|
Nebula 3.4, December 2006http://www.nobleworld.biz/nebulaarchive/nebula34.htmlCopyright © Habiba Hadziavdic
Images of "Gypsies", a German Case: Gilad Margalit.
Sinti and Roma have lived for over six centuries in Europe and, numbering well over eight million people, constitute its largest ethnic minority. It is somewhat hard to estimate the exact numbers of German Sinti and Roma since Germany's Basic Law prohibits the collection of ethnic data. Nonetheless, a 1999 report submitted by the German Government to the "Advisory Committee on Implementation of the Framework Convention of National Minorities" estimated there to be 70,000 German Sinti and Roma. Many Romani leaders put the number between 150,000 and 200,000, mindful that their estimates include all Sinti and Roma living in Germany independent of their citizenship status [1]. As a reference year for the first chronicle citation of Sinti and Roma in Germany, authors [2] point to the year 1417 and to Sebastian Münster's Cosmographia as the first detailed account. Münster was acquainted with Sinti and Roma from Heidelberg, observing and documenting their customs, which is why his chronicle became the most colourful, personal, and creditable account. Historically, German Sinti and Roma have been depicted as nomads and itinerant showmen. Often, the description of Sinti and Roma as non-sedentary or as people having only atypical occupations allows for further discrimination against this ethnic group. Portrayed as different from the rest of the Germans, both in their alleged essence (nomads) and means of livelihood (entertainers, door-to-door salesmen, or small circus performers), Sinti and Roma continue to be considered foreign or Fremde, although they have lived in Germany for more than six centuries. Sinti and Roma are generally characterized as the eternal Gypsy wanderers who stand outside of the conventional norms. Although the nomadic lifestyle might be desirable for some Sinti and Roma, as may also be the case for individuals of various other ethnicities, the argument that all Sinti and Roma are intrinsically nomadic is reductive and even at times racially prejudiced. Moreover, the issue of nomadism in relation to Sinti and Roma remains a multifaceted issue that requires a well-balanced approach, even if some Sinti and Roma do assert their nomadic lifestyle. Accordingly, this paper challenges the anti-"ziganistic" hegemony that essentialises and others Sinti and Roma, forcing an entire group to morph into a homogenous entity. Particular lifestyles (nomadism or sedentary), types of occupations, and behavioural characteristics are not tied to a single identity of a group as a whole, but rather individually determined. Lastly, it is not one of the goals of German Sinti and Roma to create an artificial so-called "nation state" in which all Sinti and Roma would be granted citizenship based on their ethnicity. Rather, Germany is the nation state of German Sinti and Roma. As much as the historical data imparts that German Sinti and Roma have lived in Europe for centuries, the taxonomical description of their culture makes the debate about their nationality and the nature of their cultural production animated and continuous. In the spirit of the Enlightenment, research on Roma continues to be based on observation, collection, classification, and description whereby the researcher's objectivity frequently remains unquestioned. Often, the authority of the researcher is established by an addendum of charts, tables, and other statistical data as an empirical support of their claims. In his book Time and the Other, postcolonial scholar Johannes Fabian addresses the issue of the de-temporization of the Other in anthropological writing. In his account, the Other is the object of a researcher's study, ontologically and culturally presumed to be different. Additionally, Fabian maintains that the researcher is allowed to disregard temporal relations when studying a presumably unchanging, primitive culture. The terms civilization, evolution, development, acculturation, and modernization are all terms "whose conceptual content derives from evolutionary time [4]" (17, footnote added). Persistently referring to the time of the Other as not belonging to the contemporary time, the researcher marginalizes the Other and permanently signifies it as primitive and "not-the-same." Partially borrowing from Levi-Strauss, Fabian argues that the taxonomical description of culture becomes ontological when "it maintains that culture is created by selection and classification." The consequent concept of culture is "devoid