KAIA S. RØNSDAL
We were invited to friendships Lived hospitality
DOI: https://doi.org/10.30664/ar.92002 Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
his article explores hospitality in relation concerning what voices, bodies and prac- to migration within the framework of spa tices make up the critical counter-power, tial theory and calling. The material of the T and where it is rooted. Such strategies are article is based on fieldwork carried out in the Nordic borderlands and conducted in relation to characterized by collaborations focused on a research project exploring Nordic hospitality. subject-to-subject relationships between The concept and context of the borderland, as the researcher subject and research field, well as the methodological development of this including the space in which the research project, are based on spatial theory, phenomen ology and theology. The material discussed are takes place. The article is not aimed at doing excerpts from a small fieldwork narrative about empirical analysis of data to make certain borderland experiences, and interviews regard truth claims concerning migration issues. ing events that took place on the Russian–Nor Rather, the aim is to use excerpts from two wegian border during the so-called refugee crisis in 2015–16. The article aims at, by means of these of the respondents’ short narratives, the narrative excerpts, exploring how conceptualisa researcher subject’s experience, and reflec- tions of hospitality, by discussing them in relation tions on the local migration crisis, as well to the concept of calling from Scandinavian cre as the events’ cultural and historical con- ation theology, may contribute to extensions of text, to discuss conceptualizations of hos- both concepts. pitality. The discussion takes place within the framework of spatial theory primar- Introduction ily in the tradition of the French sociolo- The article explores the conceptualizations gist Henri Lefebvre (2003 [1970], 2007 of the notion of hospitality, based on short [1974], 2008 [1961]), and calling in the excerpts of fieldnotes from fieldwork car- tradition of Scandinavian creation theol- ried out in North Norway in 2017–18. The ogy, linking this to embodied spatial call- cited field narrative and interviews regard ing. Furthermore, the spatial theory relates understandings and experiences of hospi- both to the emphasis on the lived encoun- tality in the region as a borderland, mean- ters in the research strategy, as well as the ing here an area in close vicinity to interna- theoretical framework. tional borders, actualized by the so-called refugee crisis of 2015–16. The article relates Space and hospitality to work exploring decolonial research The very short introductory version of strategies (cf. Lid and Wyller forthcoming), Lefebvre’s theory of the production of space
Approaching Religion • Vol. 10, No. 2 • November 2020 20 (2007 [1974]) in this context is that space 2009 (van Houtum and Boedeltje 2009). is to be understood in an active sense as an We all know that following the events of intricate web of relationships that is contin- 2015 this quote is outdated, and with the uously produced and reproduced. Spaces current situation in Greece and Turkey, are formative. This spatial analysis thus including now the impact of the COVID- concerns active processes of social pro- 19 virus, we may be standing at the thresh- duction. In the context of [Nordic] bor- old of yet another transhistorical number derlands, then, both the dis-placed and the of deaths on our shores and along our bor- ‘placed’ are all producing space, and that ders, as ‘sovereign states claim monop- space exists from the moment of social oly control over the mobility of people’ encounter. (Chattopadhyay 2019: 150). The interpretations of space are con- Every day the news is filled with human nected to the relationships between three tragedy at or near borders. There is, per- different analytical levels – the perceived, haps not surprisingly, rather little of any the conceived and the lived – and how counter-narratives; the human encounters, changes occur in the interplay between openings and possibilities that also make all the levels of space. A space is constant up life at the borders. ‘B/ordering separates ly in motion, always different, always being but also brings together. Respectively, bor- moved forward – the world is moved ders are open to contestations at the level of forward by contrasts, contradictions and the state and everyday life’ (Chattopadhyay tensions (Lefebvre 2007: 42). Space is to be 2019: 151). understood less as something that is, but as something we do, or in the interpretation Border encounters of Kirsten Simonsen, space is a verb rather The material of the article is based on field- than a noun (Simonsen 2010: 45). work from the Nordic borderlands, con- This is where I am concerned with hos- ducted in relation to a research project pitality; this is my starting point: in the exploring Nordic hospitality.1 The concept spaces that occur when humans encounter and context of the borderland, as well as the each other. Furthermore, when I discuss methodological development of the project hospitality it is not in church or politics, but is based on spatial theory, phenomenology in spaces of civil society, where people are, and theology. where life is lived, and where they interpret Border situations need to be empha- and understand hospitality. I always start sised as ‘radical stages of relations’ (Agier in the lived, in the embodied, as humans 2016: 23). The shift of the borders to are situated bodies. Whilst, furthermore, becoming a relational arena has signifi- understanding them not only as situated, cance for how we approach the migrant but also as a situation, the meaning of the as a concrete and embodied human being, body opens up in the process of creating rather than homo sacer, a mere biological meaning (Nahnfeldt 2016: 66). fact (Agamben 1998), ‘abandoned to the So, let us start with a quote: ‘The number of unauthorized migrants who have died attempting to cross the borders to Europe 1 ‘NORDHOST: Nordic Hospitalities in the Context of Migration and Refugee Crisis’, is transhistorical and has reached frighten- a project financed by the UiO: Nordic, one ing heights’ (Chattopadhyay 2019: 157). of the University of Oslo’s interdisciplinary This quote is citing an article written in strategic research areas.
