Myth and Symbols of European Integration – Western and Eastern Perspectives
Course Code: MK_016 Language of Instruction: English Course tutor(s) Dr Krzysztof Kowalski works as a Senior Lecturer at the Institute of European Studies at the Jagiellonian University. His interests cover the anthropology of Europe, anthropology of European institutions (institutional anthropology), processes of history, memory and heritage invention at a European, national, regional and local level.
Description The aim of the course is to present an anthropological point of view on the integration of Europe with special attention put on a variety of different readings of European, institutional symbolism especially in the context of its Western and Eastern understandings. The category of myth and symbols as well as memory and history will be the crucial element of the course. Special emphasis will be placed on examining strategies of the social invention of these phenomena. The symbolization of time and space of Europe will be discussed in depth so as to present their role in the appearance of local, national and supranational identities.
Type of course Additional (elective) course for all specializations and specialty (MA level) Year of Studies: 1 or 2 Number of ECTS points 4.5
Prerequisites (if applicable) There is no prerequisite.
Intended Learning Outcomes Students will understand the process of invention of European symbolism, mythology heritage and history as a means providing the citizens of the EU with a conceptual framework owing to which the European (and civilian) identity takes its form. As special emphasis will be given to anthropological perspectives of analysis, students will be familiarized with the process of self and other in contemporary Europe; in other words how social, political and ethnic exclusion and inclusion are symbolically constructed.
The student: EK1: has ordered and extended knowledge of terminology used in the humanities and social sciences (K_W03+++) EK2: has ordered, extended knowledge about traditional and contemporary trends and systems in anthropology, sociology, philosophy and social psychology and understands their historical and cultural contexts (K_W16+++) EK3: has extended knowledge about European cultural heritage and contemporary cultural life in Europe, as well as the functioning of the most important institutions in this field (K_W17+++) EK4: has an ability to search, gather and interpret data and information based on relevant sources; has the ability to evaluate the importance of sources (K_U01+++)
1 EK5: has the ability to read with comprehension and critically analyze texts pertinent to European studies and have the ability to compare them to texts presenting different views on the subject, confront them and draw his or her own conclusions (K_U02+++) EK6: has the ability to write independent and creative esseys in Polish or in any foreign language (different from the language of study programme) based on a suitable selection of sources and methodological workshops; ability to write an MA thesis based on own research questions/hypotheses (K_U09+++) EK7: has the ability to effectively work individually as well as interact and work in a group, performing different roles in it (K_K02+++) EK8: is aware of his or her responsibility for preserving the cultural heritage of the region, country and Europe (K_K04+++) Course communication dr Krzysztof Kowalski
Notices and announcements via USOS and students’ notice board COURSE ORGANIZATION
Spring Semester Time and place: will be posted by CES in the online calendar
Course type (seminar/lecture/workshop, etc.) The course will consist – first of all – of lectures complemented with discussions for which students are highly encouraged to read key and additional readings. The second element of the course will be focused on individual research and a presentation to be done during the last course meetings (in the form of seminars). The subject of the individual research and – in consequence – of the presentation and essay must be previously discussed and accepted by the instructor. The final decision on the amount of meetings dedicated to students presentations will depend on the amount of the course participants.
