Читать книгу Kaliningrad – an ambivalent transnational region within a European-Russian scope - Evgeniy Chernyshev - Страница 4

Scope of study

This study focuses on the question of self-understanding and self-positioning of Kaliningrad’s youth as a process and the result of the Kaliningrad regional culture.

The background of the study is the following factors and circumstance, which up to date play the significant role within the issue of self-understanding and in the positioning of Kaliningradians: distinctive history of the region; multilevel cultural space and identity representations; migration genesis of the region’s society, and significant migration flows; peculiar geographic location.

Therefore will be examined approach to cognition of historical heritage, historical consciousness; practices in everyday life, which illustrate strategies and experiences of Europeanization; the practice of transmigrant and cross-border mobility; enclave/exclave phenomenon, the concept of the «bridge» and «pilot region»; and phenomenon of regional culture.

During the study were involved ethnographic, anthropological and sociological approaches and resources, including participant observation, various interviews, go-alone, press materials, statistic data and literature.

Field description: relevance of research

The Kaliningrad region was formed in 1946 on the territory of the former East Prussia as a most western part of Russia. There processes of globalization and regionalism intertwined, which are manifested by peculiarities of established regional culture. The particularity of the historical heritage and cultural space of the Kaliningrad region is largely determined by such features as a bordered zone, multiethnic, and multi-religion. That is why the following issues are the most relevant: the historical roots, cultural identity, and cultural dialogue. Cultural issues of the Kaliningrad region are significant, not only because of their specificity in comparison to most other regions of Russia, but also because of active cooperation in the bordered zone.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union the Kaliningrad region was separated from the rest of Russia by several borders. Traditional economic ties were broken; the region experienced a severe crisis and fought for economic survival. The status of a special economic zone1 assigned to the area became a way out. Later, a special economic zone was perceived as a compensation tool of drawbacks of exclave position of the region.

There is a growth of interest among residents of the region to the pre-war history, arise discussions about the renaming of the city, Russian Germans and residents of the former Soviet Union republics actively immigrated to Kaliningrad. The area was opened for foreigners, including former inhabitants of East Prussia. There was an implementation of long-term programs of cross-border cooperation. In the 2000s, numerous investment programs for the region’s development were started and a program of resettlement of compatriots from the former Soviet Union republics was introduced. In spring 2004, the neighboring Baltic countries and Poland have become members of the European Union. Since 2004 the Kaliningrad region is the only Russian enclave within the EU.

The topic is relevant due to the presence of accumulated data on regional culture and the lack of complex studies focused on the cultural space of the region in the context of cross-border mobility and self-actualization of young Kaliningradians. Moreover the analysis of the complex socio-cultural processes in the Kaliningrad region is important for the development of regional cultural policy priorities.

Maintenance and development of regional culture plays a significant role for mutual understanding, which should make for overcoming various severities of contemporary inter-regional relations.

Objective and tasks

Objective of the study is to explore the self-understanding and self-positioning of young Kaliningradians in the context of regional culture, and its development as a transnational bordered zone.

The assigned objective involves the following tasks:

– describe distinctiveness of the cultural space of the Kaliningrad region and forming on its basis a model of regional culture,

– analyze the position of exclave Kaliningrad region in the social-cultural discourse of the inter-regional dimension;

– consider the establishment and development trends of regional identity, self-positioning of youth under conditions of exclave region: If a combination of historical memory and geography provides a sense of commonality resulting in a perceived, distinct kind of groupness?

– characterize everyday cultural orientations of young Kaliningradians in the scope of EU-Russia: If the choice with whom to distinguish themselves (Russian or Europeans) is a choice between two temporalities for Kaliningradians?

«Kaliningrad issue»: focuses of research

The Kaliningrad region is an administrative-territorial unit of the Russian Federation, which has the most unusual history among other entities of the Federation and consistently attracts socio-political and research interests. Established as a result of the Second World War the Kaliningrad region became a target for intensive Soviet resettlement policy. The complete shift of the population in extremely short period of time has prepared the necessary «testing ground» for voluntaristic construction of the collective memory of new inhabitants of the region – immigrants from various Soviet republics and regions.

The cultivation of the idea that the territorial accession is just the trophy of war was an important arrangement of Soviet propaganda and cultural-educational policy, which was most pronounced in the first two decades after the war. The official discourse has ensured the fact that the Second World War is the starting point of history of the region.

History and culture of the Kaliningrad region after 1945 has long remained beyond the scope of scientific research in Western Europe and in Germany in particular. Scientific interest in the «Kaliningrad issue» was focused mainly within the field of politics and economics. Researches on socio-cultural issues appeared only in recent times, and presented in studies of Kaliningrad’s youth by Matthes2, Hoppe3, Brodersen4.

The second half of the 1980s marked a new phase in studies of the Kaliningrad region. It was officially recognized the fact of the continuity of pre-war and post-war (Soviet) histories. This trend was accelerated since the early 1990s,, when the discourse was aimed on questions of «who we are here?», «what is our mission?», «what are our roots?»

Therefore in the post-soviet time the public and scientific debates on the question «whether is it appropriate to regard Kaliningradians as a distinctive group or community, framed by regional cultural markers», acquired a significant role in the political and everyday discourse.

The 1990s may be defined as the period of updating the regional cultural, historical, ethnographic and multidisciplinary studies. Researches of this period are characterized by the introduction of results of ethnographic studies. The issue of cultural identity came to the fore in the last twenty years5.The issue of identity and regional consciousness is associated by many researchers with Kaliningrad’s exclave status6. This approach allows defining the Kaliningrad region as a geographical and political space, but also as cultural exclave.

