Dana Bizuleanu
Babeş-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
dana_bizuleanu@yahoo.com

 

 

Exploring Diversity: The Literature of Migration

 

Abstract: All modern forms of migration are being state controlled through the politics of migration. These kinds of movements enter interdisciplinary fields that can shed light upon how (new) societies appear. It would be more relevant to explore the manner in which migration and European memory seem to be intertwined. Literature uses its own means to find proper instruments and show how migration has turned into a fundamental condition of mankind. In the German speaking world we encounter the term “literature of migration”. There are several criteria deployed to define literature written by non-natives. The components of migration, identity, discourses on Otherness and the role of the state in the migration process are all part of a discourse on migration and “orienting diversity”. How does a literature of migration in the German space enter a dialog with a rather unknown Romanian literature? What similarities and differences emerge in the literature of two European spaces in regards to their nomadic and migrant authors? A possible answer could relate to the manner in which migrant authors uncover a source for the imaginary that can support and fuel memory, while revisiting traumatic spaces.

Keywords: Migration; Components of Migration; The Politics of Identity; Displacement; Literature of Migration

 

 

Movement, Literature and Dispersion: E Pur si Muove[1]

 

The era of migration[2] has not ended. Movement, migration and dispersion describe a rather broken European continent, united solely through what the European Union was supposed to achieve: a common European identity in the aftermath of World War II. Efforts to unite a divided and traumatized space aim at enabling aggressors and victims of the last two world conflagrations to live in peace and harmony.[3] The challenges our Union faces emerge exactly from the manner in which a common European memory seems to be caught in the limbo of an alterist discourse that is fuelled by the commemoration of traumatic experiences. There is a paradox in exploring European memory: spaces of commemoration are contested and don’t seem to support an articulation of other or alternative histories. There is one particular example that comes to mind. Nucşoara and its surroundings was a place in Communist Romania where partisans still opposed, until their capture and execution in the 1960s, the Communist regime. After 1989 there were numerous attempts to commemorate their bravery without proper results. The small, almost deserted village is still divided between labelling the partisans as thieves or as heroes.[4]

Next to writing a chapter on a common European memory, the Old continent is plucking the grapes of wrath. European cities like Paris, London, Madrid and, newly added to the list, Brussels have been targeted by their own citizens, converted to terrorism. Mainstream press makes these attacks more visible than those that happen on a daily (horrible) basis in other parts of the world. The causes that stand behind such, yet again traumatic experiences are not to be discussed here. More relevant would be to explore the manner in which migration and European memory seem to be intertwined. Moreover, in the debate on the existence of a common European memory, the violence, brutality and criminality of Communist regimes in Eastern Europe enter new terms and territories. Society undergoes changes due to migratory movements and the different historical, social and political stages show how migration operates with socio-political elements and cultural phenomena. This reciprocal relation describes a movement from a point A to a point B opens up the possibility for returning to point A.

 All modern forms of migration are being state controlled through the politics of migration. These kinds of movements enter interdisciplinary fields that can shed light upon how (new) societies appear. Literature uses its own means to find proper instruments and show how migration has turned into a fundamental condition of mankind. 

Migration presupposes the movement from a point A to a point B. Moreover, this movement implies two poles, even two systems (in Michel Foucault’s definition). Motives that drive the population movements need no hierarchies, as individuals are actually being drawn in a process of transformation and justification. In this case, transformation implies a statutory, fundamental and essential change, at an individual level, while in a justification process migrants assume a new and different social, political and judicial status. This status is controlled and awarded by the host society. The source society will process an individual, in high mobility, differently. Hence, these three factors (migrants, host and source societies) cannot be looked upon separately, in a migratory context, but as part of an area that consists of what I call components of migration. Any type of movement can exhibit these elements and patterns as they are individual, quantifiable and observable stages. They are signs of a personal, social and psychological transformation process.

The components of migration are constant elements in the mentioned processes of transformation and justification; they touch upon how the individual adapts to conditions of high mobility; they appear on an individual level, in different intensity degrees and in any type of movements (not necessarily across borders). The components are the decision to relocate, the cultural shock, adaptation, assimilation and integration through political participation. The usage of these terms helps to describe phenomena that can be identified on an individual, social and cultural level. The components of migration will help individuals understand migratory movements as part of a discourse that is based on issues of identity and Otherness.

