UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los Angeles A Thorn in the Eye: Bosnian Mixed-Ethnicity Families in a Polarized Land A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Anthropology by Hannah Keziah Conrad 2014 Copyright by Hannah Keziah Conrad 2014 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION A Thorn in the Eye: Bosnian Mixed-Ethnicity Families in a Polarized Land by Hannah Keziah Conrad Doctor of Philosophy in Anthropology University of California, Los Angeles, 2014 Professor Douglas W. Hollan, Chair This dissertation draws on extensive field experience in Sarajevo between 2002-2012 to provide an intimate account of how individuals from mixed families in Bosnia today manage their sense of self and their kin relationships in the face of pressures to align themselves with a single ethno- national category. Such families, which were associated with the socialist rhetoric of “brotherhood and unity” during the Yugoslav period, came under severe pressure during the war, as the populations of entire towns fled “ethnic cleansing” and sought safety in territories controlled by their own people. Mixed families and persons continue to represent “a thorn in the eye” that troubles nationalism, unsettling national categories and insistently recalling histories of interconnection that bind the peoples of the Balkans despite war and the ravages of communal hatred. ii This work traces the repercussions of mixing, the challenging experiments with ethno- religious affiliation that face not only the marriage partners, but move through extended kin networks and profoundly influence the lives of children born into the family. Using audio and video recordings made over 12 months in 2011-2012 among 11 families in Sarajevo, the dissertation focuses on everyday family interactions—routines and conversations located in households—as a way of gaining insight into the micro-processes through which persons and identities are constituted as kin relations are enacted. It shows how particular metaphors of kinship are employed to naturalize nationalist xenophobia, and how mixed marriages challenge these claims. Emphasizing everyday ethical responses to violence, or the ways ordinary people participate in struggles to define and transform social reality, the dissertation underscores the importance—and the difficulties—of creating meaningful relationships with real individuals who represent “otherness,” recognizing them as multi-dimensional human beings rather than caricatures. iii The dissertation of Hannah Keziah Conrad is approved. Elinor Ochs Jeffrey Prager Christopher J. Throop Yunxiang Yan Douglas W. Hollan, Committee Chair University of California, Los Angeles 2014 iv Dedicated to Nada Bojanić 1942-2014 v Contents Abstract of the dissertation ii List of figures vii Guide to pronunciation viii Transcription conventions ix Acknowledgments xi Vita xii Introduction: A Thorn in the Eye 1 1 Nationalism, Kinship Ideologies, and Mixed Marriage 21 2 What is at Stake 55 3 Family in the Margins: Inhabiting a World Divided 83 4 Stuck in Transition: Loss and Aspiration in a Time of Uncertainty 113 5 Achieving the Ordinary 152 Conclusion 181 Bibliography 184 vi List of figures Figure 1, “I made okra, Grandpa” 161 Figure 2, “My dear Emir” 165 Figure 3, “For real okra you make it with lamb meat” 167 vii Guide to pronunciation c ts as in “pats” č, ć ch as in “match” dž, đ j as in “judge” h ch as in “loch” j y as in “Yugoslavia” š sh as in “sheep” ž zh as in “measure” viii Transcription conventions In this dissertation I have chosen to represent the speech of my interlocutors in several ways. Sometimes, I simply quote people’s words in English, using an idiomatic, loose translation within the flow of text. At many other points, I reproduce a transcript of their words in the Bosnian language, and provide a gloss that strives to balance intelligibility in English with a bit more information about how the speaker delivered the words and how interactions unfolded in time (Ochs 1979, Duranti 1997). These transcripts vary in their level of granularity, but draw on conventions developed by conversation analysts for the representation of talk in social interaction (Sacks, Schegloff, and Jefferson 1974). A period indicates falling intonation, not necessarily the end of a sentence. ? A question mark indicates rising intonation, not necessarily a question. , A comma indicates slightly rising, “continuing” intonation. ::: Colons indicate elongation of the preceding sound, proportional to the number of colons. - A hyphen indicates that the speaker abruptly cut off what they were saying. hh This indicates aspiration, audible out-breathing. It often suggests laughter or sighing, and may occur in the middle of a word. word Underlining