Читать книгу Staging Citizenship - Ioana Szeman - Страница 8

Roma are always the last to count, but we won first prize. We would not settle for second or third place.

—Maria, Roma dancer, interview with the author, 2009

I’ve worked hard. When you look at me, you can see that I’ve succeeded through my voice, not my looks.

—Viorica, Roma singer, Romanian reality TV show Clejanii, December 2012

Moderator: Why is there tension between Roma and Romanians?

Roma activist: First of all, you should not use these terms; you should speak of Roma and non-Roma, as all Roma [in Romania] are Romanian citizens.

—Talk show on Romanian national TV channel Realitatea, December 2007

According to Maria, dance was the only avenue of success available to her as a Romni.¹ High rents and unemployment had driven Maria and her family to Pod,² a settlement where people squatted in improvised lodgings and collected recyclables from a nearby refuse site. Living in difficult conditions, without infrastructure or medical facilities and far away from schools, Roma in Pod could be mistaken for refugees in a camp, even though they were citizens of Romania. Local media looked down on Roma from Pod and often described them as poor, dirty and lazy. A far cry from such stereotypes, thirty-five-year-old Maria – always impeccably dressed in modern clothing – lived with her family in a wooden house, one of several wooden and brick houses that some residents had managed to build in Pod with the money they made from scavenging on the refuse site. She had been a member of a Roma dance group that was formed and active during the first post-socialist decade; she showed me her dance costumes, which included long, colourful skirts, scarves decorated with coins, and high-heeled shoes. Sitting in her spotlessly clean living room, Maria, dressed in jeans and a T-shirt, proudly reminisced about her dance group’s success in competitions: ‘When they heard that we were coming, they were surprised, and the last ones to come ended up winning first prize. Roma are always the last to count, but we won first prize. We would not settle for second or third place.’ She told me that even though sometimes they were looked at with suspicion because they were Roma, their performances always earned them praise.

At the opposite end of the social spectrum, Viorica, a famous Roma singer from the band Taraful din Clejani, explains that her successful musical career is the result of hard work, not looks. With her musician partner and two children, Viorica featured on Clejanii, a reality show on Romanian television portraying their daily life. The quotation in the epigraph is from the third episode, in which she and her daughter Margherita pay a visit to a designer. When the designer offers Margherita a modelling job (a way for the designer to gain publicity through the reality show) and asks her to lose a little weight for the purpose, Viorica – blonde, slightly overweight and in her late thirties – tells her daughter: ‘Yes, make sure you do not end up like me. Once you’ve gained weight, it’s hard to lose it.’ Then she turns to the camera: ‘Thank God I did not make my living that way. I succeeded through hard work, through my voice.’ Viorica expresses her relief at being successful because of her musical abilities when most female artists in Romania are evaluated for their image and appeal as sex objects. She is one of very few female Roma musicians to have enjoyed success in a field where Roma men reign. And yet, despite their success and prosperity, famous Roma musicians such as Viorica are not considered part of the nation in Romania; indeed the reality show trod a fine line between admiration and mockery of Viorica and her family.

The final quotation in the epigraph is from a discussion between a non-Roma moderator and a Roma activist during a 2007 talk show on Romanian national television. The moderator refused to refer to Roma as Romanian citizens, even though most Roma in Romania have Romanian citizenship. Two Roma activists – a man and a woman – were the only Roma on this talk show, which focused on the question ‘why is there tension between Roma and Romanians?’ and featured five other guests. The moderator, a non-Roma woman, did not seem to understand why the activists were insisting that Roma were Romanian citizens, and she proceeded to call them ‘Ţigani’ even after the activists had told her that the term was not acceptable and she should use ‘Roma’ instead.