In the 2000s, due to the emotional quest of «Kaliningrad distinctiveness» and as a result of search for some regional «identity», not only the territory and place, but also people – Kaliningradians became the object of significant attention. In this context among political establishment is studied and crystallized the idea of «strengthening of loyalty» to the Russian statehood («center») among the Kaliningrad community. Particular attention is given to the young generation. To this end, political actors, mainly of the central government, bring to the agenda the topic of «latent separatism».

Academic science, especially political science and sociology, were involved in carrying out the necessary adjustment of the attitude of Kaliningradians from superfluously «European» to more typically «Russian». Anthropology brings modest «contribution» to this activity. The complexity of the abovementioned factors leads to the enrichment and diversity of discourse about identity and regional culture as a model (modification) of the national identification core. Since 2004, the Kaliningrad region has become a Russian enclave within the EU and discourse articulated more intensely.

In 2007, neighboring Poland and Lithuania became the members of the Schengen area and the «Kaliningrad issue» became a topic for EU – Russia relations. Since this time Kaliningrad regional official and public institutions are included in multilateral projects of «region-building» in the Baltic Sea region. The expiry of the valid law of «The special economic zone «Kaliningrad region»7 permanently brings the issue of economic security of the region, which has a lasting impact on «Kaliningrad distinctiveness».

The «Kaliningrad issue» is quite actively developed by political science with the intensive involvement of the methods of empirical sociology and statistics. A number of questions rise: «What role plays the identification of the region’s residents with their space of habitat», «where are the boundaries of the construct of regional identity», «Do they lie exclusively within the administrative boundaries of the Kaliningradskaja oblast or construct of identity finds nutritional base abroad, in the border areas, in the „center“ or anywhere else?» and «Is it possible at all to measure the construct of regional identity by spatial categories?»

Since the beginning of 1970s, the regular development of the academic design of «regionalism» theories in European academic circles began. Theoretical development of political anthropology, political sociology, social psychology, cultural history, focused on the categories of «place», «territory», «identity», «border» and «boundary». It is worth to note the studies of Keating8, Aronsson9, Neumann10, Joenniemi, Browning11, Paasi12.

As an important milestone of the study of regional «historical self-consciousness» should be considered a long-term research project of Kaliningrad historians led by Kostyashov. The large-scale collection of memories of the first Soviet immigrants was published in the Polish, Russian and German languages and became a significant example of oral history13.

At the same time, including through this project, a gradual shift took place among the German scientists away from the extreme views of Kaliningrad as a place without a past, or vice versa, as a place without a present and future14. In particular, Matthes15 has repeatedly appealed to the theme of regional identity of residents of the Kaliningrad region.

Also I should note the high relevance of the studies of Hoppe16 and Brodersen17, who undertaken a successful attempt to reconstruct and analyze the cultural, historical and social contexts of everyday life of Kaliningradians in 1945—1970, that is, during the period of most massive ideological «processing» of the population and prior to the planned upgrading of the urban landscape of the city of Kaliningrad.

Among the studies of regional identification and consciousness of Kaliningrad in 1990-2000-ies the most relevant in terms of the objectives of this research are studies of Sezneva18 and Browning19.

At present, the theme of the Kaliningrad region is positioned in a few focuses of research capacity.

Firstly, from a geopolitical point of view as a distinct region, which is an enclave / exclave. In recent decades, theories of enclaves, as well as the history of their origin, development and specific problems, are subjects of many studies. The Kaliningrad region is one example of which is reviewed and analyzed in scientific body of literature. It is worth to note the studies of Vinokourov20 and Nis21, which consistently develop the theoretical basis of the phenomenon of «enclaves».

Enclave territorial entities are considered as a kind of category of regions, which plays an important role at the intersection of theories of globalization and regionalism. So often enclaves/exclaves become places for application of interests of different dimensions: local, regional, national and cross-border.

The Enclave is an area or territory, which controlled from outside by motherland, an international organization or a transnational enterprise, which is lying outside the enclave. Accordingly to this definition, also Oblast’ may be an enclave: it is important that this Oblast’ is an integrated component of another state and politically controlled by this state. In this case, from the perspective of the administrative center (Moscow) such area is an exclave, but from the point of view of the surrounding states (European Union) and the international community is enclave. The state, which surrounds the enclave/exclave, is named surrounding state. The state, part of which is an enclave/exclave, is named – mother country22.

The necessity for design of theoretical framework for socio-economic development of the Kaliningrad region in terms of EU and NATO enlargement to the East in the mid-2000s has led to the search for evidence-based ways to ensure stability and coexistence with neighboring states23. However, it should be taken in account that this search takes place from the perspective of the established categories of political science that preaches the classical approach to the role of state institutions and their borders as limits of political influence. The issue of the «most western region» of Russia is poorly considered in cultural studies as in Russia so in Western Europe. The focus of research aims on discourse about Kaliningrad from the standpoint of political science, which theories are seen among political actors as most applicable and practically oriented in terms of the study of the Kaliningrad exclave, as a factor of Russian foreign policy24.

The second focus of scientific interest can be designated as historical memory. The memory is positioned in a close relationship with migratory flows and changes that have taken place in the second half of the 20th century in the region25. As known, life in the Kaliningrad Oblast was ensured by method of labor rotation. This shifting of population formed a kind of psychology with a sense of temporality that to some extent stuck in the mentality of Kaliningradians26. This population has built the city of Kaliningrad. This process was the central point of identification of people with new place27.

The third focus is related to the question of identity and identification of Kaliningradians in the process of everyday life and its articulation in the socio-political discourse. Starting from fifty years ago, the presence of Kaliningrad has been the subject of identity politics. However earlier in the spotlight was the idea that «Kaliningrad plays the role of the western Soviet outpost populated by «homo sovieticus kaliningradensis»28.