Contact hours: - 30 hours of lectures with elements of seminars
Breakdown of ECTS credits participation in classes and seminars 30 hours reading preparation for classes and seminars 22,5 hours work on the presentation 30 hours work on the essay 30 hours Didactic methods used Lectures and presentations done by students Mode and criteria of assessment of learning outcomes Evaluation of the progress done by the student based on both: the quality of the presentation on the chosen subject and the quality of the essay presented at the end of the course. written paper, preparing presentation and participation in in-class discussions EK1, EK2, EK3, EK4, EK5, EK6 in-class discussion EK7, EK8
2 Assessment As the course combines instructor’s lectures and subsequent discussions, individual research, an oral presentation and written essay, the final grade will comprise all these elements respecting the following rule: 1) attendance of the lectures is not compulsory but highly recommended as active class participation makes up 5 % of the final mark; 2) active seminar participation makes up 5 % of the final mark; attendance of the seminars is obligatory - students must attend at least three sessions of student presentations (including the one in which they present). 3) 15-20 minute compulsory presentation on a chosen subject makes up to 40% of the final mark. Students are obliged to provide fellow students with hand-outs, may use power- point (not necessary) and are expected not to read but to present their argument(s). If two students prepare a joint presentation, its expected length is 25-30 minutes. 4) The final paper will account for 50 % of the final mark. Requirements for the final paper: 24,000 up to 27,000 characters (i.e. 13 up to standard 15 pages, character Times New Roman, size 12, interline 1,5). This amount of characters does not cover the bibliography! A joint essay (based on a joint presentation) is NOT possible. The text must respond to all academic standards (notes, references, citations and bibliography). Internet, academic (!!!) sources are welcome however neither the presentation nor the essay can be based only on this source. The essay may be either a written version of the previously done presentation or it may discuss another topic agreed upon with the instructor. The assessment of this dissertation will be based on the originality of the student’s argument, analytical approach and reference to the literature. The essay must be submitted to the instructor’s pigeonhole in the CES administration office or sent to the address
STRUCTURE OF THE COURSE
No. Title of the session Format (lecture, seminar, combination) 1 Introduction lecture + discussion 2 Classical paradigm of anthropology vs. Lecture modern anthropology 3 Anthropology of European institutions Lecture (French, British and Polish experience) 4 Invention of European symbolism – Lecture the flag of Europe 5 Invention of European symbolism – Lecture the anthem of Europe 6 Seminar – discussion on students’ seminar presentation topics 7 Memory, tradition, heritage and lieux Lecture de mémoire 8 Invention of European heritage Lecture 9 Myth and politics lecture
3 10 Political mythologies in Central lecture Europe 11 Political mythologies in Central Lecture Europe – the Polish case 12 Myth and Mythologies in/of the Lecture European Union 13. Seminar – students’ presentations Seminar 14. Seminar – students’ presentations Seminar 15. Seminar – students’ presentations Seminar
Session no. 1 Introduction
Format lecture + discussion
Aim of the session, The interest of the lecture is (1) to present the general ideas and objectives main issues of the course, (2) to show the specificity of the anthropological perspective discussed to the integration process, (3) to justify the choice of subsequent lecture subjects, (4) to discuss the students’ form of commitment (i.e. research project, format of presentation and essay). Students will be asked to give a very short presentation of their academic background and their expectations concerning the course. Key readings for the session Questions for class discussion (based on readings)
Additional/further readings
Session no. 2 Classical paradigm of anthropology vs. modern anthropology
Format lecture
Aim of the session, The main idea of the lecture is to present the classical paradigm of main issues discussed anthropology in the context of European, intellectual background at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries (i.e. otherness, distance, voyage, participant observation, return, speaking on behalf of the unknown). In this respect Bronisław Malinowski’s vision of anthropology will be examined in detail. The second and crucial element of the lecture will show reasons for which the above mentioned paradigm was/is completed with a new one in which anthropologists “visibly” tend to search for otherness IN Europe. The lecture will end with some reflexion on how “anthropology at home” was/is done.