Approaching Religion • Vol. 10, No. 2 • November 2020 21 unconditional power of the sovereign’ non-encounter, is often not interpreted as (Katz 2017: 2). This is explored through a space and is sometimes referred to as a bottom-up insights developed for events in ‘nonspace’ to illustrate this. Borderlands or the Nordic borderlands. border spaces may also be such nonspaces, The empirical, ‘from below’ and enacted as the encounters there are rarely the main and lived encounters belong to post-colo- object of interest. Furthermore, such non nial traditions, challenging and reconfig- spaces may be counterspaces, in that they, uring migration binaries such as guest/ as in Michel Foucault’s (1984) notion of host; victim/agent; villain/victim, etc. (cf. heterotopia, may be different from the Machado et al. 2018). dominant spaces, and through their very I aim at showing and discussing how differences thus direct criticism towards hospitality may take the concept of calling society, threatening the general discourse from Scandinavian creation theology, and and challenging the ethical discourse. They become an interesting and fruitful exten- are also rich and complex social spaces. sion of both concepts. Thus, the border situation also pushes refu- Traditional notions of both hospital- gees and migrants to ‘reshape their lives in ity and the concept of calling may become order to … give them a new form in a new passive, as binaries such as guest and host place. [Creating a] complex and multifac- are traditionally seen as pre-determined eted flow of migrants who actively resist the and set. I aim to argue that hospitality may restrictions imposed on them’ (Katz 2017: be pinpointed as a pre-reflexive action, thus 13) by biopolitical ordering and border challenging the possible rigidity of the roles sovereignty. and their binary aspect. The premise here is that there are ways In Lutheran theology ‘calling’ is the of discovering the calling, and that we name for the task, God-given to humans, meet in the calling as equal bodies with of taking responsibility for each other. The pathos, provided that it is something we responsibility is founded on an idea about are affected by (Waldenfels 2011: 27), pro- humans’ co-creating missions and adds voking the sense of something ‘done to us’ a sacred dimension and ethical value to (Waldenfels 2007: 74). Who calls and who interpersonal encounters and practices responds is not something decided before- (Nahnfeldt 2016). Cecilia Nahnfeldt points hand, it is unclear and open, and so are the out that openness to calling entails being premises of the spaces themselves. prepared for disruption in the calling. She who is attentive to her fellow human does The Arctic route2 not decide the time and space for the call- In 2015, around 1.3 million people crossed ings. It is about letting oneself be inter- the borders of Europe (Pew Research Center rupted, and to bear seeing or daring to receive an opening (ibid.). 2 The following account builds on news art The calling thus bears the character- icles from local, national and international istic of disruption or an encounter; it also broadcasters in 2015 and 2016, non-aca- takes place in the minor encounters in demic and academic publications, as well lived spaces, such as the fleeting encoun- as the informants of this project. I have included the details necessary to contextu- ter between a beggar and a passer-by in a alize the chapter. The political, departmen- public transport station (Rønsdal 2018a, tal and legal version of the events and the 2018b). Such an encounter, or explicit local experience of them may differ.
Approaching Religion • Vol. 10, No. 2 • November 2020 22 2016). They were refugees and migrants the local news station reported on the situ coming from a wide range of nations, find- ation but were unable to catch the atten- ing any possible route into a European tion of the capital. The international media, nation. Norway has a 196-kilometre border however, were attentive, and once they with Russia. Two thirds of it follows the started broadcasting from Storskog, the courses of rivers. 230 Norwegian soldiers Norwegian media and government realized guard the Norwegian side, while the same that this was an international event. number of Russians soldiers guard their Furthermore, it became a national side. 396 border posts mark the border: and international political issue. The refu- yellow and black on the Norwegian side, gees heading to Norway were piling up in red and green on the Russian. Russia addi- the two Russian cities closest to Storskog, tionally has a fenced-in militarized security Nikel and Zapoljarnyj, creating a difficult zone for several kilometres into the coun- situation among the politicians, locals and try. Only one road crosses the border, and amongst the migrants themselves. Russian consequently, the entire border has one border authorities and Norwegian police border station, called Storskog. It is illegal agreed on a maximum of 200 border cross- to make the crossing on foot, but a bicycle ings per day. is considered a vehicle. Once the Norwegian government real- At the beginning of the twenty-first ized the severity of the situation, they mobil century, an average of five asylum seek- ized to find means to control and eventually ers crossed this border annually.3 In 2015, stop the increasing flow of migrants using 5,465 asylum seekers found their way the Arctic route into Norway. To stop the along this route into Norway on bicycles, stream of asylum seekers the law had to be most granted once-through visas in Russia. changed. What may be the fastest legisla- Already in March 2015, a few asylum seek- tive amendment in Norway was performed ers crossed this border. In August, a hun- in 10 days. The state secretary himself trav- dred people crossed, and new records elled to the border to oversee the end of were set every day. By October 50 to 60 allowing asylum seekers in. The police and people crossed every day. According to the local agencies were critical, as the area could Norwegian law, asylum applications can be not accommodate the numbers of people processed at the border, or inside the ter- who had already arrived, as well as the fact ritory. As it was impossible to differentiate that it was now late November and the cli- between those seeking asylum and others, mate conditions were endangering the situ- as well as handling the sheer number of ation. The state secretary and government people arriving, the border authorities were unaffected and additionally increased simply decided to let every third-nation the offensive to deport the migrants. The citizen enter. lack of clear agreements with Russia, led to The local police, politicians and popu migrants being sent back and forth across lation mobilized. The transit reception the border zone several times. The govern- centre, the nearby asylum seeker receptions ment argued stolidly by law, pressurising centres, as well as all the hotels in the area the authorities on site. The asylum seek- were full. The local politicians as well as ers were not accepted by the Russian gov- ernment, which had been provoked by the Norwegian government’s attempts to 3 With the exception of 56 in 2003. return people. The result was that with 328