Nowadays it is explicitly clear that the analysis of identity and culture has become a significant theme in historical studies of borderlands, precisely because of the tensions residing in state’s attempts to impose national culture on all of its localities. Ambivalence border regions «often experience as they are both: pushed away from national centers, as part of the centrifugal forces of being the state’s frontier with non-national others, and pulled in by the centripetal forces of the borderlands and state centers across their borderline»29.

The fourth focus is directly related to the nature of the Kaliningrad boundary regional culture. Social scientists often neglected or underestimated transfrontier cultural systems. This is partly the result of different research focuses, but also methodological complexity. Symbolic design of the boundaries to border cultures are often highly significant signs of national and regional identity, but also are among the most difficult to perceive.

One of the trends which took interdisciplinary approaches to the research of frontier has been through the conception of borders and their regions as «systems» worthy of study in their own right, and not only at the peripheries of states and their institutions, or as the outer cover of state societies30.

As Prescott has classified, two research themes would be of concern to an anthropologist: the study of the impact of the boundary on the attitudes of border inhabitants and exploration of the effect of the boundary on national policies31. It is reasonable and justifiable to consider all the above aspects in interrelationship. Until now, it did not occur and studies are not based on a multidisciplinary approach of social sciences. Theory and methodological development of anthropology and cultural studies are still on the edge of the Kaliningrad issue.

Course of field research

Since I am an aboriginal Kaliningradian, I can then test on myself the processes and changes that occurred and are occurring at the moment in Kaliningrad. Meanwhile, it is necessary to take into account the fact that a large part of Kaliningradians are immigrants, which means that they have previously changed their place of residence. Young Kaliningradians with a migrant background are became a noticeable part of my research. Another important point, I come to make my study from Germany (Berlin), so the perception of me as an interlocutor from the view of respondents could be often described as «an alien who once lived in Kaliningrad, but came away long time ago and now explores period of his life, which was once, but already gone».

I talked «just about the complex» with those who are the target of public actors, and object of politics, social studies and educational activities. The course of field research provided answers to the questions that troubled me even earlier. Moreover, it has allowed me to take a novel look at the scope of study.

Interviewed people can be divided into two major groups: the «experts» and «ordinary» respondents.

«Experts» are increasingly public people with experience in a particular field of activity. These are people who lead an organization or institution, who are, or have been involved in various initiatives, activities and events that affect, shape, and govern the cultural and social landscape of the Kaliningrad Oblast as ambivalent border region, located at the junction of different spaces. Among them are scientists, leaders of public initiatives, entrepreneurs, leaders of NGOs, government officials, and journalists. In general, these are young people up to 35 years old. Each of them has their own life story, some born in the Kaliningrad region, and some immigrated with their families. However, each of them spent a lot of time in the region already, familiar with daily life of the region and its socio-cultural image and they themselves form it. Almost all experts expressed their wish to be marked in the thesis by their real names and positions.

I have a different degree of familiarity with each of them: from friendly relations, to those I was meeting for the first time. It is worth to note that in both cases, I tried to stick to the same format of conversation, although it is obvious that the meetings with strangers lasted for a shorter time than with familiar persons. I was pleasantly surprised that even strangers, who just learned about the theme of my research, always have expressed a wish to meet. Moreover a waiting time for a meeting was relatively short, even despite of a high official status of the respondent and his/her busyness.

Another observation: almost all of my interviews I have appointed by Facebook or other online social networks. This applies both to my friends and strangers (even high ranking officials). In all cases, online social networks have played the role of an effective communication channel, which is to some extent eliminates the social status of the respondent and makes his/her more accessible for communication.

In my opinion, a significant role was played by the fact of presence of «mutual friends» on online social networks. This fact serves as an effective recommendation and partially replaces the initial phase of familiarity, because it is always possible to make inquiries about the person beforehand. Although Kaliningrad is a town with a population of nearly half a million people, nevertheless, it is a «big village», where many know each other. This is especially noticeable in certain professional circles (among journalists, academics, social activists, politicians e. t. c.).

The venues of my interviews were cafes, offices and breaks during events and conferences.

The sample interviews allowed my respondents to move away from the structured aspect of the conversation and give a response in broader framework of the designated theme. Although, it was largely possible with the second group of respondents.

The second group of respondents is «ordinary people». This group is more numerous and includes a variety of people. Almost all of them are mentioned in the text of the thesis anonymously (under fake names) or under real, but without family names. I have only few familiar people among this category of respondents.

The type of interactions with the second group may be divided into interview (which were planned in advance) and conversations that occurred spontaneously. Interviews were conducted during the events at the opening of thematic exhibitions, scientific conferences and seminars. I should also mention the sporadic conversations that took place in public transport. Here I mean traveling from Kaliningrad to Poland (Gdansk and Olsztyn) and Germany (Potsdam) by bus.

The conversations on the border, while waiting for the border and customs control, as well as with applicants for Schengen visas, who submitted their documents to the General Consulate of Poland and Germany in Kaliningrad, were devoted to the cross-border mobility and perception of Kaliningrad as a borderline region. With some of these people I have managed to become acquainted and to meet again to clarify some questions. In Poland, mainly in Gdansk and Sopot, I was looking for places that are particularly popular among Kaliningradians, who travel there for recreation and shopping of popular products and foodstuffs.

Since many Kaliningradians «migrate» on weekends to «Trójmiasto»32 my field of research literally «overflows» across the border and rushed for 120 kilometers into the EU, «carpets» the cobbled streets of the old town of Gdansk, corridors of shopping malls, seafront of Sopot, theatrical annual processions of the St. Dominic Fair, yacht festivals and new shopping centers, arrayed along the Polish-Russian border.

