Identity and Othering in Past and Present: Representations of the Soviet Era in Estonian Post-Soviet Textbooks

Abstract

This paper analyses representations of the ‘core Soviet era’ (1945-1985) in Estonian post-Soviet history textbooks (1989-2016). Attitudes towards the Soviet system have been a rich resource for identity building, and hence a powerful political tool across the whole of the post-Soviet block. Based on an analysis of sections about the Soviet era in Estonia in 21 textbooks, the paper takes a look at how textbooks reflect broader processes of social meaning making, identity building and othering after a profound social and political turn. In 1989 and during the early 1990s, perspectives and narratives in Estonian history textbooks were closely related to social memory and national politics, enacting a specific social representation of the Soviet era that dominated the Estonian-speaking public space during the 1990s. The Soviet era, Russia and local Russians became the main Others for Estonia and Estonians. Over time, public discourse has diversified. The national curriculum and textbooks, however, still maintain the canon that formed in 1990s and thus reflect earlier sentiments. Apart from the increasing salience of Soviet-era daily life in more recent textbooks, the thematic choices and emphases have changed little since the 1990s. Therefore, even if the style of writing has ‘cooled down’, issues of identity preservation, resistance and accommodation, together with a saliently negative representation of wrongdoings by the Soviet system, still prevail. On the one hand, this testifies to the resilience of an established tradition in the textbook genre in general. On the other hand, it reflects the dominance of an ethnocentric tradition in Estonian history textbook writing. The paper discusses the implications of these findings for interethnic relations in Estonia.

Abstract

Background

When group interests conflict in the present, a historical period often becomes an arena where conflict is fought out symbolically. In the former Eastern block, one such period is the post-WWII Soviet period. The question of how to evaluate the Soviet period still produces controversial answers and is a frequent matter of social and political contention. In Estonia the two main ethno-linguistic communities – native Estonian-speakers and native Russian-speakers – remember the Soviet era differently: native Estonian-speakers evaluate the era much more negatively than native Russian-speakers. This ‘mnemonic conflict’ causes difficulties in history teaching because what Russian-speaking students have heard at home may conflict with what they hear from a teacher or read in history textbooks. In addition, some native Russian-speaking students may be offended by how the Soviet era is represented in these textbooks. They may feel that, since the Soviet era is represented as a time of Russian oppression in Estonia, they too, as Russians, will be cast in a negative light in the textbooks. Moreover, native Estonian-speaking students also view the Soviet era as something increasingly distant and difficult to comprehend.

Why was this study conducted?

The first aim of the study was to research the representations existent in Estonian history textbooks about the Soviet era, specifically the period between 1945 and 1985. The second aim was to discuss the possible implications of textbook representations for intergroup relations in Estonia.

What did the researchers do and what did they find?

I analysed the relevant sections about the Soviet era in 21 textbooks that were published between 1989 and 2016. By doing so, I reconstructed the main trends in representing the post-WWII Soviet era (1945-1985). I had the following research questions in mind when analysing the textbooks: What themes constitute the post-war Soviet era in the textbooks, and from what perspectives are the themes approached? How do the textbooks relate to social memory and politics after a profound social and political turn? What changes can be detected in the textbook representations over time? What may be the implications for students from ethnic minorities (specifically, Russian-speakers) and students from the majority (Estonian) group? I paid attention to 1) explicit and clearly visible topics; and 2) less explicit, underlying themes. I found that except for the increasing prevalence of Soviet-era daily life in more recent textbooks, the thematic choices and emphases have changed little since the 1990s. At the same time, the style of writing has cooled down in the textbooks. So on the surface, the textbooks have become friendlier towards Russian-speaking students. However, due to the stability of thematic choices, the textbooks are still clearly written with native Estonian-speaking, rather than Russian-speaking, students in mind. That is to say, underlying themes still speak mainly to ethnic Estonians, rather than to any other possible group of readers.

What do these findings mean?

These findings help explain why some Estonian native Russian-speakers are still offended by the way in which the Soviet era is depicted in textbooks. The findings also demonstrate the importance of paying attention to both the visible, surface level, and underlying deep level of a text when analysing and evaluating school history textbooks. Both levels can have an impact on intergroup relations in at least two ways: 1) they can affect how a group of readers feels when reading the textbook and how it makes them feel about another social group with which they associate the textbook; and 2) they can affect what stereotypes about the self and the other the text enhances or reduces.