Approaching Religion • Vol. 10, No. 2 • November 2020 23 asylum seekers having been returned at ing from the encounters between humans? the border, Russia ceased cooperating and Without embodied, lived, spatial encoun- none of those deported from Norway could ters? Hospitality is conceptually linked re-enter Russia. to theology, and ultimately appears as an Before the legislative amendment, three ethical demand in one form or another, out of four Syrians who arrived through ‘ethics-as-hospitality’ (Dikeç et al. 2009: Storskog were granted residency; subse- 9). ‘When it is the ethical challenge of the quently only one of 259 was granted resi- other that is central, and this is confronted dency. The amendment also opened the in action, then a theologically relevant way to apprehending people who were practice takes place’ (Wyller 2008: 179). likely to be denied asylum, which led to sev- The calling is thus also essentially related to eral asylum seekers exploring the options ethics. It is, according to Nahnfeldt (2016), of church asylum. a holistic view and life attitude. We are sent out into the everyday with an ethical Hospitality as ethics request: we should take responsibility for The borderland is also a ‘new’ space of other humans and meet their needs. This encounter between religions, and in a pre- request challenges us to ask questions; who carious space holding creative qualities, cre- to listen to and what their needs really are ating a ‘new’ space of theological research (ibid.). By linking hospitality to the concept (cf. Machado et al. 2018). Hospitality is of calling, I introduce hospitality as some- linked to space as ‘to practice hospitality is thing that may entail resistance from and to welcome others into what will become a for those involved. shared space with the presence of another’ When talking of hospitality, there is (Reaves 2016: 39), and in the case of the usually an idea of someone, often with little narratives discussed here, this shared space to give, coming to someone already there, was a borderland. who (can) offer shelter and bare necessities. What is hospitality; what is its con- There are guests and hosts, and often a gen- tent? Academic and non-academic litera- eral idea of temporality, in the sense that ture alike does not offer a single, universal the guest is expected not to stay indefin definition. itely. I introduce a sense of a hospitality that interchanges, that may entail resistance … there are consequences to the fact from and for those involved. that there is no single definition, mainly found in the variety of ways in The Arctic borderlands: which hospitality is discussed while a ‘heritage of resistance’ lacking a cohesive sense of authority The region has had national borders and practice in communities. There since 1826 when the frontier between fore, instead of looking for a definition Norway and Russia was first staked out. of hospitality, it is more beneficial to Subsequently the borders between Russia explore the meaning of hospitality. and Finland have been drawn, re-drawn (Reaves 2016: 37) and fought over many times. People have inhabited the area for more than 10,000 And, I would add, explore the spaces years. Until around 200 years ago, the where, maybe, it is practised and lived. Can population consisted mostly of Sami people we even talk of hospitality without start- who have been following reindeer migra-
Approaching Religion • Vol. 10, No. 2 • November 2020 24 tion routes regardless and irrespective of memory in the area may be a kind of ‘heri these modern frontiers, and people on all tage of resistance’ (Reaves 2016: 6), form- sides are connected to each other through ing local hospitality practices. family bonds and friendships. Industry and international politics have been the deci- Borderland encounters sive forces of change, exerting an influence If you can get airline tickets, or by other on who has settled and formed the popu- means reach Murmansk, you can get to lation. The borders have been implicated Zapoljarnyj or Nikel, two cities with popu in refugees coming this way before; from lations of 10,000–15,000, 30 and 50 kilo- times of war and enmity between Russia metres from Storskog and the Norwegian and Finland. border. The cities have clear boundaries, Throughout the Second World War and between them and Storskog there is people here also lived alongside strangers. mostly wilderness with sparse vegetation, Around 160,000 German soldiers were a rocky landscape with small, windswept living in the area of Sør-Varanger during Arctic birch trees that, as you get closer to the war years, and many stayed in people’s Norway eventually give way to tall pines. homes, often while the families were still There are no lights, no houses, no gas sta- living there – or many families stayed tions, no people. Only passing cars, lor- together in one house as the Germans ries, and buses. This area is as far east as had seized their homes. Additionally, Istanbul, and once you cross into Norway, as many as 65,000 Soviet war prisoners you jump over two time zones. were in the many camps in the area – in a Thirteen kilometres from Storskog, on county of about 7,000 inhabitants. During the other side of the border, in the county the war locals themselves fled or were of Sør-Varanger is Kirkenes, a town with evacuated by force. The area was devastat- 3,500 inhabitants. In Kirkenes you feel the ingly bombed by the allies and torched by vicinity to, and presence of, other nations, the Germans.4 Many children were sent to with street signs in both Russian and Sweden when the war ended, for nourish- Norwegian. Finland is only a forty-min- ment and healing, after years of food dep- ute drive away, and Finnish influence is rivation and sickness. During the 1990s also detectible in the names of people and there was a direct route from Kosovo5 places. Sør-Varanger lies far away from the to Sør-Varanger, as the region is a recep- capital, the geopolitical centre of Norway. tion county. This historical and collective As in most border areas the locals travel ‘next door’ to do their shopping. In Kirkenes people go to Russia and Finland to save some money. Many go to Russia 4 Due to its geographical location the county once a week to fill up their cars’ gas tanks, of Sør-Varanger was of particular interest to as the price of gas and diesel is consider- all sides in WWII, and the area paid an enor- ably lower than in Norway. Many also go mous price. Kirkenes was one of Europe’s most bombed cities (328 bombardments). to Russia for a Friday beer or payday beer, In October 1944, Kirkenes was burned to again due to the lower price. They must the ground, leaving only 39 houses intact. be sure to remember the time difference, 5 In news items and articles, there are some crossing the border before the Norwegian disagreements on the city of origin; I have found variously Skopje, Pristina, Sarajevo border control guards close for the night. and Kosovo. Locals have a grenseboerbevis (local border