On the other hand, my experience of research and teaching at the Baltic Federal University of Immanuel Kant helped me to establish contacts with students of universities of Kaliningrad, with whom I have organized pre-scheduled interviews.

My affiliation with the institution «from the West», which is the Humboldt-University, initially caused the «mixture sense of wonder» among the respondents of my research. The interest of Russian researchers, mostly political scientists and sociologists, considered as usual. Interest on the part of the West is expected only in respect to the lighting in the news and usually in a negative context. The fact that I am conducting an academic study has caused slight bewilderment: «It cannot be! We are interesting for researchers from the West?»

Secondly, my respondents were surprised after I said that I am conducting research in «European Ethnology». They asked with curiosity: «They are interested what we eat, drink, how looks like our housing is and what we daily wear?»

At this point, I should refer to Buckowski33, who is of the opinion that still exist knowledge hierarchies, when researchers from the west and their study met with more respect among the field. As explanation for this attitude Buchowski considers a kind of inferiority complex among anthropologists from Central and Eastern European countries, who research the post-socialism. In my case, it was quite the contrary, because people, who are unfamiliar with me, took me as a researcher from the «Western Europe».

Buckowski explains this approach as reaction on colonial pattern of thinking. According to Buchowski, western anthropologists often reject locally produced theories, because they would classify it as ideologically contaminated. The western anthropologists pursue the goals to preserve their interpretations and discourse sovereignty and to legitimize their scientific position34.

In conversations some respondents expressed ambivalent feelings of suspicion and of respect to me at the same time.

During interviews with respondents from both groups I felt their aspiration to «explain» features, problems and possible prospects of Kaliningrad, as part of a cross-border space and as a «European» city. I felt their aspiration to use me as a reporter on the line to the west. This confidence appeared after a few respondents said about it directly. One opinion united almost all respondents: «It is „nice“ and „right“ that they are interested in us».

How was the search and identification of fields for interviews and participant observation? Field was found at scientific conferences, at educational institutions, informal youth hangouts, in the corridors of the official regional authorities, media expert communities of journalists and political scientists, in the queue on sale of European goods, on the state border (on the way to it, during customs and pass control and during my stay abroad in bordered zone).

As Baumbach emphasizes the main agents involved in creating and sustaining «regions of culture» and «regions of identity» are acting by communicating shared traditions, customs, and values include a wide range of different sites and media devoted to the promotion of regional history and the creation of a regional collective consciousness. This is exemplified through museums and monuments, traditional fairs and festivals of art35. Therefore events and actions, which aimed at maintaining or reconstruction of historical traditions and values, have been my priority in time of field research. Among them are public holiday of «Long sausage»36, historical reconstruction37, «Week of Prussia cat»38. By these and other events I held participating observations.

As Welz considers «participating observation is used by the European ethnology often only to provide additional background and contextual knowledge»39. Through those events and holidays I was looking for this background and knowledge, and my search led me to respondents and interviews, which I did not plan and did not expect at all.

I undertook periodic visits to the «field», and constantly visited and left again. I considered this approach as appropriate, taking into account the peculiarity of the study and issues, which stood in front of me. During my empirical research new developments took place: «field» was updated and expanded. Actually it was formed «additional field» – Small border traffic, which is not only spatially enriched the participating observation (allowing more intensively include the border areas of Poland), but also qualitative diversified the research in the «original field» directly in Kaliningrad, made it more complex and multifaceted, especially in the context of cross-border mobility.

If in Kaliningrad I was presented as a «guest» of the field, then in Berlin, the «guests» were Kaliningradians: there was the opposite context. I had the opportunity to experience it during the final phase of empirical research of startup entrepreneurs from Kaliningrad in Berlin. I chose this example of cross-border mobility for the following reasons: it is a novel focus of the study, which has not previously covered; IT – initiatives are a key part of the discourse on Russia’s modernization as a vector of post-socialist development; Kaliningrad (besides Moscow) declared as a «pilot region» of the modernization.

Participating observation provides the context and collection of background information, as well as provided me with initial ideas on self-identification strategies of young Kaliningradians in the context of the regional culture of the transnational space.

Looking to the study of self-consciousness (Selbstverständigung) the following methods showed their relevance. As Margarethe Kusenbach40 did, I actually exercised go-alongs in time of participating observations. Go-alongs, participant observation, and the abovementioned interviews served to provide an actual view on the daily emotional practices, as well as on the patterns of expression of personal views on cultural memories.

Theoretical and methodological basis of research: Theoretical approach of field

When writing the thesis it has been used a wide range of sources due to the intended objective and tasks.

In this dissertation the following are analyzed: theoretical works of cultural studies, sociology and anthropology, in which the basic examined ideas and approaches to the analysis of problems of this study; archival sources; historical and political studies of regional scientists; periodic regional and national press; statistical publications, which contains factual information about the Kaliningrad region.

I pay intent attention to the dynamics of tradition of the Kaliningrad region’s cultural study, which has its specific features that are directly related to the distinctive social and cultural situation in the region. Complex solving of research’s tasks and analysis of socio-spatial form of the regional community required the implementation of following approaches:

– a systematic approach, which helped to identify and clarify the features of everyday self-positioning of actors under conditions of Kaliningrad’s regional culture;

– historical and cultural approaches have allowed analyzing the relation between self-positioning of Kaliningrad youth and cultural/historical traditions of exclave society.

The field of research may be perceived as a socio-cultural space, which is characterized by variety of networks and actors producing it. So I fall on the idea of a multi-sited ethnography introduced by anthropologist George Marcus41, who impugned the concept of culture as a closed entity and makes possible new ways of research.