of a theory, creativity or production because in a radically taxonomic frame it makes no sense to raise the question of production. By extension we never appreciate the primitive as producer" (62). In cultural texts, the examples of portraying Sinti and Roma as primitive, as gatherers rather than producers, as people completely incapable of relating to modern society and its economically highly structured system, and as borrowers, if not thieves, are myriad. Moreover, the perpetual discrimination against Sinti and Roma is facilitated by the rhetoric of "Gypsies" as nationless people, who are first and foremost perceived as not German (or broader "not European"). As there might be individuals or groups of Sinti and Roma who indeed would associate with nationless, my emphasis in this critique will be on the general argument of the inherent nationless of Sinti and Roma as eternal wanderers incapable of relating to conventional lifestyle. It is the homogenizing feature of the discourse about Sinti and Roma that makes it anti-"ziganistic". Similarly, some Sinti and Roma might adhere to the nomadic lifestyle, as do individuals of various other ethnicities across the world, but the contention that all Sinti and Roma are inherently nomadic is racially prejudiced. Additionally, due to the historical circumstances associated with nomadism and "Gypsies", such as the anti-"Gypsy" laws explicitly targeting Sinti and Roma's alleged itinerant way of life and trades, the issue of nomadism in relation to "Gypsies" remains a multifaceted issue that has not yet been studied in all its dimensions. In his 1996 article "Antigypsyism in the Political Culture of the Federal Republic of Germany: A Parallel with Anti-Semitism?"[5] and his 2002 book Germany and Its Gypsies [6] historian Gilad Margalit characterizes and exploits the cultural construct "Gypsy" (he is only one of many authors who manipulates the construct [7]). By critically engaging with this construct, I will illustrate here [8] some of the characteristics of the persistent nature of the contemporary discourse about Sinti that continues to study "Gypsies" as unchanging and primitive ("disregards temporal relations"). The critique of Margalit's marginalization of the persecution of Sinti and Roma, both prior to and in the Holocaust, as well as in post-war Germany, allows me to delineate some of the general misconceptions still circulating within the Romany discourse (both in German and American scholarship [9]). He portrays "Gypsies" (his term for Sinti and Roma) as stateless, apolitical, and criminal nomads, and in doing so creates fertile ground for continuous discrimination against Sinti and Roma. His characterization of "Gypsies" parallels historical, narrative, and ethnographic texts, which in similar fashion typify Sinti and Roma as uncivilized and uncultured "Gypsies" (outside of terms "derived from evolutionary time", e.g. "civilization, evolution, development, acculturation, modernization..." ) [10] One of Gilad Margalit's central claims is that "racist antigypsyism began in Germany only in the late decades of the nineteenth century and existed on the margins of racist anti-Semitism." [11] In the article, he characterizes the contemporary as well as centuries-old anti-"Gypsyism" as "superficial", "less dramatic in character", lacking "demonizing characteristics" and "the element of 'conspiracy' that was dominant in nineteenth-century anti-Semitism." He asserts that the "Gypsy" within German culture could be categorized as the "known other", for Sinti and Roma's coexistence in Europe is six centuries old. "For generations, the Sinti [...] wandered in specific regions and consequently mastered the local dialects. [...] Their fortune-telling skills left its impression in German (and non-German) literature and folklore" (2). Lastly, Margalit contends that anti-"Gypsyism" "was never a political issue in Germany previous to the Third Reich" and that "...the 'Gypsy Question' was a marginal issue on the Nazi agenda; it was part of the so called 'Social Question' - the problem of the lower and poorer strata from which many criminals supposedly came, and on which most of the public welfare expenditure was spent" (2). He concludes that, "Due to these factors the Romanies and their bitter fate in the Third Reich did not become a central subject in post-1945 German political culture until the 1980s" (3). Although Margalit includes the alarming findings of the 1994 Emnid public opinion poll, according to which "68 percent of the Germans agreed they would not like to have Romanies as their neighbours", he fails