4 Key readings for the Malinowski B., Introduction [in:] Argonauts of the Western Pacific, pp. 1- session 25 (copy of this text is available in the library of the Centre for European Studies)
Geertz Cl., 1988, Works and lives. The Anthropologist as author, Stanford University Press, Stanford, chapter 4: I-Witnessing: Malinowski Children, pp. 73-102
Questions for class Was Marco Polo or Ryszard Kapuściński an anthropologist? Why yes or discussion (based on why not? Difference between science, erudition and scholarship. readings)
Additional/further Barnard A., 2000, History and theory in anthropology, Cambridge readings University Press, Cambridge, chapter 5: Functionalism and structural- functionalism, pp. 61-79
Miner H., 1956, Body Ritual among the Nacirema, “American Anthropologist”, 58 (3), p. 503-507 (copy of this text is available in the library of the Centre for European Studies)
Session no. 3 Anthropology of European institutions
Format lecture
Aim of the session, The main idea of the lecture is to present the experience of anthropology main issues discussed carried out in Europe and especially in some European institutions. Special attention will be placed on French research focusing on two aspects: (1) the institutional culture of the European Parliament and the European Commission and (2) the symbolisation/invention of time and space of the EU from Brussels bureaucrats point of view. A second component of the lecture will take into consideration British, anthropological reflection on invention of European symbolism, heritage and memory. Key readings for the Abélès M., 2000, Virtual Europe (chapter 2) [in:] I. Bellier, T. Wilson (eds), session An Anthropology of the European Union, Berg, Oxford, pp. 31-53
Boissevain J., 1994 Towards an Anthropology of European Communities (chapter 2) [in:] V. Goddard, J. Llobera, C. Shore (eds) The Anthropology of Europe, Berg, Oxford, pp. 41-57 Questions for class Institutional culture or culture of Europe? What are symbolic frontiers of discussion (based on Europe? readings)
Additional/further Goddard V., Llobera J., Shore C. Introduction: An Anthropology of Europe readings (chapter 1) [in:] V. Goddard, J. Llobera, C. Shore (eds) The Anthropology of Europe, Berg, Oxford, pp. 1-41
5
Shore C., Wright S., Policy: a new field of anthropology (chapter 1) [in:] C. Shore, S. Wright (eds) Anthropology of Policy, Routledge, London-New York, pp. 3-39
Session no. 4 Invention of European symbolism – the flag of Europe
Format lecture
Aim of the session, Departing from the conviction that each political entity needs symbols, main issues discussed narratives and rituals, the lecture shows the history of the European flag: i.e. the role of the Council of Europe (1948-1955), the official acceptance of this symbol by the European Parliament, the European Council (1986), presence and absence of this symbols in the recent European treaties. The lecture will demonstrate possible, different readings and understandings of the twelve golden stars on the blue background. The lecture will show – as well - the tension between the religious and the political in some European countries. Key readings for the Shore C., 2000, Building Europe, Routledge, London-New York, chapter 2 session Creating the people’s Europe: symbols, history and invented traditions, pp. 40-66
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Europe (the page is provided not to give information on the symbol but a background for a discussion) Questions for class Is one community possible if there are multiple understandings of its discussion (based on main symbol? readings)
Additional/further Shore C., 2000, Building Europe, Routledge, London-New York, chapter 5 readings A “supranational” civil service? The role of the Commission in the integration process, pp. 130-147
Shore C., 2000, Building Europe, Routledge, London-New York, chapter 6 The Brussels context: integration and engrenage among EU elites, pp. 147-171
Shore C., 2000, Building Europe, Routledge, London-New York, chapter 7 Transnational, supranational or post-national? The organisational culture of the Commission, pp. 171-206
Session no. 5 Invention of European symbolism – the anthem of Europe
Format lecture
Aim of the session, Making a reference to the case of the flag of Europe, the lecture will main issues discussed investigate the role of music – i.e. the anthem of Europe - in the process
6 of European community invention. It will show the history and debate on the anthem of Europe and certain arguments against it deriving from different national and historic contexts. The presence and absence of this symbol in the recent European treaties will be discussed as well. Key readings for the Key readings are the same as for the session 4 + session http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbols_of_Europe#Anthem (the page is provided not to give information on the symbol but a background for a discussion). Questions for class Does the EU have an institutional heritage? If yes, does the EU protect it discussion (based on and how? readings)
Additional/further readings
Session no. 6 Seminar – discussion on students’ presentation topics
