1. Extracts from Flexibility in culture
Ethnic Groups and Boundaries
by Fredrik Barth What is flexibility and it’s nuances?
“First, it is clear that boundaries persist despite a flow Is it a adaption, a pulsation? Is it a permanent, irreversible change?
of personnel across them. In other words, categorical ethnic distinctions
do not depend on an absence of mobility, contact and information, I was searching for a ‘cultural contour’ or ‘border space’ where the
but do entail social processes of exclusion and incorporation whereby discrete traditional cultural image is challenged.
categories are maintained despite changing participation and membership in the My hypothesis is that this space keeps the culture with both vibrant
course of individual life histories. Secondly, one finds that stable, persisting, and and protective mechanisms. I think the elements within this space are
often vitally important social relations are maintained across such boundaries, and easily changable and adaptable to reactions of outer or inner changes.
are frequently based precisely on the dichotomized ethnic statuses. In other words, One might say that this zone ‘fill up’ the in between space, between
ethnic distinctions do not depend on an absence of social interaction and the indside and the outside. It is indeed also a creative sphere. It forms
acceptance, but are quite to the contrary often the very foundations on which tradtional cultural values as more accesible and visible to the outside,
embracing social systems are built. Interaction in such a social system does not lead as reinterpretations of traditional cultural values. This space also car-
to its liquidation through change and acculturation; cultural differences can persist ries a potent field of feelings.
despite inter-ethnic contact and interdependence.” The flexibility and the protecting maintenance of the contour are
controlled within the register of subjective feelings and opinions of
“The critical focus of investigation from this point of view becomes the ethnic the Sami people.
boundary that defines the group, not the cultural stuff that it encloses. The In this border zone one also get aware of what distinguishes me from
boundaries to which we must give our attention are of course social boundaries, you. You can place yourself inside of what you recognize something
though they may have territorial counterparts. If a group maintains its identity when else from outside you. In this way it is a zone of differences, exclusion
members interact with others, this entails criteria for determining membership and and inclusion.
ways of signalling membership and exclusion.”
I have in this diagram distinguished that
1) individual reinterpretations or experimentings are pushing this
contour
2) provocations from ‘outside’ impact the ‘body of the culture’. These
“We can best analyse the interconnection by looking at the agents of change: what provocations tend to collect strong reactions from within the culture.
strategies are open and attractive to them, and what are the organizational
implications of different choices on their part?” To look upon the cultural definition as a whole one could acknowl-
edge it as a more ‘stable cultural definition’ that individs can acknowl-
“(i) they may attempt to pass and become edge themselve a part of/inside of, and that has sort of a consensus.
incorporated in the pre-established industrial society and cultural group; (ü) they At the same time, within this ‘more fixed image’ the individual in-
may accept a `minority’ status, accommodate to and seek to reduce their minority terpretations of the shareholders of the culture constantly challenges
disabilities by encapsulating all cultural differentiae in sectors of non-articulation,.... this view, and those are the ones that define themselves inside of or
(iii) they may choose to emphasize ethnic identity, using it to outside of. This view is challenged by influences in each of the share-
develop new positions and patterns to organize activities in those sectors formerly holder’s lives.
not found in their society, or inadequately developed for the new purposes.”

2. - Det utløste negative
følelser og en bevissthet
om at jeg måtte beherske
meg for ikke å si hva jeg
mente om forestillinger
som “primitiviserer”
samene som “the nobel
savages” eller de “edle
ville”.
ikkesamen
Incident
- Da jeg første gang ble klar over en - Hendelsen utfordret
ikkesames forestilling av samer, og mine egne sentrale
hvordan vedkommende forventet at forestillinger om det å
jeg skulle bekrefte denne forestill- være same, så da må
ingen ved å fortelle om “samelivet” den vel ligge ganske i
slik som ikkesamen forestilte seg det. sentrum.