Approaching Religion • Vol. 10, No. 2 • November 2020 25 traffic permit) and may cross the border It was impossible for him to not continue without visas. taking action, and he had, by the time of the interview, been to Greece three times, Hospitality and the other to a camp in the north of that country. Lars There is a local claim that there is some- tells me about the things he has learned, thing called North Norwegian hospital- how enriched his life has become; all that ity. I am interested in whether this exists, he has been given through his experiences and does it have something to do with the with the refugees. border? Through media reporting from At the same time that Lars is going Storskog in 2015–16, it became clear that through this, Maria, a nurse with two grown several local people were engaged in the children, is watching the news. Families are crisis. Two people, Lars and Maria, were walking or bicycling in the nothingness on among those who acted when ‘the refugees the way to Storskog. She sees small children came’ across Storskog. and exhausted parents – almost invisible Lars, a man in his late forties, is one of bodies in the darkest darkness in this bare many locals who goes to Russia for cheap landscape. She sees people in danger and is fuel. During the fall of 2015 he meets fam- moved to action. ‘Many people were freez- ilies wandering the desolate road between ing. They were not dressed for the Arctic. Nikel and Storskog; more and more people, They had never worn wool as a base layer, and many small children, who are either or down jackets and those kinds of clothes. walking or bicycling. These people are not That is how I got involved, watching the dressed for the harsh climate here. He, a news and thinking “Oh my god, they are man who used to be an adamant opponent freezing to death, these poor refugees!”, of immigration, an ‘unknowing sceptic’ as so I started collecting winter clothes here he calls himself, is moved to action. ‘Those in Kirkenes.’ Maria starts driving over to bicycling from Nikel – it is 30 km – started Nikel, to the hotel there that is the last pit- to get very cold. The locals drove like crazy. stop before the border. She brings clothes They were so exhausted; there were small and reflective wear. children. I started driving over with clothes In these explorations of hospital- and other things. It is illegal to take people ity, I include the perspective of the lived, in the car, because of the border zone. It did common space, and the bodies participat- something to me; people shouldn’t be in ing in them. When discussing the con- such a situation.’6 cept of hospitality, it may be fruitful to The refugee crisis completely altered use spatial concepts in order to search the course of Lars’s life, ‘My life has turned for, find, and understand such hospitality, around 180 degrees, completely upside- as it is enacted and lived among humans. down, in the last three years.’ After the situ- Following the notion of nonspace, encoun- ation at Storskog and Kirkenes had calmed ters may provide moments of safety and down, after the border was closed, Lars had protection. This is elegantly illustrated by only begun his engagement with refugees. Elie Wiesel, whose following quote regard- ing Jewish tradition, sums up how I under- stand (non)space, body and hospitality to 6 The quotes from the interviews have been be connected: ‘… when we speak of sanc- translated to as closely as possible reflect tuary, it refers to human beings. Sanctuary, the sentiments expressed in Norwegian. then, is not a place. Sanctuary is a human
Approaching Religion • Vol. 10, No. 2 • November 2020 26 Roadsign on the road from Zapoljarnyj. To the right is north to Kirkenes, to the left is southeast towards the Finnish border. Photo: Kaia Rønsdal, June 2017. being. Any human being is a sanctuary’ the border shifting, making this place the (Wiesel 1984–5: 387). centre. It was the borderland, an ambigu- Borders shift; ‘the border that used to ous site and object of national governance. keep ethnic “Others” very far away has come close to us, to the centre of our cities The other at the border and national governance’ (Agier 2016: 25). Lars and Maria and a few other people soon Borders are understood as ‘multidimen- became the key civil agents for the refugee sional but ambiguous sites that have sym- network in Kirkenes. bolic, religious, moral and political dimen- sions’ (Machado et al. 2018: 7). We drove over many times with When starting from the notion of bor- warm sweaters, coats, shoes, bean- derlands as ‘places of recognition and ies and reflective wear. Things that exchange between individuals’ (Agier were donated, and from our own clos- 2016: 16), what does the concept of hospi- ets. A lot of people donated. It almost tality entail when based on encounters in became an obsession to drive over, and real, lived borderland space? This is devel- in the end we almost went daily. We oped by exploring how border encounters didn’t know how many were coming. are lived spatially (Lefebvre 2007). This In the end almost 200 people crossed direction would mainly follow the phe- the border daily. Maria and I drove nomenological discussion on others and together many times, but also I went borders, the guest/host, and other binar over to fill up alone. But it was obvi- ies. Although Sør-Varanger is a small ously not only us, there were many county, geographically far from national others. We were not outstanding, but government, yet living everyday life with we might have been the most visible and on the nation’s border, the crisis led to because we were so much on social
