Orientalist Knowledges at the European Periphery: Norwegian Racial Projects, 1970-2005 A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Eileen Muller Myrdahl IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Jigna Desai, Adviser May 2010 © Eileen Muller Myrdahl 2010 Acknowledgements In the spring of 2005, when I was still in the very early stages of this research, Norwegian social anthropologist Marianne Gullestad graciously agreed to be on my dissertation committee. I was thrilled to be working with her: Gullestad’s writing on Norwegian processes of racialization is both foundational and exemplary, and has deeply influenced my own thinking. Her death in 2008 left a massive gap in Norwegian scholarship and intellectual life. As Anne-Jorunn Berg later wrote to me, “nobody can fill the emptiness that Marianne Gullestad left behind. Her research is unique, so be glad you got to know her.” In dedicating this dissertation to Marianne Gullestad I wish to express my gratitude and honor that she was willing to work with me, and acknowledge her undiminished stature in scholarship on Norway. Many people have had a hand in allowing me to complete this work. First, I must thank all those who generously gave their time and shared with me their experiences of moving to Norway. Here they must be known by their pseudonyms: Agnieszka, Ákos Nagy, Alma, Anne Line Farkas, Angela, Elpidios Biros, Eva, Mr. Fabis, Lázár Dobos, Margit Dobos, Miroslav Pekar, Sara, and Szilárd Farkas. I have not only learnt a tremendous amount from their stories and insights, but have also had a lot of fun meeting a group of interesting and impressive people. Whatever insights this dissertation offers are the results of the stellar advice and support of Jigna Desai; the weaknesses are all my own. This dissertation is also much improved from the generous feedback and assistance offered by Anne-Jorunn Berg, Karen Ho, Kevin Murphy, and in particular Richa Nagar. Jørgen Carling, Marta Bivand Erdal, Yannis Tavridis, and Zuzana Weiterschütz helped me get in touch with many of the interviewees in chapter two, and their assistance was essential in bringing about this chapter. Ann-Margot Nørholm first pointed out the i troublesomeness of the searches for love that I discuss in chapter four, and this chapter has been shaped by our many conversations about Norwegian family reunification policy. Beyond generally being a supportive bunch, my family has directly and indirectly enabled my research and writing. Bente Myrdahl and Hans Stapnes have provided updates on new publications and media events, as well as put me in touch with several interviewees. Being on “mum and Tiffany’s scholarship” was central to allowing me to finish the dissertation over the past year. Vilda, Fride, Cecilie and Andrew Windtwood have cheerfully put me up for weeks at the time over the past seven years, and Ian Wood not only put me in touch with one of the interviewees but also readily acted as chauffeur without once asking when I plan to learn to drive. My dissertation would have been weaker, my paper work would not have been in on time, and, more importantly, I’d have been much less happy if I hadn’t gone through this process with Ayana Weekley. Thanks also to Ayana and to helen crump for the very helpful writing group. A special thanks is due to Fareda Banda, who has encouraged, pushed, and cheered me on (academically and otherwise) for more than a decade, all the while providing uncannily good advice and insight. Finally, Tiffany Muller Myrdahl makes me happy every day, which is no small feat through years of graduate school. And I wouldn’t have been done in time without you. ii Dedication This dissertation is dedicated to the memory of Marianne Gullestad 1946-2008 iii Abstract In this dissertation I examine recent Norwegian racial formations. I argue that whiteness has become an increasingly central aspect of productions of Norwegian national identity. Furthermore, I show that the racializing processes first established in the early 1970s continue to be reproduced and shape Norwegian society today. The dissertation focuses on three disparate but interlinked sites. First, I discuss the experiences of postwar Southern and Eastern European migrants in Norway, based on interviews with 12 migrants. I argue that these migrants are produced as white in a qualitatively different way from non-migrant Norwegians who are seen as white. Furthermore, I suggest that the apparent production of the migrants’ children as white and Norwegian shows that Norwegian forms of whiteness are less dependent on tracing descent to Norwegian territory than has previously been suggested. Secondly, I trace the changing discourses of race and migration that culminated in the 1975 “immigration stop” legislation. I argue that at the beginning of the decade Norwegian understandings of immigration were not heavily dependent on constructions of race, but that they became so within a few years. Using close readings