Parliament] could possibly govern all the countries. I think it could maybe work if they had like a-like a degree of devolved power to every country.”). Finally, in both examples, compatibility is also constructed by categorization strategies stressing that the unity at the European level does not hinder cultural diversity or national identity and interests (for instance, Example 2.2 argues that diversity would even enrich decision making, and Example 2.3 argues that the convergence of interests depends on adequate institutional arrangements). Example 2.3 takes further this argument by an intergroup comparison stating the relative similarity of European peoples (for instance, due to internal migration and historical links) in contrast to Americans’ diversity. This move distinguishes Europe/European from America/Americans in this articulation.
The discursive building of European identity
The feeling of identification is frequently emphasized in the UK. The interviewee in Example 2.2. reacts by ‘Yes, absolutely. Yes, definitely’ to the question about his European identity. This discursive move may be better understood in the context of a counter-argumentative schema where the identification is built arguing against the British interviewees’ perception of a hegemonic social norm in rejecting the European integration or even the “objective” geographical location in Europe (“I think Britain tries to be quite un-European …Britain tries not to be European when it is” in Example 2.3). Example 2.2: Paul (Manchester, male interviewee, reported strong EU identification and British more than English salient identity) I: So the – if you had to choose one label, if you were – I don’t know, say you were abroad or say R: I’ve got to say British haven’t I? I mean I wish I didn’t have to say that but I think because, but you do. Unless I suppose, I mean I think it – I just think it would be an insult to Europeans to call yourself a European because you know, if I was French and someone said ah, you’re not a European because Britain but I wish we could call ourselves that. That’d be good. I: You’d like to be European? R: Yes, absolutely. Yes, definitely. I: Would you like to see that completely replacing national identity, European identity? R: No. But I don’t think it ever will, I mean like, it’d be like in this I mean you could say like well this country’s all English but I don’t think the Liverpudlian national identity for example is particularly usurped by your Welsh national identity or a bit. And I can see something similar with like Europe. I mean it doesn’t have to be I don’t think. I mean the French would still be, you know, particularly French and like you know, in the way they react to things and that I think that that that’d be a good thing. I dunno lots of people who react differently together are probably going to on the whole make better decisions and do less rash things because you know if you’re not all thinking the same way, you have to justify what you’re going to do much Example 2.3: Edward (Edinburgh, male interviewee, reported strong EU identification and Scottish more than British national identity) I: And do you think that the, we’ve got similarities with other countries in Europe that maybe makes Europe distinct from America or Asia or R: Yeah I think, I think the fact that all-all of Europe is, as I’ve said so many countries are close together. There’s a lot of em,-em sort of migration between the countries. Eh obviously there’s historical links going back to
Hector Grad
when Scotland was a catholic country and you had like France and Ireland and Spain and there was all these kind of relations there. Um em obviously there’s migration between a lot of the European countries… … I: So do you think there are other things that unite em Europe with, that distinguish it from other places like America or R: Yeah um no I would say the diversity of cultures but I think America is a very diverse place in its own, its own right. It’s got nothing that defines the people there. Eh so there’s certain things like I’m not sure. I think like the single currency is probably uniting Europe a bit, places like Britain is you know are we going to join them or not? I don’t know if Britain is trying to stay out for reasons of superiority, like oh we used to own half of you so we’ll have our own?? (currency?) … I: What about other aspects of the EU. Em, if they decide, you know, if-if the power shifted from say Holyrood or Westminster to Brussels. Em so that they were collecting taxes maybe… Do you have any sort of sense of concern about that or?? you know do you like the idea? R: Well I think the European parliament have to be enormous to, I don’t think em they could possibly govern all the countries. I think it could maybe work if they had like a-like a degree of devolved power to every country. I mean there’s no way what works in Scotland is gonna work in Germany… But then again after a period of time they might be able to bring everyone to a level playing field. But um, I think, I think it could work but again there had to be a lot of devolved power if they were. You know, certainly perhaps centralised power moves to Brussels but em you know as it stands you know the power being in Westminster you know moving it across the-the um Channel is not going to make so much of a difference. As long as there’s still a good enough representation of British or Scottish interest. Depending on how they decide to devolve it. If they say Brussels and London and then maybe like a Scottish parliament would be like a sub branch of Westminster. I think it could work but yeah they’d have to keep-keep power devolved to a certain degree?? … R: …I think Britain tries to be quite un-European… Eh I think Britain tries to be very British. It’s maybe a, an imperial thing. For whatever other reason I do think that Britain tries not to be European when it is. Eh again it’s maybe just being separated, just the geography. You know having, having eh water between you and the rest of the, and the continent.
The discursive building of European identity
The associate fields evoked in these examples are far more elaborate than the shared geographical location. Historical and political topics are evoked as allowing the subjective compatibility while geographical topics emerge just in references to others’ discourses questioning the belonging to Europe: “maybe just being separated, just the geography”. Furthermore, there are instances of intertextuality, evoking discourses that construe other identity positions. The speakers choose the counter-argumentative marker “but” to take distance from other identity positions which, rejecting the compatibility of national and European identities, are depicted as hegemonic in society – as reflected in the personification of this position in countries’ categories ( “Britain tries to be quite un-European”). The discursive resources and strategies that build the non-automatic compatibility between national and European categories are, firstly, the acceptance and internal attribution of European identity (even emphasized in the interviewees from the UK). Secondly, the social categorization strategy is subjective, since the sense of belonging emerges as the main membership criterion. The discourses build a polarization between Europe and the USA which serves as basis for the presentation of similarities and differences. The articulation strategy displays a distinction of levels as in the automatic articulation, but now the compatibility is built on a subjective logic. Interviewees building the non-automatic compatibility frequently evoke discourses of incompatibility in the context of counter-argumentation efforts to underscore their rejection of these discourses (which are perceived and depicted as hegemonic in the UK). Table 2.2 below summarises the characteristics of this type of compatibility articulation. Non-automatic mechanisms of compatibility were found in the discourse of 15% (8 of the 54) interviews, and it is relatively frequent among interviewees reporting strong European identification in the pre-interview survey (21% of them vs. 10% of the weak identification interviewees). Discussion This discourse analysis of in-depth interviews was useful in disclosing a diversity of constructions of European identity and its articulation with the nested national identities. The objective overlapping between these categories leads to network the identification with Europe by automatic or non-automatic mechanisms of articulation: Both mechanisms share the distinction between different levels of identity which allows for a strong European identity compatible with national identity. Automatic articulation of logically nested categories leads to the compatibility of identities. Non-automatic articulation may acknowledge that objective nesting mainly rests on subjective identification.
Hector Grad
Table 2.2 Construction of Europe as a social category and its articulation with national identity – Summary of discourse analysis: Non-automatic compatibility TYPE OF ARTICULATION
NON-AUTOMATIC: COMPATIBILITY
Subject attitude: Identification Attribution
Acceptance [UK: emphasized] Internal
Social Categorization Strategy: Topics Intergroup Comparison & Outcome
Articulation Strategy: Levels’ organization Logical mechanism Relationship Argumentation Schemes:
Emotion (sense of belonging / feeling European) EU vs. non-EU comparison – EU: similarity – non-EU (USA): difference → Unity (supra) & diversity (inter) → Convergence between national and EU interests / projects Distinction between levels Subjective logic (identification) Compatibility [UK] Counter-argumentation: Acknowledgement of (objective + subjective) belonging vs. the anti-EU norm [Edinburgh] Analogy EU//UK
Summing up, the networking of national and European identities does not seem to arise only from a Cartesian logic of objective categories but also from the meanings attributed to these categories and from their subjective articulation. Thus, the (in)compatibility is not a feature of social categories or a personal trait but arises from the specific social and political implications of these categories. Distinct social experiences may reinforce different constructions of European identity and articulations with other social identities. Therefore, automatic articulation has been more characteristic of Spanish interviews, and non-automatic articulations have been similarly frequent in both political cultures. The analyses point out that the European category maybe construed with different meaning, salience and articulation of other less inclusive identities. Furthermore, a functional antagonism which would obstacle the simultaneous identification is just one of the possible articulations between these identities. The salience of national identity may sometimes reinforce the contrast and perception of differences between nations, but not always inhibits the perception of inter-national (European) similarities. All in all, that diversity questions the classical structural expectations of SIT/SCT (Oakes, 1987; Brewer, 1991; Brewer & Roccas, 2001).
The discursive building of European identity
This research on the construction of social identities would help to design political, social, and educational strategies adjusted to personal and group diversity in the construction of European identity. In line with Hornsey & Hogg’s (2000a, 2000b) arguments, the building of a European social category compatible with national identities seems feasible on social psychological and practical grounds: In our study, British identity emerged as a clear example of a supra-national identity compatible with national English or Scottish identities. Therefore, this case raises the question of which the conditions are for reinforcing the identification with a further European level in the UK. Regarding the alternative projects for European integration, either subsidiary, civic or supra-national definitions of citizenship may lead to the development of European identity and its compatibility with national identities. The compatibility depends on the content, building processes, and networking of these identities. Moreover, this compatibility may be founded either on basic automatic logical nesting or on non-automatic social psychological articulation. Therefore, each project may be more effective in different populations and political conditions. This work posits new questions for research: The current analyses focused on the articulation of compatibility between European and national identities. Firstly, the relation of this compatibility to the articulations of lack of identification and incompatibility should be analyzed in further research. Secondly, national identities may correspond to state-level categories in some political configurations but to regional-level categories in other configurations. Thus, to fully understand the building of national identity and its networking to subordinate and superordinate levels, also the articulation of national and regional categories should be addressed. Thirdly, though building mechanisms were here thoroughly described, and some hints about their development may be found in the analyses of categorization strategies, further evidences for the less frequent articulation mechanisms (like contingent networking) would clarify their conceptual status. The conditions for the development of different building mechanisms at individual and cultural level should deserve specific attention in this context as well. Finally, this research considered discursive articulation as a component antecedent of the identity building process. This approach is consistent with Foucault’s (1969/1972) view of discourse as a social practice generative of knowledge. Nevertheless, other discourse analyses of geopolitical identities consider that the discursive construction of compatibility or incompatibility between identities is just a tool in strategic argumentation. For instance, Reicher & Hopkins (2001) claim that people construct compatibility or incompatibility arguments in order to reject or to support nationalist positions. According to this view, the discursive articulation of identities is construed as contingent on speakers’ goals. Therefore, the concep-
Hector Grad
tual status of discursive articulation as antecedent or consequence of identity building processes should also be clarified. References Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined communities. London: Verso. Billig, M. (1995). Banal nationalism. London: Sage. Breuilly, J. (1982). Nationalism and the state. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 475–482. Brewer, M. B. (2001). The many faces of social identity: Implications for Political Psychology. Political Psychology, 22, 115–125. Brewer, M. B., & Roccas, S. (2001). Individual values, social identity, and optimal distinctiveness. In C. Sedikides, & M. B. Brewer (Eds.), Individual self, relational self, collective self (pp. 219–237). Philadelphia: Psychology Press. Cinnirella, M. (1996). A social identity perspective on European integration. In G. Breakwell & E. Lyons (Eds.), Changing European identities: Social psychological analysis of social change (pp. 253–274). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology. A once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Belknap. Condor, S. (1996). Unimagined community? Some social psychological issues concerning English national identity. In G. Breakwell & E. Lyons (Eds.), Changing European identities: Social psychological analysis of social change (pp. 41–68). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Delanty, G. (2000). Citizenship in a Global Age: Society, culture, politics. Buckingham: Open University Press. European Communities (2005). Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Foucault, M. (1969). L’Archéologie du Savoir. Paris: Gallimard. [English translation: The Archeology of Knowledge. London: Routledge, 1972.] Gellner, E. (1983). Nations and nationalism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Gellner, E. (1983). Culture, identity, and politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Grad, H. M. (2001). Los significados de la identidad nacional como valor personal. In M. Ros & V.V. Gouveia (Eds.), Psicología social de los valores humanos: Desarrollos teóricos, metodológicos y aplicados (pp. 265–284). Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva. Grad, H. M., & Martín Rojo, L. (2003). ‘Civic’ and ‘ethnic’ nationalist discourses in Spanish parliamentary debates. Journal of Language and Politics, 1(2) Special Issue on parliamentary discourse, 225–267. Grad, H. M., & Ros, M. (1998, August). Value connotations of national identity in three cultural regions of Spain. Paper presented at the XIV Congress of the International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology, Bellingham (Washington, USA), August 2–7, 1998. Habermas, J. (1996). Citizenship and National Identity. In J. Habermas (Ed), Between facts and norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge: Polity. Hobsbawm, E. (1990). Nations and nationalism since 1780. Programme, myth, reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hodge, R., & Kress, G. (1992). Language as ideology (2nd Ed.). London: Routledge.
The discursive building of European identity
Hornsey, M.J., & Hogg, M.A. (2000a). Assimilation and diversity: An integrative model of subgroup relations. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 143–156. Hornsey, M.J., & Hogg, M.A. (2000b). Subgroup relations: A comparison of the mutual intergroup differentiation and common ingroup identity models of prejudice reduction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 242–256. Keating, M. (1996). Nations against the state: The new politics of nationalism in Quebec, Catalonia and Scotland. London: Macmillan. Keating, M. (2001). Plurinational Democracy. Stateless nations in a post-sovereignty era. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Licata, L. (2003). Representing the future of the European Union: Consequences on national and European identifications. Papers on Social Representation, 12, 5.1–5.22. Retrieved July 12, 2004, from http://www.psr.jku.at/. Liu, J., & Hilton, D. J. (2005). How the past weighs on the present: Social representations of history and their role in identity politics. British Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 537–556. Liu, J. H., Lawrence, B., Ward, C, & Abraham, S. (2002). Social representations of history in Malaysia and Singapore: On the relationship between national and ethnic identity. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 5, 3–20. Linz, J.J. (1973). Early state-building and late peripheral nationalisms against the state: The case of Spain. In S.N. Eisenstadt & S. Rokkan (Eds.), Building states and nations. Models, analyses and data across three worlds (pp.32–116). Beverly Hills: Sage. McCrone, D. (1998). The Sociology of nationalism. London: Routledge. Moreno Fernández, L. (1988). Identificación dual y autonomía política: Los casos de Escocia y Cataluña. Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas, 42, 155–174. Oakes, P. J. (1987). The salience of social categories. In J. C. Turner, M. A. Hogg, P. J. Oakes, S. D. Reicher, & M. S. Wetherell (Eds.), Rediscovering the social group: a Self-categorization Theory (pp. 117–141). Oxford: Blackwell. Potter, J., & Wetherell, M. (1987). Discourse and Social Psychology: Beyond attitudes and behaviour. London: Sage. Reicher, S., & Hopkins, N. (2001). Self and nation: Categorization, contestation, and mobilization. London: Sage. Ros, M., & Grad, H.M. (2004, July). Who do you think you are? Regional, National and European identities in interaction. Conference “Orientations of Young Men and Women to Citizenship and European Identity”, Scotland House, Brussels, July 8, 2004. Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. In E. Rosch & B. B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and categorization (pp. 27–48). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Scheibe, K. E. (1983). The psychology of national identity. In T. R. Sarbin & K. E. Sarbin (Eds.), Studies in social identity. New York: Praeger. Smith, A.D. (1986). The ethnic origins of nations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Smith, A.D. (1991). National identity. London: Penguin Books. Tajfel, H. (Ed.). (1978). Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations. London: Academic Press. Tajfel, H. (1979). Individuals and groups in social psychology. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 18, 183–190. Turner, J.C. (1999). Some current issues in research on social identity and self-categorization theories. In N. Ellemers, R. Spears, & B. Doojse (Eds.), Social identity. Oxford: Blackwell. Turner, J.C., Hogg, M.A., Oakes, P.J., Reicher, S.D., & Wetherell, M.S. (Eds.). (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A Self-categorization Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
Hector Grad van Dijk, T. A. (1991). Communicating racism. Ethnic prejudice in thought and talk. Philadelphia/Amsterdam: John Benjamins. van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Ideology. A multidisciplinary approach. London: Sage. Verschueren, J. (1999). Uderstanding pragmatics. Londres: Arnold. Wodak, R., de Cillia, R., Reisigl, M. & Liebhart, K. (1999). The discursive construction of national identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
9–11 Response(s) Three Arab-American groups respond discursively to the attacks of September 11, 2001 Lutfi M. Hussein
Mesa Community College, AZ
The events of September 11, 2001 have had far-reaching effects worldwide. Immediately after these events, the United States government declared “War on Terrorism.” This war has been waged against Taliban and al-Qaida in Afghanistan, the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, “terrorist” groups throughout the world, and arguably civil liberties within the U.S. itself. Given the ethnic/racial and national origins of the alleged “evil-doers” that carried out the “terrorist” attacks, Arabs living in the U.S. have had to contend with the consequences of these attacks. This paper investigates the social and political impact of these attacks on three Arab-American groups. The discursive responses of these groups on their respective Web sites are analyzed within Fairclough’s framework of Critical Discourse Analysis. These responses can be seen as discourses of social struggle, “the process whereby social groupings with different interests engage with one another” (Fairclough, 1989: 35).
Key words: Critical Discourse Analysis, Identity, Sept. 11, Arab Americans Introduction and theoretical framework Critical Discourse Analysis (henceforth, CDA) is defined by Teun van Dijk in his editorial of the first issue of Discourse and Society as the study of the reproduction of sexism and racism through discourse; the legitimation of power; the manufacture of consent; the role of politics, education and the media; the discursive reproduction of dominance; the discursive reproduction of dominance relations between groups; the imbalances in international communication and information.
Lutfi M. Hussein
Kress, agreeing with the thrust of this definition, offers one adjustment – that CDA be employed in investigating “the most unremarkable and everyday of texts” (1990: 84), rather than be only applied to specially designated texts. “This scope and the overtly political agenda,” writes Kress, “serves to set CDA off on the one hand from other kinds of discourse analysis, and from text linguistics (as well as from pragmatics and sociolinguistics) on the other” (84). The label CDA can be somewhat confusing because it can be understood in (at least) two senses (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2002): First, it refers to the theory and framework developed by the British scholar Norman Fairclough. Second, it refers to one of several theories and approaches advanced by scholars such as Ruth Wodak (discourse-historical approach), Teun van Dijk (critical discourse analysis), and Ron Scollon (Mediated Discourse). While they may vary from one another, these approaches still draw on similar theoretical grounds. For example, they define discourse in broad terms to include written and spoken language in addition to visual representation; they subscribe to the dialectical relationship between discourse and social reality; and they are all politically committed to examining the role of discourse in the (re)production of social power. In this paper, I will be applying CDA as theorized by Fairclough. Interested in investigating the interface between language use and social practice, Fairclough presents a “three-dimensional” framework for CDA whereby discourse is analyzed as text, as discourse practice (processes of text production, distribution and consumption), and as sociocultural practice. Fairclough (1995a: 133) defines CDA as discourse analysis which aims to systematically explore often opaque relationships of causality and determination between (a) discursive practices, events and texts, and (b) wider social and cultural structures, relations and processes; to investigate how such practices, events and texts arise out of and are ideologically shaped by relations of power and struggles over power; and to explore how the opacity of these relationships between discourse and society is itself a factor in securing power and hegemony.
The systematic exploration of the “often opaque relationships of causality and determination” between discursive practices and sociocultural practices, in the context of power struggle, lends CDA its critical edge in the study of discourse, especially as it builds on the premise that discursive practices are constitutive of and are constituted by sociocultural practices. Fairclough uses “critical” and “critique” in his works to signal his “commitment to a dialectical theory and method” which explores the interrelationships between things and the interconnections of cause and effect that “may be distorted out of vision” in human matters (Fairclough, 1995a: 133). CDA, however, goes beyond everyday critique, because “it can draw upon social theories and theories of language, and methodologies for language
9–11 Response(s)
analysis, which are not generally available, and has resources for systematic and in-depth investigations which go beyond ordinary experience” (Fairclough & Wodak, 1997: 281). Another integral part of Fairclough’s framework is “power.” In his early works, such as Language and Power, power is defined negatively as direct control, manipulation and domination. The role of CDA in such a case would be to help fight oppression and emancipate the oppressed groups. However, in his later works, especially with Discourse and Social Change, Fairclough “opens up the possibility of a broader conception of power” (Bloome & Talwalkar, 1997: 111). Fairclough argues that the contemporary struggle over power stems from the power inherent in discourse as a social practice. Within Fairclough’s approach the discursive practices of a community are to be understood in terms of “orders of discourse.” The orders of discourse, consisting of discursive types, are important to understanding the inter-relationships between the different types constituting the social institution or social domain. The Web site of an organization would be the order of discourse and each of its separate Web pages would be a discursive type (or a communicative event) (e.g. About Us, Links Web pages). The discursive type is by turn divided into discourses (as a count noun) and genres. A discourse, representing a certain social practice, refers to “knowledge and knowledge construction” (Fairclough, 1995b: 56). Politics, as a social practice, for instance, is signified in liberal, democratic and socialist political discourses. On the other hand, a genre “is a use of language associated with and constituting part of some particular practice, such as interviewing people (interview genre) or advertising commodities (advertising genre)” (56). One of the distinctive features of genres is that they “can be described in terms of their organizational properties – an interview, for instance, is structured in a quite different way from an advertisement” (56). Research data One of the main objectives of this study is to see how Arabs living in the United States of America have responded discursively to the tragic events of September 11, 2001 in New York City, Washington, DC, and Pennsylvania. In analyzing this discourse, I have applied the framework developed by Norman Fairclough. In doing the textual analysis, I have drawn, as stipulated in Fairclough’s approach, on Systemic-Functional Linguistics (SFL). Some of the main SFL sources I have consulted are Michael A. K. Halliday (1994), Michael A. K. Halliday and Ruqaiya Hasan (1989), J. R. Martin and David Rose (2003), and Suzanne Eggins (1994).