to make an analytical assessment of anti-"ziganism" that would satisfactorily explain the continuing sweeping prejudice against Sinti and Roma. The Same poll reveals the disproportionate hatred towards Sinti and Roma in comparison to other ethnic groups, such as Arabs, Poles, Africans, Turks, and Jews [12]. In order to show that "...hostility toward the Romanies lacked a religious temper and demonizing characteristics" Margalit evokes so-called "romantic" images of "Gypsies" evident in "centuries of coexistence." "The romantic aspect of the Gypsy image became a symbol for freedom as early as the seventeenth century. [...] ...depiction of the Romani lifestyle as true, natural, and passionate influenced generations in Germany and elsewhere..." (2). Similarly, Margalit sentimentalizes "Gypsies"' "fortune-telling skills" that "left its impression in German (and non-German) literature and folklore." The Same literature generally typified "Gypsies" (especially women) as deceitful, unscrupulous, and dangerous vagabonds [13]. The anti-"Gypsy" laws highlight the authorities' particular disdain for "Gypsy" fortune-tellers [14]. Lastly, Margalit's assertions that "antigypsyism was never a political issue in Germany previous to the Third Reich" and that "...the 'Gypsy Question' was a marginal issue on the Nazi agenda..." are erroneous [15]. While evoking alleged romantic [16] images of free-roaming "Gypsies" that might lead to the conclusion that anti-"Gypsyism" is "superficial", "less demonizing", and "not political" [17] Margalit fails to scrutinize any anti-"Gypsy" decrees and edicts passed by the German authorities targeting and limiting the movement, settlement, and coexistence of Sinti and Roma since their arrival to Germany. The abundance and evident forcefulness of these laws elucidate the politically, racially, and culturally motivated exclusion of "Gypsies" from the rest of German society and Margalit's emphasis on romantic imagery obscures this fact. In his book Zigeunerverfolgung in Deutschland mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Zeit zwischen 1918-1945 (The Persecution of Gypsies: 1918-1945), historian Mohammad Gharaati outlines the persecution of Sinti and Roma in Germany. According to Gharaati, between the years 1500 and 1800 [18] the German authorities passed 148 anti-"Gypsy" edicts preventing Sinti and Roma from acquiring permanent residency and employment (32). Decades before the rise of the Third Reich, German police and various government ministries enacted laws according to which all Sinti and Roma residing in Germany were required to register with the police and unemployment agencies in each district, be fingerprinted and photographed, and have their genealogical data recorded [19]. From April to December of 1907, a few years after the establishment of the special "Gypsy Affairs Agency" ("Nachrichtendienst in Bezug auf die Zigeuner", 1899) in Munich under the directorship of the criminal investigator Alfred Dillmann, there were 289 criminal cases filed against Gypsies, the majority of which were for such trivial offenses as camping or driving a defective car (59). The anti-"ziganistic" vehemence inherent in such laws, as explained in Gharaati's work, coupled with the general literary descriptions of "Gypsies" as Tatars, Turkish spies, Egyptians, carriers of the plague, traitors to Christendom, and invaders in general, speak against Sinti and Roma as the "known other(s)." [20] "Gypsies" are indeed perceived by the political authorities as "the element(s) of 'conspiracy'" within German society, notwithstanding that their history in Germany is over six centuries long. By considering the historical data that Gharaati presents, we see how Margalit fails to reveal the mendacity inherent in the romanticization of "wandering" "Gypsies". Based on extensive research of the anti-"Gypsy" laws [21], the persevering anti-"ziganistic" attitudes, and the contemporary literature of the Sinti and Roma political activists, it is my contention (contrary to Margalit) that most Sinti and Roma "travelled" in order to comply with the law and out of necessity to find employment. For example, in his book Geschichte der Zigeunerverfolgung in Deutschland [22] (The History of Persecution of Gypsies in Germany), Joachim Hohmann highlights the immensity of anti-Gypsy laws since Sinti and Roma' s arrival to Germany. These ordinances targeted the movement and prohibited the settlement of "Gypsies". Hohmann concludes that based on his analysis of the anti-"Gypsy" laws the image of a free-roaming "Gypsy" is merely a cultural construct. "Under these