In the field I explore not the space of urban or boundary milieu, but cross-border interaction, historical memory and actual self-identification. Field research is focused not on an enclosed entity, but on the interweaving of actors at regional and transnational level.

Post-socialism: Europeanization and modernization

If I take in respect the ideas of the anthropologist Gisela Welz, than the definition of Europeanization can be designated as «a process of EU-Europe making»42. It means that I assume that the definition of «Europe» is beyond the scope of the institutional organization of the European Union.

Relying on the Wolfgang Kaschuba and Tsypylma Darieva43, I understand «Europe» not as a fixed entity, but much more as flexible area with variable borders, which allow us to introduce the Europe as changeable socio-cultural structure. Europe may be designated as a symbolic figure or idea that shaped the identity formation in the national and European context44.

The anthropological and ethnological research of Europeanization take a wide vision on the phenomena of Europeanization, while the Europeanization was comprehended as a process, which takes place at different levels and contributes to more comprehensive understanding of the «making of Europe»45.

John Borneman and Nick Fowler46 assume Europe as the research object, which still in the process of development. This research accepts the «making of Europe» as multifaceted process, which involves interdisciplinary approaches of historians, political scientists, sociologists and anthropologists. Unlike their colleagues, who primarily analyze governmental structures and its history, anthropologists are focused on the making processes of Europe either in interaction with, or apart of the European Union.

I perceive the Europeanization as Römhild primarily not as a political practice, but rather as a cultural practice47. With my research on the Kaliningrad bordered region, I find myself on the «edge of the Europe». In this regard from the points of view of Regina Römhild and Gisela Welz48 the research on «edge» of the Europe contribute to new insights to how in frames of Europeanization articulated the cultural-public space and urban area. Consequently it can lead to a broader understanding of Europeanization itself.

Also the attribution of «edge» refers to the geopolitical dimension of the research field. Secondly, it refers to imagination and appreciation in politics, as Buchowski described it49. However, the attribution of Kaliningrad as a «peripheral» or the «edge» located territory is not only an analytical category, but is also the procedure of self-attribution. The application of analytical categories such as «center» and «edge» or «periphery» contribute to self-attribution and self-perception and leads to corresponding spatial practices.

The frontier of the 1990—2000’s was a time when not only political but also social and cultural discourse about Europeanization emerged among academic, social, cultural, educational and youth organizations in Kaliningrad. Questions about: who we are, why we are here, how can we position ourselves in the plane relations of center, the region, neighborhood, and most importantly if we can provide habitat quality, which is comparable to ours surroundings?

A discourse on the Europeanness was formed to integral part of the public life of the region. For objective reasons, the main carriers of discourse are young Kaliningradians, who prone to mobility for travel, academic, cultural and economic reasons. The concept of Europeanization could be related with the theory of transition of post-socialist countries and regions, at that the transition is described as a transformation through modernization.

Modernization was performed as a process of technical modernization, development and formation during the transit from the starting point of post-socialism to the developed capitalism of the Western European sample. In more detail, it is the following: «Circumscribed by popular stereotypes, eagerly strengthened by western and neo-liberal discourses that reflect power relations between the East and the West, people on both sides of the former Iron Curtain simply define it as a transition from the authoritarian regimes to democracy, transformation from commanded economy to free market and a rapid change of social mentalities from communist to capitalists»50.

We can find the linkage of the Europeanization issue to the post-socialist urban space in focus of cultural-anthropological perspective of researches of Vonderau51. I assume that a similar approach could be taken in respect to Kaliningrad. In this context, I take a view of Römhild on the Europeanisation from the «bottom», which means the understanding of cultural, social and political practices of Europeanization as a process of negotiation of different actors52.

Boundary modality

Significant attribute of the «edge» of the Kaliningrad region is boundary modality. In principle, borders are divided into the interrelated concepts of boundaries and frontiers, both of which are separating territories of different states. According to Prescott, «there is no excuse for geographers who use the terms „frontier“ and „boundary“ as synonyms»53. He goes on to define border as the areas adjacent to the boundary, which «fringe» it54, while the borderlands refers to «the transition zone within which the boundary lies»55.

As Prescott56 determined, boundaries are «the lines which demarcate state territory, and in most places they have superseded frontiers which were zones of varying depth which marked either the political division between two countries or the division between the settled and uninhabited areas within a country»57. It may be argued that boundaries can be compared one to the other as «the symbols and reality of the physical extent of the state, as social and political facts, with form and function different in minor details but similar in most major ways», as frontiers, on the contrary, are phenomena of history58. Frontiers cannot be isolated from their «particular historical circumstances because they are the products of historical forces which cannot be duplicated, and which in most cases are older than those entities which are framed by the modern boundaries of nation-states»59.

As can be confirmed the border issues has appeared widespread by scholarly debate. On the one hand it concerns the boundaries of Europe. In this case the discussions include geographical, cultural or historical issues. First of all, they touch upon the broad question of European identity and the semantic dilemma of the term European. On the other hand the academic debate concerns the question of the European Union borders. Such diversity of areas results from the phenomena of boundaries60.

Meanwhile, anthropological theories and methods enable ethnographers to focus on local communities at international borders in order to examine the material and symbolic processes of culture. This focus on everyday life and on the cultural constructions, which give meaning to the boundaries between communities and between nations, is often absent in the wider perspectives of the other social sciences61. Still the scientific studies devoted to the issue of Kaliningrad are characterized by the limited concern on the importance of daily cultural practices, which serves only as a facultative argument for the Russian political scientists and sociologists.