Lutfi M. Hussein
For the purposes of this study, I have chosen to focus on three Arab-American groups. Here they are: – ADC: The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (http://www.adc. org/) (Appendix I) – Ahbab (Arabic for “lovers”): Site for the Gay and Lesbian Arab Society (http:// www.glas.org/ahbab/) (Appendix II) – AWSA: Arab Women’s Solidarity Association (http://awsa.net/) (Appendix III) These are all advocacy groups that are committed to promoting human rights, particularly those of Arab Americans. While they agree on the overall objective of protecting “human rights,” each has a narrower focus that is intended to serve its target audience. ADC focuses on political and social matters, Ahbab on (homo)sexuality, and AWSA on women’s rights. They all have physical addresses in the United States, where their servers are hosted. Their target audiences are primarily Arab Americans. For ease of referencing, I will be using the abbreviated forms for “The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee” (ADC), “Site for the Gay and Lesbian Arab Society” (Ahbab), and “Arab Women’s Solidarity Association” (AWSA). While ADC is a mainstream political organization, the other two are advocates for marginalized groups. This selection is deliberate to test whether the Arab-American community has spoken in one or multiple voices after the Sept. 11 attacks. In their immediate response to the attacks, ADC posted several Web pages while Ahbab and AWSA each posted only one Web page which was presented as a press release. ADC’s Web pages were presented as: ADC Pledges Support for National Day Mourning; ADC Fund for Sept. 11 Attack Victims; Advice to Arab-American Parents – Helping Children Cope; Advice to Educators from ADC; and Justice Department Joins Hands with ADC to Combat Hate Crimes. Since Ahbab and AWSA had each only press releases in response to Sept. 11 attacks, I have chosen to include only the press releases issued by the three Web sites. (See the appendices) Analysis The analysis will examine the features of grammar (themes, modality, and transitivity), word meaning, and wording that help establish the ethos of each text, which consequently reflects the ethos of the respective Arab-American group.
9–11 Response(s)
Thematic organization In this section I will do an analysis of the thematic patterning of each of the three texts. Halliday (1994) categorizes Theme into three types: 1) Topical Theme, that element in the beginning of the clause that has function in transitivity (i.e. it can function as Actor, Goal, Range, etc.); 2) Textual Theme, a set of discourse signalers, including yes and no, signaling a new discoursal move or continuation of the same discoursal move; and 3) Interpersonal Theme, including vocatives, modal adjuncts (e.g. probably, personally, tentatively), and a finite verbal operator (if preceding the topical theme) (e.g. Argue, I did where Argue is the finite verbal operator, and I is the topical theme). Halliday draws a helpful distinction between marked and unmarked theme: Markedness here refers to whether a word or phrase is in its typical place in a clause. ADC: Themes These are the topical themes in the ADC text – note that (*) indicates a marked theme, and the antecedent of a pronoun is provided within parentheses: Para. 4 our fellow American citizens (*) … make … this attack … Arab-American community … no matter who was responsible for this terrible crime (*) … Arab Americans … the best answer to such a despicable attack … Arab Americans … we (Arab Americans) Para. 5 grief/as grief gives way to understandable anger (*) … a pattern of collective blame and scapegoating against Arab Americans and Muslims … before the culpability of any single individual … persons with connection to the Arab world or the Islamic faith/even if persons with connections to the Arab world or the Islamic faith prove to have had a hand in this outrage (*) … we (ADC) … the pattern … Arab Americans … we (ADC) … crimes Para. 6 This rising tide of hostility towards Arab Americans … the goal and purpose of ADC/it is the goal and purpose of ADC, the leading membership and civil rights organization of the Arab-American community (*) … every Arab American who faces harassment, discrimination or hate crimes … ADC … we (ADC) … we (ADC) Para. 7 ADC … we (ADC) … we (ADC)
Lutfi M. Hussein
The Themes in para. 4 illustrate an interesting move from second person to third person to first person, at which point the speaker identifies with Arab Americans. The themes in para. 5 exhibit some more variation, where we read about the anger Americans have felt as a result of the terrorist attacks and how Arabs living in the U.S. have suffered in a violent backlash. The marked textual adjunct “already” emphasizes how serious this backlash has been. And the use of the logical connector “as a result” reinforces this conclusion. Finally we read about ADC’s appeal to Americans not to take their anger out on their fellow Americans (i.e. Arab Americans). In para. 6, ADC makes it clear that they are committed to defending Arab Americans against such crimes and in para. 7 they state their overarching policy towards promoting dialogue between the U.S. and the Middle East. The only two interpersonal themes used in the text are “clearly” and “unfortunately,” both of which are marked. The former refers to what the author believes is the right way to respond to the attacks, and the latter describes how the author feels about the pattern of violence against Arab Americans. Ahbab: Themes The topical themes in Ahbab run something like this – note that (*) indicates a marked theme, and the antecedent of a pronoun is provided within parentheses: Para. 1 welcome … the purpose of this site … here (*) Para. 2 this fall (*) … gay Arabs in the US, Australia, and Europe … gay Arabs in the Arab world … corrupt regimes … our community (gay Arabs) … we (gay Arabs)/as we closely monitor events in countries such as Egypt, Lebanon and the UAE among others (*) … we (Ahbab) … in western countries … members of our community (gay Arabs) Para. 3 gay Arabs … many (gay Arabs) … others (gay Arabs) … all of you (gay Arabs affected by terrorist attacks) (*) … do not … these attacks … they (these attacks) … Ben Laden’s message … this (Ben Laden’s message) … going after Ben Laden … it (going after Ben Laden) … going to war … we (Ahbab/gay Arabs?) … some groups such as the Israelis … we (Ahbab/gay Arabs?) Para. 4 we (Ahbab) … we (Ahbab) … take … we (Ahbab) … we (Ahbab) … enjoy
In para. 1, the Ahbab text starts out by welcoming “Queer Arabs worldwide” and briefly introducing the site, stating its goal and some of its features. The use of “hello” marks the tone as friendly and informal.
9–11 Response(s)
After this brief and informal introduction, we are presented in para. 2 with a narrative (Labov, 1972) about the struggle of gay Arabs worldwide in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks. The marked topical theme “this fall” marks the beginning of the this narrative (i.e. “orientation”). We are told about how gay Arabs have been attacked and subjected to harassment worldwide because of their identity as Arabs (i.e. “complicating action”). These gay Arabs however have not been silent. They have protested these attacks against them in the Arab countries and been promoting social awareness in western countries (i.e. “resolution”). In para. 3, the text specifies how gay Arabs were directly impacted by the terrorist attacks as they suffered financial and emotional loss. The marked theme “all of you” shifts the focus from third person to second person, where only gay Arabs are being addressed. This is restating, though in some detail, the complicating action. Then the reader is told not to give up and recognize the terrorist attacks (the manifestation of Ben Laden’s message) for what they are: an attack against gay Arabs. After being told they are targeted by Ben Laden, the readers (i.e. gay Arabs) are prompted to welcome the war against Ben Laden. Interestingly, it is not mentioned who is waging this war. This is made possible through the nominalizations that are functioning as the themes in (18–19). Going to war is functioning as the resolution of the climax, whereby justice gets served to gay Arabs in the war against Ben Laden’s group. While acknowledging how complicated this war may become politically (hinting that the Israelis may benefit from it), the text still finds the challenge “between seeking justice and avoiding horrors that will come back to haunt all of us in the future” (21C). This position may very well be that of the U.S. government, which by the way does not play any role in the thematic organization of the text. This reservation works as the coda (in Labov’s parlance). The use of the mood adjunct “clearly” in (20A) is intended to make it clear that Ahbab is not violent especially not towards people living in the Middle East. In para. 4, we find similar themes to those presented in para. 1. They involve first person and second person, whereby Ahbab, thanking the readers, encourages them to submit their work to the Web site to share with their visitors. The mood adjuncts “always” and “please” and the informal “enjoy” (for a closing) indicate how Ahbab is trying to maintain a friendly and possibly informal relationship with their readers. This echoes the use of “hello” in the first paragraph. While paragraphs (2) and (3) deal with important social and political issues, the introductory and concluding paragraphs deal with issues less serious, setting the tone as friendly and informal. This is reinforced in the invitation to “visit [their] shopping and personals areas.”
Lutfi M. Hussein
AWSA: Themes Here are the themes in the AWSA text – note that (*) indicates a marked theme, and the antecedent of a pronoun is provided within parentheses: Para. 1 Arab Women’s Solidarity Association Para. 2 AWSA … our hearts and prayers … many people … families and communities … we (AWSA) … we (AWSA) Para. 3 we (AWSA) … along with being among the victims who have died and been injured (*)… Arab-Americans and Muslim-Americans … past attacks on the US … we (AWSA) … all people of conscience Para. 4 we (AWSA) … we (AWSA) … under international law (*) … the US … the US … those attacks … we (AWSA) … the Bush administration and the Israeli leaders … we (AWSA) … we (AWSA) … we (AWSA) Para. 5 we (AWSA) … we (AWSA) … all forms of violence against civilians and the murder of innocent people Para. 6 we (AWSA) ... the road to peace and justice
AWSA is referred to in the third person in the headline and first paragraph which makes the tone of the text somewhat more formal. The structures of most of the sentences with AWSA serving as the theme and subject have the language of official declarations especially with the grammatical parallelism (“we declare …,” “we are also concerned that …,” “we are confident that …,” “we hope that …,” and “we believe that….”). In para. 2 AWSA expresses its condolences to those who have been impacted by the attacks, who are referred to in the second person. The use of second person maintains the formal tone set in the first paragraph. The use of “our civil liberties” (7C) means AWSA is identifying itself with Americans. In that capacity AWSA is appealing to “all people of conscience” to “stand with Arab and Muslim Americans” who are “bearing the brunt” of the terrorist attacks. To emphasize this “brunt,” the clause (8A) is given as a marked topical theme. The topical themes in para. 4 alternate primarily between AWSA and the U.S. administration and Israel. The only other marked theme in the text is given in (13): “under international law.” This theme is intended to function as an
9–11 Response(s)
intermediary between the other two themes. The topical themes in para. 5 and para. 6 include AWSA as well as two nominalizations. One refers to the violence committed against innocent people and the other to the road to peace and justice. Both of these themes refer to abstract notions of violence and justice. Mood and modality According to Halliday, grammatical mood consists of the subject and the finite (i.e. predicator). While the theme in a clause is significant because it demonstrates what the clause is about, the subject is not any less significant because it “is the element in which is vested ‘modal responsibility’ — on which the validity of the writer’s argument is made to rest, in each clause” (Mann & Thompson, 1992: 337–340). ADC: Mood and modality In the ADC text we find there to be correspondence between the subjects and themes except for the marked themes in (1A), (8A), and (14A). This means that most of the themes in the text do have a role in establishing the mood. Modality in this text is realized in the use of attitudinally loaded finites (e.g. want, appeal, and urge), modal adjuncts (e.g. without exception, clearly, just, even, unfortunately) and modal finites (e.g. will, seem, should). On the other hand there is only one example of modulated modality: “there can be no reason or excuse for collective blame ….” (9C). Interestingly, we find that polarity does not vary much in any of the texts. We find only two clauses in the negative in Ahbab (16, 18A), two in AWSA (13, 17B), and none in ADC. Consequently, what we find in these messages are assertions rather than denials. Ahbab: Mood and modality In the Ahbab text, we find that all subjects correspond to the themes except for the two marked topical themes: “this fall” (4) and “to all of you.” The markedness of these themes however is interesting because the former begins the narrative, by setting it in a specific time, and the latter shifts the narrative from third person to second person. The use of second person is yet another linguistic strategy employed in the Ahbab text to engage the reader, setting the informal tone and friendly nature of the text. Other strategies include using “hello and welcome” (1), “please” (23A), in addition to the use of imperative: “do not be fooled” (14A), “take time to write us” (23A-B), and “enjoy” (26). While the other texts make commands, they do not use the unmarked imperative mood to do that (see below). The text consists mostly of declaratives, the only exception being the three instances of imperative given above.
Lutfi M. Hussein
The primary verb tense used throughout the text is the present including the narrative part, which suggests that the narrative is presented as an ongoing one, a constant struggle for gay Arabs. One of the features that set the Ahbab text apart from the other two is that it does not address the Sept. 11 attacks in much depth. For example, it does not use attitudinally loaded terms like the other two do (see below) and it takes for granted that the attacks were carried out by Ben Laden’s organization and that a war must be waged against Ben Laden’s group. Furthermore, we find in the text few modal adjuncts (for example, “closely,” (8A), “directly,” (11), “clearly,” (20A), and “specially,” (20B)). We find only one modalized verb, “would like” (22C), and one modulated verb, “ought to” (21A). The use of pronouns such as we and you is very telling especially in a text that is posted on the Internet, possibly available for all to see. While the three Web sites vary in their use of we, Ahbab uses we consistently to refer to the Web site and gay Arabs, and you to refer only to gay Arabs, specifically those impacted by the Sept. 11 attacks. The declarative clauses in (22C-22E), (23A, 23B), and (24A, 24B) all serve the function of command. This probably is to be expected in a paragraph that fits more the register of sales/commercials than that of narratives. AWSA: Mood and modality The subjects in AWSA all correspond to the themes except for the clause (13) with its marked theme “under international law,” which is to be expected in a text that is referring to “international law” and requesting that this law be observed. The fact that most of the themes are functioning as subject suggests that the themes are given prominence in the roles acted out in the text – i.e. the themes are active participants in the text. While this text does not have as many modal adjuncts as Ahbab or ADC, it still is loaded with attitudinal meanings that are realized through the use of modalization and modulation. For example we find the modal finite “will” used widely (10B, 10C, 15B, and 18B), and we also find the modulated finites “should” (14A and 15A) and “must” (21B), both of which render a meaning of obligation. Interestingly, all the modulated verbs indicating obligation refer to the U.S. and the course of action that must be taken (by the U.S.). One of the main differences between this text and the other two in terms of mood is to be found in the primary tense used. In AWSA we find some verbs referring to the future while the other two refer to the past and present (with the one exception of (4B) in ADC — this tense however could be argued is used to refer to the present). This is very interesting: While all three texts focus on what happened in the past and how that has affected the present, AWSA is the only text that
9–11 Response(s)
explores the implications of the terrorist attacks for the future. Condemning the Sept. 11 attacks, AWSA is not only concerned about the violent backlash against Arab and Muslim Americans but is also apprehensive about the repercussions of the actions of the U.S. government, especially those that may be merely reactionary with serious consequences. That the AWSA text is the most formal of the three is evidenced in the use of third person to refer to AWSA, the structurally complex sentences which is realized through the projection of mental processes (cf. 10, 16, 17, 18, 20, and 21), the formal verbs realizing finites (e.g. condemn, urge, oppose, declare) and the use of only declarative clauses. Process types and transitivity The third dimension of grammatical analysis to be carried out is that of transitivity and of the various types of processes employed in the texts under study. The tables below (1–3) show the types of processes (including the total numbers, and percentages) used in each of the three texts. Table 1. ADC: Process Types Process Type Total Number Percentage
Material Mental 26 57.7
6 13.3
Relational
Verbal
Behavioral
10 22.2
0 0.0
1 2.2
Relational
Verbal
Behavioral
10 23.8
1 2.3
1 2.3
Relational
Verbal
Behavioral
5 13.8
0 0.0
6 16.6
Existent Total 2 4.4
45 99.8
Table 2. Ahbab: Process Types Process Type Total Number Percentage
Material Mental 25 59.5
5 11.9
Existent Total 0 0.0
42 99.8
Table 3. AWSA: Process Types Process Type Total Number Percentage
Material Mental 18 50
5 13.8
Existent Total 2 5.5
36 99.7
By examining the percentages of the different process types employed in the three texts, I have arrived at these conclusions. First, material processes figure
Lutfi M. Hussein
prominently in each of the texts with little variation. (For example, Ahbab has about 10% more material processes than AWSA but only 2% more than ADC.) This means all three texts are focused on describing actions and events in the world. Second, both ADC and Ahbab have twice as many relational processes as AWSA. Third, the number of mental processes the texts have is almost the same. Fourth, AWSA has the largest number of behavioral processes. Finally, verbal and existent processes are few if ever present. In conclusion, each of the texts is focused primarily on describing actions and events (of things happening in the world outside the text), then to a lesser degree establishing relations between the various participants, and using mental processes to refer to the respective texts to varying degrees (see below). The behavior of the various participants is described more in AWSA than it is in either of the other two texts. ADC: Transitivity In Table 4 are listed the major participants in the ADC text. Those that are thematically similar or identical have been identified as the same participant for simplification. It is clear that “ADC” and “Arab-American community,” combined, are the main participants in most of the processes used. I have chosen to refer to them as one participant because the text does merge these two identities primarily through the use of the pronoun we. One of the other participants is “retaliation against Arabs.” (Except for one reference to retaliation “against Arab Americans and Muslims” (8B), ADC is more concerned with Arab Americans as the rest of the text shows.) While AWSA does have “retaliation” as a participant, it does not restrict it to Arabs. AWSA includes “retaliation” against Arab Americans, Muslim Americans, Table 4. ADC: Participants in Transitivity Behavioral
Total
36 (99%)
9 (99%) 8 (99%)
–
Existent
Verbal
1 (100%) – – – – – –
Relational
– – – – – – –
Mental
4 (44%) 5 (62%) 1 (11%) – 3 (33%) – 1 (11%) – – 1 (12%) – – – 2 (25%)
Material 17 (47%) 6 (17%) 4 (11%) 2 (5%) 2 (5%) 5 (14%) –
Process Type
ADC/Arab American community retaliation against Arabs Sept. 11 attacks all Americans Arab Americans must be alert conflict between East and West terrorists
Participants
– 1 (50%) – – – 1 (50%) –
1 (100) 2 (100%)
9–11 Response(s)
and the people of the Middle East who may have to suffer in possible American military strikes in the region. ADC is the only one that offers guidance to Arab Americans on what to do in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks to keep safe. Ahbab: Transitivity In Ahbab (Table 5) we find that the participant “Ahbab/gay Arabs” is by far the most frequently used participant. This suggests that the text is focused on telling us more about this participant than any other. Since this text is the only one that refers to the Web site proper I have decided to include “Ahbab Web site” as a separate participant which indeed plays a significant role especially in the introduction and conclusion of the text, where a commercial aspect of the identity of the Web site is apparent. One of the distinctive features of this text is that it refers specifically to gay Arabs whether they are living in the Arab world, Europe, the U.S., or Australia. While this text includes as participants “response to Sept. 11 attacks” and “retaliation,” it, unlike the other two texts, does not refer to non-gay Arabs. It is only in this text that we find the participants, “corrupt Arab regimes,” and “religious extremists in Arab countries,” both of which, we are told, are responsible for the oppression of gay Arabs. On the other hand, we find “Israel” in both Ahbab and AWSA but not in ADC, and “Sept. 11 attacks” in all three texts. Table 5. Ahbab: Participants in Transitivity
Ahbab/gay Arabs Ahbab Web site Sept. 11 attacks responding to Sept. 11 attacks retaliation against gay Arabs Israel corrupt Arab regimes religious extremists in Arab countries
19 (47.5%) 5 (62.5%) 5 (12.5%) 1 (12.5%) 7 (17.5%) – 1 (2.5%) – 4 (10%) 2 (25%) 2 (5%) – 1 (2.5%) – 1 (2.5%) –
Total
40 (100%) 8 (100%) 12 (100%) 1 (100%) 1 (100%)
5 (42%) 1 (100%) 1 (100%) 1 (8%) – – 2 (17%) – – 3 (25%) – – 1 (8%) – – – – – – – – – – –
Existent
Behavioral
Verbal
Relational
Mental
Material
Process Type
Participants
– – – – – – – –
Lutfi M. Hussein
AWSA: Transitivity In AWSA text, we find three participants that are not mentioned in either ADC or Ahbab: “the victims and their relatives,” “the US,” and “past attacks on the US.” These three participants along with “responding to Sept. 11 attacks” (which is used to refer to more than just Arab Americans or Muslim Americans) reflect the universal concerns expressed in this text. These concerns are evident in the invoking of historical facts (the oppression of Japanese in the U.S. during and after WWII), international law and community, and the repercussions of retaliatory strikes against people (in general, not specific ethnic or religious groups) Table 6. AWSA: Participants in Transitivity
5 (71%) – 1 (14%) 1 (14%) – – – – – –
2 (40%) 1 (20%) 1 (20%) – – – – – – 1 (20%)
– – – – – – – – – –
34 (101%)
7 (99%)
5 (100%)
–
2 (50%) – 1 (25%) – 1 (25%) – – – – –
Existent
Verbal
9 (26%) 6 (18%) 3 (9%) 2 (6%) 2 (6%) 5 (15%) 4 (12%) 2 (6%) 1 (3%) –
Behavioral
Relational
Total
Mental
AWSA the victims and their relatives responding to Sept. 11 attacks Sept. 11 attacks the U.S. retaliation for Sept. 11 attacks all Americans Israel terrorists past attacks on U.S.