indicates a part of an utterance that is stressed in some way. WOrd Capitalization indicates that part of an utterance is markedly louder. ° ° Talk that occurs between degree signs is markedly softer. ↑ An utterance preceded by an upward-pointing arrow is of markedly higher pitch. ix (( )) Text appearing within double parentheses is a description of behavior, gesture, gaze, or other aspects of the utterance difficult to reproduce in the transcript. (word) Text within single parentheses represents an inaudible or inarticulate utterance. (xx) Xx’s within single parentheses represent a totally unintelligible utterance. … An ellipsis represents a stretch of speech irrelevant to the transcript, which has been left out. = An equal sign indicates that the speaker went on with no pause, or that the next speaker began speaking without a discernable pause. [ Left brackets, appearing in adjacent lines of transcript, indicate that two speakers began to overlap at that point (.) A dot in parentheses indicates a short pause, hearable but not necessarily measurable. (0.5) A number in parentheses indicates a longer pause, in this case about half a second. I have adopted these conventions fairly idiosyncratically, using them only as needed to indicate salient features. Other choices I have made in the dissertation include the use of a different font, Courier New, to represent speech transcribed directly from my recordings. I also occasionally insert clarifying text or alternative translations within paired right and left brackets, as one ordinarily does in a passage of text quoted from another source. x Acknowledgments I remember my first arrival in Bosnia-Herzegovina, in 2002, when I moved to Sarajevo to work in a local NGO. I knew, from books and film and news coverage, about the war and the dreadful violence of the 1990s. I knew something of the courage Sarajevans had shown during the long siege of their city. But I was unprepared for the generosity, warmth, and humor with which Bosnians lived their lives, and with which they received me among them. There is no way I can adequately thank the people who welcomed me then, nor those who opened their doors to me during my fieldwork in 2011-12, offering their family lives to scrutiny and speaking candidly about their own private thoughts, doubts, and ways of finding meaning and belonging. I am profoundly grateful for their participation, and have tried to show my deep affection and respect for them in these pages. Ever since those early days, I have admired the priority given to family in Bosnian life, and I have been moved and humbled by the family relationships that I witnessed. I want to express my gratitude to the families in Bosnia who welcomed me and made me feel as if I were an honorary daughter, especially the families of Dževad and Lida Avdagić, Mehmed and Safija Kokorović, and Nada and Nenad Bojanić. Friar Ivo Marković and the Pontanima choir drew me into another form of family, a dynamic, often turbulent, and always richly meaningful community. My thanks go to Randy and Amela Puljek-Shank, Sandra Kasalović, Nataša Maksimović, Matt Harms, Daniel Janzen, Julianne Funk, Boris Mrkela, Sabaheta Abadžić, and Sabina Dervišefendić for companionship in Sarajevo and important insights into life and family relationships there. xi I would never have written this dissertation without the guidance and support of my committee, and I thank Jason Throop, Elinor Ochs, Yunxiang Yan, Jeffrey Prager, and especially my chair, Doug Hollan. His unwavering belief that I could pull it off kept me going at times when I doubted in my own capacities, and his thoughtful questions and comments have challenged me, always reminding me of the complexity of human lives and the limits of anthropological theorizing. Sandro Duranti and Linda Garro deserve thanks, as well as members of the Mind, Medicine and Culture working group, the Discourse Lab, and the Culture, Power, and Social Change group, who all offered forums for discussion of my work at different points along the way. Crucial individuals who supported me through the writing process include the members of my writing group, Anna Corwin, Katja Antoine, and Ellen Sharp, and a larger circle of friends and colleagues, especially Jennifer Guzmán, Katie Hale, Rachel Flamenbaum, and Bonnie Richards. It has been a delight to have Merima Ključo in Los Angeles as occasional expert consultant and constant friend. My own family has shaped my interest in the lives of families and the ways people need and nurture family relationships. I am enormously thankful for my parents, Dan and Mary Ann, and for my sisters, Mimi, Marsha, and Debbie. They have cheered me on, come to visit me wherever I go, read chapters, and believed that I will be done sooner or later. Soul