Thus, I would like to contribute to a broader understanding of Europeanization, which is not comprehended as an exclusively political or historical practice, but also as a cultural practice62, then the theoretical approaches of Verdery63 and Buchowski64 in contexts of post-socialist Poland and Romania are applicable in the field of post-socialist Kaliningrad transition under European surrounding. As is known, the «collapse of the Soviet Union changed the geopolitical, economic and mental maps, and withdrew the elementary ordering paradigm, historical basis»65 in all abovementioned societies.

Nonetheless, for many «Easterners», the West continues to be a model they want to apply, in which democracy, free market, consumption and affluence prevail. But for quite a few among them the effective realization of this goal now looms as a menace over local economic interests and national, religious and cultural identity. The principle of hierarchy has come to dominate the redefinition of identities66.

Regional culture of Kaliningrad enclave

In the 1990s, the studies of regional particularities were intensified in the Russian social sciences. Studies were promoted by the trend of regional sovereignty, requiring the development of a new regional cultural policy; as well as the need for understanding the specifics of regional development in the context of globalization.

The majority of Russian researchers agree: the distinctiveness of the culture of each particular region due to a variety of geographic, economic, historical and social factors, as well as the specifics of the socio-cultural experience and cultural consciousness of residents. In particular the problems of regional culture are discussed in the theoretical studies of cultural philosophy and cultural studies67.

Taking into account the objectives set out in this study should be made, first of all, the following concepts: region68; regional culture69; are applied to the Kaliningrad regional culture – enclave and exclave70; cultural landscape71.

The concept – the region – is considered in the thesis as a socio-cultural phenomenon, which is caused by the specifics of the geopolitical, ethno-cultural, historical and cultural diversity of the Kaliningrad region.

Regional culture is understood in this thesis as original integrity of certain area, which is reflected in the human mind, representing the unity of the world of nature, and society. This totality has temporal and spatial characteristics.

Since the literature on various aspects of the Kaliningrad region often contains the term enclave/exclave and enclaveness/exclaveness, so in the dissertation analyzed the significance of these definitions and varied contexts of their application. According to fundamental research on this topic by Vinokourov72, I define the enclave as part of the territory of the state, surrounded by the territory of another state. In cases if the area has access to the sea used the notion of half-enclave. The decisive criterion for enclave-defining is the sovereignty over a particular territory. Under the working theories of exclaves, an exclave is understood as a region separated from the mainland, surrounded by more than one other state: since Lithuania declared independence in 1990 the Kaliningrad region became an exclave of the Soviet Union, but after its collapse – an exclave of the Russian Federation.

Exclaveness, pogranichnost73, multi-ethnicity, multireligious, multilayered ambivalence are hallmarks of the Kaliningrad region culture, that’s why has importance the concept of the Kaliningrad regional identity: it reflects the specific features of bordered region.

In this thesis to analyze the cultural space of the Kaliningrad region and to identify its specific was applied cultural approach, which allowed integrating accumulated research knowledge about the region. Cultural analysis involves a comprehensive study of the processes and trends taking place in the cultural space of the region.

Cultural analysis of complexly organized cultural space of the Kaliningrad region has caused a systematic approach to development, which had an important methodological significance for this study.

In this regard, was paid considerable attention to the concepts of enclave/exclave self-consciousness. Also in the thesis the influence of the enclave/exclave condition of the region on the identity of youth is shown. Therefore, the proposition is substantiated: in result of exclave character of region among young residents forming an identity, which is different from typical Russian – regional and local components are more significant than in other regions of Russia.

Thereby I perceive the region as a concentration of cultural reflection, which gives rise to new cultural meanings and creates new cultural texts that embody regional, Russian and all-European features.

I assume that the cultural space has integrative and evaluative properties. I share the point of view of cultural scientist Lotman74. He defined cultural space as a shared memory space from the standpoint of semiotic concept of culture. That is, culture is a collective memory and collective intelligence, which produces a supra-individual mechanism for storing and transferring of traditional texts, and developing of new texts.

However, time transforms the system of cultural codes, and thus changing the paradigm of memory – it is particularly the case within the Kaliningrad regional culture in the context of discussions about the relation to the German cultural heritage of the former East Prussia. Memory function allows restoring cultural dimensions. In the cultural space can coexist cultural dimensions of the present and of the past: their dialogue. It is about the coexistence of cultures, intercultural dialogue, which – given the meaning the pogranichnost of the regional culture and its historical specificity – is of particular importance for this study.

I distinguish and implement the following spatial couples, which, in my opinion, are specific especially for Kaliningrad regional culture: mainland/enclave, surrounding state/half-enclave, Russia/West, center /periphery, Königsberg/Kaliningrad.

Results of empirical studies show that in the case of Kaliningrad regional culture, in contrast to the typical Russian dichotomy of East/West and Europe/Asia, following semantic pairs have fundamental meaning – West (Kaliningrad region) /East (Russia) and Europe/ Russia (Kaliningrad region).

Identity: Transnational region

It should be taken into account that potential rivalries and conflicts between local, regional, national and supranational levels of co-operation must not be ignored. At best, these levels complement each other, creating a European identity in diversity75. We can find the increased attention to the «Europe of the regions»76 in numerous studies. Generally, this attention is directed to the «interaction of memory culture and regional history»77, as well as to political, economic, and social forces involved in constituting a region and establishing regional identities78.

As I turned to the issue of the region and to Kaliningrad region as an example of it, than would be taken into account that the meaning attached to region can vary quite dramatically depending on the perspective from which it is considered. As Michael Keating notes, «there is consensus that the term refers to space, the notion of space itself can have several meanings: territorial space; political space and the space of social interaction; economic space; functional space»79.

