‘Zwarte Piet contested’ Tolerance and the (re)production of the Zwarte Piet tradition in the Netherlands Laura Wouters 3709574 04-08-2014 A thesis submitted to the Board of Examiners in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Arts in Conflict Studies & Human Rights 2 MA Conflict Studies and Human Rights Graduate School of Humanities Utrecht University Supervisor: Dr. A. Sanchez Meertens Submitted: 04-08-2014 Program Trajectory: Research and Thesis Writing Only (30ECTS) Word Count: 26.748 Internship at Meertens Institute Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Peter Jan Margry 3 4 Abstract The aim of this research is to gain insight in how the discourse surrounding the Zwarte Piet tradition in the Netherlands has been produced and consumed through Dutch media in correlation with Dutch national identity. Initially it seems that the discourse surrounding Zwarte Piet contrasts the idea of the Netherlands as a nation being commonly associated in the public discourse with tolerance as one of its core values. Therefore this thesis investigates this apparent contradiction. It becomes clear that different forms of knowledge about this tradition exist. These different forms of knowledge lead to heavy debates between challengers and defenders of Zwarte Piet, which in turn leads to the cementing of the boundaries of two imagined communities. Celebrating Sinterklaas including Zwarte Piet is no longer as self-evident as it was before because of the discursive resistance of challengers. The objections to a reformulation of Zwarte Piet are mainly produced as a reaction to the discursive resistance of opponents of Zwarte Piet in its current form and the clashing of two different forms of knowledge. Critiquing tolerance and employing intertextuality are main strategies of discursive resistance to attack Zwarte Piet. It turns out that cultural politics of emotion play an important role in the defence of the figure of Zwarte Piet. Media plays an important role in the framing of the debate. This research contributes to the development of a better understanding of the role of the media in discourse analysis, and how we should research production and consumption, regarding discursive media analysis. Journalists are not outside the discourse. In this thesis we will see that the production and consumption processes are dialectical processes, in which the media plays an important role as the main channel of communication of discourse. 5 6 Acknowledgements First and foremost I would like to thank all my informants that contributed to this research by interviews, readers’ letters or completing questionnaires. Without you this research would have been impossible. Then, I would like to thank my supervisors, Dr. Ariel Sanchez Meertens and Dr. Peter Jan Margry. Dr. Ariel Sanchez Meertens, who kept me enthusiastic and interested in this research topic and assured me that this could become an interesting thesis. Your constructive comments were very helpful. Dr. Peter Jan Margry, who made it possible to do my internship at the Meertens Institute, which exposed me to a different academic environment and gave me the possibility to see my research in a broader perspective of identity and Dutchness. Your advice was extremely helpful in keeping me on the right track. Then, I would like to thank the whole staff of the Centre of Conflict Studies of Utrecht University for their inspiring and stimulating education throughout this academic year. I also would like to thank Suzan Saat for her academic and emotional support. Thank you for your feedback, for calming me down in times of stress, and sharing this thesis-writing experience with me. Thank you to all who proofread this thesis. You provided me with essential feedback. 7 8 Table of contents Abstract .................................................................................................................................................................. 5 Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................................ 7 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 11 1.1 Background ........................................................................................................................................... 13 1.2 Relevance ............................................................................................................................................... 16 1.3 Zwarte Piet, Dutch identity and tolerance ................................................................................... 17 1.4 Methodology and theoretical angle ................................................................................................ 18 1.5 Structure of the thesis ......................................................................................................................... 22 2. Producing the Zwarte Piet Discourse: Discursive resistance vs. defending tradition ...... 24 2.1 Is the white hegemony breaking down? ....................................................................................... 27 2.1.1 Critiquing Dutch tolerance as discursive resistance ......................................................... 28 2.2 A nonsense discussion? / The defence .......................................................................................... 36 2.3 Changing minds ................................................................................................................................... 43 2.4 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 45 3. Transforming knowledge into truths in news articles about the Zwarte Piet discussion ..... 47 3.1 Frame building ..................................................................................................................................... 49 3.1.1 Journalist-centred influences ................................................................................................... 49 3.1.2 Personal ideology and professional values ......................................................................... 49 3.1.3 Political orientation of the medium ....................................................................................... 52 3.1.4 External sources........................................................................................................................... 53 3.2 Agenda- and frame setting ................................................................................................................ 57 3.3 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 59 4. The reception processes of ‘truths’ about Zwarte Piet ............................................................... 61 4.1 Individual level processes of reception ........................................................................................ 62 4.2 The discourse surrounding Zwarte Piet and its wider socio-cultural implications ......... 65 4.3 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 67 5. Conclusion and discussion .................................................................................................................. 69 Bibliography ...................................................................................................................................................... 73 Appendices ........................................................................................................................................................ 76 Appendix 1: Interview list ....................................................................................................................... 76 Appendix 2: Survey respondents ........................................................................................................... 78 9 10 1. Introduction "Verene Shepherd, the UN investigator who believes that the Sinterklaas celebration should be banned, has been threatened and intimidated from the Netherlands. The United Nations, in an open letter asked to stop the harassment against the woman and her colleague”1. "A group of at least thirty people stood around me. They were furious. Suddenly they shouted: So you are against Zwarte Piet? Fuck off to your own country!”. “Then I said: ‘Yes, please' That is precisely the point. We Papuans are living in exile in the Netherlands. And I tried to say I'm not against Zwarte Piet, but also came to critique the UN. ‘Really, just ask the people in Delft: I'm crazy about Sinterklaas. There is no bigger fan of Sinterklaas than I am’. But the explanation did not come through. The group scolded at her, and then a man even grabbed her flag". I thought: that’s not going to happen to me". Kaisiepos fled from the crowd, but a man grabbed her, and it seemed he would hand out a hit. "Someone stopped him. I am grateful for it, because that man really had hate in his eyes."2 The existence of the Zwarte Piet3 tradition has never been as heavily, emotionally and aggressively debated as in 2013. In the tradition, Saint Nicholas, Sinterklaas in Dutch, is accompanied by Zwarte Piet, a man with a blackened face often wearing hoop earrings and a brightly coloured suit. Increasingly,