Material
Process Type
Participants
– – 1 (50%) – – 1 (50%) – – – –
4 (100%) 2 (100%)
Word meaning and wording Below is a listing of the nominal groups and other lexical items referring to the Sept. 11 attacks that are loaded attitudinally (Martin & Rose, 2003). (The numberletter combination appearing to the left of each line is the number of the clause in the respective text.) It is clear that there is variation in the number and kind of attitudinally loaded lexicon used to refer to the Sept. 11 attacks in the three texts. As AWSA’s share seems to be the largest, Ahbab’s seems the smallest. The lexicon employed in AWSA also offers a wide lexicogrammatical variation; in addition to attitudinally loaded
9–11 Response(s)
processes (e.g. “condemn,” “mourn,” “devastate,” and “injure”), we find nominal groups of varying complexity (Halliday, 1994). For example, we find these nominal groups in the AWSA’s text:
Thing: “attack” Deictic plus Thing: “these attacks” Epithet plus Thing: “terrorist attacks” Deictic plus Epithet plus Classifier plus Thing: “the horrible terrorist attacks” Classifier plus Thing plus Thing: “family members and friends” Epithet plus Thing plus Thing: “incalculable suffering and sadness” Thing plus Qualifier: “loss of innocent lives”
Epithet plus Thing plus Qualifier plus Qualifier … etc.: “a growing culture of violence linked to increased militarization and war that are devastating communities across the globe While we may find some of these complex nominal groups in ADC, we find only few of them in the Ahbab text. In conclusion, the AWSA uses more attitudinally loaded lexicon to express its position regarding the Sept. 11 attacks (see below: Sections 3.4.1 – 3.4.3). While agreeing that the Sept. 11 attacks were “terrorist,” ones that have caused the suffering of so many “innocent” people, the three groups disagree on how the U.S. should respond to these attacks and what Americans and the U.S. government should do to stop the retaliation being carried out against Arab Americans in a backlash. ADC 1B the deep shock, outrage and anger…the heinous and reprehensible attack 3B every bit of the heartache and anguish that all Americans have been enduring 4A this terrible crime, which no cause or ideology could possibly justify 4B no less moved, no less angry and no less outraged 5A despicable attack 7B struggling 7C this national nightmare 8A grief … understandable anger 9B this outrage 11B the intense depths of pain and anger at this attack 15B this time of crisis
Lutfi M. Hussein
Ahbab 5 the terrorist acts of a few 11 the September 11th savage attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City 14B these attacks 16 the WTC attacks 17A a message of hate and ignorance [towards gays Arabs] 17B a message that seeks to silence our [i.e. gay Arabs’] love 17C banish our [i.e. gay Arabs’] existence AWSA 1A condemns attacks 2B condemning the horrible terrorist attacks 2C mourning the tragic loss of so many lives, 3 our hearts and our prayers go out to all the victims of the attacks in New York and Washington 4 lost family members and friends 5 devastated by these attacks 6A our deepest condolences … lost loved ones 6B our heartfelt sympathy … been injured 8A the victims who have died and been injured 8B these attacks 12 the attacks 15B loss of innocent lives 16B loss of innocent lives 17B loss of innocent lives 18D incalculable suffering and sadness 19 terrorist attacks … a growing culture of violence linked to increased militarization and war that are devastating communities across the globe 20B all forms of violence against civilians and the murder of innocent people … intolerable 20C the September 11th victims, federal employees of Oklahoma City, Iraqi children, Sudanese pharmaceutical plant workers … targets … retaliation Conclusion In the aftermath of the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001 in New York City, Washington, DC, and Pennsylvania, Arabs living in the U.S. became very concerned about the possibility of a backlash against them as a community. As it turned out not only Arabs needed to be concerned about such a backlash, but also non-Arab Muslims and
9–11 Response(s)
those who may be perceived as either Arab or Muslim. (On Sept. 15, 2001 in Mesa, Arizona, Balbir Singh Sodhi was the first to be shot dead in a hate crime directly related to the Sept. 11 attacks. Sodhi was neither an Arab nor a Muslim—he wore a turban!). Cases of civil rights abuses and discriminatory acts against Arabs and Muslims increased and in some cases tripled (http://www.adc.org/index. php?id=282&no_cache=1&sword_list[]=discrimination, (http://www.cair-net.org/ asp/execsum2004.asp). In this paper I have tried to understand how Arab Americans responded to the Sept. 11 attacks by analyzing the immediate discursive responses of three Arab-American groups: ADC, Ahbab, and AWSA. While these groups agreed that Arabs suffered, or were very likely to suffer, in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, they differed in the way they perceived of and therefore responded to this threat. For example, ADC had several Web pages dedicated to managing the consequences of Sept. 11. This may reflect ADC’s political mission and goals which are echoed in its name: American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. Ahbab (Site for the Arab Gay and Lesbian Society) saw the Sept. 11 attacks as a “direct” attack against gay Arabs worldwide. Ahbab felt the Sept. 11 attacks were directed at gay Arabs by “religious extremists” and “Ben Laden’s” “organization.” So they saw in the Sept. 11 attack a religious, ideological, and (homo)sexual meaning. Their response is, as a result, focused on protecting only gay Arabs from the backlash. (Lesbian Arabs are briefly mentioned in the text. It is clear though that they are not part of the target audience.) The Arab Women’s Solidarity Association which started out in the 1980s as a feminist group in Egypt, dedicated to protecting the rights of Arab women, took a different approach. AWSA argued that causes of the Sept. 11 attacks exceed those of narrow ideological struggle between East and West (read Arab world vs. the U.S.; Islam vs. the West/Christianity) (cf. Samuel Huntington 1996; for responses to that argument, see John Esposito 1992 and Edward Said 1979, 1997). They “view” the “attacks as part of a growing culture of violence linked to increased militarization and war that are devastating communities across the globe” (AWSA text). Their response is consequently more universal where they invoke international law and try to contextualize the backlash against Arabs and Muslims in the U.S. as part of a general attitude towards vilification of the Other. My original research question was intended to examine the Arab-American response (in the singular), but as this study illustrates there was not only one response. How Arab-American groups responded to the Sept. 11 attacks depended on their respective political, ideological, and organizational interests and positions. While it may be tempting to speak of Arab Americans as one monolithic group—as we often see and read in the mass media—it surely is an inaccurate and misleading depiction of what is a heterogeneous community. This heterogeneity is
Lutfi M. Hussein
partly illustrated in the diverse responses of the three groups examined in this study. In addressing the research question, I have applied a theoretical framework that analyzes the discursive construction of group social identity. This framework, developed primarily by Fairclough (2003, 1999, 1995, 1992, 1989), builds on Systemic-Functional Linguistics. In this framework, group identity can be analyzed in terms of linguistic features such as theme, modality, transitivity, word meaning, and wording. Appendix I Text of ADC (The American Arab Anti Discrimination Committee)
Retrieved Sept. 12, 2001 Para. 1 11-September- 2001 Para. 2 Statement by ADC President Ziad Asali Para. 3 Contact: Hussein Ibish – (202) -438–7297 Para. 4 1A First of all, to all our fellow American citizens, I want 1B to express the deep shock, outrage and anger that the entire Arab-American community has felt as a result of the heinous and reprehensible attack against our society yesterday in New York and Washington, DC. 2 Make no mistake about it, [sic] 3A this attack was aimed at all Americans without exception 3B and the Arab-American community shared every bit of the heartache and anguish that all Americans have been enduring. 4A No matter who was responsible for this terrible crime, which no cause or ideology could possibly justify, 4B Arab Americans will be no less moved, no less angry and no less outraged than our fellow Americans. 5A Clearly, the best answer to such a despicable attack is for all Americans to join hands and come together 5B to support each other in our time of need. 6A Arab Americans are among the most eager
6B 7A 7B 7C
9–11 Response(s)
to do just that. We stand with our country and fellow citizens in struggling to get through this national nightmare.
Para. 5 8A Unfortunately, as grief gives way to understandable anger, 8B a pattern of collective blame and scapegoating against Arab Americans and Muslims seems to be emerging 8C even before the culpability of any single individual has been established. 9A Even if persons with connections to the Arab world or the Islamic faith prove 9B to have had a hand in this outrage, 9C there can be no reason or excuse for collective blame against any ethnic or religious community. 10A Already we have received numerous disturbing reports of violent attacks, threats and harassment against Arab Americans and Muslims in many parts of the country 10B and the pattern seems 10C to be growing. 11A As a result Arab Americans […] are feeling deep anxiety about becoming the targets of anger from other Americans. 11B <<, in addition to feeling the intense depths of pain and anger at this attack we share with all our fellow citizens,>> 12A We appeal to all Americans 12B to bear in mind 12C that crimes are the responsibility of the individuals who committed them, not ethnic or religious groups. Para. 6 13 This rising tide of hostility towards Arab Americans is creating a troubling situation for communities around the nation. 14A It is the goal and purpose of ADC, the leading membership and civil rights organization of the Arab-American community, to ensure 14B that every Arab American who faces harrassement, [sic] discrimination or hate crimes has a support mechanism and an organization 14C to defend them. 15A ADC is committed 15B to providing this service to our community at this time of crisis, 15C and we are ready 15D to do everything in our power 15E to assist any Arab American who is the subject of discrimination or hatred.
Lutfi M. Hussein
16A 16B 16C 16D 16E
We urge all Arab Americans to exercise caution, use their common sense, be aware of and alert to those around them and to report any suspicious behavior or threats to the police and ADC.
Para. 7 17A ADC is there as a resource for Arab Americans and Americans in general 17B to help 17C in any way it can. 18A We are ready 18B to help bridge the gaps in perception and communication that lead to misunderstanding and even conflict between the United States and the Arab and Islamic world. 19A We are committed 19B to fostering 19C and promoting dialogue 19D in order to counter all those in the Middle East and here in the United States who would promote the false idea 19E that there is or should be a generalized conflict between the United States and the Arab World or between the West and Islam.
Appendix II Text of Ahbab (Site for the Gay and Lesbian Arab Society)
Retrieved Oct. 18, 2001 Ahbab: Text Para. 1 1 Hello and welcome to the Ahbab site, the online community for Queer Arabs worldwide. 2A The purpose of this site is to help us communicate 2B network 2C and stay in touch within Arab communities all over the world. 3 Here, we have gathered news, articles, and other services that we hope you will find entertaining and educating.
9–11 Response(s)
Para. 2 4 This fall, our community is going through some very hard times. 5 Those of us in the US, Australia, and Europe are having to endure harassment and racist attacks due to the ignorance of some people who associate all Arabs and Muslims with the terrorist acts of a few. 6A Those of us in the Arab world are seeing an increase in harassment and discrimination 6B as corrupt regimes try to appease the religious extremists in their countries at our expense. 7 Our community is not being silent though, [sic] 8A as we closely monitor events in countries such as Egypt, Lebanon and the UAE among others, 8B we have and continue to speak out 8C and protest repressive actions by these governments. 9 In western countries, Gay Arabs have been at the forefront of protest against racial profiling and discrimination. 10A Members of our community are out there 10B organizing vigils, workshops, and teach-ins. Para. 3 11 Some Gay Arabs were directly affected by the September 11th savage attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City. 12A Many have lost friend[sic], 12B others were affected financially and emotionally. 13A To all of you, we send our deep feelings of solidarity 13B and tell you 13C not to give up. 14A Do not be fooled, 14B these attacks targeted us. 15 They targeted our being as Gay men who have chosen to live our lives in the open and to challenge twisted interpretations of scriptures and tradition. 16 After all, Ben Laden’s message is not that different from that of Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, the so-called Christian preachers who blamed the WTC attacks on gays, feminists, and other progressive groups. 17A This is a message of hate and ignorance, 17B a message that seeks to silence our love 17C and banish our existence. 18A Going after organizations such as that of Ben Laden is not being Pro-American or Pro-West, [sic] 18B rather it is being on the side of humanity and freedom.
Lutfi M. Hussein
19A 19B 20A 20B 20C 21A 21B 21C
That is not to say that going to war is the best solution. Clearly we are concerned about the well-being of people in that region, specially since some special interest groups, such as the Israelis, are using this tragedy to shamelessly promote their policy. Thus, we ought to be vigilant on how to strike the right balance between seeking justice and avoiding horrors that will come back to haunt all of us in the future.
Para. 4 22A As always, we thank you for 22B visiting Ahbab 22C and we would like 22D to remind you 22E to visit our shopping and personals areas. 23A Please take time 23B to write us your thoughts, comments, or suggestions. 24A We also encourage you 24B to send us your contributions, [sic] 25 we welcome articles, essays, poetry, or anything else you would like to share with our audience. Para. 5 26 Enjoy Para. 6 27 The Editors
Appendix III Text of AWSA (Arab Women’s Solidarity Association)
Retrieved Sept. 14, 2001
9–11 Response(s)
AWSA: Text Para. 1 (Headline in color and bold) 1A Arab Women’s Solidarity Association: Condemns Attacks, 1B Urges Tolerance 1C and Opposes Retaliatory Military Strikes Para. 2 2A The Arab Women’s Solidarity Association stands together with others 2B in condemning the horrible terrorist attacks committed Tuesday, 2C and in mourning the tragic loss of so many lives, 2D including those related to our own members. 3 Our hearts and our prayers go out to all the victims of the attacks in New York and Washington. 4 Many people have lost family members and friends. 5 Families and communities have been devastated by these attacks. 6A We send our deepest condolences to all those who have lost loved ones 6B and we send our heartfelt sympathy to all those who have been injured. Para. 3 7A We also stand together 7B in urging all people of conscience 7C to resist any curtailing of our civil liberties, and any anti-Arab American and anti-Muslim American actions. 8A Along with being among the victims who have died and been injured, 8B Arab-Americans and Muslim-Americans are also bearing the brunt of these attacks in the form of hate crimes, witch-hunts, and multiple forms of racist violence. 9 Past attacks on the U.S. have resulted in assaults on communities, such as Japanese Americans, who were victimized for no reason other than the color of their skin or their national origin or their mode of worship. 10A We hope 10B that all people of conscience will stand with Arab and Muslim Americans, and all others who may be targeted or defamed because of what happened, 10C and stand together, in human solidarity, with all people who have been victimized by violence, loss and ongoing injustice. Para. 4 11A We are saddened 11B hearing the calls for revenge and the talk of war. 12 We declare our opposition to retaliatory military strikes in response to the attacks.
Lutfi M. Hussein
13 14A 14B 15A 15B 16A 16B 16C 17A 17B 18A 18B 18C 18D
Under international law, there is no recognized right of retaliation or vengeance. The U.S. should endeavor to bring those responsible for attacks to justice in the courts. However, the U.S. should refrain from any retaliatory attack on any country or community it believes to have been responsible, since those attacks will undoubtedly result in the further loss of innocent lives. We are also concerned that the Bush administration and the Israeli leaders are taking advantage of the loss of innocent lives to heighten their policies of increased militarization, occupation, and war. We are confident that there is no value in attacks that are destined to result in an even greater loss of innocent lives. We hope that we will use words and take actions that will heal and support each other and try to maintain our calm and humanity in the face of incalculable suffering and sadness.
Para. 5 19 We view Tuesday’s terrorist attacks as part of a growing culture of violence linked to increased militarization and war that are devastating communities across the globe. 20A We believe 20B that all forms of violence against civilians and the murder of innocent people are intolerable, 20C whether enacted against the September 11th victims, federal employees of Oklahoma City, Iraqi children, Sudanese pharmaceutical plant workers or those who might be targets of the Bush administration’s plans for retaliation. Para. 6 21A We believe 21B that the road to peace and justice must begin with implementation of peace and justice, both at home and abroad.
9–11 Response(s)
References Bloome, D. & Talwalkar, S. (1997). Critical discourse analysis and the study of reading and writing. Reading research quarterly, 32(1), 104–112. Chouliaraki, L., & Fairclough, N. (1999). Discourse in late modernity: Rethinking critical discourse analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Eggins, S. (1994). An introduction to systemic functional linguistics. London: Pinter Publishers. Esposito, J. L. (1992). The Islamic threat: Myth or reality? New York: Oxford University Press. Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. London: Longman. –––. (1992). Discourse and social change. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press. ––– (1995a). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London: Longman. –––. (1995b). Media discourse. London: Arnold. –––. (2003). Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. London: Routledge. Fairclough, N., & Wodak, R. (1997). Critical discourse analysis. In T. A. van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as social interaction.(pp. 258–284). London: Sage. Mann, W. C. & Thompson, S. A. (1992). Some lexicogrammatical features of the zero population growth text. (pp. 327–358). Amsterdam: Benjamins. Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar. (2nd ed.). London: Arnold. Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1989). Language, context, and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Huntington, S. P. (1996). The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. New York: Simon & Schuster. Kress, G. (1990). Critical discourse analysis. Annual review of applied linguistics, 11, 84–99. Labov, W. (1972). Language in the inner city. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press. Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2003). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause. London: Continuum. Phillips, L. & Jørgensen, M. W. (2002). Discourse analysis as theory and method. London: Sage. Said, E. W. (1978). Orientalism. (1st ed.). New York: Pantheon Books. –––. (1997). Covering Islam: How the media and the experts determine how we see the rest of the world. (Revised ed.). New York: Vintage Books. Van Dijk, T. A. (1990). Discourse & Society: A new journal for a new research focus. Discourse & Society, 1(1), 5–16.
part 4
Identity construction and human suffering
Sexual assault trials, discursive identities and institutional change Susan Ehrlich
York University, Canada
Introduction Recent formulations of the relationship between language and identity, following Butler (1990), have emphasized the performative aspect of identity. Under this account, language is one important means by which identities are enacted or constituted; identities are something individuals do – in part through linguistic choices – as opposed to something individuals are or have (West and Zimmerman 1987). While the theorizing of identity as ‘performative’ has encouraged language and identity researchers to focus on the agency and creativity of social actors in the constitution of gender, race, ethnicity, etc., there has been less emphasis placed on another aspect of Butler’s framework – the ‘rigid regulatory frame’ (Butler 1990) within which such identities are produced. That is, what has been emphasized in recent work on language and identity is the linguistic and interactional agency of speakers in constructing different kinds of identities; what has received less attention are the limits and constraints on speakers’ agency in constructing these identities.1 For Cameron (1997), this emphasis on the ‘performative’ aspect of Butler’s work, rather than on her discussions of the regulatory norms that define and police normative constructions of identities, may arise because philosophical accounts of Butler’s ‘rigid regulatory frame’ often remain very abstract. That is, with respect to philosophical discussions of gender at least, Cameron (1997: 31) argues that ‘gender…floats free of the social contexts and activities in which it will always be… embedded,’ obscuring the fact that the routine enactment of gender is often, perhaps always, subject to what she calls the ‘institutional coerciveness’ of social situations. In other words, cultural norms (i.e., Butler’s rigid regulatory frame) make 1.
For a discussion of this issue with respect to ethnic identities, see Woolard (forthcoming).