Approaching Religion • Vol. 10, No. 2 • November 2020 27 media and urged people to drive over. people will enter each other’s homes and We got so much scolding, but there get a cup of coffee, ‘There is always coffee’, are worse things to be scolded for, for even when there is no one home. Maria fuck’s sake. thinks this has to do with the war. As the Germans occupied people’s homes for I have been to Kirkenes many times. their own use, families would move into I have been across the borders to Russia other families’ homes. Maria’s grandpar- and Finland. I have been to the hotels in ents had told her how they lived several Zapoljarnyj and Nikel where the refugees families together in one home, and that this stayed (in all the rooms, hallways, meet- was part of people’s narrative, thus shap- ing rooms) before they started their walk ing them as being maybe more welcoming towards Norway. I have driven on the road and open. Lars said: ‘Borders and border to Storskog. I have seen and felt the deso- experience and the border area, it’s signifi- lation and distance. I have felt the Arctic cant. It comes in our mother’s milk, history, winter on and in my body, on my nose parents and grandparents. In the Balkans and hands, felt how the lungs shrink when in the 90s, people were received with open you inhale the cold air. I have read about ar m s .’ Lars and Maria in news items from all over We have talked about what they, Lars the world; two ordinary people who were and Maria, did; what drove them, what they moved to action when the refugees came to have done subsequently, and how the ex Norway. perience has shaped them, as well as many, Maria and Lars got engaged in the polit- many other things connected to what took ical crisis that suddenly had its epicentre place back then. Both were arrested when in Kirkenes, at Storskog and at the tran- the situation in Kirkenes was at its most sit/deportation centre. They helped people critical and they were charged with help- on the Norwegian side and on the Russian ing people escape the police (and deport side; they talked to everyone who listened: ation) into church asylum in the church of Kirkenes. She paid her fine. He spent It was hectic, and it was completely three years being acquitted. Both state that absorbing for a period of time. One their lives will never be as before the refu- thing was the practical, and after gees came. Both were threatened, scolded, we were arrested it exploded in the and Lars even received death threats. But media, and I don’t know how many they will never look back. Maria said: ‘My 100s of interviews we did. It was life is before and after the refugees came intense. But we were focused on get- … Getting involved and how much you ting it out there; the whole world had receive in return… fantastic people! So, it is to know how hellishly we were treat- obvious that it changed me in many ways.’ ing these refugees, Norway, one of the Both said that their lives would never be richest countries in the world, Norway the same as before the refugees came. When the nation of peace, right? we reflected on hospitality, they both men- tioned the refugees as most hospitable. That We talked about so-called North Nor they, Lars and Maria, had never received so wegian hospitality, and Kirkenes as a his- much hospitality as when the refugees came. toric place of reception. They told me of Maria said: doors that are always open in Kirkenes;
Approaching Religion • Vol. 10, No. 2 • November 2020 28 They have it in their culture, and we of hospitality this may be. have so much to learn. They are super The Danish philosopher and theolo- hospitable. … So they are used to it, gian Knud E. Løgstrup’s most famous work we didn’t teach them up here … And is The Ethical Demand(first published they think we do not visit enough. in 1956). He stated that you can never After some days they call and say: ‘it’s engage with another human without hold- been too long, Maria, what are you ing pieces of his life in your hand, and the doing?’ In that way they are amazing. demand is that we care for that life. In the Nordic countries during the last half of When talking about this with Lars, he the twentieth century, theological thinkers used examples both from Kirkenes and such as Løgstrup developed a theology and from his experiences in the Greek camps: philosophy that shaped his work on ethics. One central dimension here is that ethics It was quite interesting. I am there to are developed in the encounters between help, they are where they are, in their humans. Although a theologian himself, [temporary] homes. And it is true, we Løgstrup rejected making the question of are guests. To be fellow humans, to compassion and care a religious one. Rather, help them in a terrible situation. They he made them a universal challenge to have no other place in the entire world everybody, in a reciprocal interdependence than right there, it is their home, we regardless of faith or creed (Løgstrup 2000; are their guests, it’s as simple as that. Christoffersen 1999). This ethical demand is thus not a religious concept, but rather a And later, in continuation, he said: ‘We universal concept that every human being were invited into the tents, every day, to is called by the other to heed this other life food, tea coffee, friendships, it was unbe- and take care of and protect it. In my inter- lievable!’ (my emphasis). pretation, this concerns both biological life, as well as the socio-ethical responsibility An ethical demand of living with respect for other lives. This How could we interpret the hospitality should mean that when refugees come to Lars and Maria talk about experiencing at our doors, they are the life held in our hand Storskog? To answer this, I will explore these to care for, to show hospitality. narratives or statements on experienced Lars and Maria both stated that hos- hospitality using phenomenological con- pitality was something that came with the cepts. The employed perspectives explicitly refugees. If that is the case, it challenges emphasise the role of practical experience. this notion. If hospitality comes with the Furthermore, the geographical, political and other, the concept of calling from trad historical context setting the stage for these itional thinkers such as Løgstrup is con- narratives is significant, as the embodied tested. In order to discuss this and explore memories and presence of the people who other possible interpretations I will start by play a part in it are shaped in this particular introducing some perspectives influenced context, and they produced and continue to by the tradition of Løgstrup, as these will produce this particular space. also play a part in my explorations. I will Hospitality has a clear ethical dimen- emphasise the philosophical and univer- sion, and by linking it to a specifically sally ethical understanding in the explor Lutheran tradition, I will explore what kind ation of hospitality.