Identity is considered being a very versatile and controversial, capacious concept, which occupies a key place in the discourse of Kaliningrad (inside) and about Kaliningrad (from outside). The inevitable background of this discourse is the border modality of the region. If I turn to Barth, who pointed out that the differences between cultures, and their historic boundaries and connections, have been given much attention, I recognize that his study provided a significant impetus to expand the horizons of the state of research in the second half of the 20th century, with a focus on the «constitution of ethnic groups, and the nature of the boundaries between them»80, which have not been correspondingly investigated before. Opinion that the borders are «meaning-making and meaning-carrying entities, parts of cultural landscapes which often transcend the physical limits of the state and defy the power of state institutions»81 finds justification in a place like the ambivalent region of Kaliningrad.

Martinez82 based his concept of the borderlands milieu, on the study of the US-Mexico border. Such «milieu» can be affected by many cross-border and national factors, which can be grouped in such a way as to produce a typology of borderlands interaction. In the assumption of the concept of Matinez, depending on the political conjuncture the Kaliningrad region as borderland can be attributed to two groups. First, coexistent borderland is present when neighbouring states reduce tensions to a manageable level, and modest cross-border interaction occurs. Second is interdependent borderland, which involves a symbiotic relationship between border regions in adjacent countries. There is a binational economic, social and cultural system at work between the two border regions, and perhaps between their states, but a number of policies retain state separation at the boundary83. The existence of binational economic, social and cultural system at work on the level of the two border regions allows us to stress, that the Kaliningrad region nowadays can move towards the tendency of an interdependent borderland.

In the issue, anthropological research on border cultures contributes to our knowledge of identity formation84. Taking into account the concept of Martinez, it is worth to note that the Kaliningrad borderland is bears the imprint of ambivalence, which is reflected, cultivated and maintained in the mindsets of young Kaliningradians. Because of their transborder and transnational linkages, these border cultures are often treated suspiciously by states and their agents, many of whom believe in the traditional view of the convergence of state, nation, identity and territory85. As we know the stronger rulers belief was that strict control of the frontier was essential to the maintenance of their power86. The above is manifested in the Kaliningrad regional culture, forms it and affects the everyday practices.

It is certainly a commonplace in the interdisciplinary field of border studies that the border can only be conceptualized as being shaped and produced by a multiplicity of actors, movements and discourses. But most of these studies still perceive the practices of doing borderwork and making borders as «acts and techniques of state»87, more specifically state political institutions. Then from the empirical point, the politicization of cultural identity requires people to react against their own felt disadvantage and denigration, as well as occurring in characteristic economic and political circumstances88.

During my empirical study I asked my respondents about the format of interaction within political, economic and cultural dimensions in the space of the borderland region and whether it is legitimate to talk about the hierarchy or the interdependence of these measurements. I have collected very different answers, which made the basis of empirical research in the light of the idea that the culture is but one element in the definition and reproduction of a political system.

I consider the point of Strassoldo relevant who concluded that the ambivalence of border life is a defining feature of border societies in several respects89. Border people may demonstrate ambiguous identities because economic, cultural and linguistic factors pull them in two directions. They are also pulled two ways politically, and may display only a weak identification with the nation-state in which they reside. This ambivalent border identity affects the role that border communities play in international cooperation and conflict90. Everyday practice of young Kaliningradians and empirical research logically fall on this theoretical basis.

For Anderson, borders are both institutions and processes. Anderson also stresses that «borders are markers of identity, and have played a role in this century in making national identity the pre-eminent political identity of the modern state»91.

The frontiers are markers of identity, in the twentieth century usually of national identity, although political identities may be larger or smaller than the «nation» state. Frontiers, in this sense, are part of political beliefs and myths about the unity of the people and sometimes myths about the «natural» unity of a territory92. These «imagined communities», to use Anderson’s93 phrase, are now a universal phenomenon and often have deep historical roots. These communities are defined by imagined boundaries, if we follow Cohen’s remark, that «where cultural difference was formerly underpinned also by structural boundaries, these have now given way to boundaries which inhere in the mind: symbolic boundaries»94. To accept this assumption, we must proceed from the fact that «human consciousness and social organization are profoundly conditioned by territory and frontiers»95. I note the importance, of how Cohen estimates symbols as a resource for identity. According to his point of view they are «pragmatic devices which are invested with meaning through social process of one kind or another, they are potent resources in the arenas of politics and identity»96.

I share the view, that in certain circumstances the frontier acquired a mythic significance in building nations and political identities, becoming, as Anderson signalized, the mythomoteur of a whole society97.

For Barth98, ethnic groups are socially designed using individuals who adjust their cultural identity by emphasizing or underplaying it according to current context. Individuals can cross the boundaries between groups if they find it advantageous to do. Moreover they can maintain regular relations across them, but this does not affect the durability and stability of the boundaries themselves. Accordingly, «cultural emblems and differences are thus significant only in so far as they are socially effective, as an organizational device for articulating social relations»99.

Here it is necessary to bear in mind that according to the discourse of anthropology the «boundary» is the word with the most general application; whereas the term «border» item is situationally specific and «frontier» has come to be reserved to fairly strictly limited geopolitical and legal applications100. At that point following question has considerable importance, «why inter-group boundaries are sharply marked even as people cross them and even as the cultural differences between the groups change»101.

In this regard, I share the view of Sezneva who, in writing about Kaliningrad, takes the point that «there are no reasons to believe that a certain behavioral pattern will automatically lead to the formation of a particular political attitude, or learning about a history will automatically form a particular identity. How people categorize and identity the social world and themselves within it, and how these categories impact on their behavior are not the same issue. Categories of self-understanding do not always provide a basis for collective action and the formation of collective subject-ness»102.