Format seminar + discussion
Aim of the session, The seminar will entirely concentrate on students’ research proposals. For main issues discussed the seminar students are obliged to provide a draft title, working hypothesis and arguments, and bibliography that refers to the proposed subject. At this stage of work the general idea of the presentation and subsequent essay should be quite clear. Key readings for the session Questions for class discussion (based on readings)
Additional/further readings
Session no. 7 Memory, tradition, heritage and lieux de mémoire
Format lecture
Aim of the session, The main idea of the lecture is to present a few notions that are crucial main issues discussed for the next part of the entire course. These are especially the definitions of tradition and heritage, their mutual relation/tension and interdependence. The lecture will show – as well – the process of heritage invention as a process of self/group definition. An element of symbolic inclusion and exclusion will be mentioned. In this respect each cultural policy is a delicate and political subject on European, national and local levels. A strong need for a common history museum will be discussed especially in respect to the Museum of Europe. Its philosophy, lack of
7 collection and temporary exhibitions will be discussed in relation to the European heritage and identity invention. Key readings for the Hudson K., 1999, Attempts to define ‘museum’ [in:] D. Boswell, J. Evans session (eds) Representing the Nation: A Reader. Histories, heritage and museums, London – New York, Routledge, pp. 371-379
Clifford J., 1988 The Predicament of Culture, Cambridge MA, Harvard University Press, chapter 10 On Collecting Art and Culture, pp. 215 – 251
Clifford J., 1999 Museum as contact zone (chapter 21) [in:] D. Boswell, J. Evans (eds) Representing the Nation: A Reader. Histories, heritage and museums, London – New York, Routledge, pp. 435-458
Questions for class Does Europe have a common heritage or a commonly contracted past discussion (based on that delineates what Europe is and/or what Europe is not? readings)
Additional/further Hobsbawm E., Ranger T., 1983, Introduction : Inventing Traditions [in:] readings Hobsbawm E., Ranger T. (eds) The Invention of Tradition, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 1-14
Benedict A., 2000, Imagined communities, Verso, London–New York, chapter 1 Introduction, pp. 1-9
Benedict A., 2000, Imagined communities, Verso, London–New York, chapter 10 Census, map, museum, pp. 163-187
Session no. 8 Invention of European heritage
Format lecture
Aim of the session, Deriving from a conviction that each power needs a material form that main issues discussed incarnates it, the lecture presents the search for the architecture of the common capital of the EU (i.e. different cities, variety of architectural projects). In this respect the lecture focuses on the relation between the material and the immaterial, the power and the symbol. The second part of the lecture will present the European programme CULTURE2000 as a means of invention and promotion of European heritage. The case study of the project The Square: a European Heritage/La Place: un héritage européen will be presented in details. Key readings for the Hein C., 2004, The Capital of Europe: Architecture and Urban Planning for the session European Union, Westport, Conn., Praeger, chapter 5 Strasbourg: Parliamentary capital of Europe, pp. 95-112
Hein C., 2004, The Capital of Europe: Architecture and Urban Planning for the European Union, Westport, Conn., Praeger, chapter 7 Brussles: Executive Capital
8 of Europe, pp. 135-160
Questions for class Is a common European heritage a fact or a postulate? discussion (based on readings)
Additional/further European Commission, 2010, Preserving our heritage, improving our readings environment - 20 years of EU research into cultural heritage, vol.1, available at http://ec.europa.eu/culture/news/news2469_en.htm
Session no. 9 Myth and politics
Format lecture
Aim of the session, This lecture opens a subsequent block of interest of the entire course that main issues discussed is especially focused on the presence of myth in the politics. With its introductory character, the lecture refers to the classical tension between logos and mythos and gives basic information on the notion of myth, i.e. M. Eliade, R. Barthes, C. Castoriadis, Sorel and others with special attention paid to the definition of myth by Leszek Kołakowski. Key readings for the Eliade M., 1961, The Sacred and the Profane, Harper & Row Publishers, session New York, chapter 1 Sacred Space and Making the world Sacred, pp. 20- 67
Eliade M., 1961, The Sacred and the Profane, Harper & Row Publishers, New York, chapter 2 Sacred Time and Myth, pp. 68-115
Kołakowski L., 1989 The Presence of Myth, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, chapter 1 Preliminary Distinctions, pp. 1-8
Questions for class Does Europe need myth/myths or a mythology/mythologies? If yes what discussion (based on for? Is a social life possible without myth(s)? Is a non-religious man readings) possible to imagine?
