Abstract
In this interesting and well-written book, Richard Jenkins sets out to study how contemporary Danish identity and ethnicity unfold in everyday life. The reference to everyday life highlights one of the book’s theoretical assumptions, namely that ethnicity is a matter of what people do in their daily lives. The focus is on Denmark, more specifically on what “being Danish” means. The study of “Danishness” is based on ethnographic work in Skive, a small town counting around 20,000 inhabitants, which is placed not in the periphery of Denmark, but far from the cultural and political capital of Copenhagen.
I was initially surprised by Jenkins’ general ambition to contribute to debates about identity in Europe by means of a study of Denmark and Skive. Interestingly, in Chapter Two he notes that Danes, too, often wondered about this when he conducted the research behind the book: why Denmark, and why Skive? Jenkins answers the first question by referring, among other things, to two events from the past decades when Denmark attracted international attention. The first was the 1992 referendum in which Denmark rejected the European Union’s Maastricht Treaty proposals and produced an at least temporary setback in the process toward tighter European unification. The second event was the 2005 publication of the infamous Mohammed cartoons and the crisis that followed. Jenkins’ point is that both of these events warrant close scrutiny of the complexities of Danish identity, as the Danes’ attitudes to the EU and to their Islamic minorities revolve around what it means to be Danish. This relates to another of Jenkins’ theoretical claims, namely that identity transpires as the result of an interaction between internal group identification and external categorization done by others. That is, Danish identity evolves in its relation to what is seen as its “other(s).” It might be argued that, since Jenkins conducted the majority of his fieldwork in 1996–7, referring to the Mohammad cartoons assumes the role of a post-factum justification. Yet, Jenkins convincingly demonstrates that a range of the issues that were discussed in the wake of the cartoon crisis were already manifest in the 1990s.
Still, why base the analysis of Danishness on an examination of a small, apparently unimportant town? Here Jenkins’ arguments are more pragmatic. For example, he mentions the size of the town as being manageable for a sole ethnographic researcher. I was not entirely convinced about the selection of Skive at this point in the book. While Skive might be more representative of Denmark than, say, Paris, Texas, in the United States, there are still important differences between Skive and Copenhagen (which Jenkins also acknowledges). However, and this is certainly to Jenkins’ credit, when reading the various analyses I was soon persuaded that Skive was in fact well-chosen for this study of Danish identity: it is easy for me, as a Dane, to recognize his findings and to see that what he demonstrates on the basis of his Skive material seems very plausible.
What, then, does Jenkins find out? First of all, he undermines the idea, beloved by both Danes and non-Danes, that Denmark is culturally and socially homogeneous. Instead, he demonstrates, Danishness is replete with paradoxes. This applies, for instance, to the excessive use of the flag in everyday contexts where it can symbolize both “the abstract space of everywhere-that-is-Danish” and “concrete local spaces” (p. 151). Indeed, vernacular flagways constitute one of the shared everyday practices that make up what it means to be Danish, according to Jenkins. The others include: speaking Danish, socialization processes through the basic public school system; everyday social democracy (interpersonal etiquette emphasizing equality); a shared stock of songs; support for powerful state social democracy (the welfare state); participation (if often only sporadic) in the national Lutheran church; and a relationship to the royal house, either through the media or through the public appearance of members of the royal family.
A question that immediately arises when studying this list is how, for example, to place people with a different faith. Are they excluded from being Danish? Two points are important here. The first is methodological. In his ethnographic research, Jenkins deliberately chooses to focus on people whose traits are shared by the majority of the population: white Danes. Second, especially at the end of the book, Jenkins draws on his examination of what it means to be Danish to discuss what this form of ethnicity entails in terms of living together with people who in various ways do not share the abovementioned everyday practices. What, in short, may be the societal place and status of immigrants whose everyday practices differ from what is covered by the notion of Danishness? Jenkins proposes different scenarios, the most realistic of which he considers to be a redefinition of Danishness—some form of ongoing revision of what it means to be Danish. One of the interesting observations he makes here is how capitalism may play a progressive role in this redefinition of Danishness: in recent years, Danish public school education has focused increasingly on education in literacy, numeracy, and science in order to improve Denmark’s chances in future global capitalism, and while this takes place alongside attempts to strengthen values currently associated with being Danish (such as education in Danish culture), it is likely that the responses to the challenges of future capitalism will prevail and have a greater impact on the formation of Danishness.
As this example indicates, the field of education is central to Jenkins’ analysis because schools play a key role in civil enculturation. One of the core strengths of the book is the unusual selection of materials from this and other fields. In his discussion of the public school system, for example, the opinions of pupils figure centrally, meaning that Danishness is not just studied on the basis of adult voices. Similarly, in his discussion of the Danes’ relation to the EU, he examines readers’ letters published in two Skive newspapers during the 1992 referendum campaign. This, too, allows for a highly interesting inclusion of voices not usually heard.
A few critical remarks may be raised. For example, Jenkins’ analysis of new Danish school laws’ emphasis on Danish culture in the basic public school curricula could have benefitted from showing in more detail how, and by means of what technologies, this focus on Danish culture is being enacted in actual teaching situations: what is being read and discussed in class, and how? Similarly, the understanding of these school laws could have been improved by linking them more explicitly to the past decades’ waves of neoliberal modes of governing. Such critiques notwithstanding, Jenkins’ book is highly recommended—not only for its content, but also for its style. As mentioned, the book is well written. Theoretical terminology is downplayed, meaning that the book does not aim at an exclusively academic audience, but appeals to a wider circle of readers. What is more, at times the book is really amusing, the funniest part being Jenkins’ struggles to adapt to Danish customs of saying “thank you” in almost any social situation, and his parallel failure to find a Danish equivalent to his English “please.” These are spot-on observations of cultural difference, and wonderful examples of what being Danish (also) means in everyday life.