Hybridism

3. MIGRATION LITERATURE – SOCIAL, LITERARY AND EDUCATIONAL ASPECTS

3.3 Literary aspects of migration literature and its reception

3.3.2 Hybridism

written: the early writing of „guest workers‟ as collected in anthologies such as Südwind – gastarbeiterdeutsch and Südwind – Literatur was called Betroffenheitsliteratur (literature of victims) and described as “therapeutic writing by victims of social processes.” (Fischer and McGowan 1996: 4) Said (1997) pointed out that victim-hood does not necessarily lead to an increased sense of humanity (Said 1997: 88)²². Fischer and McGowan (1996), referring to Özakin in her critique of Günther Wallraff‟s book Ganz Unten describe pity as a means of stabilizing cultural dominance, even as the most refined form of contempt. (Fischer and McGowan 1996:

14) Still, German literary circles initially labelled Turkish-German literature the literature of victims. And despite the fact that the second and third generation were

“critical in new ways of the prejudice they encounter in Germany, but also of the self- pity, subservience, backwardness or greed of their parents‟ generation.” (Fischer and Mc Gowan 1996: 6), it seemed a utopian task to transform literature of victims of social contempt into one that drives an intercultural literary movement, surpasses borders and helps transform German literature and its criticism. It is significant, however, that although Betroffenheitsliteratur has been described as such by literary criticism, this label does not necessarily reflect how the authors saw themselves and their writing. It cannot have been a “literature written by victims” as much of this literature was an attempt to inform, criticize and subvert. One should rather say that it represents a rejection of victim status. Chapter 4 elaborates further on the significance of Betroffenheitsliteratur for the development of intercultural writing in Germany as well as its educational value.

development of many forms of hybrid existence. Durzak (2004) writes that the hybridism of one‟s own cultural identity creates new hybrid ways of expression that can be described as intercultural. (Durzak 2004: 34) He characterizes intercultural texts as a fusion of aesthetic form and narrative tradition of the writer‟s country of origin with those of the German-speaking world:

Interkulturelle Texte sind dann vorhanden, wenn der Autor Momente der ästhetischen Form und der Tradition des Erzählens und Schreibens, die auf sein Ursprungsland zurückweisen, in seine deutschsprachigen Texte zu integrieren vermag und sich ästhetische Überkreuzungen und Darstellungsweisen ergeben, die in der deutschen Binnenliteratur so nicht vorhanden sind. (Durzak 2004: 34)

As an example, he mentions the novels of Özdamar who transports Turkish idioms directly into German and thus adds oriental colour to her texts. (Durzak 2004: 34) Another example is the Syrian author Rafik Schami whose narratives evoke the idea of someone slowly and lovingly knitting a colourful oriental carpet, for example in his 2004 novel Die dunkle Seite der Liebe. Schami (1995) has also been able to create parallels, for example in his book Die Reise zwischen Nacht und Morgen where he portrays the perspective of the German alongside that of his Arab friend. Whereas the German tells the story of travelling in a linear way moving in logical consequence towards a conclusion, the friend‟s narrative resembles the painting of a series of colourful pictures. These are just a few examples of how language and narratives from oral traditions have merged with writing in German and from within a European narrative tradition. Language hybridism has also taken shape in Zaimoglu‟s (1995) creative reworking of interview material in order to avoid “the false folkloristic impression of a flowery language of Orientals”.²³

Hybridism in writing goes beyond the European dichotomy of self and other.

Postcolonial theory has replaced it with the idea of a fusion or merging of cultures as Esselborn (2004) explains: “Der europäischen Dichotomisierung von Fremd-Eigen, Selbst-Anderer, West-Ost hat die postkoloniale Theorie das Konzept der „Hybridität“,

23 Zaimoglu, F. 1995. Kanak Sprak.14. Also:

Adelson, L. 2005. The Turkish Turn in Contemporary German Literature. 97.

der Vermischung und Überlagerung der Kulturen entgegengestellt.“ (Esselborn 2004:

17) Hybridism is a case of successfully assimilating and integrating largely compatible parts into a coherent whole. Hybrid writing would be impossible if authors assumed concepts of difference and cultural relativism. There are, however, voices that warn against the in-between, against “meeting on bridges”. Quoting Adelson‟s manifesto Against Between, McGowan (2004) notes that the relegation of Turkish- German writing to an in-between of “the” German and “the” Turkish culture has been viewed as problematic. (Mc Gowan 2004: 32) Chiellino, according to McGowan (2004), saw „bridges without banks‟ (Brücken ohne Ufer), a vision that was liberating and frightening at the same time. (McGowan 2004: 36) Mc Gowan also mentions Zehra Çrak‟s poem “Sich warm laufen” as describing the ambivalent experience of a liberating removal of boundaries and freezing isolation („die Ambivalenz der kulturellen Schwellenerfahrung zwischen befreiender Entgrenzung und fröstelnder Isolation.“) (McGowan 2004: 37) Oscillating between feelings of liberation and anxiety as a result of transgressing borders is a recurrent theme in intercultural literature. I therefore regard Adelson‟s manifesto with caution; she argues that the concept of “between two worlds” is to the “detriment of our analytical enterprise […]

partly because it suggests, contrary to all apparent evidence, that worlds remain stable while unstable migrants are uncertainly suspended between them.” (Adelson 2005: 4) She continues to say that this concept

[…] does more to assuage anxieties about worlds, nations, and cultures in flux than it does to grasp the cultural innovations that migration engenders. […]

One of the worlds is customarily presumed to be European and the other not, while the space between is cast as a site of discriminatory exclusions or the home of happy hybridity. (Adelson 2005: 5)

To Adelson, the concept of the “in-between” is not sufficiently credited with positive notions such as innovation or personal growth; she regards hybridity as “too invested in the paradigm of identity.” (Adelson 2005: 170) Hybrid writing does, however, emanate from individual authors whose identities were forged between worlds, an experience described here rather frivolously (and contradictory to her earlier statement rejecting the “in-between” as a negative connotation) as “happy hybridity”.

The concept of a life between worlds appears to be a question of perspective: it could

stand for instability, insecurity and discrimination as well as for opportunity, individuality and innovation. However way it may be viewed, it remains a reality.