Susan Ehrlich
certain performances of gender seem appropriate and intelligible; in Butler’s (p. 49) words, they ‘congeal over time to produce the appearance…of a natural kind of being.’ These same cultural norms render other performances of gender inappropriate and unintelligible and at times subject to social and physical penalties and sanctions (e.g., homophobia, gay-bashing, the ‘fixing’ of intersexed infants). For Butler and other post-structuralist theorists, identities are never outside the established meanings or discursive practices within a culture, but rather are determined by the ‘subject positions’ that particular discourses make available. As Shotter and Gergen (1989) comment, identities are always embedded within discourses, and such discourses ‘lay out an array of enabling potentials, while simultaneously establishing a set of constraining boundaries beyond which selves cannot be easily made.’ What is invoked in these comments is a Foucauldian notion of ‘discourse’: the idea that people’s understandings of the world are shaped by culturally-available, sense-making frameworks and that these frameworks or ‘discourses’ constitute constraints on the kinds of identities individuals are easily able to take up. Indeed, what I explore in this paper is the force of cultural discourses, both hegemonic and non-hegemonic ones, in structuring the kinds of identities individuals are able to take up within the context of Canadian sexual assault trials. In the first part of the paper, I demonstrate how culturally-dominant notions of male and female sexuality can impose constraints on the formation of trial participants’ identities – both on identities that are imposed upon participants by others (i.e., judges) and on identities that participants claim for themselves. In the second part of the paper, I focus on the emergence of counter-hegemonic discourses within Canadian sexual assault trials, demonstrating the way that such discourses make different kinds of identities available for participants. Dominant discourses, violence against women and other-imposed identities Susan Estrich’s (1987) book, Real Rape, provides a compelling argument for the differential treatment of stranger rape vs. acquaintance rape within the American legal system. The question Estrich explores in her book is why many cases of rape in the United States that meet the statutory definition (i.e., acquaintance rapes) are often not considered as such by police, prosecutors, judges, and juries. That is, Estrich argues that the law differentially prosecutes perpetrators and differentially protects the interests of victims. And paradoxically, it is the cases of rape that are least frequent that the law treats most aggressively. In cases of stranger rape, what Estrich calls “real rape,” in which the perpetrator is an armed stranger jumping from behind the bushes and, in particular, a black stranger attacking a white woman within the context of the United States, Estrich argues, the law is likely to arrest,
Sexual assault trials, discursive identities and institutional change
prosecute, and convict the perpetrator. By contrast, in cases of what Estrich calls “simple rape” – that is, when a woman is forced to engage in sex with a date, an acquaintance, her boss, or a man she met at a bar, when no weapon is involved and when there is no overt evidence of physical injury – rapes are much less likely to be treated as criminal by the criminal-justice system. Put in slightly different terms, the discourses that surround the prosecution of “real rape” vs. “simple rape” cases in the criminal justice system (e.g., the discourses of police, lawyers and judges) bring into being definitions of what constitutes a well-founded complaint, a believable or legitimate victim and a plausible or legitimate perpetrator. Legitimate or plausible perpetrators, for example, are strangers to their victims, carry a weapon and inflict physical injury upon their victims beyond the sexual violence; legitimate or believable victims are women that are raped by precisely these kinds of perpetrators. The discourses of rape that surround the criminal justice system’s treatment of rape, then, construct stranger rape as “real rape” and render the vast majority of rapes, and victims, invisible. Research on the language of sexual assault trial judgements (e.g., Coates, Bavelas & Gibson (1994); Coates and Wade (2004)) within the Canadian context is strikingly consistent with Estrich’s findings within the American legal system. That is, in investigating judges’ decisions in Canadian sexual assault cases between the years of 1986 and 1992, Coates, Bavelas & Gibson (1994) found judges to have extremely limited ‘interpretive repertoires’, or discourses, in the language they deployed in describing sexual assaults. In describing “stranger rapes”, judges employed a language of assault and violence; however, in describing cases where perpetrators were familiar to their victims and often trusted by their victims, the language judges used was often that of consensual sex. For example, the unwanted touching of a young girl’s vagina was described as ‘fondling’ in one trial judgement; in another, a judge described a defendant as ‘offering’ his penis to his victim’s mouth. Expressions such as ‘fondling’ and ‘offering a penis’ conjure up an image of affectionate, consensual sex, thereby situating the violent acts that were at issue into a framework of normal sexual activity. Coates et. al. (1994) argue that such linguistic representations are ‘anomalous’ because they are inconsistent with both Canadian law and the experiences of the victim. That is, in spite of the fact that Canadian statutory reforms in 1983 explicitly reconceptualized sexual assault as a crime of violence rather than a crime of sex, most cases where the perpetrators were known to the victims (even in cases where the accused was convicted) were described by judges in a language of erotic, affectionate and consensual sex. Like Estrich, then, Coates et. al. found that legal representations of non-stranger rape conceptualized it as consensual sex, thereby constructing victims as participants in consensual sex.
Susan Ehrlich
Dominant discourses, violence against women and self-imposed identities It is not only the legal system, however, that has some difficulty in characterizing non-stranger rape in a language of violence and abuse. Bergen (1996), for example, found that women used the term, “rape”, in partner relationships only to describe extremely violent sexual acts that made their partner’s behaviour unrecognizable to them. Likewise, Wood and Rennie (1994), based on open-ended interviews with women who had been raped by dates or acquaintances, showed that the women had great difficulty naming their experiences as rape, because, Wood and Rennie argue, the women saw two different ways of representing their sexual experiences – as rapes or as dates – but neither of these corresponded terribly well to the women’s own experiences. While the characterizations of non-stranger rape described by Bergen (1996) and Wood and Rennie (1994) occurred in interviews with researchers, what I describe below suggests that even women who are in court to seek compensation for sexual abuse can have difficulty representing themselves as victims of violent and abusive sex when their perpetrators are individuals they know and trust. The data I present in this section come from a civil trial involving sexual abuse.2 While my previous work (e.g., Ehrlich 2001) has focused on sexual assault trials within the criminal justice system, I have more recently turned to investigating comparable cases within the civil system because of the limited advocacy complainants seem to have in the criminal system. Within the Canadian criminal justice system, as is the case in all legal systems deriving from the English common law, complainants are not directly represented by lawyers of the state; rather, state lawyers, called Crown attorneys in Canada, represent the state and complainants assume the role of witnesses for the state. For a number of feminist legal theorists in both Canada and the United Kingdom, the lack of agency exercised by complainants who are merely witnesses for the state and not directly represented by the state is noteworthy – and problematic. Within the Canadian context, Busby (1999) comments on the heavy caseloads of Crown attorneys, precluding careful preparation of witnesses for trial. Complainants do not generally have any input regarding plea bargains; moreover, if an accused is acquitted, complainants have no involvement in determining whether an acquittal should be appealed or not. In Busby’s (1999: 268) words, ‘in law’s Official Version, a complainant has no interest in the outcome of criminal proceedings.’ Lees (1997) makes similar comments about complainants’ status within sexual assault trials in the British criminal justice system. Even more significant, perhaps, than the limited representation and advocacy complainants receive from prosecuting lawyers are the ideological 2. This case forms part of a larger corpus of civil trials that I am collecting and analyzing.
Sexual assault trials, discursive identities and institutional change
perspectives that they themselves embrace or embody on behalf of the state. Lees (1997: 57), for example, suggests that prosecuting lawyers in Britain are ‘inept at countering myths and prejudices about women’ put forth by defense lawyers; indeed, according to Lees, ‘they often share them.’ By contrast, complainants who seek damages for sexual abuse or sexual assault within the Canadian civil legal system have their own legal representation; indeed, they can be represented by lawyers who self-identify as feminists. As Sheehy (1994: 214) says of women seeking compensation for sexual harms against them: ‘In a tort suit the woman…has an attorney representing her own interests, and not simply the Crown as overworked and sometimes ambivalent advocate for the state.’ Sheehy (1994: 205) further elaborates on the agency women are able to exercise within the civil system (in contrast to the criminal justice system) in the following excerpt: A woman who has been raped may have many reasons to pursue compensation. It may be the most empowering action available to her, especially if the criminal process has derailed, as it so often does. Compensation may be the only process which she gets to drive, instead of respond to; it may be the only time when the legal system focuses on her needs; and it may be the only state acknowledgement of a wrong against her that she will receive. (emphasis in original)
Given, as Sheehy remarks, that civil trials constitute a forum that victims of violence seem to ‘drive, instead of respond to’ with lawyers that represent their own interests, I have speculated that they may also provide a site for the emergence of counter-hegemonic or alternative discourses regarding violence against women, that is, sense-making frameworks that do not conceptualize and represent nonstranger rape and abuse in the language of consensual sex. Marciano v. Metzger & Metzger (1985): The complainant in the case that forms the focus of this section was a victim of incest. (See Ehrlich (2007) for further discussion of this case.) The incest began for K.M. (i.e., the complainant) as a young child with her father fondling her on a regular basis; after the age of ten or eleven the incest involved sexual intercourse.3 K.M.’s cooperation and silence were elicited by various threats that the complainant had reason to take seriously, according to a number of judicial rulings. She was also rewarded with soft drinks, potato chips and money. Over time, K.M.’s father gave her the responsibility for initiating the sexual contact. The complainant tried several times to disclose the abuse but without success. At age ten or eleven she tried to tell her mother and at age sixteen she told a high school guidance counselor, who referred her to a school psychologist. Her father forced her to withdraw her accusations to both the school psychologist and a lawyer for the local school board. Other disclosures that she made 3. The facts of the case are taken from the Ontario Court of Appeal and Supreme Court of Canada judicial rulings.
Susan Ehrlich
after leaving her parents’ house amounted to nothing until she attended meetings of a self-help group for incest victims and realized that her psychological problems as an adult were caused by her experience as a victim of incest. With additional therapy, the complainant came to realize that it was her father who was at fault and not the complainant herself. In 1985, at the age of 28, the complainant sued her father for damages arising from the incest and for breach of a parent’s fiduciary duty. A jury found that the defendant had sexually assaulted the complainant and assessed damages at $50,000. The trial judge ruled, however, that the action was barred because the statute of limitations period for civil cases had expired. This ruling was subsequently overturned by the Supreme Court of Canada and the complainant was awarded the damages. K.M.’s lawyer began her direct testimony by asking questions of K.M. that imputed to K.M. allegations and complaints regarding her father’s sexual assault/ sexual abuse. Consider (1) below, which is illustrative:
1. Q: You allege in your statement of claim that your father sexually assaulted you. A: Yes. Q: That he sexually abused you for a period of approximately eight years. A: Yes. Q: How old were you when your sexual abuse began? A: I believe I was eight.
In this example, the lawyer’s first two questions seek confirmation that K.M. has made allegations to the effect that her father sexually assaulted and sexually abused her; both of these questions are confirmed by K.M. The third question then treats the sexual abuse as presupposed information – i.e., information whose truth is taken for granted – as is indicated by its presence in the temporal clause ‘when your sexual abuse began.’4 Subsequent questioning by the lawyer also presupposes that sexual abuse has taken place. In (2), for example, the lawyer presupposes that K.M.’s father had begun to sexually abuse her and inquires as to how it began.5 2. Q: How did it happen that your father began to sexually abuse you; how did it begin? A: When I was about eight I was sitting on the couch with him, Mom wasn’t home and he had just sent the other kids to bed.
4. Temporal clauses have been identified as presupposition triggers, that is, as syntactic constructions that are sources of presuppositions (Levinson 1983). 5. The Wh-construction in English is conventionally interpreted such that the information after the Wh-word (e.g., What, Where, How) is interpreted as presupposed, that is, is already known to be the case (Yule 1996: 28-29).
Sexual assault trials, discursive identities and institutional change
Q: Where was your mother? A: At work doing twine and he was asking me, after the kids went to bed, if I knew what different parts of the body were called. Q: And did you? A: No. Q: And did he tell you? A: Yes. Q: And what did he say to you? A: He said that – He pointed between my legs and said that that was called a cunt.
While it is hardly surprising that K.M.’s lawyer names her father’s behaviour as sexual abuse and, once K.M. confirms this designation, treats the abuse as information that should be given information and thus taken for granted within the discursive space of the trial, what is perhaps surprising is that K.M. very rarely named her experiences with her father as sexual abuse or sexual assault. For example, in the following sequence about K.M. disclosing her father’s abuse to a high school guidance counselor and to a doctor at the Kitchener-Waterloo hospital, K.M. twice describes the abuse as ‘my father/dad was having sex with me’ (italicized below).
3. Q: Now then, we know that you told your mother what you did when you say you were about eleven? A: Yes. Q: And then later did you have another conversation with some other person and made a disclosure? A: Yes. I told my school guidance counselor when I was in grade 10. Q: What was his name? A: Mr. Rys. Q: And he was your counselor at high school? A: Yes. Q: What school did you go to? A: St Mary’s High School. Q: How did it come to be that you were engaged in a conversation with Mr. Rys? A: I saw him in the school and I thought he seemed like such a nice man that I could trust him, so I didn’t want to stay at home any more and so I went to tell him to see if he could get me out of there. Q: What did you tell him? ----→ A: That my father was having sex with me. Q: This is when you were in Grade 10, that would be 1973.
Susan Ehrlich
A: Yes. Q: And what did Mr. Rys do? A: He phoned my father. Q: And were you also referred to the Kitchener-Waterloo hospital? A: Yes. Q: And did you see Dr. McKie? A: Yes. Q: And on how many occasions did you see him? A: About three times. Q: And I understand that when you saw him he asked you questions about what happened. A: Yes. Q: And what did you tell him? ----→ A: That my dad was having sex with me.
While in both italicized sentences above K.M.’s father is the referent of the subject noun phrase (i.e., my father, my dad) and thus interpreted as taking a more active role in the activity (Eckert and McConnell-Ginet 2003), it is also the case that the predicate representing the activity, ‘have sex with X’, is not one that conjures up images of coerced or forced sex. Rather, it is a predicate that denotes consensual sex. One piece of evidence for this claim is the fact that the predicate can occur in reciprocal constructions such as ‘They had sex’ and ‘They had sex with each other.’ That is, ‘have sex with X’ is a predicate designating an activity that is ‘engaged in by two people on the basis of mutual desire’ (Cameron and Kulick 2003). Indeed, K.M. also uses one of these reciprocal constructions, ‘we had sex’, in representing events that took place between her and her father at a point in time when her mother was hospitalized for childbirth. Consider example (4) below:
4. Q: Was your mother hospitalized for childbirth for the children that were born after you, do you know? A: She had to go into the hospital to have Rosie, I remember that. Q: And when she went into hospital to have Rosie where were you? A: Well, the night she went in I was sleeping with my girlfriend in a tent and Dad came to the tent to get me to tell me to come home and then I had to spend one night with my Dad in bed and then make his coffee and his lunch the next morning. Q: How old were you then? A: I think ten or eleven. Q: Rosie was born in 1968. A: Yes. Q: You were born in 1957?
Sexual assault trials, discursive identities and institutional change
A: Yes. Q: And you said you had to sleep in bed. Whose bed did you have to sleep in? A: My Dad’s. Q: Did anything occur that night? ----> A: Yes. We had sex and then I had to go to sleep and I was scared that one of the kids might see me in there.
In using the reciprocal construction, ‘We had sex’, K.M. is highlighting the mutually- consensual aspect of the activity, and not its forced, coercive nature. In addition to using this reciprocal construction to represent the sexual abuse she suffered at the hands of her father, K.M. also used the construction ‘have sex with X’ with herself as the referent of the subject noun phrase (as opposed to her father as the referent of the subject noun phrase as in (3) above). Consider example (5) below: 5.
---→
Q: You met Mr. Miersma in November of 1983. A: Yes. Q: And what did you think of that relationship? A: He was a very nice man. He was very kind and he liked to just talk. Q: And did you make a disclosure to him? A: Yes. Q: Do you know when it was in the relationship that you made a disclosure to him? A: I think it was a month after I had known him. Q: Why did you make this disclosure to him? A: Because I didn’t want to lose him and I wanted him to know right away what I had done so if he didn’t love me or didn’t think he could love me he could leave right away. Q: What had you done? A: I had had sex with my dad. Q: Now, having made this disclosure to Mr. Miersma did he make some suggestions to you, following which you made some enquiries?
As stated above, the referent of the subject of ‘have sex with X’ is interpreted as taking a more active role in the activity than the referent of the object of the preposition ‘with’. Thus, in this articulation of the events, K.M. represents herself as an active participant. While it could be argued that K.M. is the topic of this sequence (she is being asked what she did, not what her father did) and hence information structuring factors would account for K.M.’s position as subject (i.e., discourse topics often assume subject position), there are alternative ways of representing K.M. as subject. For example, K.M. could have responded with ‘I had been sexually
Susan Ehrlich
abused by my dad’ rather than ‘I had had sex with my dad’, thereby maintaining herself as topic (i.e., in subject position) and depicting the forced and abusive nature of the events. Perhaps the most striking – and disturbing – dimension of K.M.’s representation of the sexual abuse she endured was the fact that her representations of socalled consensual sex with other men were articulated in precisely the same way. That is, in keeping with the very restricted discourses available for depicting violence against women, and non-stranger rape and abuse in particular, K.M. employed the language of consensual sex for both sexual abuse and so-called consensual sex. Consider examples (6) and (7) below, where K.M. is describing relationships that she had with men other than her father.
6. Q: Following your separation from your husband did you associate with other men? A: Yes. Q: And would you describe your association with these other men? ---→ A: We had sex. Q: You say “we had sex”. You had sex with other men? A: Yes. Q: With what frequency? A: Some were married, so whenever they could come to my house they would come, so it always varied. 7. Q: Are you frightened of your father today? A: Yes. Q: Are you able to have a reasonably healthy and meaningful relationships with men? You told us about the relationship with Peter being a good one, but before that had you had any reasonably healthy and meaningful relationship? ---→ A: I could have sex with them. I don’t know what “healthy” -- Q: Let’s deal with your relationship with Steven. You told us you didn’t love him when you accepted his proposal of marriage; you didn’t love him when you married him.
Notice that in both of these examples – where K.M. describes sexual relations with men other than her father – she uses constructions identical to those she has used in depicting her sexual abuse: the reciprocal construction ‘We had sex’ and the ‘have sex with X’ construction with K.M. as the subject noun phrase ‘I could have sex with them.’ A problem to emerge from these data concerns the fact that a woman who is seeking compensation for sexual abuse does not generally represent herself as a
Sexual assault trials, discursive identities and institutional change
victim of coercive and forced sex but rather as a participant in consensual sex. For Coates, Bavelas and Gibson (1994), whose work I have cited earlier, this problem is, in part, a discursive one. For example, they speculated that the tendency for judges to describe non-stranger rape in the language of consensual sex was, in part, the result of the absence of a well-developed sense-making framework or discourse (what they called an ‘interpretive repertoire’) for the conceptualization and description of non-stranger rape. In the case of K.M., given that she was not raped or abused by a stranger with a weapon (i.e., her situation did not match the prototypical case of rape), she no doubt had difficulty deploying a language of abuse, force and violence, not recognizing her experiences in this language. Moreover, Gavey (1999) has made the point that the dominant (and restricted) discourses about women, men and sexuality under discussion here are as much about normative heterosexuality as they are about rape. To elaborate, when dominant notions of heterosexual sex include women ‘as the passive recipients of an active male desire’ (Gavey 1999: 60), then on a continuum of victimization, non-stranger abuse (such as that experienced by K.M.) may have more in common with such representations of normative heterosexuality than it does with stranger rape. Indeed, this commonality may account for K.M. representing her experiences of sexual abuse in precisely the same terms that she represented her experiences of ‘normal’ heterosexual sex. Certainly, the process of naming an experience as sexual abuse is an important and complex aspect of coming to terms with the abuse, but I am suggesting something further: that the lack of a well-developed discourse for representing sexual abuse by non-strangers whom women trust probably does not facilitate this process of formulation and naming. (See also Wood and Rennie (1994) for discussion.) Counter-hegemonic discourses and other-imposed identities For critical discourse analysts such as Fairclough and Wodak (1997: 258), the relationship between ‘a particular discursive event’ and ‘social structure(s) which frame it’ is a dialectical one. That is, ‘discourse is socially constitutive as well as socially shaped’ and ‘it is constitutive both in the sense that it helps to sustain and reproduce the social status quo, and in the sense that it contributes to transforming it’ (emphasis mine). Consistent with Coates et. al., who advocate the development of sense-making frameworks that do not treat non-stranger sexual assault as consensual sex, Fairclough and Wodak point to the transformative effects of discourse. Crucial to the problem, then, of discourses that ‘normalize’ unwanted sex perpetrated by men women know and often trust is the development of counter-hegemonic discourses. Thus, in line with Fairclough’s (2003: 124) claim that discourses not only describe the world as it is, but ‘are also projective…and tied in to projects
Susan Ehrlich
to change the world in particular directions’, in the remainder of this paper I describe the emergence of a feminist discourse for representing non-stranger rape in the legal system, that is, a sense-making framework that does not conceptualize and represent non-stranger rape and abuse in the language of consensual sex. Kelpin v. Alfred (1996): The examples of an alternative discourse or framework for making sense of non-stranger abuse come from a 1996 civil trial involving a complainant, whom I will refer to as J.K., who sued a physician for damages for sexual assault and breach of trust.6 (See also Ehrlich 2002 for some discussion of this case.) The complainant had a long history of sexual abuse that preceded the sexual abuse perpetrated upon her by the medical doctor, Alfred. She was sexually abused by her father from approximately four years of age to twelve. She was raped by a friend’s brother at fourteen years of age and by a tennis pro in the Bahamas when she was seventeen. The incidents under scrutiny within the civil trial analyzed here occurred over a four-year period, from 1972 to 1976, during which time the complainant visited the doctor thirty-six times. During each of these visits, the defendant allegedly gave the complainant an internal gynecological examination. The complainant reported that these examinations were inordinately long and that they were conducted with her completely in the nude. She felt that many of the internal examinations were unnecessary and done by the doctor for his personal sexual gratification. During several of the internal examinations, the complainant also reported that the doctor manipulated her clitoris and brought her to orgasm, and did breast examinations with his full hand rather than with his finger tips. The testimony of the complainant was found to be credible by the judge and she was awarded $20,000 in general damages and $10,000 in aggravated damages. In the examples that follow, I focus on the presuppositions embedded in the questions asked by the complainant’s lawyer and, in particular, the way that these presuppositions represent the events under investigation as violent and aggressive sexual acts. It is significant that, while much of this information is new information or a new characterization of information within the context of the trial, it is treated by the complainant’s lawyer as presupposed, given information.7 By introducing claims in the form of presuppositions, Fairclough (2003: 40) argues that a speaker/ writer is signalling that the material ‘has been said or written elsewhere, that one’s interlocutors have indeed heard it or read it elsewhere’ or, put another way, that it is part of a stock of mutually accessible, cultural background knowledge. Within the context of this trial, then, the fact that the complainant’s lawyer characterizes 6. The facts of this case are taken from the trial judge’s decision. 7. Note that this contrasts with examples (1) and (2) above, where the lawyer first introduces the sexually-abusive nature of the father’s behaviour as new information, waits for it to be confirmed by the complainant and only then treats the information as presupposed or given.
