This book has intrigued me for some years. Since writing my essay on
spatial and temporal aspects to national identity and history in the Republic
of Macedonia, I have seen and read more essays and books on the topic. This
book I felt would add to my knowledge of the role aesthetics and materialism
play in reshaping ethnic, national and social relations in Macedonia.
Rozita Dimova seeks to account for the changing roles and relations
that have occurred during socialism and since the fall of socialism between,
mainly, the Albanian and Macedonian ethnic groups in Macedonia. Her central theme
revolves around the axis of loss and gain in the perceptions of members of both
of these groups. This perception reaches back beyond the emphasis that is
usually placed on the economic demise of Yugoslavia in the early 1980s, and
instead looks to the 1950s and 1960s when consumerism became apparent in
Macedonia and peoples experiences of it started to cement. These experiences
accelerated once democratization ensued, and flowed in tandem with migrations
from rural to urban settings.
Dimova’s anthropological research displays examples of how
ethno-national ‘conflict’ can arise in the tamest and most innocent of
circumstances. Reading the accounts, from both ethnic communities, you get a
sense of how these people slowly realized their sense of loss, gain or
entitlement based on their past experience and yearning for times gone by or for
a better future. One example is a young Macedonian mother, Lela, who lives in
an apartment block where she has to save for minor luxuries in life. The
description of her deteriorated flat can be viewed as a metaphor for how the
Macedonians’ feel about their place in present society. A family of Albanians
moved into the upstairs flat, the constant noise of children and residue of
bread making on the balcony, both creeping into the downstairs flat. This
intrusion leads Lela to feel nostalgia for the past, a sense of a loss and a
former entitlement because of the position her ethnicity led ‘her’ to have in
the past.
Another story is of an Albanian father who is paying for her daughters
wedding. His tastes reflect those of Macedonians, and underlines how Albanians
are aligning their tastes to those of Macedonians. Among the Albanian community, the ability to purchase this ‘Baroque’ furniture elevated your
social standing within your ethnic community. In relation to the Albanians’
standing with the Macedonians, they see it as one of eliminating the ethnic
stereotype of being backward through the medium of purchasing commodities, as a
way to show their advancement and economic strength. However, from a Macedonian
perspective, the move towards similar tastes becomes a threat to their
identity, with ‘us’ and ‘them’ becoming less distinct. Dimova believes that
Macedonians don’t like the idea that Albanians want to be like them and get
jealous of their commodities, but also don’t see why they would want what
Macedonians like when they are richer than them and can afford other styles.
This theme of ‘us’ and ‘them’ is explored in relation to gender,
especially in respect to Albanians, with an air of ‘nesting orientalisms’ about
it from Dimova. Here she observes how women are seen as the carriers of
Albanian national identity and outlines why Albanian men seek to keep their
women ignorant and uneducated so that they wouldn’t contribute to the decline
of the nation. Yet, Albanian men, particularly those who work abroad, have
mistresses and are happy for them to be ‘loose’ women. This hypocrisy within
Albanian masculinity arises because Albanian men fear Albanian women may prefer
Macedonian men. This exemplifies loss on the Albanian side, as families in the
past were rural, subsistence based, with the women uneducated and home based. A
market economy and democratization works for Albanian men, and any extension to
Albanian women is seen as a threat to the Albanian nation, hence Albanian men
don’t want ‘them’ (women) to become like ‘us’ (men).
I see these examples highlight the importance of movement in what
Dimova observes. Where there is movement, or a transition, then differing or
opposing forces converge and conflict emerges. Conflict can only occur if there
is a movement of peoples, commodities, customs etc, into spaces and times that
haven’t experienced such movement or change. Conflicts emerge and are seen as
ethno-national because the two ethnicities experience movement, or lack of
movement, differently. For some Albanians it is the desire to have commodities
similar to their Macedonian co-nationals; a market economy has allowed them to
purchase it, and moving homes near to Macedonians meant they saw and wanted to
acquire their ‘Baroque’ style of interiors. For Macedonians, they see their
place as having slipped from the Yugoslav days to where they are now challenged
in their dominance of the state. Former jobs pay less or are gone, and they
historically didn’t need to be guest workers as their positions at home were
secure. The free market has meant new neighbours and Albanians wanting to
emulate them, although they now cannot keep up that same aesthetic pretence due
to the last of money. Hence the basis of Macedonian or Albanian nationality is
questioned. This doesn’t affect all people across Macedonia, and neither is
there solely resentment or mimicry between ethnicities because it is also
experienced within each ethnicity.
But Dimova delivers a fresh account of how low level ethno-national conflicts
form part of people’s daily lives, and describes their attempts to rationalize
their lot in life at present due to factors that are historical, cultural and
economic.
No comments:
Post a Comment