Daily reports on migration tend to describe rather hysterically and convulsively aspects regarding border crossings. Hence, understanding the works of writers with a migrant background becomes a question of one’s position towards socio-political and external factors. If migration is a fundamental condition of mankind, then a plea for the establishment of an international literature will help integrate and explain how some authors of different origins than assigned by the language of creation are successful across borders, nations and countries. A part of the German speaking world has faced dilemmas of integration and descent. Germany and Switzerland implement different politics of integration and migration control, while Romania has (partially) not changed its status from a source country for migrants to a target society. Motives that ground the decision to relocate are multiple, from economical reasons to forced exile. Despite all of these complex issues, source and target societies showcase spectacular changes. The necessary framework for understanding and interpreting literature produced in conditions of high mobility in the German speaking world becomes volatile as methods seem stuck in an alterist discourse. The shelves for such writings still bear the name “foreign literature.” There are different criteria used to describe literature produced in high mobility. In the German speaking world we encounter the term “literature of migration”. There are several criteria deployed to define literature written by non-natives. Firstly, authors use both their mother language and the acquired one in the creative process. Secondly, aspects related to what researchers call jus sanguinis designate the authors’ origin as necessary criteria for interpreting their writing. A third perspective comes close to the aesthetic function of literature: transit as a literary theme with its cathartic function. Such efforts are a sign of how Europe has become a cradle for (new) societies and cultures and how complex such phenomena turn out to be. 

 

Some Identity Issues

 

The most relevant studies that have had a tremendous impact on the study of migration have come from the field of sociology. But interdisciplinary endeavours, like the ones Charles Taylor engages in, start with concepts of nation, nation-building, multicultural and national states[5]. Statistics elaborated in the second half of the 20^th century have focused on individual phenomena (for e.g. the percent of female migrants)[6] and on analyzing the role of the state in the migration process:

 

Emphasis on exchange between cultural groups on negotiating identities is reflected in concepts of diasporic belonging and societal embeddedness as well as transnational or transcultural capabilities to chart life projects and develop ways of everyday life under conditions of high mobility.[7]

 

Like Nancy Forner, Richard Dyer attempts to define what conditions of high mobility cause on an identity level. First and foremost, migrants affirm but also assume an identity: „Crucial to such affirmation is the construction of a sense of oneness with a social grouping.”[8] This sense of oneness is reconstructed through engaging with differences, as “identity is simply the recognition of the attempt to define a «self» or presence, a community or a group […] against another.”[9]

Identity issues have opened the path for the politics of identity. In his book The Politics of Identity. Liberal Political Theory and the Dilemmas of Difference Michael Kenny discusses the term having as a starting point the dilemmas of plurality and the recognition of what individuality really is. Kenny sees in individuality the belonging to a nation, ethnic group, religion or a sexual minority.[10] Michael Kenny’s study explores political theory and liberalism and how, at the core of applying identity politics and policies, we find social movements that actually form, reform and deform power relations and decisional factors. The components of migration, identity, discourses on Otherness and the role of the state in the migration process are all part of a discourse on migration.

 

Discourses on Migration

 

Documenting migration is complex and difficult. That is why such projects are quite rare. But Transit Deutschland[11] is an 800- or more page collection of texts documenting migration in Germany (from press articles to interviews) over a time span of nearly 40 years. The anthology is the result of the cooperation between Konstanz University, Germany and University of California, at Berkeley, USA. Multiple voices emerge from the anthology: from authors to politicians, to editors and NGO representatives. Moreover, the anthology documents press articles on migration and racial attacks in Germany, engaging with the reception of migration in target societies. The components of migration, migration policies and integration are clustered under the label of “orienting diversity.”[12] Deniz Göktürk, in an article on Istanbul as the largest non-EU European cultural capital in 2010, describes consequences of such an orientation: 

 

Vision, planning and the practice of orienting diversity are interconnected. Representing Istanbul in cinema or in other media is influenced by public debates on the city’s urban planning, conservation, economy, migration, tourism, culture and democracy. We are therefore not talking about representations of the city taken from reality, as these representations are influenced by urban planning, economy and politics. The key issue at hand is not necessarily to explore how these images emerge from social reality or geopolitical constellations […] but on how urban spaces and social realities can be constructed through imagination.[13] (my translation)  

 

Göktürk underlines how, in this particular case, we witness the representation of an urban imaginary through a selection of common and identifiable images of Europe and the world. Such an orientation will also engage with the reconciliation of memory. The traumatic past is a powerful tool in the formation of a common European identity. Hence, as Aleida Assmann has pointed out, Europe has become a “community of memory.”[14] She begins her argumentation from the incapacity of European states to recognize and commemorate traumatic experiences aggressors and victims have in common. Assmann explains how collective memory and national histories collide with individual memories[15] and how complicated it is to enable victims and aggressors to share grief. The fall of Communism and the expansion of the EU that now includes several former Communist states in Eastern Europe have made such efforts even more difficult.

