Page 108 - MIGRATION

Basic HTML Version

106
MIGRATION, MEMORY, HERITAGE: SOCIO-CULTURAL
APPROACHES TO THE BULGARIAN-TURKISH BORDER
The above considerations call for a certain analytical simplification so that we can reduce
the number of possible and plausible forms of inheriting to several, the practical logic of which
can be explicated by applying specific analytical techniques. The thus outlined theoretical premise
allows me to delineate three modalities in the way in which inheritance is “inherited”:
1) complete reproduction
of tradition and of the inheritance accumulated in it - this is the
case in which the contradiction of inheritance may be entailed in the form of inheriting itself but
does not lead to questioning it (i.e. inheriting without problems when the “inheritor who respects
oneself will behave as an inheritor and will be inherited”);
2)“new eyes”
upon the very same inheritance which allow one to see things hidden before
– there are a number of contradictions here, but they are also within the form itself and entail
changes of particular elements but not of the form
qua
form (i.e. there is a registered presence of
antinomy but it is surmountable by means of a variety of everyday practical actions and/or social
policies – the inheritor, restoring the disruption in his biographical experience, will start to behave
as an inheritor and will consequently be inherited again);
3) breaking with it –
the existing contradictions testify to the form of inheriting itself being
“broken” – it can no longer serve to orient practical actions and this leads to questioning it (i.e.
that which is problematic is the very inheriting of the inheritance of “Thracian Bulgarians” or of
“Bulgarian-Turkish out-migrants” in the studied cases – the inheritor has managed
on his own
to
negotiate with his biographical experience, overcoming the discontinuity in his own biographical
illusio
; as a result, the ontological complicity between biographical and social
illusio
will be restored
and the inheritor will have “inherited himself”.
13
In the first and the second case we have successful, in the sense attributed by John Austin,
acquisition of “inheritance”, since its “contradictions” may have particular dimensions within the
form of inheriting but they do not question the form itself – these may be the little “doubts” with
regard to the choice made (for example, the different types of discursive strategies for “justifying
the choice” to “go” and “stay” and/or “return” on behalf of Bulgarian out-migrants to Turkey which
we observed during our field work), or the attempt to “transmit” the inheritance to my inheritor.
Such is the case of S. K. singing nursery rhymes and children’s songs in Bulgarian, this being one of
the examples of successful receiving/transmitting of inheritance. His son does not know Bulgarian
but he sings to him “
Mila moya mamo
”, “
Hubava si moya goro
” and other Bulgarian songs through
which the child gradually “inherits”
Bulgarian-ness
on a pre-reflexive level. In another instance, an
elderly pre-school teacher used to sing Bulgarian songs in a kindergarten setting to her group of
Turkish kids immediately after out-migrating fromBulgaria. These songs she later on translated into
Turkish.
It ismore interesting to follow the thirdmodality among the forms of acquiring inheritance –
its rejection. In its essence, this type of modality is deeply contradictory since in it the“contradictions
of inheritance” question the very form of inheriting, i.e. these are contradictions which are
problematic for the process of inheriting itself.
In the following paragraphs I will dwell on the description and analysis of several
13 On the issue of “self-inheriting” see Deyanov 2011.