circumstances, that there could have existed an unrestrained, free-roaming nomadic way of life is out of question" (80) [23]. While some Sinti and Roma choose to lead a nomadic lifestyle (as do individuals of other ethnicities throughout the world), the contention that all Sinti and Roma are inherently nomadic is at best reductive and at worst racially prejudiced. The extermination of the Sinti and Roma resulting in the death of more than 500,000 Sinti and Roma could hardly be summarized as "marginal" and "not politically motivated." [24] It certainly was not due to the lack of anti-"ziganism" that the persecution of Sinti and Roma before and during the Holocaust "did not become a central subject in post-1945 German political culture until the 1980s." Contrary to Margalit (and an array of similar authors), I argue that post-war attitudes towards Sinti and Roma, exemplified by the absence of a single Sinti and Roma witness at the Nuremberg trial, the fact that no reparation monies were paid, or the denial, well into the 1980s, of their genocide in the Holocaust, are centred around the construct "Gypsy". By supporting the unchanging and unchallenged nature of this construct, Margalit's writing furthers this particular discrimination of Sinti and Roma. Surely, the approach of non-"Gypsies" towards "Gypsies" was adjusted to the spirit of the era, but the belief in the "Gypsy" essence, and the prejudiced vision inherent in such a viewpoint, remained the same. In his analysis of the history of madness, Madness and Civilization [25], Michel Foucault reminds readers that in order to understand the relationship between the sane and insane in any given epoch one must begin to examine the silence, what has not been said about the changing treatment of those labelled as the insane. The belief in a particular and anomalous essence of the insane, which makes them ontologically different than those categorized as the sane, supports the further belief in a permanent essence of being, and in this case, radically different and possibly dangerous. The idea that there could be an irredeemable "Gypsy" essence, or what Slavoj Zizek terms the "real kernel" [26], that could be qualitatively assessed, led to Sinti and Roma's extermination in the Holocaust. In summary, as only some Sinti and Roma identify with "mobility" and non-wage labour, it is anti-"ziganistic" to characterize an entire group as inherently and uniformly nomadic and communal, particularly due to the generalized, culturally assigned anti-"Gypsy" connotations that such descriptions generate. The celebrated "Gypsy" innocence and worry-free lifestyle are presumably what makes them "Gypsies". They all dance, sing, play music, and have strong communal relations. The persistence of the belief that all "Gypsies" create and remain in close-knit communities has had certain detrimental effects, one example of which is the common belief in high rates of incest among "Gypsies". Certainly it is not Sinti and Roma's alleged racial inferiority or general inability that pigeonholes them in the role of wedding musicians and travelling salesmen. Instead, a revision and careful evaluation of the autonomy of expression and the necessity of the space for such exhibition is needed. Often forced to be on the move, Sinti and Roma frequently did not have access to education or public life in the past. The children of those Sinti and Roma who would permanently settle in an area faced continued persecution in schools and communities, and the adult Sinti and Roma were often performing menial services for those in power and with prominent positions. Pointing to the paradigm and the predicament of subaltern women, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, in her article "Can the Subaltern Speak?" [27], asserts that at the crux of the problem is not merely speaking, having nothing to say or that no accounts of the subject-consciousness of women exist, but that she is allocated no position of utterance. Appropriating Spivak's gender-centred critique, it could be said that by ignoring the efforts and achievements of hundreds of organizations and people working for the rights of Sinti and Roma, such as European Roma Rights Centre, Roma National Congress, Helsinki Citizen's Assembly, Roma Section, Union Romani, Zentralrat Deutscher Sinti und Roma, Dokumentations-und Kulturzentrum Deutscher Sinti und Roma, Romani Rose, Wilhelm Spindler, Anton Franz, William Duna, and Ian Hancock, to name just a few, authors curtail the impact the Roma advocates have had in exposing biased trends and practices towards Sinti and Roma.
Notes:
|