 

The Literature of Migration

 

In the attempt to define new cultural phenomena in the German speaking world, literature written by non-natives has been firstly tackled from a thematic point of view. This particular story starts in the economic booming years of Western Europe and coincides with the import of foreign labourers into Germany and Switzerland back in the 1950s. Most workers came from the southern parts of Europe like Portugal, Greece, Italy and Turkey.[16] As policies enabled them to settle in Germany and Switzerland it soon became clear that governments never intended to integrate the newly arrived. Social distress, discrimination and identity issues became visible in and literature was no stranger to them. Interestingly enough, the first texts that dealt with migrants were written by German authors and often portrayed migrant workers as victims of a corrupt system of labour import. The term Gastarbeiterliteratur (literature of the guest worker)[17] comes from a social and political status of the migrant worker and applies a judicial term to thematically describe literary phenomena. The 1980s brought massive social and political change in the world. Migrant authors that were both part of the first and second generation of migrants founded the PoLiKunst Bewegung (Polinationaler Literatur- und Kunstverein, multinational literary and artistic organization). Rafik Schami, Suleiman Tafiq and Franco Biondi were amongst the active members of the literary movement called Literatur der Betroffenheit (the literature of consternation). This is the term used by migrant authors to define their own creation. The authors motivate their choice of labelling through the fact that shock and consternation is visible on both ends of a cultural contact. Most authors of the PoLiKunst Bewegung build adapted, adoptive and even recycled literary universes and their belonging to a culture is closely linked to their mother language, despite the fact that they also write in German. In Switzerland Franco Aste and Franco Supino founded “I Poeti del Gruppo 83.” Being Secundi, Italian word that designates a second generation of migrants, authors write both in Italian and German on identity issues and cultural quests. Moreover, poets belonging to the group had been well received in Italy as well. Contemplating the past reveals “a textual ganglion where transnational historical processes intersect, from which […] new perspectives on central questions in German culture can be developed.”[18] Moray McGowan’s interpretations on the works of German-Turkish author Zafer Şenocak unravel not only new perspectives on German culture, but how a spatial dilemma emerges. Before detailing what such a dilemma consist of, it would be useful to point out that the works of migrant authors have gradually become mainstream literature in the German speaking world. Moreover, there were attempts to find proper literary tools to explore such creations. Therefore we can find, next to the literature of migration, the term literature of the migrants, inter/transcultural literature, transnational and even intercultural literature. The latter is discussed by Michael Hofmann who sees in the ever-changing literary landscape the aesthetic value of the literature of migration: “[the reader] encounters the other and reflects upon what German literature and identity really mean.”[19] Critics have attempted to define this new literary movement through a national lens. But the authors themselves, dissatisfied and puzzled by socio-political framing, sought out to edit anthologies that would discuss literature written in German from a pragmatic point of view. The dialog emerged, not between literary critics, but focused on the writings and the public. This is not something out of the ordinary, but the lack of reference to other literary forms, themes and literary motives meant that nothing, but socio-political frameworks could influence the reception of the literature of migration. One valuable contribution to the recognition and visibility of this literature was the awarding of the Adelbert von Chamisso[20] literary prize. The prize is granted every year to authors writing in German and who live in the German speaking world. But the area of nomination has been substantially increased as in past years authors who live outside the borders of the German speaking countries have been shortlisted. Thus, we return to the spatial dilemma I previously mentioned. Language and space of origin seem to be irrelevant in the current literary landscape. Stuart Taberner, the editor of an anthology of texts on The Novel in German since 1990, offers a solution to this spatial problem. Seeing literature written in German outside national borders, he moves on to reveal particularities of the German novel. Starting with the trauma of the nationalism-socialism in Germany and ending with migration, Taberner sees in the current literature written in German, firstly, a confrontation with the present, by individualizing trauma. Crushed by transformative forces in society, individual traumas enter an imaginary that will internalize and recast reality. For Taberner, Herta Müller’s writings, for example, “reveal the gap between the promise of emancipation to the reality of broken human subjects, during the communist period in her native Romania and after her move to the Federal Republic.”[21] Secondly, novels explore biographies and autobiographies by juxtaposing histories and possible histories, like in the works of Günter Grass, Martin Walser, Cristoph Hein and Daniel Kehlmann. Thirdly, the past does not only refer to a Nazi past, but to individual crisis that can lead to such disasters. The last paradigm identified by Taberner places the accent on the individual spatial, temporal and identity relocation. Therefore, 

