REVIEWS 391 Dzenovska, Dace. School of Europeanness: Tolerance and Other Lessons in Political Liberalism in Latvia. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY and London, 2018. xiv + 276 pp. Notes. Bibliography. Index. $29.95: £23.95 (paperback). Dace Dzenovska, a social cultural anthropologist at Oxford University, has written a singular account of the introduction of Western political liberal ideas, most notably tolerance, into the political space of post-Soviet, postsocialist Latvia. School of Europeanness has wide-ranging appeal beyond her discipline and provides as many insights into the crisis of twenty-first-century liberalism across the West as it does to its case study of Latvia. Dzenovska moves effortlessly between minority policy, language and migration with a steady focus on liberalism’s concept of political tolerance, specifically at a time and place when the global standing of liberalism is being challenged. Her book is a welcome addition to many different disciplines, from minority studies to migration policy, from the introduction of liberalism to post-Socialist states, to contemporary affairs and to Baltic studies. Dzenovska employs a deceptively simple, yet illuminating, tool for her study of the well-worn subject matter of the last thirty years of Latvia’s political and social relations. A great many historians, political scientists, economists and sociologists have chronicled Latvia’s transition from a Soviet Socialist, albeit occupied, Republic to a member state of the European Union. Even the subject matter, from minority rights legislation, language policy, border control and migration, seems well-covered. Dzenovska, however, looks at the confluence of eventsandactors,andinstinctivelyunderstandsthatthisnexustellsagreatdeal aboutallofthoseinvolved,andmoreimportantlyaboutthepowerrelationships between the actors and not just the Latvian state. Western governments and non-governmental organizations (international and in Latvia) identified a lack of classic, Western liberal tolerance and critical thinking in Latvia. A host of campaigns run by a gamut of organizations and, what Dzenovska calls ‘tolerance workers’, rushed to meet this need, and Dzenovska sees this as the perfect theoretical space to unpack the meanings and biases of all of those involved. The presentation is endlessly fascinating, and as a good scholarly work should do, leads to more questions. Within Latvia’s political space, for example, there are diverging opinions of what tolerance is, who lacks it, and who deserves it. Dzenovska brings this sharp eye and approach to the formation and definition of ‘state people’ and their minorities (chapter 2), the socialist legacy regarding intolerance (chapter 3), the encouragement of critical thinking in political space (chapter 4), the use of language (chapter 5) and the bordering of independent Latvia and the European Union (chapter 6). Each of these SEER, 97, 2, APRIL 2019 392 chaptersaregroundedinasophisticatedunderstandingoftheoreticalacademic constructs, and the rich trove of other academics’ work amply discussed in the introduction and in the first chapter, which examines the applicability of post-colonial thought to Eastern Europe, as well as throughout this thoroughly enjoyable work. One of the many strengths of this study is Dzenovska’s frequent injection of her own experience into the discussion. Dzenovska’s biography in some ways mirrors the book’s subject matter, with an early experience in the Soviet paradigm, a hopeful journey through Western liberalism and a learned academic career, with sojourns outside of the Baltic area in post-colonialism, Foucault, the deconstruction of the meaning of language in power dynamics and migration studies, which enables her to critique this study’s subject matter as almost no one else would be capable of doing. Furthermore, her rich experience in Latvia adds colour and personal insight into subject matter that is often presented distantly and in too dry a manner. Her retelling of discussions among ‘tolerance workers’, or her first hand observation of exams given by language inspectors to bus drivers are a welcome departure from the staid presentation in many sources. The vibrancy of Dzenovska’s presentation does potentially contain one of the few caveats about her sources. Her vivid and engaging descriptions of personal experiences are not entirely placed into a context of how representative these exchanges may be. Dzenovska is to be lauded for personally doing the fieldwork of monitoring language exams. Her empathetic discussion of both language inspectors and the tested, increasingly surly, bus drivers brings the subject matter to life in a way...
Search from 250 M+ research papersSearch from 250 M+ research papers
Open Access
Sep 1, 2020
Sintija Kalna + 3
