Thoughts from "In the Field"

When I hear the term "being in the field," my brain always jumps to images of Indiana Jones conversing with natives, dashing around temples, and kicking back shots in a bar.  As I sit typing on my computer in a comfortable house with a nice view of the rose garden outside, it's hard to conceive of myself of doing anything close to that. Nevertheless, things occasionally happen that remind me that I am actually "in the field."

I am lucky to be staying with a host family that loves to talk. I mostly just ask them questions and then sit back and watch the show. The other day I was talking to my host mom and she told me about her youth in a village near Bessarabka, which is also in the south of Moldova. The south of Moldova has been ethnically mixed at least since the late 18th century, when the Russian Empire invited Bulgarians, Germans, and Gagauz to settle here. My host mom described the families that lived on the street in her village and listing off their ethnicities:"Moldovan, Moldovan, Gagauz, Ukrainian, Gagauz, Gagauz..." She added that there were Jewish and Gypsy (sorry, no politically correct terminology here) families practically in every village as well. Her point was that in the Soviet period, you knew your neighbors' nationalities, but that didn't keep people from living together and getting along.

By the time the Soviet Union was falling apart, however, things began to change. Moldovan nationalists started chanting the slogan "Suitcase--Train Station--Russia!" in a not-so-subtle attempt to let Russians know that they weren't welcome in the country any more. Many Russians did indeed leave the country (including one of my current classmates at Harvard). Of the Jews who remained in Moldova--many Moldovan Jews died in the Holocaust--most packed their bags and left for Israel. The country as a whole became more homogeneous, although the south of Moldova remains ethnically mixed.

The very next day I was reading Nationalism Reframed by Rogers Brubaker, who challenges the way nationalism is traditionally understood through examples from Central and Eastern Europe. Brubaker suggests that we see "nationness" not as a stable phenomenon, but rather as an event, "something that suddenly crystallizes rather than gradually develops." People's sense of belonging to a national group fluctuates. It may be practically irrelevant for years, and then suddenly become the defining characteristic of a person. Almost without warning, public and private life are suddenly "nationalized."

Brubaker quotes at length the Croatian writer Slavenka Drakulic, who has an amazing gift for identifying and explaining facets of life in post-communist Europe. She writes,

"The trouble with this nationhood, however, is that whereas before, I was defined by my education, my job, my ideas my character--and, yes, my nationality too--now I feel stripped of all that. I am nobody because I am not a person any more. I am one of 4.5 million Croats... Something people cherished as a part of their cultural identity--an alternative to the all-embracing communism...--has become their political identity and turned into something like an ill-fitting shirt. You may feel that the sleeves are too short, the collar too tight. You might not like the colour, and the cloth might itch. But there is no escape; there is nothing else to wear. One doesn't have to succumb voluntarily to this ideology of the nation--one is sucked into it. So right now, in the new state of Croatia, no one is allowed not to be a Croat."

It is one thing to read Brubaker's and Drakulic's writings on nationalism, and another to see them in your everyday life "in the field." For a person like me who is interested in these phenomena, Gagauzia is a very exciting place to live.