 

dealing with the past crystallizes the tension between fiction as a mode of reimagining and fiction as an instrument of historical interrogation – once again, we return to a traditional concern with identity and art either as a poetic transcendence of a flowed reality or as an instrument of intervention in the same.[22]

 

Nomads, Migrants and the Displaced

 

Carmine Chiellino’s handbook on intercultural literature in Germany has a chapter on Rumäniendeutsche Literatur[23] (Romanian-German literature). The most well-known literary movement in the Romanian-German literature was the Aktionsgruppe Banat. Herta Müller, during her student years, became close to literary group and even made her debut in a similar direction with its members.[24] The Aktionsgruppe Banat (1972-1975) included Gerhard Ortinau, Rolf Bossert, Richard Wagner and William Totok. Most authors were well received by the public and enjoyed recognition until the group was dissolved in 1975. The members confronted censorship and harassment from the Romanian totalitarian regime. Moreover, even the German community in Romania rejected their writings, especially Müller’s Niederungen. Most members managed to leave Romania for Western Germany and even continued to write.[25] Herta Müller settled in West Berlin in 1987 and continued to publish novels, essays, short-stories and articles. In 2009 she was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature. In Switzerland, well-known Romanian born authors are Cătălin Dorian Florescu and Aglaja Veternayi. While Florescu explores liminality and porous borders in his novels Wunderzeit, Zaira or Der blinde Masseur, Veteranyi’s short, but prolific literary career, left us two remarkable novels that deal with the fragmented existence of individuals transiting multiple spaces (Warum das Kind in der Polenta kocht, Das Regal der letzten Atemzüge). How does a literature of migration in the German space enter a dialog with a rather unknown Romanian literature? What similarities and differences emerge in the literature of two European spaces in regards to their nomadic and migrant authors? Romanian literature of the past twenty years is a literature of loss and escape. In a broader sense, the literature of loss is very similar to the Literatur der Betroffenheit. This loss is first and foremost an identity loss, as the imaginary is still very much caught in the persistent ruins of a Communist past, yearning for la belle epoch of the 1920s and showing a present from which one needs to escape from. The fifty years of communism have completely eradicated references not only to literary forms, themes and motives, but decentred a society, enabling massive migrations towards other Western countries. Moreover, the 1990s are violent, fuelled by a political class just “upgraded” to a democratic one, as most dignitaries were part of the Communist nomenclature. Dealing with an infamous past meant that literature had to experiment and transcend borders. Cinematic representations become a cradle for a Romanian imaginary. This passage into a new medium enabled the freeing from a claustrophobic past, but allowed, through irony and humour, for the remains of that past to become visible. Hence, like in the literature written in German, individual crisis and personal histories criss-cross the Romanian imaginary where authors, in a race against time, seek to defeat a historic time.[26] That is probably why migrant and nomadic authors find their place in Romanian literature, as national frameworks are silenced through a constant “come-and-go” movement. But totalitarianism has engraved deep scars and the literature of migration seems to reflect on the meanings of a dispersed and displaced Self. The works of Richard Wagner, Eginald Schlattner and Herta Müller take on a tremendous task of revisiting traumatic spaces. Such authors reflect on a dispersed self: on the one hand assembling the image of the eternal guest (Communist policies on ethnic groups concerned solely a rapid assimilation or expulsion), on the other hand showcasing an imaginary encoded through ethnicity and ideology. Moreover, from a thematic point of view, their writings break taboos and reveal main causes for an oppressive daily existence. The fall of Communism did not bring with itself a solid and guaranteed access to memory, but it rather eluded any real confrontation with a common traumatic past. Migration, a desolated future, families at the brink of disaster, violence madness and despair describe a present in need of escape. A rather nostalgic view on the past (unrelated to Communism) is closely linked to Western Europe and to Romania before 1945.[27] Nomadic experience explores, on the one hand the liberty trance that revealed itself after 1989, on the other hand it opened up a new path of exploring possible history and traumatic memory. Displacement, mobility and non-belonging are constituents of the literature of migration and we are not necessarily dealing with their representations.[28] Like in the case of Turkish-German authors, Romanian-German authors build an imaginary cut off from both the adoptive and the original space. Migrant authors build an imaginary that feeds on multiple spaces that have the potential to exist at the same time. The permanent source of creation is therefore not the space of origin, but how such individuals experience spatial overlapping. In other words, the migrant experiences space as a locus coeruleus. In anatomical terms the locus coeruleus[29] designates a part of the brain that generates physiological reactions to high stress and panic. I use this metaphor to describe how we are dealing with an attempt to constantly dismantle spatial entanglements. Migrant authors uncover a source for the imaginary that can support and fuel memory, while revisiting traumatic spaces, like in the works of Herta Müller and Aglaja Veteranyi.