Sexual assault trials, discursive identities and institutional change
the doctor’s behaviour with the complainant as violent and abusive and that these characterizations are presupposed may be an attempt on the part of the lawyer to ‘naturalize’ a counter-hegemonic, feminist discourse. More specifically, through the presuppositions embodied in her questions, the complainant’s lawyer introduced terms and categories into the discursive space of the trial that often transformed the complainant’s own characterizations of her experience.8 In particular, the lawyer used terms in her questioning of the complainant that made a sharp distinction between consensual sex, on the one hand, and non-consensual sex, on the other hand. Moreover, non-consensual sex was categorized, through the presuppositions of lexical and grammatical choices, as violent, abusive and involving force, even when the perpetrator was someone the complainant knew and trusted and there was no evidence of physical violence or the threat of physical violence. Consider example (8) below, where the lawyer is questioning the complainant about the way the defendant conducted pelvic examinations. At this point, the complainant has not characterized the doctor’s behaviour as sexual abuse or sexual assault but has said that she felt discomfort with the way the doctor conducted both breast and pelvic examinations. When asked why she kept going back to see the doctor in spite of her discomfort, the complainant said various things: that she didn’t know that what he did was wrong, that she felt powerless and that she thought it was her fault because she had large breasts. Notice that in the first question of (8), then, that the lawyers asks about what the complainant now says was wrong with the examinations.
8. Q: Is there anything about the way in which these pelvic examinations were conducted which you now say was wrong? JK: Yes. Q: Tell me what those factors are? JK: I believe I should have been provided with covering, I believe that I should have been -- it should have been explained to me why I had to get undressed and that I understood why I was getting an examination. And I believe he should have done a pelvic examination in a proper way. Q: By which you mean? JK: To do either a Pap smear or check my abdominal area for whatever reason and not do it in the fashion that he did it in. Q: And have you explained to us the fashion in which he’s done it? JK: Yes. ---→ Q: Did anyone else force you to engage in non-consensual sex during your teenage years? 8. This was also something observed within the first set of trial data presented in the paper.
Susan Ehrlich
What concludes this example is a question from the lawyer inquiring if ‘anyone else’ had forced the complainant to engage in non-consensual sex. Here the lawyer reformulates the complainant’s previous descriptions of the defendant’s behaviour as instances of ‘forced, non-consensual sex’, while at the same time moving onto another topic (i.e., the existence of other perpetrators of non-consensual sex during her teenage years). And, crucial for my purposes is the fact that this characterization is presupposed by the lawyer’s question; specifically, her use of the phrase ‘anyone else’ presupposes the existence of a previous perpetrator of forced, nonconsensual sex, i.e., the defendant. Example (9) begins with a question about incidents of non-consensual sexual intercourse that occurred between the ages of 12 and 16.
9. Q: Between the ages of 12 and 16, did you have any non-consensual sexual intercourse? JK: Yes. Q: Can you tell me about that? JK: Yes. One time I was seeing this -- before George, I was seeing this boy by the name of Larry and I was waiting for him at his house and his mom said that I could wait downstairs until he came home because him and his brother had the basement, that’s where their rooms were and a very large rec room was. And I was waiting for him and his brother came home and just had sex with me. Q: How old were you? JK: Just before -- just before I met George. So I was -- just the same year that I met George. Q: And how did you feel after this event? JK: Just completely numb, without feelings. --→ Q: Was there any acts of violence, aside from the act of the sexual intercourse, were there any physical acts of violence that occurred during this occasion? JK: No. We weren’t even undressed, it was very fast.
In this example, the complainant says that she did have non-consensual sex between the ages of 12 and 16 and then proceeds to describe one such incident. The lawyer then asks, in the underlined question, whether there were any acts of violence ‘aside from the act of the sexual intercourse.’ It is presupposed by this question that non-consensual sex is in itself an act of violence, irrespective of other acts of physical violence that may or may not have occurred simultaneously. And, it is my contention (following Fairclough 2003) that in representing this proposition as presupposed, the lawyer is signaling that it is more generally understood that nonconsensual sex is, by definition, violent.
Sexual assault trials, discursive identities and institutional change
In example (10), we see the judge explicitly drawing attention to – and objecting to – similar presuppositions conveyed by the lawyer’s questions. Example (10) occurs in response to the final question of example (8). That is, in response to the question, ‘Did anyone else force you to engage in non-consensual sex during your teenage years?’ the complainant describes an incident of non-consensual sex that occurred while she was vacationing in the Bahamas. 10. 1 JK: 2
When I was on a holiday in the Bahamas, I was -- I had met a tennis coach there and he also had sex with me without my permission. 3 Q: Can you expand upon the circumstances that gave rise to this event? 4 JK: Well, he offered me something to drink in his car, and I believe that we were supposed to be taking some kind of trip 5 around the island, it’s not that big of an island. And instead 6 we ended up at a hotel where he -- I believe where he was the 7 area -- where he was a tennis coach. And then I was in his 8 room and then the next thing I know he was telling me to get 9 into the bed and we were having sex. 10 (some intervening turns) 11 Q: Had you known this tennis coach for very long? 12 JK: No. 13 Q: Did you meet him again afterwards, after the sexual event? 14 JK: I believe I saw him on one other occasion after. 15 Q: Is that all? 16 JK: Yes. --→ 17 Q: What was your reaction to the sexual activity that was forced on you? 18 JK: Just -- I didn’t just - 19 The Court: She didn’t say he forced it on her, Ms. V., she said without 20 her permission. 21 Q: Excuse me. Let me rephrase. 22 The Court: If you’re going to lead her, you better get it correct. 23 Q: Was there any physical force applied by the tennis coach in 24 prevailing upon you to have the sex? 25 JK: No. I was just scared and just did what he wanted me to do.
A few turns after the complainant characterizes sex with the tennis coach as ‘without [her] permission’ in line 2, the lawyer recasts this formulation – in the form of a presupposed proposition – as ‘sexual activity that was forced upon [the complainant]’ in the question of line 17. The judge objects to the lawyer’s version of events in
Susan Ehrlich
line 17, challenging her equating of non-consensual sex with forced sex. While the lawyer ultimately alters her question in response to the judge’s objection, her initial question, ‘What was your reaction to the sexual activity forced upon you?’ characterizes the events between the complainant and the tennis coach as ‘forced’ sex. In other words, the lawyer signals through her question in line 17 that ‘sex without permission’ is equivalent to ‘forced sex’ and that this equivalence is a generally understood one. Indeed, even in her reformulated question in line 23–24, the lawyer refers to physical force, suggesting the existence of other kinds of force (e.g., the force of power and authority) that could accompany non-consensual sex. To summarize, the events under scrutiny in the civil trial analyzed in this section concern a complainant who was sexually abused by the defendant, a medical doctor, on numerous visits to his office over a period of four years. And, like the complainant of the previous trial described in this paper, J.K. did not generally position herself as the victim of forced sex or abusive sex or sex that was inherently violent by virtue of its non-consensual nature. Indeed, much of the time the complainant described herself as a participant in consensual sex. Consider example (9) where the complainant characterizes her experiences with Larry’s brother as ‘And his brother came home and just had sex with me.’ (This is italicized in the example.) And, in example (10), she says about the tennis coach: ‘He was telling me to get into the bed and we were having sex.’ (This is also italicized.) As argued above, the fact that the complainant at times characterizes her experiences in this way is perhaps testimony to the power of the restricted discursive frameworks available for representing sexual abuse by people victims know and may trust. Having not been raped by a stranger with a weapon, the complainant may have difficulty deploying a language of assault and violence to describe her experiences. And, for the lack of a better-developed discourse for describing non-stranger sexual abuse, she often describes her experiences using the language of consensual sex. Conclusion A recurring theme in the work of language and law scholars has been the way that lay litigants’ voices are silenced or rendered unrecognizable once they enter the legal system. For example, much research on courtroom discourse (e.g., Woodbury 1984; Walker 1987; Ehrlich 2001) has highlighted the way that lawyers’ questions – especially in cross-examination – structure and constrain witnesses’ testimony, preventing the emergence of witnesses’ own stories and own voices. Indeed, because the narratives that emerge in trial discourse are determined to a large extent by the questions lawyers ask of witnesses (e.g., their controlling of topics, their selective reformulating of witnesses’ responses, etc.), Cotterill (2002: 149)
Sexual assault trials, discursive identities and institutional change
argues that courtroom narratives are best characterized as ‘dual-authored texts’, ‘with the emphasis on the voice of the lawyer as the primary and authoritative teller.’ And, one of the corollaries of such an argument is that witnesses are best served when their narratives are unmediated by the talk of legal professionals or legal conventions (Conley and O’Barr 1990; Taslitz 1999). Like the research described above, the primary focus of this paper has been the force of dominant discourses in structuring the identities of lay litigants in legal settings. At the same time, this paper has also demonstrated that identities can be mediated and structured by alternative, counter-hegemonic discourses. More specifically, I have argued that the complainant’s lawyer in the Kelpin v. Alfred trial recontextualized the complainant’s version of events (at times represented as consensual sex) within an alternative, feminist framework: one which recognized the abusive, violent and forced nature of non-consensual sex even when it is perpetrated by someone the victim knows (and trusts) and even when the victim ostensibly colludes with her abuser. That is, the lawyer in this case transformed the complainant’s narrative into one that was more resonant with the complainant’s experiences of abuse and more consistent with the complainant’s efforts to seek compensation from the defendant. Indeed, it is questionable whether an unmediated narrative from the complainant would have achieved the same result. As noted earlier, Shotter and Gergen (1989: Preface) view discourses as not only ‘establishing a set of constraining boundaries’ on identity construction, but also ‘an array of enabling potentials.’ In line with this view, I am suggesting that the articulation of an alternative, feminist understanding of non-stranger sexual assault within the public space of a trial enables and facilitates the creation of new kinds of subject positions (both self- and other-imposed) for women violated and abused by men they know and trust. Moreover, I have suggested that the presupposed status of this feminist sense-making framework (and the concomitant subject positions it creates) is significant because it functions to naturalize such a framework, that is, to represent it as something that is more generally understood and accepted within the speech community or culture. Because representations of identities and experiences will always be mediated in some way by culturally-available discourses, the attempt to naturalize a feminist, counter-hegemonic discourse may have significant implications for the legal system’s treatment of non-stranger sexual abuse and assault. References Bergen, R.K. (1996) Wife Rape: Understanding the Response of Surviviors and Service Providers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Susan Ehrlich Busby, K. (1999) “Not a victim until a conviction is entered”: Sexual violence prosecutions and legal “truth” in Elizabeth Comack (ed.), Locating Law: Race/Class/Gender Connections. Halifax, Nova Scotia: Fernwood Publishing. Butler, J. (1990) Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. London: Routledge. Cameron, D. (1997) ‘Theoretical debates in feminist linguistics: Questions of sex and gender’ in Ruth Wodak (ed.), Gender and Discourse. London: Sage. Coates, L., Bavelas, J. and Gibson J. (1994) ‘Anomalous language in sexual assault trial judgements.’ Discourse & Society 5: 189--206. Coates, L. and Wade, A. (2004) ‘Telling it like it isn’t: Obscuring perpetrator responsibility for violent crime.’ Discourse & Society 15: 499–526. Conley, John & O’Barr, William (1990) Rules versus Relationships: The Ethnography of Legal Discourse. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Cotterill, Janet (2002) “Just one more time…”: Aspects of intertextuality in the trials of O.J. Simpson’ in Janet Cotterill (ed.) Language in the Legal Process. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Eckert, P. and McConnell-Ginet, S. (2003) Language and Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ehrlich, S. (2001) Representing Rape: Language and Sexual Consent. London: Routledge. Ehrlich, S. (2002) ‘(Re)contextualizing complainants’ accounts of sexual assault.’ Forensic Linguistics 9: 193–121. Ehrlich, S. (2007) ‘Normative discourses and representations of coerced sex’ in J. Cotterill (ed.) The Language of Sexual Crime. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Estrich, S. (1987) Real Rape. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Fairclough, Norman. (2003) Analyzing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research, London: Routledge. Fairclough, Norman and Wodak, Ruth (1997) ‘Critical discourse analysis’ in T. A. van Dijk (ed.) Discourse as Social Interaction. London: Sage. Gavey, Nicola. (1999) ‘”I wasn’t raped, but…”: Revisiting definitional problems in sexual victimization’ in S. Lamb (ed) New Versions of Victims: Feminists Struggle with the Concept, New York: New York University Press. Foucault, M. (1972) The Archeology of Knowledge and the Discourse on Language. New York: Pantheon Books. Lees, S. (1997) Ruling Passions: Sexual Violence, Reputation, and the Law. Buckingham: Open University Press. Levinson, S. (1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sheehy, Elizabeth (1994) ‘Compensation for women who have been raped’ in J. Roberts and R. Mohr (eds) Sexual Assault: A Decade of Legal and and Social Change. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Shotter, J. and Gergen, K. (1989) Texts of Identity. London: Sage Publications. Taslitz, A. (1999) Rape and the Culture of the Courtroom. New York: New York University Press. Yule, G. (1996) Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. West, C. and Zimmerman, D. (1987) ‘Doing gender.’ Gender and Society 1: 25--51. Wood, Linda and Rennie, Heather. (1994) ‘Formulating rape: The discursive construction of victims and villains.’ Discourse & Society, 5: 125–148. Walker, Anne Graffam (1987). ‘Linguistic manipulation, power and the legal setting’ in Leah Kedar (ed.), Power through Discourse. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex.
Sexual assault trials, discursive identities and institutional change
Woolard, Kathryn. (forthcoming). ‘Bystanders and the linguistic construction of identity in face-to-back communication’ in Peter Auer and William Kallmeyer (eds.) Social Identity and Communicative Styles. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
The representation of PLWHAs and the dangerous ‘other’ Lean, Mei Li & Lee, Stella Meng Hui
University of Malaya; Taylor’s College Petaling Jaya, Malaysia
This article is an attempt to analyse the identity construction and the discourse representation of People Living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHAs) and the group of people associated with the disease, Acquired Immuno-Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS). The second group of people here will be referred to as the Dangerous ‘Other’ in this article. The data is extracted from TIME magazine between 1983 and 2004. Adhering to the Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) paradigm as constructed by Fairclough (1992a, 1992b, 1995a, 1995b, 2003), the article investigates how the media in the advent of disseminating information on AIDS, have “recontextualised” scientific discourse as well as the representation of PLWHAs and the group of people known as the Dangerous ‘Other’ (e.g. homosexuals, prostitutes, drug addicts). The results from the intertextual analysis indicate that the representation of PLWHAs is constructed within the paradigm of “innocent” victims versus “Guilty” victims. As for the Dangerous ‘Other’, they are ‘polarized’ (van Dijk, 1998) – We are Good and They are Bad – resulting in a positive self-representation and negative other-presentation to the public.
Key words: Recontextualisation, AIDS, Representation Introduction This article is an attempt to analyse the identity construction and representation of People Living with HIV/AIDS (henceforth referred to as PLWHAs), and the group of people associated with the disease1 (henceforth referred to as PAWD) Acquired Immuno-Deficiency Syndrome (henceforth referred to as AIDS).
1. In this study, the term ‘the group of people associated with the AIDS disease’ refers to those from the high-risk groups (i.e. homosexuals, intravenous drug users, prostitutes).
Lean, Mei Li & Lee, Stella Meng Hui
Since the 1980s, attention to the AIDS virus (henceforth referred to as HIV), and AIDS has moved from the medical to media discourse, and this ‘paradigmatic shift’ inevitably creates new forms of subjectivity, new forms of representation (Zuraidah Mohd Don and Lean, 2002a). Patton (1990: 26) surmises that “the emergence of media experts has increased the gap between the producers and consumers of scientific knowledge”. In their efforts to translate science, reporters have fallen prey to elisions and simplification, resulting in distorted scientific “facts” and their social implications (Patton, 1990). Zuraidah Mohd Don and Lean (2002b) both concur with Patton (1990) that the media appropriate, organise and project certain representations of AIDS, certain versions of scientific knowledge according to their own purpose. It exemplifies how the media ‘recontextualise’ scientific discourse, thus, bringing to light that in the process of recontextualisation, scientific discourse “can be appropriated and transformed in diverse and unpredictable ways from the perspective of those who are reconstructing it” (Chouliaraki and Fairclough, 1999: 45). Thus, the aim in this study is to explore the fundamental part the print media play in constructing the different identities of PLWHAs and PAWD, particularly at how there is implicit boundary maintenance of Us versus Them.2 Background First recognised in 1981, AIDS originally appeared focussed on the homosexual community. The early years were defined by confusion about how the disease is acquired and by the politics of prevention and treatment. It did not help either that the first five cases of AIDS patients were homosexuals (Hunting for Hidden Killers, 1983), leading to the disease being labelled as the ‘gay plague’ (Curtis and Taket, 1996). In addition, the fact that the legendary Hollywood icon, Rock Hudson, who represented the “old-fashioned American virtues” (Clarke, 1985), disclosed that he was suffering from AIDS (Treichler, 1996), and that he was also a homosexual, further established the notion that AIDS is a homosexual disease. However, many assumptions were shattered in 1991, when basketball legend Magic Johnson revealed that he contracted HIV through unprotected heterosexual sex. Suddenly, everyone understands that AIDS does not discriminate; neither race nor gender, nor sexual orientation provides any protection. New treatments have lengthened lives, and education has helped slow transmission, but a true remedy remains elusive. 2. This term ‘Us versus Them’ is made popular by Teun van Dijk (1998: 25) to describe group ideologies involving the representation of Self and Others.
The representation of PLWHAs and the dangerous ‘other’
Discrimination and stigma are closely linked together in the AIDS context, particularly for PLWHAs and PAWD. According to Goffman (1963), a person with a stigma is not quite human. Goffman adds that it is a socially constructed deviance label and a culturally relative construction. This stigma is enhanced if the person possesses a dangerous contagious disease (Jones et al., 1984; Alonzo and Reynolds, 1996). For instance, in this study, PLWHAs and PAWD are stigmatised owing to the disease they are carrying. Furthermore, the stigma is also greater for those people whose condition originates from his own behaviour (De Jong, 1980; Jones et al., 1984; Crandall and Moriarty, 1995). This burden of stigmatisation is brought upon by the belief that AIDS is the punishment or deserved consequence of immoral behaviour (Albert, 1986; King, 1989; Lupton, 1993; Murphy, 1994). Victims of HIV are grouped into ‘innocent’ or the ‘guilty party (Street, 1988; Colby and Cook, 1991; Lupton, 1993; Green and Sobo, 2000). Beliefs also emphasise the ‘endogenous nature of HIV infection, explaining the common distinctions between ‘innocent’ and guilty’ PLWHAs (Gwyn, 2002). For instance, the telecast by BBC 1 (1800, 12 October 1987, as quoted in Williams, 1999; 97) reported on the “pleas from people who got the AIDS virus by accident”. The newsreader explained that haemophiliacs face the threat of AIDS “through no fault of their own” (Ibid). Such reporting implies that homosexual men and intravenous drug users are to blame if they contract the virus (Willians, 1999). Herek (1990) adds that people who contract AIDS through blood transfusion do not meet the deviance criterion for stigmatisation, thus are ‘innocent’ or ‘blameless’ victims. Mothers, children and haemophiliacs especially, are routinely referred to as ‘innocent parties’ or ‘innocent bystanders’ (Miller et al, 1998). Children are seen as innocent and undeserving of illness, especially an illness so stigmatised with negative implications and laced with a perception that the victim “got what he deserved” (Polinko et al., 1995: 821). Subsequently, sympathy goes to mothers and children, the haemophiliacs and those who contracted AIDS through blood transfusion, which were contaminated before the virus was even isolated (Watney, 1996). In the early days, AIDS was described by reference to groups whose symptoms were recorded, the ‘4Hs’: homosexuals, Haitians, haemophiliacs, and heroin injectors (Miller et al., 1998; Lemelle, Harrington, and LeBlanc, 2000). AIDS is seen even up to today by some as an illness confined to marginal groups in society: intravenous drug users, homosexuals, and prostitutes (Kennamer and Honnold, 1995; Williams, 1999). Although the media have tried to bring the awareness that everyone is at risk, the association of AIDS with homosexuality and with sexually transmitted disease has proven more powerful than anticipated (Lupton, 1994; Gilman, 1996). The identification of susceptible ‘risk groups’, reinforced and repeated in numerous media accounts, had a profound effect on the popular image of HIV/AIDS, excluding those with the virus from the rest of society (Miller et al.,
Lean, Mei Li & Lee, Stella Meng Hui
1998). The term ‘risk group’ becomes a metaphor for ‘otherness’, and a community divided into ‘Us and Them’ (Ross, 1989). Theoretical background Analyses of the media representation of AIDS have tended to focus on metaphor and images which construct PLWHAs as ‘other’ (Clatts and Mutchler, 1989; Herzlich and Pierret, 1989; Sontag, 1991; Watney, 1989; Juhasz, 1990; Tambling, 1989; Lupton, 1991). Behind the creation of AIDS as a disease of the ‘other’ – whether focussed on homosexuals, intravenous drug users, prostitutes – lies, in Watney’s words, “the picture of a world carved up into ‘high-risk groups’, endlessly threatening to overwhelm the rest of the population” (Watney, 1989: 19). Valuable though this work on images and metaphors of AIDS is, it often neglects other forms of media representation that are available in Critical Discourse Analysis framework.3 Thus, this paper will choose to focus its analysis on one of the aforementioned forms of representation: representation of social actors. The analysis of the present study is drawn upon the work of Norman Fairclough (1992b, 1995a, 1995b, 2003). Adhering to the Critical Discourse Analysis paradigm as constructed by Fairclough, the article investigates how the media in the advent of disseminating information on AIDS, have ‘recontextualised’ scientific discourse in the representation of PLWHAs and PAWD. The study thus encompasses the analysis of the choices in the representation of social actors (participants). Fairclough (2003) charts the following variables as the choices available in the representation of social actors. However, he adds that van Leeuwen’s (1996) list is more extensive than his. The first variable is the inclusion or exclusion of social actors. Here, one examines which social actor is included and which are excluded. For those who are excluded, are the social actors suppressed (i.e. not included in the text at all), or backgrounded (i.e. mentioned somewhere in the text, but having to be inferred in one or more places). The second variable is the use of pronoun or noun. Fairclough states that social actors are sometimes realized as either a pronoun (‘I’, ‘he’, ‘we’, ‘you’, ‘they’, etc.) or as a noun. The following variable is concerned with the grammatical role of the social actor. The social actor can be realized as either a Participant in a clause (e.g. Actor, 3. Media representation can be analysed by looking at representations of social events, representation of process and the process types, representation of social actors, and representation of time and space.