These three examples illustrate what this book defines as the citizenship gap for Roma: the distance between legal citizenship, which most Roma hold, and actual citizenship,³ which the majority of them cannot access fully. Actual citizenship is the ability to take advantage of the citizenship rights that have been gained through legal citizenship but which, if ‘understood as private “liberties” or “choices”, are meaningless, especially for the poorest and most disenfranchised, without enabling conditions through which they can be realized’ (Yuval-Davis 1997b, 18). Actual citizenship encompasses both cultural citizenship, ‘the right to belong while being different’ (Rosaldo 1994, 402) – with material and symbolic consequences – and basic citizenship rights such as the right to medical facilities, running water and so on.⁴ In this book I argue that all Roma experience a citizenship gap to different degrees, depending on class, gender, occupation, age, geographical location and so on, despite the visibility of Roma post-1989 as performers or as victims of poverty and discrimination, in Romania and beyond. Even though they were recognized as an ethnic minority in 1991, Roma in Romania continue to be seen as foreigners, while most Roma see themselves as both Roma and Romanian. Viorica and the Roma activists discussed above experienced the citizenship gap in terms of cultural citizenship and belonging; in addition to the deficit in cultural citizenship, Maria and numerous other Roma, in Pod and elsewhere in Romania, who live in poverty and face eviction and discrimination on a daily basis, also lack basic citizenship rights, despite new measures officially designed to improve their situation. I argue that all Roma face a cultural citizenship gap in post-socialist Romania, and many Roma also experience a complete citizenship gap with regard to both cultural belonging and basic citizenship rights.

Indeed, this book shows that Roma are denied cultural citizenship not only in Romania, but also in most other European countries; and, at the same time, many of them suffer discrimination and abuses of their basic rights. I argue that policies and social programmes for Roma need to be linked to interventions in the official and symbolic definitions of citizenship, which are not captured by a focus on legal citizenship or poverty alone. This book intervenes in current debates on Roma and citizenship in Europe (see Sigona and Trehan 2009; van Baar 2011; Sigona 2015; Hepworth 2015) by introducing (the lack of) cultural citizenship as a key concept for understanding the lack of access to citizenship for Roma.

Numerous reports by international NGOs have brought to global attention the discrimination and abuses Roma suffer across East Central Europe. From Albania to the former Yugoslavia and Ukraine, many Roma lack access to public services, experience violence and are denied basic human rights.⁵ Even though minority rights for Roma were high on the agenda of Eastern European countries’ EU accession negotiations, which have seen thirteen additional states join the EU over the last ten years, the situation of many Roma in these countries has not changed significantly. Furthermore, police violence against Roma in Western Europe, including the fingerprinting of Roma in Italy in 2008 and the expulsions of Romanian and Bulgarian Roma from France from 2010 onwards,⁶ have brought to light the struggles of Roma across Europe. Both the forced eviction of numerous Roma to places like Pod, inside Romania, and the expulsions and police violence targeting Roma in France, Italy and elsewhere in Europe, can be regarded as state-sponsored attacks on Roma, who are not treated as equal citizens by their governments. Hepworth (2015) discusses Romanian Roma living in camps in Italy who were deported to Romania, despite their legal status, as ‘abject citizens’ in the EU. Sigona (2015) coins the phrase ‘campzenship’ for the status of refugee and migrant Roma in Italy, while van Baar (2017) proposes the concept of evictability to underline the internal biopolitical border within Europe. At the same time that Romanian Roma, who were EU citizens, were being expelled from Western Europe, impoverished Roma in Pod were literally and metaphorically being pushed to the margins of Romanian society through evictions, poverty and joblessness. I show how the precarious status of migrant Roma in the EU is predicated on the citizenship gap they experience in their countries. In Romania these expulsions failed to cause widespread outrage, as most non-Roma did not identify with those who were being expelled; media coverage condemned the migrants rather than the expulsions, reinforcing the citizenship gap for Roma. Furthermore, the Romanian government collaborated with its French counterpart in the repatriation process. There was widespread frustration in Romania at perceived anti-Romanian sentiments in France in the aftermath of the expulsions, and members of Romanian parliament proposed to replace the name of the ethnicity ‘Roma’ with ‘Ţigani’, supposedly to avoid further conflation between Roma and Romanians – as if Romanian Roma were not Romanian citizens. Such instances reveal the lived reality of the citizenship gap for Roma on the one hand, and the symbolic and actual reinforcement of this gap by many non-Roma, including politicians and state employees, on the other.

Staging Citizenship shows that the citizenship gap for Roma has persisted because official recognition has not granted Roma the same status as other, ‘legitimate’ minorities in Romania. I argue that the Romanian state has not changed its hegemonic definitions – which equate citizenship with ethnic Romanians and draw on ethnicity-based paradigms of citizenship, national culture and history – and has thus maintained the citizenship gap for Roma. In this book I use performance paradigms and examine how different Roma have negotiated and resisted the citizenship gap and claimed citizenship and belonging through music, dance, activism and everyday encounters. Drawing on more than a decade (2001–2012) of ethnographic research among Roma living in or touring cities in Romania and Western Europe, this study is the first to address at length the perspective of the urban and rural impoverished Roma who are part of the mass exodus to the margins of society, in places like Pod.⁷ This book discusses ethnoculture in relation to political economy, gender and history. It engages with disenfranchised urban Roma – most of them with part-time careers as amateur dancers or musicians – in the squat settlement of Pod, Transylvania, and with Roma artists, intellectuals and activists; it also discusses concerts, fairs, cultural performances and activist training sessions. Staging Citizenship explores the proliferation of a wide range of Roma performances and representations, from live music to TV soaps and reality shows, and the rise of Roma activism in the post-socialist period, examining the citizenship gap that all these different Roma experience to different degrees.