 

Conclusion

 

Migration into Europe has changed our understanding of nationality, borders, society and identity. On the one hand, we are witnessing the terrorist threat that is not necessarily coming in with the streams of migrants from Syria and other parts of the Arab world; on the other hand, we have the chance to understand how the spaces we inhabit merge and how movement is part of our daily life. The literature of migration is not a mere symptom of being in-between or a symbol of non-belonging. Migrant authors uncover the most visible trait of the relationship we have with spatial entanglements: its precariousness. Maybe this can be seen as another shared traumatic experience. As Herta Müller comments in an interview on Oskar Pastior’s concentration camp years, movement means: “aus der Welt hinaus, hinter das Ende der Welt.”[30]

 

Bibliography

 

Anghel, Remus Gabriel; Horvath, Istvan (eds.), Sociologia migrației. Studii de caz românești, Iași, Polirom, 2008, p. 16.

Assmann, Aleida, “Europe: A Community of Memory? Twentieth Annual Lecture of the GHI, November 16, 2006”, in GHI Bulletin, no. 40/2007.

Castels, Stephen; Miller, Mark J., The Age of Migration. International Population Movement in the Modern World, New York, Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.

Chiellino, Carmine (ed.), Interkulturelle Literatur in Deutschland. Ein Handbuch, Stuttgart, Metzler, 2000.

Cordoş, Sanda, Lumi din cuvinte. Reprezentări şi identităţi în literatura română postbelică, Bucharest, Cartea Românească, 2012.

Dyer, Richard, White: Essays on Race and Culture, London, New York, Routledge, 1997.

Ernst, Thomas; Heimböckel, Dieter (eds.), Verortungen der Interkulturalität. Die „Europäischen Kulturhauptstädte“ Luxembrug und die Großregion (2007), das Ruhrgebiet (2010) und Istanbul (2010), Bielefeld, transcript, 2012.

Forner, Nancy, From Ellis Island to JFK; New York’s great Wave of immigration, New Haven, Yale University Press, 2000.

Göktürk, Deniz; Gramling, David; Kaes, Anton; Langenohl, Andreas (eds.), Transit Deutschland. Debatten zu Nation und Migration. Eine Dokumentation, Konstanz, Konstanz University Press, 2011.

Gutmann, Amy (ed.), Multiculturalism. Examining the Politics of Recognition, New Jersey, Princeton University Press, 1994.

Kenny, Michael, The Politics of Identity. Liberal Political Theory and the Dilemmas of Difference, Cambridge, Polity Press, 2004.

Manea, Norman; Cordoș, Sanda (eds.), Romanian writers on writing, San Antonio, Trinity University Press, 2011.

Müller, Herta, Lebensangst und Worthunger. Im Gespräch mit Michael Lentz. Leipziger Poetikvorlesung 2009, München, Carl Hansen Verlag, 2009.

Müller, Peter; Cicek, Jasmin, Migrantenliteratur: Arbeitstexte für den Unterricht, Leipzig, reclam, 2007.

Mungiu-Pippidi, Alina; Althabe, Gérard, Secera şi buldozerul. Scorniceşti şi Nucşoara. Mecansime de aservirea a ţăranului român, Iaşi, Polirom, 2002.

Schmitz, Helmut (ed.), Amsterdamer Beiträge zur neuerene Germanistik. Von der nationalen zu internationalen Literatur. Transkulturelle deutschsprachige Literatur und Kultur im Zeitalter globaler Migration, Amsterdam, New York, Rodopi, no. 69/2009.

Schuster, Diana, Die Banater Autorengruppe. Selbstdarstellung und Rezeption in Rumänien und Deutschland, Konstanz, Hartung-Gorre Verlag, 2004.

Taberner, Stuart (ed.), The novel in German since 1990, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2011.

Wolfreys, Julian, Critical Keywords in Literary and Cultural Theory, London, Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.

 

Notes