The representation of PLWHAs and the dangerous ‘other’
Affected), within a Circumstance (e.g. in a preposition phrase, for instance ‘She walked towards John’), or as a possessive noun or pronoun (e.g. ‘Laura’s friend’, ‘our friend’). The fourth variable looks into the social actor as ‘activated’ or passivated’. The social actor is identified as either in the Processes (loosely, the one who does things and makes things happen), or as the Affected or Beneficiary (loosely, the one affected by processes). Hence, the social actor is considered ‘activated’ if he is the Actor in the processes, and is considered ‘passivated’ if the social agent is the Affected or Beneficiary. The fifth variable outlined by Fairclough is personalization or impersonalisation of the social actor. The social actor is considered to be represented personally when he is referred to as a specific individual or group or community. Alternatively, the social actor is deemed to be impersonalised if for instance a boy is referred to as ‘the star’. The next variable deals with how the social actor is represented: by name (e.g. ‘Stella Lee’) or in terms of class or category (e.g. ‘the lecturer’) or as a group (e.g. ‘the lecturers’, ‘lecturers’). The seventh and final variable as defined by Fairclough is the representation of classified social actors. In cases where social actors are classified, they can be represented specifically or generically. For example, ‘the lecturers’ may refer to a specific group of lecturers (e.g. those who work in a particular University), or to the class of lecturers in general, all lecturers. The sample chosen as the data for this study consists of a corpus of articles taken from an international magazine publication: TIME magazine. The corpus consists of 115 articles published by TIME magazine on AIDS since 1983 until 2004. The year 1983 was chosen as the starting year of compilation as that was the year when TIME magazine published its first article on AIDS. This paper is about the identity construction of PLWHAs and PAWD. Thus, the aim of this study is to examine how PLWHAs and PAWD, are represented as social actors using the choice of various variables4 as delineated by Fairclough (2003). These choices are socially significant, for instance with respect to the representation of agency, especially in terms of ‘Innocent’ versus ‘Guilty’ victims (PLWHAs), and The Representation of the ‘Other’ (‘We are Good’ and ‘They are Bad’) (PLWHAs and PAWD).
4. The variables listed are inclusion/exclusion, pronoun/noun, grammatical role, ‘activated’/’passivated’, personalized/impersonalized, name/classified, specific/generic.
Lean, Mei Li & Lee, Stella Meng Hui
Analysis The analysis of this study is divided into two parts. The first part will look into how PLWHAs are constructed as ‘Innocent’ or ‘Guilty’ victims. The second half of the study deals with both PLWHAs and PAWD, and how there is polarisation that occurs between Us and Them, leading to the representation of ‘We are Good’, and ‘They are Bad’. The construction of the ‘innocent’ and ‘guilty’ identities ‘Innocent’ victims The first extract (Extract 1) below is about how a young African boy who has AIDS, is given the task of spreading awareness on AIDS to the rest of the world, especially Africa. The social actors in the extract below, including the following extracts, are underlined, while the asterisk is used to signal suppression.5 Extract 1 NEWSMAKER: NKOSI JOHNSON The most powerful message can come from the un-likeliest messenger. When Nkosi Johnson, an 11-year-old South African with AIDS, walked into the stage at an international AIDS conference in Durban last year, he hardly seemed able to hold the microphone, let alone address 10,000 delegates. The shiny black suit he wore hung from a body ravaged by disease. The belt around his waist had six extra holes punched in it. He wore a diaper in case of diarrhoea. Lit by a fearsome spotlight, the tiny figure paused for a few seconds, took a deep breath and began. “Care for us and accept us – we are all human beings. We are normal. We have hands. We have feet. We can walk, we can talk, we have needs just like everyone else.” Nkosi Johnson died in June this year, aged 12. In sub-Saharan Africa, where 28 million people have HIV/AIDS, his brand of candour remains rare. But thanks in part to the dying boy’s speech, more people have begun to speak about AIDS rather than hide from it. This year the cacophony of South Africans questioning their government’s AIDS policies – and President Thabo Mbeki’s odd reluctance to accept the link between HIV and AIDS – grew louder. Across the continent groups began demanding cheaper or free antiretroviral drugs*. “Nkosi made a lot of adults think, ‘Well, if this little kid is open about his status, then surely we can take those bold steps,’” says Nkosi’s doctor Ashraf Coovadia. “He was incredibly brave.” 5.
Supression is a form of exclusion, where the social actor is not heard in the text at all.
The representation of PLWHAs and the dangerous ‘other’
Like most kids infected with AIDS*, Nkosi was born with it. He met his father for the first time at his mother’s funeral. Taken in as an infant by Gail Johnson, a middle-class white woman who met him while volunteering at a Johannesburg AIDS care centre, Nkosi lived a relatively normal childhood. He loved puzzles and cards. “He cheated like hell,” remembers Gail. When the former PR executive first enrolled Nkosi in primary school, they met opposition from some parents because of his HIV status. Mother and child went public with a complaint and won. Nkosi dreamed of lecturing on AIDS around the world. But after a vicious seizure last Christmas, he slipped into a coma and never recovered. (TIME, 2001–2, 31 Dec – 7 Jan, Vol.158, No.26, p.40–1)
The main social actor in Extract 1 above is Nkosi Johnson. He is represented in a desirable light, where he is never backgrounded and is highly personalised and individualised. Nkosi is constantly referred to in the text by his name and is also nominated whereby his personal details are made known (‘an 11-year-old South African with AIDS’). He is also referred to impersonally five times under the reference ‘tiny figure’, ‘dying boy’, ‘little kid’, ‘an infant’. The choice of categorising Nkosi impersonally all serve to represent him as an ‘innocent’ victim who is a young, helpless child who is dying through no fault of his own. Additionally, he is always referred to as an individual, except for two instances, where Nkosi is referred to as groups. The first instance is when Nkosi gave his speech and spoke on behalf of other AIDS victims (‘we’, ‘us’), and the second time is when the writer groups ‘most kids infected with AIDS’ with Nkosi, who is also born with the disease. This form of grouping is also termed as assimilation, or collectivisation to be more specific.6 In the second instance when Nkosi is grouped with other children with AIDS, there is evidence of suppression, as the parents who gave the children AIDS, including Nkosi, are not mentioned. But this does not mean the lessening of the children’s innocence, as they are passivised (‘Like most kids infected with AIDS*, Nkosi was born with it’). This shows that the children are ‘at the receiving end of ’ (van Leeuwen, 1996: 44) the unnamed agency, their parents. Subsequently, Nkosi is highly activated in the extract (‘walked into the stage’, ‘paused for a few seconds, took a deep breath and began’, ‘made a lot of adults think’, ‘dreamed of lecturing on AIDS’) and this serves to foreground Nkosi’s dynamic force in actively spreading awareness about AIDS and this also tends to highlight the point that he is an ‘innocent’ victim, since many ‘guilty’ victims will not be as active or vocal as Nkosi.
6. Social actors who are referred to as groups are termed as assimilation, which can be further categorised under aggregation and collectivisation. Aggregation quantifies the groups of participants by referring to them as statistics. As for collectivisation, the groups of participations are referred to as a mass noun or ‘a noun denoting a group of people’ (van Leeuwen, 1996: 49).
Lean, Mei Li & Lee, Stella Meng Hui
The second group of social actors in Extract 1, which helps in the construction of ‘the innocent’ are the people related to Nkosi. The first person is Nkosi’s doctor, Ashraf Coovadia. Ashraf is represented individually and personally and is nominated. He is personalised as ‘Nkosi’s doctor’ and thus, is entitled to be titulated, in the form of the standard title ‘Dr’. However, Ashraf ’s title is backgrounded and has to be inferred by the reader. By backgrounding Ashraf ’s title, the reporter probably wishes to portray Ashraf as both an expert and someone who is approachable. Ashraf is also activised in his representation, and more so when one of his statements actually frames another statement (‘“Nkosi made a lot of adults think, ‘Well, if this little kid is open about his status, then surely we can take those bold steps’”’). This is considered significant as Ashraf is considered as the expert, or a member of the elite group who is in the position to talk authoritatively by virtue of his status as a doctor. Consequently, Ashraf ’s statements stand to add more credence to Nkosi’s role and also Nkosi’s representation as an ‘innocent’ victim of the disease (‘open about his status’, ‘incredibly brave’). The other person socially related to Nkosi is Gail Johnson. Note that although Nkosi is Gail’s foster child, both of them share the same surname, Johnson. This lends itself to more credibility on Gail’s representation in the extract. Gail’s character is highly personalised and individualised, and she is also nominated. Gail is represented as a ‘mother’ to Nkosi and nominated semi-formally in terms of identity (‘a middle-class white woman’) and function (‘former PR executive’). She is highly activised in her representation as she is constantly portrayed as the active agent who is doing something (‘Gail Johnson, a middle-class white woman who met him while volunteering at a Johannesburg AIDS care centre…“He cheated like hell,” remembers Gail. When the former PR executive first enrolled Nkosi in primary school, they met opposition from some parents because of his HIV status. Mother and child went public with a complaint and won’). Gail’s activised representation serves to show that she is taking on a dynamic role in Nkosi’s life and also in AIDS-related work. Her representation and activised role is that of a protective mother who goes to great lengths to provide the best for her child. This also reinforces Nkosi’s representation as an ‘innocent’ victim who is still in need of protection from his ‘mother’. Another group of social actors identified in Extract 1 are those who have been made aware of AIDS by Nkosi, and the AIDS victims. This group of social actors are impersonalised, as they are categorised as ‘nameless characters who fulfil only passing, functional roles, and do not become a point of identification for the reader’ (van Leeuwen, 1996: 53). It is significant to note that the reporter chooses to personalise and nominate one person, President Thabo Mbeki, among this group of social actors. Thabo’s nomination is titulated in the form of honorification, ‘President’. This serves to foreground Thabo’s representation and backgrounds the rest of the social actors in this category. The impersonalisation of this group of people is in
The representation of PLWHAs and the dangerous ‘other’
terms of assimilation: aggregation (‘28 million people have HIV/AIDS’), and collectivisation (‘delegates’, ‘more people’, ‘South Africans’, ‘groups’). Ironically, this group of social actors are highly activised as they are represented as active agents of doing something (‘more people have begun to speak about AIDS rather than hide from it. This year the cacophony of South Africans questioning their government’s AIDS policies – and President Thabo Mbeki’s odd reluctance to accept the link between HIV and AIDS – grew louder. Across the continent groups began demanding cheaper or free antiretroviral drugs*). The activisation of this group of social actors is an indication that Nkosi has successfully managed to raise awareness among the South Africans, as they begin ‘to speak’ about the disease, ‘questioning’ the country’s policies, and ‘demanding’ for ‘cheaper or free antiretroviral drugs’. If Nkosi is considered or represented as a ‘guilty’ victim, he may surely not be so successful in his endeavour. Hence, this further foregrounds Nkosi’s status as an ‘innocent’ victim of AIDS. There is also a hint of suppression here as it is not mentioned from whom the ‘groups’ are demanding for the antiretroviral drugs. Thus, there is an allusion of ambivalence to the affected agency: government, or doctors? In conclusion, it is obviously clear that through the choices of variables made by the writer in Extract 1 above, the reporter has effectively portrayed the AIDS victim, Nkosi Johnson, in a desirable light, and in this case, as the ‘innocent’ victim. ‘Guilty’ victims Extract 2 THE REAL EPIDEMIC: FEAR AND DESPAIR Some of the recklessness, says Psychologist Rhonda Linde of the Boston AIDS Action Committee, is a way of coping with fear and also defying the medical establishment, which is urging the homosexual to change his life. “Such a man,” she says, “may step up the frequency with which he has anonymous sex: Homosexuals are now under heavy psychological pressure*, she says, because “AIDS can kill you, and when you start equating sex with death, you’re treading on emotionally sensitive ground.” Though Europe has only occasional scattered cases of AIDS, many members of gay communities now regard warily American homosexuals or nationals who have recently been to the U.S. Homosexuals at Cambridge University complain of cool treatment from their friends after returning from study at American universities. Says one: “No one is panicking, but there seems to be the feeling, “Why take the risk?’” West Germany has 20 AIDS cases, and an American homosexual in Berlin says, “Guys from the United States are unpopular. Pulling trade in Berlin has become quite difficult of late.” Some U.S.
Lean, Mei Li & Lee, Stella Meng Hui
experts believe that Berlin, a center for homosexuals, will be the center for the first major outbreak of AIDS on the Continent. For homosexuals, the AIDS scare is also a political setback: after a decade of social gains and increasing tolerance*, gays are suddenly pariahs again. “What we’re seeing here is the re-diseasing of homosexuality*,” says Rick Crane, program director at San Francisco’s AIDS/Kaposi’s Sarcoma Research and Education Foundation. “We get everything from fundamentalist crap about AIDS being a moral scourge to pseudo concern for gays*,” says Los Angeles’ Schulte. “There’s this soft, ugly underside that gets fed by the AIDS scare*. It’s scarier than the disease, because that kind of stigmatising* will outlast the disease.” Last week the Rev. Greg Dixon of the Moral Majority wrote: “If homosexuals are not stopped*, they will in time infect the entire nation, and America will be destroyed.” Some gays are beginning to feel a moral responsibility for AIDS. Says the Rev. Jay Deacon, a homosexual minister in Chicago: “There’s a lot of ‘This is God’s judgment on wicked sinners-the Sodomites are being judged.’ Intellectually people don’t buy that, but in their guts there’s a lot of guilt.” The threat of AIDS can awaken old doubts about the homosexual life, or sexual activity in general. Says Fishman of Boston’s AIDS Action Committee: “Many men have internalized social and moral judgments that being gay, and/or being sexually active, is sinful.” Unquestionably AIDS is reshaping homosexual communities and pushing many* toward mainstream mores, just as the herpes epidemic has restricted the sexual adventuring of many straights. The sexual revolution clearly is not over, but the ‘80s are proving to be a dangerous decade both for gays and straights who like casual sex and plenty of it. (TIME, 1983, 4 July, Vol.122, No.1, p.38)
The core group of social actors represented in Extract 2 above are the homosexuals, the AIDS activists, and the religious leaders. Other less prominent social actors realised in the above extract are the experts (‘U.S. experts’), promiscuous heterosexuals (‘straights who like casual sex and plenty of it’), and nations (‘Berlin’, ‘entire nation’, ‘America’). The representation of homosexuals in the above extract is rather significant and there are many layers of the homosexual community that the extract refers to. For starters, there is the representation of homosexuals in general: ‘homosexual’, ‘a man’, ‘homosexuals’, ‘members of gay communities’, ‘American homosexuals’, homosexuals at Cambridge University’, ‘American homosexual in Berlin’, ‘gays’, ‘pariahs’, ‘Rev. Jay Deacon, a homosexual minister in Chicago’, ‘wicked sinners’, ‘the Sodomites’, ‘people’, ‘homosexual communities’, ‘many’. This group of social actors are impersonalised, except for Rev. Jay Deacon. Looking at the many ways in which
The representation of PLWHAs and the dangerous ‘other’
the homosexuals are referred to, one can infer that the general public, including the homosexuals themselves believe to a certain extent that the homosexuals are the ‘guilty’ victims of AIDS by virtue of their sexual orientation. This is regardless of whether the homosexual is in actual fact HIV+ or otherwise. For example, the homosexual is urged to ‘change his life’ as ‘“AIDS can kill you”.’ Here, the ‘homosexual’ is in reference to the generic classification of homosexuals (a form of collectivisation), while ‘you’ is referring to the general public. By ‘urging’ the homosexuals to change their lives and placing this statement with the warning on AIDS, the homosexual is foregrounded as the ‘guilty’ victim who is an agent of infection to the rest of the public. Furthermore, Rev. Greg Dixon of the Moral Majority’s warning, ‘“If homosexuals are not stopped*, they will in time infect the entire nation, and America will be destroyed”,’ serves to reiterate the idea that homosexuals are ‘guilty’ victims who will ultimately destroy America. This strong warning, however, is rather ambivalent as it backgrounds the notion on how homosexuals are to be ‘stopped’ (e.g. to ask them to become heterosexuals, to confine the homosexuals in a place away from the rest of the mainstream society, etc.) and who is the person designated to stop the homosexuals. Additionally, the homosexuals in the extract choose to group themselves in specific classifications, ‘‘American homosexuals’, homosexuals at Cambridge University’, ‘American homosexual in Berlin.’ By doing this, the homosexuals themselves are indicating that homosexuals from certain countries are deemed even ‘guiltier’ victims of the disease, as evident by the ‘cool treatment from their friends after returning from study at American universities.’ Another form of foregrounding the impersonalisation and the status of the ‘guilty’ victim of the homosexuals, would be the use of derogatory and biblical terms such as ‘pariahs’, ‘wicked sinners’, ‘the Sodomites’. Hence, the homosexuals are highlighted as ‘guilty’ victims in accordance to these labels given to them by the society and religious leaders. The second group of social actors in Extract 2 above worth mentioning are the AIDS activists and experts. The AIDS activists and experts are highly personalised and activised, whereby they are all referred to as individuals together with their title or location: ‘Psychologist Rhonda Linde of the Boston AIDS Action Committee’, ‘Rick Crane, program director at San Francisco’s AIDS/Kaposi’s Sarcoma Research and Education Foundation’, ‘Los Angeles’ Schulte’, ‘Fishman of Boston’s AIDS Action Committee’. There is only one instance of grouping, ‘U.S. experts’, where it is specific classification. Also interesting to note is that these social actors who are named are heard in their actual speech (direct representation). For example, Psychologist Rhonda Linde of the Boston AIDS Action Committee is activated and foregrounded with the following statement. “Such a man,” she says, “may step up the frequency with which he has anonymous sex: Homosexuals are now under heavy psychological pressure*, she says, because “AIDS can kill you, and when you
Lean, Mei Li & Lee, Stella Meng Hui
start equating sex with death, you’re treading on emotionally sensitive ground.” As for the U.S. experts, their voices are heard (‘Some U.S. experts believe that Berlin, a center for homosexuals, will be the center for the first major outbreak of AIDS on the Continent’), although it is in the indirect form of speech representation. This group of social actors are foregrounded and titulated as they are deemed as the important people where AIDS is concerned and what they have to say about the disease is equally important. Thus, the statements issued by these social actors have accentuated the idea of the homosexuals as ‘guilty’ victims. The final group of social actors who are also deemed important in Extract 2 above are the religious leaders. The two religious leaders mentioned in the above extract are Rev. Greg Dixon and Rev. Jay Deacon. What is noteworthy about these two social actors is one of them is the religious leader for the heterosexual community, while the other is for the homosexual community. They are both personalised and highly activated in their respective roles as their voices are heard in direct discourse. In addition, both the social actors are named and also titulated. Naturally, Rev. Greg Dixon stresses the idea of homosexuals as being the agents of infection and also the ‘guilty’ victims of the disease (‘“If homosexuals are not stopped*, they will in time infect the entire nation, and America will be destroyed”’). Interestingly, the homosexual minister, Rev. Jay Deacon, besides framing the thoughts of the others (‘“There’s a lot of ‘This is God’s judgment on wicked sinners-the Sodomites are being judged’’) also admits that the homosexuals themselves believe deep within them that homosexuals are the ‘guilty’ victims of the disease (‘“Intellectually people don’t buy that, but in their guts there’s a lot of guilt”’). By placing the statements of these two social actors side by side and foregrounding their statements, the notion of homosexuals being ‘guilty’ victims of the disease is accentuated. The identity construction of the ‘other’ (‘We are good’ and ‘they are bad’) The analysis of the following three extracts will attempt to show how there is a distinction made in the reporting of news concerning the AIDS victims and the society, which results in a polarisation between Us and Them, leading to the conclusion that ‘We are Good’ and ‘They are Bad’. The analysis of both these categories will be done simultaneously for each of the three articles so as to show a stark contrast between the depictions. The first extract (Extract 3) below is about the fear and despair felt by the public in the United States of America in the first few years of the emergence and discovery of AIDS. The social actors in all three extracts are underlined.