As Barth stressed, the critical focus of investigation should be «the ethnic boundary that defines the group, not the cultural stuff that it encloses»103. As known, Barth emphasizes that boundary-making involves two phenomena: self-ascription and ascription by others. But he tends to focus on one side rather than the other, emphasizing internal identification rather than external constraint and the shaping influence of wider structures, such as those of class and the state. However, it makes sense to distinguish «between two analytically distinct processes of ascription: group identification and social categorization. The first occurs inside the… boundary, the second outside and across it»104.

Cohen takes the similar point as Barth. He stresses that «culture, identity and symbolism all converge on the concept of ethnicity» and makes a critic of the last one: «In some respects, this is the most difficult word of the three, since it appears to mean something – indeed, has been imported into lay usage for this reason – but, in practice, means either everything or nothing at all. Ethnicity has become the politicization of culture»105.

Cooper and Brubaker argue that «identity» is always «situated» and «contextual»106. This related to approach of viewing identity as «a process that is a temporal and dynamic phenomenon, which has a history, and even is itself situated in history as experience»107.

A combination of historical memory and geography provides a sense of commonality resulting in a perceived, distinct kind of groupness108. Does this thesis holds true in Kaliningrad? If Kaliningrad’s territorial isolation engenders a sense of «boundedness»? Borders operate as hard geographic facts and geographic borders translated into social boundaries. If the choice with whom to distinguish themselves (Russian or Europeans) is a choice between two temporalities for Kaliningradians?109 These questions need to find their answer in this thesis.

Structure of thesis

The main part of the thesis consists of three chapters.

The first is «The Kaliningrad region and its historical background» illuminates the issues of historical background and birth of the Kaliningrad Oblast’. Significant attention paid to migration flows as a source of demographic capacity before the collapse of the USSR and the formation of regional society.

For a comprehensive review of the historical context attention is paid to the deportation of German population and analysis of the settlement of first Kaliningradians. In this regard, important sources are archival materials and the results of the project «Settlers tell» of Kaliningradian historians led by Kostyashov.

We have in the focus the period of formation of the urban landscape of Kaliningrad, its perception by residents and public authorities. During this period of time, the establishment of Kaliningrad as a typical Soviet city based on official model of development of socialistic urban communities occurred. Migration dynamics is experiencing fluctuations and has changed the essence of the regional society in 1950—1980’s.

The developing of generational change and perception of cultural and historical heritage among Kaliningradians and followed change of cultural paradigm are resulted from a complex social und public process. It may be distinguished the process of cognition under the signs of «complex of temporality», «outpost in the West» and «suitcase mood». Attention is given to the turn of 1960—70s, which I believe is appropriate to be designated as the beginning of the mastering of the cultural urban landscape.

This chapter also devoted to theoretical approaches to the Kaliningrad region as exclave in consequence of the collapse of the USSR.

The next two chapters are based on empirical material including interviews and participated observations. The chapter «Positioning between Europe and Russia: strategies and experiences of Europeanization and exceptionality of Kaliningrad everyday» discloses the issue under the motto «what is the European everyday life of Kaliningradians?»

The strategy of everyday practices is affected by the emotional sentiments under the slogans of «fragment of Russia», «poor neighbor» and «pilot region». The Small border traffic, which was put into practice as an example of cross-border «European» everyday life in Kaliningrad is disclosed under the title «Hallo, Lidl, hallo Bedronka». Motives, moods, expectations from trans-boundary movements are viewed through the prism of emotional perception of territorial marginality as the characteristic and inevitable property of daily life in Kaliningrad.

Through the content of the chapter come the issue of «separatist sentiment» as a manifestation of «distinctiveness» and consciousness of the «uniqueness» as part of the public discourse and issue of loyalty to state. The Spirit of «pilot-ness» among Kaliningradians plays role of justification and attribution of distinctiveness of regional culture. «Pilot-ness» is understood as a concept with mostly a positive connotation.

The issue of consciousness of the third generation of Kaliningradians is based on the historical heritage as an actor of the transformation of mentality, which nourishes the discourse about the significance of the historic core of the city and cultural heritage. We approach the potentiality to reflect the past in the present and affect the future.

During interviews the question of «how and who distinguish themselves as young Kaliningradians» was articulated, as well as the adequacy and applicability of the issue «periphery» and metaphor of «bridge» on the boundary of Russian-EU landscape.

Appeal to the issue of the Kaliningradian identification on the transnational space takes place through the prism of All-Russian National Census 2010, which uncovered and marked the phenomenon of nationality «Kaliningradian» as reflection of marginality, rootlessness, and ambivalence.

The last chapter «Kaliningrad regional culture: self-consciousness (Selbstverständigung) in transnational space» reveals positioning and self-identification in the context of Kaliningradians boundary modalities. The historical context and cultural transborder’s dialog plays a role through the prism of migration mobility after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

The issue of borderland communities occupies a prominent place in the theory of anthropology and sociology. In this chapter, extensive attention is paid to the perception of the «space» and the aspiration of self-identity, as well as to the theme of Kaliningrad regional culture as a component (periphery) of the Russian national culture and as a link to the European cultural space.

The final part of the last chapter is devoted to empirical research in the «remote field» in relation to the «home field». During two years I had numerous interviews with Kaliningradians, which temporarily or permanently live in Berlin and find the field for the implementation of their motivations, ideas and projects. My respondents were young specialists and teams of professionals who implement and develop their startup initiatives and projects in the field of culture and innovative technologies.

I has spent considerable time searching for relevant respondents and localization of participating observation, because Kaliningradians in Berlin are not numerous and scattered among different co-working spaces and events. A process of search revealed that the consolidating center or space does not exist and is not even forming.

I study the role of startup scene as a channel of transnational mobility for young Kaliningradians and analyzed this role, within entrepreneurs’ initiatives of Kaliningradians in the Berlin startup-scene through theories of self-identity and transmigration.