Approaching Religion • Vol. 10, No. 2 • November 2020 29 Scandinavian creation theology, to about, and act towards, them. Feminist which Løgstrup was a central contributor, is theologian Letty Russel claims that one starting point. Central to Scandinavian creation theology is the notion that life has [Christian] theologians who are com- been created and given to us (Løgstrup mitted to practicing God’s hospitality 2000: 41); we did not create it ourselves. and justice are called to develop a crit- Some believe it is created by a deity, and ical way of doing theology that makes some believe that it comes into existence by sense to those who are marginalized other means. Regardless of belief, we do not and excluded (by neoconservative decide our own lives and we do not create it. rhetoric and actions), [and to] assist Life is continuously created, in the here and in God’s intention for the mending of now (Wingren 1995 [1974]: 35f.; 39f.). This creation … (Russell 1996: 477–8). shapes our world and our relationships and encounters with other people (Løgstrup The Other has always been an import 2000: 39). It is central to the Lutheran ant figure and phenomenon for theology; view of man to bear responsibility for one’s for example as the other who lives in pov- fellow man. The fact that to be human is to erty, who is tired and in need, and the ‘radi be called is constitutional of what it is to cal Other, who is God hidden behind …’ be human (Nahnfeldt 2016: 17). There are, (Boff2011 : 48), the larvae dei (God’s mask), according to Løgstrup, phenomena and ‘the idea of God acting in the ordinary life aspects of human life that are not subject to shared by all in, between, and behind the our power, that emanate from and belong face of other human persons’ (Gregersen et to life itself (Løgstrup 2000: 30, 35, 38f.). al. 2017: 15). He calls these the sovereign expressions of In phenomenology the fact that we share life, and they are phenomena such as com- a (created) life, reality, and world makes passion, trust, and openness of speech. us part of the same lifeworld (with divine His point is that these are the phenom- presence): ‘A human is inherently related ena with which lives encounter lives, and to others, to nature, culture and society’ these encounters are where ethics develop. (Wyller 2010: 190). Furthermore, we ‘share Norms only come into play in moral action the same planet, and therefore unavoidably when these spontaneous responses fail live at the expense of other life-forms, and (2000, 1972). As we are created (by God), repeatedly do so at the expense of others’ life is expressed as care for, and reception (Gregersen et al. 2016: 21) – including the of, the other. The responsibility is founded Other, who is very different from us. in an idea about humans’ co-creating mis- Following these lines of thought we see sions and adds a sacred dimension and eth- a (theological) thinking that is ‘particularly ical value to interpersonal encounters and interested in thinking of reality as a radically practices (Nahnfeldt 2016: 17). In Luther’s open concept, which leaves space to think perspective the calling belongs to creation otherness and changeability for the world. and the human being’s task to be a co-cre- Such extensions into discourse are open for ator; that this takes place through everyday discussion, not holy laws to be either con- activities, and that places her in relation doned or condemned’ (Heimbrock and with her fellow human beings (ibid. p. 73). Meyer 2010: 199). It is a normative, philo- That the world and other humans are not sophical, life-interpreting approach to God, our creations is decisive in how we think life, humans, and the world, developed
Approaching Religion • Vol. 10, No. 2 • November 2020 30 within Protestantism and usually referred significant. This could be the drinkers on to as systematic theology. This theological the park bench, the Roma living under a approach is tightly interwoven with Scandi highway bridge, or the beggar and the pas- navian creation theology. sers-by, smiling, or ignoring him. In these non-spaces it is not obvious where the call- Scandinavian creation theology stands ing may appear (Rønsdal 2018a, 2018b). and falls with the claim that there are The humans producing these spaces, who shared aspects of human life that offer may be fundamentally other to myself, are room for open-minded discussions also a part of this shared condition of living of how to live the human condition in a world that is continuously being cre- alongside people of other faiths, and ated. This implies that calling, according to with people of no professed faith at all. Lutheran interpretation, is about people’s Scandinavian creation theology leaves inter-human relations, not people’s God- ample room for common sense and relation (Nahnfeldt 2016: 111). The ethical common commitments, even where demand where you can never encoun- worldviews differ or even drift apart. ter another human without caring for the Everyday life constitutes a third realm pieces of this life that is placed in your hand between a purely political realm, and a is based on this tradition. purely religious domain. (Uggla et al. Even though this is fundamental think- 2017: 8) ing in this theological and ethical tradition, it does not quite fit the narrative of Lars For this context the important dimen- and Maria, and their experience of receiv- sion to this particular theological tradition ing hospitality from the refugees. In their is the interpretation of the world as ‘already encounters with the refugees there is some- God’s creation, a reality which should be thing more than holding the other’s life in cared for and enjoyed for its own sake, by one’s hand. This notion does not completely believers and non-believers alike’ (Uggla resonate with the experiences in the narra- et al. 2017: 11). It is a theology where our tives. It seems that their narrative cannot be fellow human, also she who is radically safeguarded by Løgstrup’s notion of hold- other, is at the centre and humanity is one ing pieces of the other’s life in one’s hands. of the goals of creation. The other central and explicitly theo- Embodied hospitality logical distinction in this tradition is the What is the significance of the fact that Lars profession of a divine presence also out- and Maria had never encountered such side religious or sacred spaces. ‘Vocation hospitality as when the refugees came? points to the present, to the present day, They were the ones who opened their arms, to this world’ (Wingren 2004 [1957]: 28) – homes and lives. They drove to Russia with to the everyday and everyday spaces. This food, water, and reflective wear. They par- is also true in the everyday lives of people took in language classes, taught people how who do not necessarily think of themselves to dress, arranged childcare, and so much as being religious. This gives a sacredness more. They risked fines and prison to help to everyday life and to everyday spaces that refugees from deportation. They worked are open to theological interpretations of around the clock for months, were called aspects and locations of life traditionally not at all hours by people who needed help or thought of as sacred, those not considered assistance. Still, their spontaneous reply