The representation of PLWHAs and the dangerous ‘other’
Extract 3 The real epidemic: fear and despair In Manhattan last week a WABC-TV crew refused to enter the Gay Men’s Health Crisis office to cover a story on AIDS. Two back-up crews also balked at going in. Said one of the technicians: “Look, nobody knows anything about AIDS. What makes them so cocksure I’m not going to get it from a sweaty palm?” One of the homosexuals in the office had a question of his own: “Do you understand now that we’re treated like lepers?” As the death from AIDS-related diseases continue to rise, so does hysteria about possible contagion. AIDS victims and members of high-risk groups – male homosexuals, Haitians, hemophiliacs and intravenous drug users – are being shunned by their communities, their fellow workers, and sometimes their friends and families. Three nurses at a hospital in San Jose, Calif., quit rather than deal with AIDS cases: some staff members at San Francisco General Hospital refused to carry trays to such patients. As more and more homosexuals contract AIDS, gay men in general are encountering a new strain of prejudice. One family dining in a San Bernardino restaurant, demanded that an effeminate waiter be fired on the spot. Several conservatives, including Columnist Pat Buchanan, have raised the question of whether homosexuals should be barred from all food-handling jobs, and diners in several cities boycotted restaurants rumored to have gay chefs. For homosexuals, the AIDS scare is also a political setback: after a decade of social gains and increasing tolerance, gays are suddenly pariahs again. “What we’re seeing here is the re-diseasing of homosexuality,” says Rick Crane, a programme director at San Francisco’s AIDS/Kaposi’s Sarcoma Research and Education Foundation. “We get everything from fundamentalist crap about AIDS being a moral scourge to pseudo concern for gays,” says Los Angeles Schulte. “There’s this soft, ugly underside that gets fed by the AIDS scare. It’s scarier than the disease, because that kind of stigmatizing will outlast the disease.” Last week the Rev. Greg Dixon of the Moral Majority wrote: “If homosexuals are not stopped, they will in time infect the entire nation, and America will be destroyed.” Some gays are beginning to feel a moral responsibility for AIDS. Says the Rev. Jay Deacon, a homosexual minister in Chicago: “There’s a lot of ‘This is God’s judgement on wicked sinners-the Sodomites are being judged.’ ‘Intellectually people don’t buy that, but in their guts there’s a lot of guilt.” The threat of AIDS can awaken old doubts about the homosexual life, or sexual activity in general. Says Fishman of Boston’s AIDS Actions Committee: “Many men have internalized social and moral judgements that being gay, and/or being sexually active, is sinful.” (Time, 1983, 4 July, Vol.122, No.1, p.38)
Lean, Mei Li & Lee, Stella Meng Hui
The Social Actors for this extract can be divided into two categories: Us and Them. Under the group Us, we have: WABC-TV crew, two back-up crews, one technician, some staff members at the San Francisco General Hospital, one family dining in a restaurant, Columnist Pat Buchanan and Rev. Greg Dixon. As for the other group Them, it is represented by one of the homosexuals in the company, AIDS victims, high-risk groups – male homosexuals, Haitians, hemophiliacs and intravenous drug users, gay men in general, an effeminate waiter, homosexuals, and a homosexual minister. It is interesting to note that for those mentioned under the Us category, their specific job function has also been given as opposed to ‘one of the homosexuals in the company’ or merely the assimilation of those with AIDS as ‘victims’ or ‘highrisk groups’ or ‘gay men in general’. Could there be a purpose for this? By doing so, the inference that can be drawn could possibly be that those who do not have AIDS are important in society, are individuals with responsibilities and have distinct talents and abilities, worthy of mention – in a nutshell, the good citizens. In contrast, those suffering from the disease are deemed unimportant, with their individuality and unique personalities and job functions blurred beyond recognition and impersonalised.7 Why is this so? Are they deemed ‘bad’? In the list above, there are two exceptions – namely the effeminate waiter and the homosexual minister. The possible explanation for this will be dealt with in the discussion of activation8 versus passivation.9 Most of the social actors in the first category of Us, have been relegated the position of activator where they are the active and dynamic forces. For example, the TV crew refused to enter, three nurses quit, some staff members refused to carry trays, one family dining demanded the firing of a waiter, etc. On the other hand, most of the passivation is undergone by the social actors from Them, with the high-risk groups shunned by the society, the effeminate waiter to be fired, homosexuals to be barred from handling food, diners and restaurants with gay chefs to be boycotted, etc. The activation of the ‘good’ shows very clearly who is in the position of control or worse still, they are ‘good’ and ‘good’ should always triumph over ‘bad’. Coming back to the two exceptions where the ‘bad’ waiter and homosexual minister are given an individualistic description, it is interesting to note that in these two occasions, they are personalised only to highlight the passivation 7. Impersonalisation takes place when the social actors are represented by other means such as abstract nouns, or by concrete nouns with meanings other than ‘human’ (van Leeuwen 1996: 59). 8. Activation occurs when the social actors are represented as the doer of an activity (van Leeuwen 1996: 43). 9. Passivation is when they are at ‘the receiving end’ of the activity. The social actor can either be subjected or beneficialised, where the subjected actors are treated as objects and the beneficialised benefit positively or negatively as a third party (van Leeuwen 1996: 43-45).
The representation of PLWHAs and the dangerous ‘other’
of their roles, i.e. the impending sacking and the judgement of the masses on the ‘bad’ people. Suppression has also been used in two instances to denote the ‘good’. The first instance is seen in “That kind of stigmatizing will outlast the disease.” Who are the people responsible for the stigmatization? Why are they not mentioned? Could it be so that attention is not brought upon those responsible? The second instance can be seen in “Many men have internalized social and moral judgements that being gay, and/or being sexually active, is sinful.” Once again, who made those social and moral judgements, condemning the homosexuals? Why have they not been identified? Could it be that they are ‘good’, therefore righteous and having the right to stigmatize and judge? An interesting reversal of the groups assimilated can be seen in the last paragraph of the extract. In the lines: “If homosexuals are not stopped, they will infect the entire nation, and America will be destroyed.” Some gays are beginning to feel the moral responsibility for AIDS.
In the first part, the ‘good’ people as in the nation and America have been assimilated, by being given a mass noun and the ‘bad’ gays have been aggregated, which is relatively less generalized. This deviance from the usual trend, in fact, stresses the point that the people are ‘good’ as the ‘bad’ gays are causing a lot of problems for the entire nation of America and in light of such a major destruction, only a few or some gays are feeling guilty about it. This insinuation portrays the gays as ‘bad’ and also, as irresponsible. In conclusion, from the analysis of this article, it is possible to glean two conclusions. Firstly, the identity of those suffering from AIDS has been constructed as ‘bad’ as they have the disease and are responsible for causing fear and despair and are not fully repentant for their actions. Secondly, those identified as ‘good’ are the hardworking citizens who contribute to the country’s welfare and they are traumatized and are in danger; hence, the need to eradicate the ‘bad’. The second extract (Extract 4) is about how the Thai people perceive the AIDS virus and those suffering from it. Extract 4 The final temple While the country has concentrated on AIDS prevention, it has not yet focussed on treatment. The virus which sometimes does not produce symptoms for years, was first detected in Thailand in the late 1980s, so only now are hospitals being overwhelmed by patients.
Lean, Mei Li & Lee, Stella Meng Hui
The victims include Buddhist monks, who normally command tremendous respect in Thai society but are now ostracized. “They made me leave my temple, “ says Phra Sompong Tammapanyo, 44, one of 12 monks at Wat Phrabat Nampo who are HIV-positive. He kept his infection secret from the other monks at his Bangkok temple until he became sick three years ago. “I don’t think they were afraid of catching AIDS,” he says. “They were afraid that if word got out, people would think the temple was evil.” (Time, 1996, 12 January, Vol.147, No.7, p.22–23)
The underlined words above represent the various social actors in the article. In the first line, ‘the country’ has been included10 while ‘the patients’ or the victims have been backgrounded11 by being nominalised12 – ‘AIDS prevention’. For whom has this prevention been carried out? The nominalization of ‘treatment’ also begs the question ‘For whom?’ This exclusion of those suffering from the disease can also be seen in the second line. Ironically ‘The virus’ in this case is even given the same status as ‘The country’ while for the phrase ‘was first detected’ (in whom?), a process noun is used instead of the backgrounded ‘patients’. It is obvious that importance is placed on those variables that have been included. These same variables have also been activated while the backgrounded patients passivated. All this has been done to show that the included and activated people in the country and hospitals in particular are diligent in fighting the disease – as inferred in the word ‘overwhelmed’. And as in any fight, there are always the ‘good’ and the ‘bad’. Moving on to the second paragraph, the ‘bad’ victims are now in the position of activation. This is to highlight the contrast of life before and after AIDS, for a Buddhist monk. Before, they “commanded” respect but are now “ostracized”. Notice that the ‘Thai Society’ is not backgrounded when it comes to giving respect but they are when it comes to ostracizing the monks. Once again, what does this mean? It could be that the ‘Thai society’ is deemed ‘good’ as they only reveres the ‘good’ monks who are free from AIDS. Or worse still are they inferring that monks with AIDS are ‘bad’? This sad implication can be seen in the next few lines. The use of the pronouns ‘he’ and ‘his’ personalize as well as implicate the monk as the activation of ‘he kept’ and ‘he became’ shows that only the monk is responsible for the former action and the current consequence. The final blow is in the last line, where the ‘other monks’ 10. Inclusion occurs when the social actors are represented (van Leeuwen 1996: 38). 11. Backgrounding is one of the two ways of exclusion, where the social actors are not mentioned within the immediate context. The other method is suppression where the social actors are not mentioned at all (van Leeuwen 1996: 39). 12. Nominalization is one method of suppression (van Leeuwen 1996: 40).
The representation of PLWHAs and the dangerous ‘other’
have been passivated as ‘they were afraid’. Why? Obviously because they as ‘victims’ were more afraid to be at the receiving end of what the Thai people would think when the ‘word gets out’ rather than be concerned about their sick brethren’s welfare or of ‘catching AIDS’. Notice the exclusion through suppression of the agent through whom the word would leak. The other monks are obviously not concerned as to how the information might spread. After all, their chief concern as ‘good’ monks is to protect the ‘good’ people from the notion that the temple, harbouring a ‘bad’ monk, is evil. The final and third extract (Extract 5) is about how the AIDS victims in Burma, even in death are stigmatized and rejected while made into objects of attraction and repulsion. Extract 5 Stalking a killer In Burma, it is believed that the heat from an ordinary funeral pyre isn’t fierce enough to kill the virus, and so the dead are cremated with burning tires. This way, even in death, the AIDS sufferer is stigmatized. “The cruelest part about AIDS is the rejection,” says Alongkot Tikapanyo, a Buddhist monk who since 1992 has tended to more than 10 000 AIDS victims at the Wat Prabat Nam Poo temple north of Bangkok. Today his hospice takes care not just of men and prostitutes but a growing number of infected housewives and children. Inside the “Bone museum” located on the temple grounds, Alongkot keeps the ashes of more than 1000 dead, each in a gray, brick-size box – remains that families did not want. The collection has become a macabre local attraction. “AIDS tours” arrive daily at the temple. Some Thais come to pay homage to Alongkot, while others bring their sons and daughters to scare them into good behaviour. After viewing the withered corpses of several AIDS victims floating in a cloudy formaldehyde pool, 11-year-old Kannika says with a shiver, “I’m afraid. Now that I know, I won’t do anything bad.” (Time, 2002, 30 September, Vol.160, No.12, p.48–61)
As the paragraph begins, the social actor is excluded (backgrounded) in ‘it is believed’. Who believes that the fire will not be able to kill the virus? It is only later on in the second paragraph that the social actor ‘families’ appear. Whilst this is so, the people suffering from this disease are impersonalised into abstraction13 with generic terms such as the dead, the AIDS sufferers, men, prostitutes, housewives, children and withered corpses. This abstraction is meant to give a negative connotation
13. Abstraction is one of the two ways of impersonalisation, where the social actors are represented by means of a quality assigned to them such as ‘the dead’ (van Leeuwen 1996: 38).
Lean, Mei Li & Lee, Stella Meng Hui
to them. Besides that, the aggregation of ‘10 000 AIDS victims’ is used to show the severity of the situation – another negative implication. This group of social actors has also been passivated through subjection to words such as ‘the collection’, ‘local attraction’, where they have been treated as objects instead of being given the honour of a good and respectable burial. Instead, they have become an irresistible horrific circus act (macabre) fit only to serve as warnings to children who might commit something ‘bad’. Emphasis is given to the last social actor, 11-year-old Kannika, who verbalises the entrenched beliefs of the Burmese people that if you are ‘bad’ or if you do anything ‘bad’, you will die as a result from AIDS and end up as a corpse. In contrast, the ‘good’ social actor, Aloongkot, is included and activated, performing charitable acts of ‘tending’ to at least 10 000 victims and is respected and revered by the locals. Why hasn’t anyone questioned why the floating corpses have not been cremated but left to be gawked at by people? The way the sentence has been constructed reveals that the person responsible for this is allowed the freedom to do so as this social actor is suppressed from the reader. In short, the ‘good’ in this article is most times activated and personalised while the reverse is true for the ‘bad’. Conclusion This paper has attempted to analyse how the identities of the ‘Innocent and Guilty’ and the ‘Good and the Bad’ are constructed due to their association or disassociation with HIV/AIDS. Those who are constructed as ‘innocent’ HIV/AIDS patients are considered victims of circumstances, such as Nkosi who is a child born with the disease. The constant references to his child status, either physically or psychologically, serve to accentuate his innocence and frailness. On the other hand, HIV/AIDS patients who are labelled under ‘guilty’ are portrayed as perpetrators who brought the affliction upon themselves and thus, deserve to suffer or die from the disease. The ‘guilty’ victims who are constantly referred to are homosexuals from all over the world. They are viewed in that light by virtue of their sexual orientation and also the fact that they are the agents of infection. Additionally, the recurring name calling adds to the ‘guilty’ portrait, more so when the derision is coming from religious leaders. The polarisation between PLWHAs or between people associated with AIDS, and non-PLWHAs as ‘good’ and ‘bad’ respectively is also demarcated in the analysed texts. It is a case of Us (‘good’) versus Them (‘bad’) where the ‘bad’ Them is dangerous and should be alienated from the ‘good’ Us. The act of impersonalising
The representation of PLWHAs and the dangerous ‘other’
AIDS victims (dead or alive) into abstraction also casts a negative light on them. This group of social actors are also passivated through subjection where they are treated as objects to be gawked at by onlookers and used as a moral piece to warn children of the consequences of being ‘bad’ (i.e. they might end up as one of the corpses left in the open for people to view without any prospects of a decent burial). The ‘good’ Us on the other hand are only pictured in the personalised and activated forms where the occupation of the individuals are mentioned. This gives an impression of Us as good and hardworking citizens who are unfortunately at risk from the ‘bad’ Them. It is without doubt that language plays a crucial role in how entities are seen, gauged or evaluated by others. In all the extracts analysed, the overwhelming perception is one that is biased against the people with HIV/AIDS. Whether they are portrayed as ‘guilty’ or ‘bad’, society seems to have made up her mind. This is mainly due to the such portrayal in the media. The ideological nuances implanted in the media texts through the representation of social actors portray the identities of the ‘Innocent and Guilty’ and the ‘Good and the Bad’ so subtly and thus, effectively absolving themselves of any blame for the negative representation of PLWHAs and those who are associated with PLWHAs. References Books: Chouliaraki, Lilie, and Norman Fairclough. (1999) Discourse in Late Modernity: Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Curtis, Sarah, and Ann Taket. (1996) Health & Societies: Changing Perspectives. New York: Arnold. Fairclough, N. (1992a) Discourse and Social Change. UK: Polity. Fairclough, N. (1995a) Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. London: Longman. Fairclough, N. (1995b) Media Discourse. Great Britain: Arnold. Fairclough, N. (2003) Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge. Gilman, Sander L. (1996) “AIDS and Syphilis: The Iconography of Disease.” Ed. Douglas Crimp. AIDS: Cultural Analysis, Cultural Action. 5th ed. Cambridge: MIT Press. Goffman, Erving. (1963) Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Green, Gill, and Elisa J. Sobo. (2000) The Endangered Self: Managing the Social Risks of HIV. London: Routledge. Gwyn, Richard. (2002) Communicating Health and Illness. London: Sage.
Lean, Mei Li & Lee, Stella Meng Hui Herek, G. M. (1990) “Illness, Stigma, and AIDS.” Eds. P. T. Costa Jr., and G. R. Vanden Bos. Psychological Aspects of Serious Illness: Chronic Conditions, Fatal Diseases, and Clinical Care. Washington DC: American Psychological Association. Jones, E. E., et al. (1984) Social Stigma: The Psychology of Marked Relationships. New York: W.H. Freeman & Company. Lemelle, Anthony J. Jr., Charlene Harrington, and Allen J. LeBlanc (2000). Readings in the Sociology of AIDS. 1990. Introd. Karolynn Siegel. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Lupton, Deborah. (1994) Medicine as Culture. London: Sage. Miller, David, et al. (1998) The Circuit of Mass Communication. London: Sage. Murphy, Timothy F. (1994) Ethics in an Epidemic: AIDS, Morality, and Culture. Berkeley: University of California Press. Patton, C. (1990). Inventing AIDS. New York and London: Routledge. Sontag, Susan. (1991) Illness as Metaphor and AIDS and its Metaphors. London: Penguin. Treichler, P. (1996) “AIDS, Homophobia, and Biomedical Discourse: An Epidemic of Signification.” Ed. Douglas Crimp. AIDS: Cultural Analysis, Cultural Action. 5th ed. Cambridge: MIT Press. Van Leeuwen, T. (1996) “The Representation of Social Actors.” Eds. Carmen Rosa CaldasCoulthard, and Malcolm Coulthard. Texts and Practices: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge. Watney, Simon. (1996) Policing Desire. 3rd ed. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Williams, Kevin. (1999) “Dying of Ignorance? Journalists, News Sources and the Media Reporting of HIV/AIDS.” Ed. Bob Franklin. Social Policy, the Media and Misrepresentation. London: Routledge.
Articles: “Hunting for the Hidden Killers.” (1983) TIME Magazine 122.1: 30–5. Albert, Edward. (1986) “Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome: The Victim and the Press.” Studies in Communication 3: 135–58. Alonzo, A. A., and N. R. Reynolds. (1995) “Stigma, HIV and AIDS: An Explanation and Elaboration of a Stigma Trajectory.” Social Science and Medicine 41: 303–15. Clarke, G. “AIDS: A Spreading Scourge.” (1985) TIME Magazine 126.5: 41–2. Clatts, Michael C., and Kevin M. Muthcler. (1989) “AIDS and the Dangerous Other: Metaphors of Sex and Deviance in the Representation of Disease.” Medical Anthropology 10: 105–14. Colby, David C., and Timothy E. Cook. (1991) “Epidemics and Agendas: The Politics of Nightly News Coverage of AIDS.” Journal of Health Politics 16.2: 215–49. Crandall, C. S., and D. Moriarty. (1995) “Physical Illness Stigma and Social Rejection.” British Journal of Social Psychology 34: 67–83. De Jong, W. (1980) “The Stigma of Obesity: The Consequences of Naïve Assumptions Concerning the Causes of Physical Deviance.” Journal of Health and Social Behaviour 21: 75–87. Fairclough, N. (1992b) “Discourse and Text: Linguistic and Intertextual Analysis within Discourse Analysis.” Discourse and Society 3: 193–217. Herzlich, Claudine, and Janine Pierret. (1989) “The Construction of a Social Phenomenon: AIDS in the French Press.” Social Science and Medicine 29.11: 1235–42. Juhasz, A. (1990) “The Contained Threat: Women in Mainstream AIDS Documentary.” Journal of Sex Research 27.1: 25–46.