of policy documents, the Parliamentary debate on the “immigration stop” and newspaper coverage from the entire period, I show that the development and passing of the legislation was dependent on, and in turn codified, racial constructs that saw some migrants as always already excessively different. Lastly, I argue that imperatives to love-and romance-based marriage that is evident in Norwegian family reunification law constitutes a racial project – one that can be seen as an extension of the processes of racialization that were established in the 1970s. I also suggest that arranged marriages queer in relation to Norwegian heteronormativities. In the conclusion I point both to the continued reiteration of race in Norway, and to forms of opposition to the racial productions that I have discussed. I argue that international iv perspectives on racial formation provide analytic dexterity that is necessary if Norwegian racializing processes are to be interrupted. v Table of Contents Preface A Few Notes About Norway & Comments on Positionality…………………….………..1 Chapter One Introduction ………………………………………………………………………..……7 Chapter Two Between God and Goddamn: Postwar Southern and Eastern European Migrants at the Borders of Norwegianness……………………………………………………...…32 Chapter Three ”A Feather In the Cap for All Narrow-Minded Norwegians” Sedimentations of Race 1970-75………….…………………………………………………………...…….73 Chapter Four Legislating Love: Norwegian Family Reunification Legislation as a Racial Project ……..…………………………………………………………………………....131 Chapter Five Illusions of a Color-Blind Present………………………………………………….…...157 Bibliography…………………………………………………………………….……..184 Appendix A The Interview Process and Rationale.........................................................207 Appendix B Interview Guide………………………………………………….…...…..213 vi Hudfargen som faren min la igjen litt av til meg fratok meg ikke bare rettighetene mine, som for eksempel å reise og bevege meg fritt. Med årene oppfattet jeg at min fars arv fratok meg hele min rett til å være den jeg var. Så min rett til å være. (...) Mens jeg først begynte å bla i generelle papirer, fant jeg ut skrekkelige ting: I mitt land er det lov å behandle mennesker som ikke har det som kalles et “typisk nordisk utseende” på en annen måte enn andre mennesker. Jeg forsøkte selvfølgelig å le. Så lo jeg ikke lenger; for et land, et samfunn, som kan produsere slike tanker om et slag mennesker, vil alltid være beredt til å produsere tilsvarende tanker om nye grupper mennesker. Og hva skal men med tanker hvis de ikke er ment å skulle lede til handlinger. (The skin color that my father left some of to me, took more from me than just my rights, like travelling and moving freely. Through the years I realized that the inheritance from my father took from me all rights to be who I was. Thus my right to be. (…) As I began to look through general papers, I found horrific things: In my country, it is permitted to treat people who do not have what is called a “typical Nordic look” differently from other people. Of course I tried to laugh. Then I laughed no more, because a country, a society, that can produce such thoughts about one kind of humans, will always be prepared to produce similar thoughts about new groups of humans. And what need does one have for thoughts if these are not meant to lead to action.) (Seyfarth 2005, 384-385) Race is not a cipher for the whole of life. When I speak of race you must bear in mind that this is not the same thing as saying that race explains everything. Race does not explain all forms of misfortune any more than it explains the colour of one’s socks. Yet conversations about race so quickly devolve into anxious bouts of wondering why we are not talking about something – anything – else, like hard work or personal responsibility or birth order or class or God or the good, old glories of the human spirit. All these are worthy topics of conversation, surely, but ... can we consider, for just one moment, race. (Williams 1997, 61) vii Preface A Few Notes About Norway & Comments on Positionality For readers of this dissertation who are not familiar with recent Norwegian nation building and immigration history, this preface provides a very brief overview of some basic information that contextualizes the chapters to come. This preface also includes a short discussion of my position as a Norwegian citizen located in the U.S. academy and grounded in U.S. theories of race while doing research on Norway. Notes about Norway Present-day Norway gained independence from Sweden in 1905, following 500 years of Swedish and Danish rule, and much of recent Norwegian history focuses on creating a national identity that can stand in contrast to Swedish or Danish identities. Thus, for example, there are today two official written versions of Norwegian, as the national founders could not agree on whether to create a written national language based on written Danish, or to form one based on the myriad Norwegian dialects.