Additional/further readings
Session no. 10 Political mythologies in Central Europe
Format lecture
Aim of the session, The lecture examines the problem of the specificity of Central Europe that main issues discussed is observable in the importance of social imaginary that marked the transformation period that started in this part of Europe with/after the collapse of the Soviet bloc. The main concern of this lecture is to show the
9 danger of political mythologies that led societies to the edge of war atrocities. Key readings for the Tismaneanu V., 1998, Fantasies of Salvation. Democracy, Nationalism and session Myth in Post-Communist Europe, Princeton University Press, Princeton, chapter Introduction. After Marx: The Return of Political Myth, pp. 3-23
Tismaneanu V., 1998, Fantasies of Salvation. Democracy, Nationalism and Myth in Post-Communist Europe, Princeton University Press, Princeton, chapter Conclusion: The Mythological Complexity in a Post-Communist World, pp. 153-169
Questions for class Is politics condemned to myth? Can politics exist without mythology? discussion (based on readings)
Additional/further Overing J., 1997, The Role of myth: an anthropological perspective or the readings reality of the really made-up (chapter 1) [in:] G. Hosking, G. Schöpflin (eds) Myth and nationahood, Routledge, London – New York, pp. 1-18
Session no. 11 Political mythologies in Central Europe – the Polish case
Format lecture
Aim of the session, The lecture examines the specificity of the Polish way to freedom and the main issues discussed role of the Catholic Church played in this process. This study case allows one to draw conclusions on the actual balance or tension between the politics and religion observed in Poland at the beginning of the XXI century. The focus of the lecture is put - as well - on the role of the ritual in the social creation of reality. Key readings for the Kubik J., 1994, The Power of Symbols against the symbols of Power, session Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park, Pennsylvania, chapter 5 John Paul II’s First Visit to Poland as an Example of the Ceremonial Transformation of Society, pp. 129-152
Kubik J., 1994, The Power of Symbols against the symbols of Power, Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park, Pennsylvania, chapter 7 Symbols and Ceremonies of Solidarity, pp. 183-238 Questions for class What was and is the role of religion in the Polish public sphere? discussion (based on readings)
Additional/further Kertzer D. I., 1988, Ritual, Politics, and Power, Yale University Press, New readings Haven – London, chapter 1 The Power of Rites, pp. 1-14
Kertzer D. I., 1988, Ritual, Politics, and Power, Yale University Press, New
10 Haven – London, chapter 5 The Ritual Construction of Political Reality, pp. 77-101
Tishner J.,2005, The Ethics of Solidarity, Kraków (copy of this text is available in the library of the Centre for European Studies)
Session no. 12 Myths and Mythologies in/of the European Union
Format lecture
Aim of the session, Taking into consideration all the definitions of myth (and mythology) that main issues discussed have already been presented during previous classes, the main idea of this final lecture is to present the role of myth in the process of European integration and in creating normative and cognitive foundations for governing in the EU. Key readings for the Salla della V., 2010, Political Myth, Mythology and the European Union, session “Journal of Common Market Studies”, vol. 48, nr 1, pp. 1-19 available at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcms.2010.48.issue- 1/issuetoc
Jones E., 2010, The Economic Mythology of European Integration, “Journal of Common Market Studies”, vol. 48, nr 1, pp. 89-109 available at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcms.2010.48.issue- 1/issuetoc
Questions for class Is the notion of myth applicable to the EU case? discussion (based on readings) Additional/further Manners I., 2010, Global Europa: Mythology of the European Union in readings World Politics, “Journal of Common Market Studies”, vol. 48, nr 1, pp. 67- 87 available at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcms.2010.48.issue- 1/issuetoc
Hansen-Magnusson H., 2010, Studying contemporary Constitutionalism: Memory, Myth and Horizon, “Journal of Common Market Studies”, vol. 48, nr 1, pp. 21-44 available at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcms.2010.48.issue- 1/issuetoc
Students are highly encouraged to read the other articles from this volume of “Journal of Common Market Studies” available at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcms.2010.48.issue- 1/issuetoc
11 Session no. 13 Myths and Mythologies in/of the European Union
Format Seminar – students’ presentations
Session no. 14 Myths and Mythologies in/of the European Union
Format Seminar – students’ presentations
Session no. 15 Myths and Mythologies in/of the European Union
Format Seminar – students’ presentations
12