The representation of PLWHAs and the dangerous ‘other’
Kennamer, J. David., and Julie A. Honnold. (1995) “Attitude Towards Homosexuality and Attention to News About AIDS.” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 72.2: 322–35. King, M. B. (1989) “Prejudice and AIDS: The Views and Experiences of People with HIV Infection.” AIDS Care 1: 137–43. Lupton, Deborah. (1991) “Apocalypse to Banality: Changes in Metaphors about AIDS in the Australian Press. Australian Journal of Communication 18.2: 66–74. Lupton, Deborah. (1993) “AIDS Risk and Heterosexuality in the Australian Press.” Discourse & Society 4.3: 307–28. Polinko, Paul, et al. (1995) “HIV in Health Care Workers: Managing Fear through a Telephone Information Line.” Social Work 40.6: 819–22. Ross, M. W. (1989) “Psychosocial Ethical Aspects of AIDS.” Journal of Medical Ethics 15: 74–81. Street, John. (1988) “British Government Policy on AIDS: Learning Not to Die of Ignorance.” Parliamentary Affairs 41.4: 490–507. Tambling, J. (1989) “The Role of the Media in Relations to AIDS.” Paper presented at ASAIHL Conference “AIDS in Southeast Asia and the Pacific Region.” Chinese University of Hong Kong. Watney, Simon. (1989) “Photography and AIDS.” Ten 8.26: 14–29. Zuraidah Mohd Don, and Mei Li Lean. (2002a) “Discourse, Power and Subjectivity: Print Media and the Discursive Construction of AIDS.” Eds. Asmah Haji Omar, Halimah Mohd Said, and Zainab Abd Majid. Language and Empowerment. Kuala Lumpur: Malaysian Association of Modern Languages. Zuraidah Mohd Don, and Mei Li Lean. (2002b) “The Discursive Construction of AIDS in the Print Media: Texts and the Representation of the Other.” Eds. Rosli Talif, Shameem RafikGalea, and Chan Swee Heng. Diverse Voices 2: Selected Readings in Language. Malaysia: Department of English, Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication, University Putra Malaysia.
Index
A Afghanistan 131 agency 5, 16–18, 61, 159, 162, 163, 183, 185, 187 Ahbab 134, 136, 137, 139–147, 150, 152 Albert 181, 198 al-Qaida 131 Althusser 17 American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee 134 Anderson 71, 74, 128 Antaki and Widdicombe 14 anti-imperialist 57 Apple 58, 59, 73, 74 Arab Americans 131, 134–136, 142–145, 147–150 Arab village 92, 98–100, 102, 103 Arab Women’s Solidarity Association 134, 138, 147, 152, 153 Arab-American group 131, 134, 147 Arab-free land 83, 104 Arab(s) 8, 80, 81, 83, 85, 86, 92, 94, 97, 98, 101, 103, 131, 133, 136, 137, 140, 142, 143, 146, 147, 151 argumentative schema 116, 118–121, 123 Arnheim 85, 101, 106 assimilation 5, 11, 12, 14, 35, 37, 49, 113, 117, 129, 185, 187, 192 Assimilation and differentiation 5, 11, 12, 113, 117 associate fields 120, 125 attribution 14, 16, 112, 117, 120, 125 automatic articulation 118–121, 125, 126 AWSA 134, 138–147, 152, 153
B Bar-Gal 78, 79, 81, 82, 87, 97, 99, 100, 106 Barth 13, 23 Bauman 9, 23 Bechhofer 7, 23, 26 Ben Laden 136, 137, 140, 147, 151 Bergen 162, 175 Berger and Luckmann 6, 10 Billig 8, 12, 19, 23, 27, 113, 120, 128 Blommaert 7, 23 Blumer 9, 16, 24 Bourdieu 16, 18, 19, 24, 50 Brewer 12, 24, 113, 126, 128 Brewer and Roccas 113, 126 Brown and Levinson 6 Brubaker and Cooper 3, 8 Büchner 11, 22, 24 Busby 162, 176 Butler 159, 160, 176 C Cameron 159, 166, 176 Canadian criminal justice system 162 categorisation 8, 9, 12, 14, 15, 21, 22, 25–27, 31, 38, 78, 112, 113, 117, 121, 122, 125, 127, 129 categorisation and labelling 36, 37 cause-consequence scheme 120 Chinese national identity 57–59, 69, 70, 72 Chouliaraki 5, 18, 24, 155, 180, 197 Chouliaraki and Fairclough 5, 18, 180 Cillia 28, 58, 74, 130 Cinnirella 19, 24, 114, 117, 128 civil system 162, 163
Clarke 180, 198 Classification images 97 Clatts and Mutchler 182 Coates and Wade 161 Coates, Bavelas and Gibson 161 Coffin 86, 104–106 Colby and Cook 181 Cole 128 collective identity 7, 8, 11, 73 colour 77, 78, 89, 92, 99, 100, 107 commitment 32, 132 Condor 23, 115, 128 Continuity, change, and fluidity 9 contrast 22, 33, 38, 41, 47, 50, 61, 67, 68, 70, 99, 117, 122, 126, 161, 163, 190, 192, 194, 196 Cooley 6, 16, 24 Cooper 3, 4, 9, 24 courtroom discourse 174 critical 4, 5, 8, 14, 15, 18, 20–24, 26, 31–33, 37, 58, 59, 61, 73, 74, 82, 83, 92, 107, 112, 115, 116, 131, 132, 155, 169, 176, 179, 182, 197, 198 Critical discourse analysis 4, 14, 15, 20, 24, 26, 58, 74, 107, 131, 132, 155, 176, 179, 182, 197, 198 critical perspective 8, 15, 22, 23, 31–33, 37 critique 8, 24, 73, 106, 132 cultural distance 49 cultural norms 159, 160 Curtis and Taket 180 D dangerous Other 198 Day 21, 24, 35, 54, 87, 134 de la Garza 11 decapitalization 50, 51, 53–55 Delanty 12, 24, 112, 128
Analysing Identities in Discourse Deleuze and Guattari 46 demographic danger 77 dialectical 132, 169 differentiation 11, 13, 27, 43, 94, 129 discourse(s) 5, 8, 10, 15, 16, 19–23, 25, 27, 32, 33, 42, 47, 50, 54, 55, 58, 59, 72–74, 105, 115, 116, 118, 119, 121, 125, 128, 131, 133, 160–163, 168, 169, 175, 176 discourse analysis 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 13, 17, 18, 20, 26, 27, 31, 56, 111–116, 121, 125, 126, 132, 155, 198 discursive articulation 118, 127, 128 discursive building of identity 121 discursive construction of identity 6, 31, 32, 36, 111 discursive practices 7, 15–18, 20, 32, 112, 132, 133, 160 discursive types 133 dissimulation 81, 89 E Ehrlich 159, 162, 163, 170, 174, 176 elite racism 27, 77, 104 Erikson 10, 24 ethnic/ ethnification/ ethnization 21, 51, 55, 79 ethnocentric and assimilatory practices 37 ethnomethodology 14, 17, 25 European citizenship 112 European identity 19, 111–118, 120, 121, 123, 125–127, 129 F Fairclough 4, 15, 24, 58–61, 73, 74, 79, 82, 106, 131–133, 148, 155, 169, 170, 172, 176, 179, 182, 183, 197, 198 Fairclough and Wodak 4, 133 female sexuality 160 field 18, 31, 38, 50, 51, 78, 80, 100, 105, 117, 124 Firer 79, 80, 83, 97, 103, 104, 106 footing 6, 7 Foucault 4, 5, 16, 17, 20, 23, 24, 50, 56, 127, 128, 176 Fowler 14, 24, 25 fragmentation 81, 89 functionalisation 14, 102
G Gavey 169, 176 Gellner 128 gender 8, 10, 15, 17, 19, 21, 24, 26, 28, 32, 48, 60, 159, 160, 176, 180 generic devices 59, 62 genericization 93, 94 genres 58, 59, 105, 106, 133 geographic silences 89 geography schoolbooks/ textbooks 82, 87, 99 Gergen 10, 11, 22, 25, 160, 175, 176 Giddens 10, 11, 18–20, 22, 25, 36, 56 Gilman 181, 197 Goffman 5–7, 10, 11, 25, 181, 197 Grad 3, 19, 23, 25, 33, 38, 56, 111, 114, 128, 129 Grad and Ros 19, 114 grammar 73, 74, 107, 134, 155 graphs 78, 89, 93, 103 great culture 62, 64, 71 Green and Sobo 181 guilty 179, 181, 183,–185, 187, 189, 190, 193, 196, 197 H Habermas 10, 25, 105, 112, 128 habitus 18, 19 Hall 3, 8, 12, 17, 24, 25, 64, 71, 74, 198 Hall and Du Gay 3 Halliday 61, 74, 133, 135, 139, 145, 155 happy life of the people 67, 72 Harré 22, 25 Henrikson 81, 87, 92, 107 Herek 181, 198 Herzlich and Pierret 182 Hester and Eglin 14 history textbooks 79, 82, 107 HIV/AIDS (PLWHAs) 179 Hodge and Kress 97 Hogg 12, 26, 27, 129 Holstein and Gubrium 10 homosexual(s) 179–182, 187–193, 196 Hornsey and Hogg 127 Hussein 131, 148 hypertexts/ hypotexts 79 I ideationally 99
identity (-ies) 3–29, 31, 33, 36, 37, 42, 47, 55–59, 62, 65–67, 71, 74, 77–80, 102–106, 109, 111–123, 125, 127–129, 131, 137, 143, 148, 157, 159, 175–177, 179, 183, 186, 190, 193, 197 identity construction 11, 17, 67, 175, 179, 183, 190 impersonalisation 14, 94, 102, 183, 186, 189 inclusiveness 113, 114, 119, 122 indigenous population 81, 83, 86 indoctrination 42, 45, 54 innocent 138, 139, 145, 146, 154, 179, 181, 183–187, 196, 197 interpersonal 99, 135, 136 Iraq 131 Israeli schoolbooks 77, 78, 80, 97, 98, 104 J Jenkins 3, 12, 16, 25, 82, 105, 107 Jewish settlements 83, 87, 99, 102, 103 Jewish territorial and national identity 77 Jones et al. 181 Juhasz 182, 198 K Keating 111, 129 Kempel 10 Kennamer and Honnold 181 Kiely 7, 23, 26 Kienpointner 22, 27 King 181, 199 Kress 14, 25, 26, 78, 80, 82, 83, 85, 92, 99, 107, 128, 132, 155 Kress and Hodge 14 Kristeva 15 Kuhn 9, 26 L land 50, 55, 66, 71, 77, 79–81, 83–87, 89, 92, 97, 99, 100, 101, 103, 105, 107, 117 land of Israel 77, 80, 83–87, 105 layout 77, 78, 83, 86, 107 Lazar 21, 26 Lees 162, 163, 176 legitimation 27, 54, 71, 80, 81, 83, 87, 131 Levita 10, 26 lexical choices 58, 60 lexicon 72, 144, 145
Li 57, 64, 74, 144, 179, 199 Licata 111, 113, 129 Lin 7, 26 Link 18, 40, 57, 58, 72, 74, 184, 187 Linz 111, 129 Liu 57, 58, 62, 74, 129 logical nesting 118, 120, 127 love of the country 62, 63 Luckmann 23 Lupton 181, 182, 198, 199 M maps 78, 89, 92, 95, 103, 106, 107 Martin and Wodak 58, 59 Martín Rojo 3, 5, 15, 19, 23, 25, 26, 31–34, 38, 46, 50, 55, 56, 114, 128 Matoesian 7, 26 McCrone 7, 23, 26, 111, 129 Mead 5, 16, 26 mental maps 92 Middle East 94, 99, 100, 136, 137, 143, 150 Miller et al 181 modality 134, 139, 140, 148 monism, hybridity and multiplicity 5 multimodal analysis of textbooks 77 Murphy 181, 198 Muslim Americans 138, 141, 142, 144, 153 N narrative(s) 10, 11, 18, 23, 33, 36, 42, 81, 97, 140, 174, 175 narrative identity 11 national identity(-ies) 19, 23, 25, 26, 28, 57–59, 62–65, 67, 69–74, 78, 103, 104, 112, 113, 118, 121–123, 125–130 national and territorial identity 77 natural beauties 62, 65, 71, 72 naturalisation 15, 96 nesting of geopolitical categories 119 networking 114, 121, 126, 127 New-Jew 78 Nichols 72, 74 non-automatic articulation 118, 121, 125, 126 non-Jews 93, 94
Index O Oakes 12, 26, 27, 113, 126, 129 objective nesting 113, 125 occupation 78, 81, 103, 154, 197 Ochs 11 Olson 104 optimal distinctiveness model 113 orders of discourse 133 othering 12, 13 otherness 14, 15, 27, 37, 42, 43, 46, 182 (the) other 9, 33, 36, 42, 43, 46, 54, 55, 62, 65, 71, 89, 95, 102, 114, 132–134, 139–143, 164, 171, 190, 192, 194, 196, 197 P Palestinian refugees 94, 95, 97 Palestinians as a problem 77 Parker 17, 26 Patiño Santos 40–43, 56 patriotism 58, 62, 72 Patton 180, 198 Peled-Elhanan 77 performative 159 peripheralness 92 personal identity 6–8, 12 photographs 78, 85, 95, 99, 103 Podeh 97, 103, 107 polarization 14, 37, 125 Polinko et al. 181 politeness 6, 24 Polkinghorne 10, 26 polyphony 23, 33 Potter and Wetherell 8, 17 power 4, 5, 15–17, 20,–22, 24, 26–28, 38, 46, 50, 51, 60, 61, 65, 71, 73, 74, 82, 87, 99, 100, 104–107, 112, 122, 124, 131–133, 149, 155, 174, 176, 199 problematisation 4, 23, 32, 37 process of categorization 22, 33 progress 98–100, 105 Q queer Arabs 136, 150 R racist discourse 78, 93, 94, 102–104 racist icons 100 rape 160, 161, 176 recontextualisation 179, 180 reflexivity 19, 20
Reicher 12, 19, 26, 27, 115, 127, 129 Reicher & Hopkins 19, 115, 127 reification 81 Reisigl 14, 28, 58, 74, 93, 103, 104, 107, 130 Reisigl and Wodak 93, 103, 104 rejection 22, 26, 33, 38, 42, 54, 56, 78, 125, 195, 198 resistance 4, 5, 16, 22, 23, 27, 33, 37, 42, 46, 50, 53–55 Reynolds 181, 198 Ricoeur 10, 11, 26, 27 rigid regulatory frame 159 risk group 181, 182, 191, 192 role embracement 7 Ros 25, 128, 129 Roseneil and Seymour 3 S Sacks 14, 27 Saddam Hussein 26, 56, 131 Sautman 57, 65, 74 Scheibe 114, 129 Scollon 7, 27, 132 Self-categorization Theory 12, 26, 27, 129 self-continuity 9, 12 September 11, 131, 134, 137, 140, 141, 143–147 Servaes 22, 27 sexual assault 160–165, 169–171, 175, 176 sexual orientation 180, 189, 196 sexually abuse 164, 170, 174 SFL 133 Sheehy 163, 176 Shi-Xu 22 Site for the Gay and Lesbian Arab Society 134, 150 Smith 26, 114, 129 social actor(s) 4, 20, 27, 94, 97, 107, 112, 114, 115, 159, 182–190, 192, 194–198 social and personal identity(ies) 12, 21 Social Anthropology 13, 111 social constructionists 9 social exclusion 32, 77 Social Identity Theory 7, 12, 20, 113 social interaction 6–9, 13, 17, 24, 28, 75, 87, 155, 176 social order of discourse 15
Analysing Identities in Discourse social practices 18–21, 112 social representations 14 Social Semiotics 80 sociocultural practice 132 Sontag 182, 198 stereotypes 40, 47, 48, 80 strategic argumentation 115, 127 strategies of articulation 116, 117 strategies of social categorization 116, 117 Strauss 6, 27 Street 181, 199 structure and agency 5, 16 Stryker 9, 27 subject attitude moves 116, 117 subjective logic 118, 121, 125 Susan Estrich 160 symbolic capital 18, 50, 51 symbolic interactionists 9, 17 Systemic-Functional Linguistics 133, 148 T Tajfel 7, 11, 12, 27, 113, 129 Taliban 131 Tambling 182, 199 text 15, 16, 21, 38, 57–61, 63–68, 70, 73, 74, 79, 82, 85, 86, 89, 95, 102, 105–107, 132, 134–145,
147, 148, 150, 152, 153, 155, 182, 185, 198 textual analysis 106, 133, 176, 197 textual theme 135 the Palestinian problem 94, 95 theme(s) 8, 65, 134–140 Townsend 58, 74 transitivity 61, 68, 134, 135, 141–144, 148 Treichler 180, 198 Tu 57, 58, 74 Turner 12, 26, 27, 113, 129 U United States of America 133, 190 Us versus Them 180 V van Dijk 14, 24, 58, 59, 75, 94, 131, 132, 155 van Leeuwen 14, 27, 78, 80, 85, 92, 94–96, 99, 100, 102, 104, 107, 182, 185, 186, 198 vector 85 visual discourse 77 visual exclusion 87 W Walker 174, 176
war on terrorism 131 Watney 181, 182, 198, 199 West and Zimmerman 159 White 9, 45, 74, 85–87, 91, 97, 105, 107, 160, 185, 186 Widdicombe and Wooffitt 17 Williams 3, 16, 17, 28, 181, 198 Wineburg 82, 104, 107 Wodak 14, 15, 19, 24, 28, 58, 59, 74, 78, 107, 112, 130, 132, 155, 169, 176 Wodak and Reisigl 15, 78 Wood and Rennie 162, 169 Woodbury 174 word meaning 134, 148 wording 60, 134, 144, 148 work and sacrifice 69 Y Yuwen bianjishi 58, 63, 64, 66, 68, 69, 75 Z Zheng 57, 58, 75 Zionism 77, 79, 85, 92 Zionist ideal/ ideology 78, 79 Zuraidah Mohd Don and Lean 180 Zygmunt Bauman 13
In the series Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture the following titles have been published thus far or are scheduled for publication: 28 Dolón, Rosana and Júlia Todolí (eds.): Analysing Identities in Discourse. 2008. xi, 204 pp. 27 Verdoolaege, Annelies: Reconciliation Discourse. The case of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. 2008. xiii, 238 pp. 26 Millar, Sharon and John Wilson (eds.): The Discourse of Europe. Talk and text in everyday life. 2007. viii, 200 pp. 25 Azuelos-Atias, Sol: A Pragmatic Analysis of Legal Proofs of Criminal Intent. 2007. x, 180 pp. 24 Hodges, Adam and Chad Nilep (eds.): Discourse, War and Terrorism. 2007. x, 248 pp. 23 Goatly, Andrew: Washing the Brain – Metaphor and Hidden Ideology. 2007. xviii, 432 pp. 22 Le, Elisabeth: The Spiral of ‘Anti-Other Rhetoric’. Discourses of identity and the international media echo. 2006. xii, 280 pp. 21 Myhill, John: Language, Religion and National Identity in Europe and the Middle East. A historical study. 2006. ix, 300 pp. 20 Omoniyi, Tope and Joshua A. Fishman (eds.): Explorations in the Sociology of Language and Religion. 2006. viii, 347 pp. 19 Hausendorf, Heiko and Alfons Bora (eds.): Analysing Citizenship Talk. Social positioning in political and legal decision-making processes. 2006. viii, 368 pp. 18 Lassen, Inger, Jeanne Strunck and Torben Vestergaard (eds.): Mediating Ideology in Text and Image. Ten critical studies. 2006. xii, 254 pp. 17 Saussure, Louis de and Peter Schulz (eds.): Manipulation and Ideologies in the Twentieth Century. Discourse, language, mind. 2005. xvi, 312 pp. 16 Erreygers, Guido and Geert Jacobs (eds.): Language, Communication and the Economy. 2005. viii, 239 pp. 15 Blackledge, Adrian: Discourse and Power in a Multilingual World. 2005. x, 252 pp. 14 Dijk, Teun A. van: Racism and Discourse in Spain and Latin America. 2005. xii, 198 pp. 13 Wodak, Ruth and Paul Chilton (eds.): A New Agenda in (Critical) Discourse Analysis. Theory, methodology and interdisciplinarity. 2005. xviii, 320 pp. 12 Grillo, Eric (ed.): Power Without Domination. Dialogism and the empowering property of communication. 2005. xviii, 247 pp. 11 Muntigl, Peter: Narrative Counselling. Social and linguistic processes of change. 2004. x, 347 pp. 10 Bayley, Paul (ed.): Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Parliamentary Discourse. 2004. vi, 385 pp. 9 Richardson, John E.: (Mis)Representing Islam. The racism and rhetoric of British broadsheet newspapers. 2004. vi, 277 pp. 8 Martin, J.R. and Ruth Wodak (eds.): Re/reading the past. Critical and functional perspectives on time and value. 2003. vi, 277 pp. 7 Ensink, Titus and Christoph Sauer (eds.): The Art of Commemoration. Fifty years after the Warsaw Uprising. 2003. xii, 246 pp. 6 Dunne, Michele Durocher: Democracy in Contemporary Egyptian Political Discourse. 2003. xii, 179 pp. 5 Thiesmeyer, Lynn (ed.): Discourse and Silencing. Representation and the language of displacement. 2003. x, 316 pp. 4 Chilton, Paul and Christina Schäffner (eds.): Politics as Text and Talk. Analytic approaches to political discourse. 2002. x, 246 pp. 3 Chng, Huang Hoon: Separate and Unequal. Judicial rhetoric and women's rights. 2002. viii, 157 pp. 2 Litosseliti, Lia and Jane Sunderland (eds.): Gender Identity and Discourse Analysis. 2002. viii, 336 pp. 1 Gelber, Katharine: Speaking Back. The free speech versus hate speech debate. 2002. xiv, 177 pp.