Market expansion to the east, in the context of EU enlargement, and the corresponding import of civil society and democracy, including a focus on the Roma minority, have led to the recent ubiquity of Roma music and dance performances, both in the West and in Romania. The figure of the passionate Gypsy has become one of the latest sources of exoticism in the West. Marketed as timeless and exotic, Roma bands from Romania and other Balkan countries feature in international festivals; DJs play ‘Gypsy music’; Gypsy dress parties have spread, from London and Paris to New York and Houston. In Romania, Roma dance and music groups have proliferated, while new TV soaps about Roma (acted by non-Roma) and reality shows featuring famous Roma musicians (such as Clejanii, featuring Viorica) have become increasingly popular. However, the visibility of Roma music and dance performance has not translated into Roma being recognized as citizens, despite the fact that Roma express cultural citizenship through these media.

This book uses performance to theorize the racialization of Roma, which leads to their misrecognition in everyday life, onstage and in media representations. At the same time, I show how Roma claim a form of cultural citizenship through these media, which goes unrecognized in official and mainstream understandings of citizenship. The book traces how divergent or parallel definitions of ‘culture’ – from the Romanian state’s definition of national culture in exclusively ethnic terms, to the authenticity criteria promulgated in EU definitions of Roma culture, to the commodified versions of culture promoted in commercial media – constitute the grounds upon which Roma continue to be denied full citizenship, cultural and otherwise. The absence of Roma from Romanian theatre is one illustration of how Roma have been excluded from the institutionalized, state-supported version of national culture. If national theatre is a reflection of the nation as imagined by its cultural producers, playwrights and so on, Roma – who have been made invisible in theatre – have instead populated other performance spaces, especially music spaces, and have become symbols of the nation while being denied their own culture. Taking its cue from performance studies scholarship on citizenship (Joseph 1999; Shimakawa 2002; Nield 2006; Roxworthy 2008; Kim 2014), on Travellers (Wickstrom 2012), and on performance ethnography (Conquergood 2002; Madison 2005, 2011; Johnson 2003) and work in Romani studies, anthropology, ethnomusicology and media studies (Lemon 2000; Beissinger 2007; Silverman 2007 2012; Imre 2009, Seeman forthcoming), this book uses performance to analyse Roma cultural production across the genres where Roma have become most visible: in music, dance and television in relation to the citizenship gap. I also analyse the representations of Roma in these media – which are usually commercial and controlled by non-Roma – in relation to the performative aspects of the racialization of Roma in everyday life.⁸ I situate these performances, in the wider structural constraints, both socio-economic and discursive/policy-related, and show how they confirm or challenge the citizenship gap. Performance, understood as “making, not faking”,⁹ in its multiplicity of occurrences—from everyday life to the stage and screen—represents a privileged lens into exploring the citizenship gap for Roma as a process, and it also brings into focus the limitations and radical potential of the new visibility of Roma artists and artefacts.

Through this book I argue that Roma in Romania are jettisoned as ‘not us’, a gesture that maintains the citizenship gap at the social and discursive levels for Roma, and the privilege of the majority through monoethnic paradigms of nation and citizenship. This jettisoning is also evident in the cultural representations and racialized hierarchies that assign low- and popular-culture roles to Roma artists and performers while maintaining their status as Other. I analyse the representations of Roma promoted through official state recognition and commercial media in relation to Romania’s dominant racial, gendered and cultural hierarchies framed by monoethnic nationalism.¹⁰ I present a diversity of Roma voices and performances, some of which have become more prominent, such as those of Roma activists, politicians and artists, while others have been overlooked, including the voices and performances of impoverished Roma, which I see as alternative performances of citizenship that resist dominant racial hierarchies and the citizenship gap for Roma.

In the rest of this introduction I provide a detailed description of the main threads of the book’s argument, followed by a brief overview of the history of the Roma in Romania and wider region, a discussion of the book’s methodology, and a chapter outline.