Approaching Religion • Vol. 10, No. 2 • November 2020 31 when asked about hospitality is that it is that it ‘is not one virtue among others but the something they received. No words about primordial condition of personal, interper- Northern Norwegian hospitality, a heritage sonal, and communal existence’ (Diprose of resistance, or how people in the bor- 2002: 5). I interpret this corporeal generos- derlands always have helped each other, ity to lie close to the hospitality emerging in or experiences of receiving. In their own the narratives. encounters with the refugees, it was only: The statements on hospitality – that it we have never experienced such hospitality was something experienced by those one as when the refugees came. may think of as hosts, intrigued me, and Lars said: ‘And it is true, we are guests. may just point out something. The events To be fellow humans, to help them in a ter- forming the background of the narrative rible situation. They have no other place in were located so close to the border where the entire world than right there, it is their someone who was not supposed to come home, we are their guests, it’s as simple as came. They may have had nothing, and that that.’ My concern is that it challenges per- is apparently the reason they had nothing ceptions and conceptions about hospitality, to give, and no one on either side had the and that it shows something I will ultim time to make up an opinion – certain cir- ately call fluid hospitality. It shows us that cumstances fell together in a way that made the conceptual roles of guest and host are certain encounters possible. Corporeal not finalised. On the contrary, it is quite generosity ‘is an openness to others that not unclear what they entail. From the outside only precedes and establishes communal the roles seem clear – someone came from relations but constitutes the self as open to the outside, others received. On the inside, otherness’ (Diprose 2002: 4). At the border, where people encounter and have real and the circumstances were such that there was lived experiences, it is pending. little time for deliberation. The dichotomy, or binary, of guest and Maybe this can be tied to the idea of the host is interchangeable and dynamic. One border: ‘we may well be in that space (or may think that in this context it is only ‘we’ time) of in-between “no longer” and “not who have the freedom and liberty to move in yet” that provides opportunities for think- and out of the roles of guest and host, while ing and acting differently. If “we, the people” people who are fleeing are locked in their is no longer convincing or effective, “we the roles, as they do not have the choices and connected” has not yet become so’ (Isin freedoms we have. However, this is limiting 2012: 165–6). This statement points to cre- both the guests and hosts to the binaries, ative potential, human encounter and con- where a guest is someone who is a victim, nectedness, in-betweenness and rupture, a villain, a refugee, unfree. Regardless of the all opening up for change, counteraction labels we place on each other, particularly and thus resistance. ‘The future – the not- from the macro perspective, none of us are yet, not-here – is given to us as that which static; our roles are negotiated and inter- comes to us from the other, from what is changed continuously; ‘we were invited … absolutely surprising, new, incalculable – to friendships’. In the narrative, there are untimely’ (Dufourmantelle 2013: 19). few expressions of expectation or demand; In modern society, there is little time or it is at times descriptions of joining the refu sympathy for detours and delays – hospital- gees in everyday life. Philosopher Rosalyn ity, generosity and calling are in themselves Diprose writes of a corporeal generosity, counter to this. It is the detours and delays
Approaching Religion • Vol. 10, No. 2 • November 2020 32 that disturb, break, and open up potential thus hospitality, is turned upside down it to the creative, to resistance. A space is con- becomes interchangeable. The subjectivity stantly in motion, always different, always of hospitality is removed from an unam- being moved forward, being produced – biguous ‘I am called’ to the others having the world is moved forward by contrasts, the role of subject. Becoming the subject is contradictions, and tensions (Lefebvre resistance. It is an absolutely radical trans- 2007: 42). formation of the calling, and an extension Furthermore, nonspaces or heteroto- of hospitality. pias, and borders, are associated with pos- sibilities, something new and maybe sur- Concluding remarks prising; an in-between. ‘The location of In the recounted events in Kirkenes, the the in-between comes to existence in the people in the narratives were involved in exact moment when the boundary line is geopolitical power spaces. However, there crossed, overcome and experienced’ (Luz is at the same time another production of 2006: 143). Diprose, building on Nietzsche, space going on. The embodied hospitality writes of corporeal generosity that it ‘is a they experience in the lived space points writing blood that says this body carries a to counterspaces, to resistance. This lived trace of the other, so this body and its cul- space has certain qualities that break with tural expression are not finished, and nei- representations of the space and thus create ther you nor I have the final word’ (Diprose another kind of interaction within – and 2002: 195). that is where the calling and thus hospital- Hospitality, then, may be an embodied, ity is uncovered and can be discussed. That pre-reflexive, enacted and lived generos- is why spatial interpretation is important ity towards the other human, entailing an for the calling for embodied hospitality and openness and willingness to let the other resistance. affect, disrupt, setting my life in motion, The individuals who encountered touching ‘me rather than finishing me or each other in those months during 2015 others off’ (Diprose2002 : 195). and 2016 were all bodies who reached out to each other and responded to each Hospitality describes a figure, a space other’s embodied spatial callings, thus also that allows a gesture of invitation to exchanging hospitality. Embodied hos- take place. That is, I believe the space pitality has nothing to do with what you of thinking itself. To think is to invite, have to give. Rather, it is hospitality which to offer a shelter to the other within is immaterial, transcendent and sensi- ourselves, the other as the possibility tive. The human who encounters is pre- to be(come) ourselves. As the experi pared to create anew from the experience, ence of an encounter and a recogni- being curious about those encountered tion, … It holds together, as separ (Nahnfeldt 2016: 187–8). In this embodied ated, the profane and the sacred. hospitality the encountering bodies sur- (Dufourmantelle 2013: 13–14) render, or even entrust themselves to each other, transcending the usual conceptions In these human encounters, bodies of (the boundaries of) hospitality. interact in ways that let us interpret them as The spatial interpretations of the border encounters of hospitality unlike anything and the displaced reveal the actual spatial experienced before. When the calling, and locations of everyday life and social life. As
Approaching Religion • Vol. 10, No. 2 • November 2020 33 lives that are usually lived ‘off-site’ in ref- Dr Kaia S. Rønsdal is cur erence to either the academy or church – rently a post-doctoral fel it may still be the most significant locus low at the Faculty of Theol ogy, University of Oslo, and of hospitable practice and even the locus member of the research where the practice should be founded. group ‘NORDHOST: Nordic Furthermore, the dogmatic loci pointed Hospitalities in a Context out by the theologian Kathryn Tanner of Migration and Refugee (2004) in her initial definition of loci Crisis’. Her discipline is the field of professional ethics and Christian social theologici must be reconfigured spatially. practice, and her main research interests are She herself suggests that the new dogmas on marginality, borders, and peripheries include in such a theology should be spatial theory, urbanity, phenomenology and theological ethics. She is currently working on … mobility and rootedness in place, a project on interreligious dialogue and social dislocation and belonging, connection cohesion in relation to migrant and refugee reception in Europe, which also includes further and disjunction, occlusion and display, explorations on the concept of hospitality. The division and incorporation, exclu- lived practices in civil society are her primary sion and inclusion – new, redemptive interest. orderings of all these spatial forms so as to rework the old in life-enhancing Bibliography and spiritually fulfilling ways. (Tanner Agamben, Giorgio. 1998. Homo Sacer: Sover 2004: xiii) eign Power and Bare Life (Stanford Univer- sity Press). Agier, Michel. 2016. ‘Epistemological decen- In my view, if one is to explore the con- tring: at the root of a contemporary and cept of theological spaces it is crucial to situational anthropology’, Anthropological maintain that the lived-space heteroto- Theory, 16(1): 22–47. pia is a concrete and present space, not an Boff, Leonardo. 2011. Virtues: For Another Pos ‘almost-space’. These spaces, the borders, sible World (Eugene, OR: Cascade Books). Chattopadhyay, Sutapa. 2019. ‘Borders re/make are real spaces, the body is located some- bodies and bodies are made to make bor- where, always, in the concrete productions ders: storying migrant trajectories’, Acme: of space. We are always physically placed An International Journal for Critical Geog bodies in lived space, participating in its raphy, 18(1): 149–72. everyday production. In Sør-Varanger they Christoffersen, Svein Aage. 1999. Etikk, eksistens may have been producing spaces of a shared og modernitet. Innføring i Løgstrups tenk ning (Otta: Tano Aschehoug). and interchanging embodied hospitality. Dikeç, Mustafa, Nigel Clark, and Clive Barnett. The displaced and the ‘placed’ bodies 2009. ‘Extending hospitality: giving space, are all producing hospitable space, and that taking time’, Paragraph, 32(1): 1–14. space existed from the moment of encoun- Diprose, Rosalyn. 2002. Corporeal Generosity: ter. It is not spaces hopefully appearing in On Giving with Nietzsche, Merleau-Ponty, and Lévinas (Albany: State University of the future. The spaces are already here, and New York Press). we are already in the concrete, lived spaces Duformantelle, Anne. 2013. ‘Hospitality: under of everyday life. It is no longer a source or compassion and violence’, in The Conditions geographical locus, it is not somewhere we of Hospitality: Ethics, Politics, and Aesthetics have to look for or visualise in the yet to be; on the Threshold of the Possible, ed. Thomas the lived locus is already here. Claviez (New York: Fordham University Press), 13–23.
Approaching Religion • Vol. 10, No. 2 • November 2020 34 Foucault, Michel. 1984. ‘Of other spaces (1967): Machado, Daisy L., Brian S. Turner, and Trygve heterotopias’, in Architecture/Mouvement/ E. Wyller (eds.). 2018. Borderland Religion: Continuité, Oct. 1984: 1–9. Ambiguous Practices of Difference, Hope and Gregersen, Niels Henrik, Bengt Kristensson Beyond (London: Routledge). Uggla, and Trygve E. Wyller (eds.). 2017. Nahnfeldt, Cecilia. 2016. Luthersk kallelse. Reformation Theology for a Post-Secular Age: Handlingskraft och barmhärtighet (Stock- Løgstrup, Prenter, Wingren, and the Future of holm: Verbum). Scandinavian Creation Theology, Research Pew Research Center. 2016. ‘Number of refu- in Contemporary Religion (Göttingen: Van- gees to Europe surges to record 1.3 mil- denhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co). lion in 2015’, Pew Research Center, Heimbrock, Hans-Günther, and Peter Meyer. 2.8.2016,
Approaching Religion • Vol. 10, No. 2 • November 2020 35 Concepts (Evanston, IL: Northwestern Uni- versity Press). Wiesel, Elie, 1984–5. ‘The refuge’,Cross Currents, 34(4): 385–90. Wingren, Gustaf. 1995 (1974). Credo. Den kristna tros- och livsåskådningen (Skellefteå: Artos). ——2004 (1957). Luther on Vocation, trans. Carl C. Rasmussen (Eugene OR: Wilf & Stock Publishers). Wyller, Trygve. 2008. ‘Compassion as an inter- ruption of the power of inscription: a con- tribution to diaconal studies’, in Lived Religion: Conceptual, Empirical and Prac tical-Theological Approaches. Essays in Honor of Hans-Günther Heimbrock, eds. Heinz Streib, Astrid Dinter and Kerstin Söderblom (Leiden: Brill Academic Pub.) 171–82. ——2010. ‘Religion and professional ethics in a post-secular society’, in Perceiving the Other: Case Studies and Theories of Respectful Action, eds. Trygve Wyller and Hans-Gün- ther Heimbrock, Research in Contempor ary Religion (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co), 188–91.
Approaching Religion • Vol. 10, No. 2 • November 2020 36