small facts large issues

Small Facts and Large Issues: The Anthropology of Contemporary Scandinavian SocietyAuthor(s): Marianne GullestadSource: Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol. 18 (1989), pp. 71-93Published by: Annual ReviewsStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2155886Accessed: 14/09/2010 05:38

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=annrevs.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Annual Reviews is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Annual Review ofAnthropology.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=annrevs

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2155886?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=annrevs

Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 1989. 18:71-93 Copyright ? 1989 by Annual Reviews Inc. All rights reserved

SMALL FACTS AND LARGE ISSUES: The Anthropology of Contemporary Scandinavian Society

Marianne Gullestad

Department of Anthropology, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60637; and Center for Research in the Social Sciences, University of Trondheim, N-7055 Drag- voll, Norway

INTRODUCTION

If anthropology is truly to become a comparative study of society and culture, modem Europe and the United States must become an integral part of the subject matter. It is necessary to overcome the now often inevitable opposition between "us" and "them," between anthropology "at home" and "abroad." We have not only to look at "us" in the same way as we look at "them," but also to see "us" through "their" eyes.

Many anthropologists therefore now recognize that it is an important anthropological task to identify and portray the many versions of "us," as well as modestly to keep in mind that the polar opposition between "us" and "them" masks the fact that all the different versions of "us" constitute only a small fraction of the total social and cultural variation of the world.

This is, I think, one useful perspective from which to look at the anthropological studies of contemporary Scandinavian society. Scandinavia is not quite "us" in the sense of being the home of anthropology, yet it is close to home. It is firmly a part of Western Europe, as well as being on one of its fringes. It is close to the anthropologist, but marginal in the discipline of anthropology. Together these ambiguities make it possible to play creatively with the categories and thereby to contribute to deconstructing and breaking down the oppositions between "us" and "them," between on the one hand

71 0084-6570/89/1015-0071 $02.00

72 GULLESTAD

anthropological studies of Europe and North America, and on the other hand studies of the rest of the world.

In addition, doing anthropological field work in this region means doing small-scale studies in complex large-scale societies. This poses more acutely than elsewhere the questions of what the units of analysis are and how to trace the relationships between parts and whole. Most anthropologists agree with Clifford Geertz that small facts speak to large issues (59). The problem is just what kinds of issues and how large they can be. This is another general question that the anthropology of Scandinavia may serve to illuminate. One may discern a movement towards new ways of chopping up society and reconstructing the relationships among the pieces.

For reasons of space, I limit this review to the anthropology of Sweden, Norway and Denmark.' The languages of these countries are mutually in- telligible and their histories are closely intertwined. However, within this region people are often more aware of the differences than the similarities in culture and ways of life.2 The anthropology of these countries is, contrary to the anthropology of Iceland (116), with few exceptions an anthropology of insiders and of outsiders who have settled in (49, 126, 127). Even with a limitation to mainland Scandinavia the literature is extensive, and the review cannot in any way be exhaustive.3

After spelling out the context for local anthropologies, I start out with a presentation of some studies and perspectives that may be considered as building blocks for more comprehensive analyses. The "small facts" that I have chosen to examine are ethnographic data about everyday life. The focus is not on "exotic" groups but on the "otherness" of what is usually considered most ordinary, trivial, and mundane. I then present three attempts to pull such ethnographies together into more comprehensive theoretical frameworks. As a preliminary shorthand, these attempts can be named after their central concepts: life-mode, class-culture, and overarching cultural categories. The review outlines both the critical opposition as well as the areas of overlap and the complementarity of these three attempts.

'In the United States, Scandinavian studies in language and literature include Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Iceland, the Faroe Islands, and Finland. In Europe, however, Finland, Iceland, and the Faroe Islands are generally included not in Scandinavia but included in the Nordic countries.

2The recent history of the two anthropological disciplines (social anthropology and European ethnology) in the three countries is portrayed in several books and papers (21, 61, 77, 83, 94, 97, 103, 130). While the study of Scandinavia is a small part of social anthropology as an academic discipline, it is the main part of European ethnology in these countries.

3I do not review the extensive and interesting literature on recent immigrants to Scandinavia, nor do I treat the extensive literature on the Sami. The works on the Sami, however, are scheduled to be reviewed by Sharon Stevens in Annual Review of Anthropology 1990.

CONTEMPORARY SCANDINAVIAN SOCIETY 73

THE PRACTICAL CONTEXTS FOR LOCAL ANTHROPOLOGIES

Just as colonialism provided one kind of context for anthropological studies, the anthropology of modem Scandinavia can be examined in relation to its welfare states. The "Scandinavian model" of social and economic development is characterized by a strong emphasis on security, safety, equality, rationality, foresight, and regulation. One consequence of this is a belief in social engineering based on social science research. The welfare states en- courage social scientists (including social anthropologists and European ethnologists) to do research for social planning and for general enlightenment. Anthropology finds its niche in relation to other sciences in the context of welfare state organization. It complements other disciplines, particularly quantitative sociology, by attempting, in different ways, to be holistic and by taking cultural meanings seriously. Since the branches of sociology with an interest in culture-the sociology of culture, the sociology of religion and the sociology of knowledge-are weak, a keen local interest in the anthropological perspectives has developed.

Although relatively few, anthropologists and European ethnologists have had noticeable national impact in the sense that they have been able to influence the concepts and the ways of thinking of other social scientists, planners, and politicians in their respective countries. Actual decisions are, however, the result of many factors over which bureaucrats and politicians do not have complete control.

The reverse side of this local relevance is of course that the purely scholarly part of the work may suffer. Doing anthropology at home in a peripheral part of the Western world implies not only the oft-noted difficulty of taking too much for granted but also certain difficulties in presentation. Much research of potential general interest to the discipline of anthropology is written up and designed only for local consumption. Many writers find it difficult to strike a balance between local relevance and contribution to the international development of the discipline (77). Therefore it is important that more anthropologists from outside the region get involved in this field and that more indigenous researchers are encouraged to sharpen their arguments by feeding their findings back into international anthropological contexts.

Not only the anthropology of Scandinavia would profit from this exposure, but also the mother discipline. The international discipline has over the years become more turned in on itself by being heavily "constructed" and jargon- ized. In contrast, the best anthropology of Scandinavia is often well written, relatively sophisticated, and relevant to a wide readership. For good and for bad, anthropological findings are folded back into local audiences and be-

74 GULLESTAD

come part of the process of how groups constantly define and redefine themselves.

BUILDING BLOCKS

The works examined in this section provide a set of anchoring points for the three totalizing perspectives that I discuss in the following sections.

Until recently the most established way of approaching the relationship between part and whole through the parts has been through a version of the community study. The most well-known example in this region is also one of the earliest: the British social anthropologist John Barnes's brief paper "Class and committee in a Norwegian Island parish," from 1954 (2). Other papers that he wrote from the same fieldwork (3-5) are not as well known as this one. Through the social experience of a relatively marginal community in a complex society, combined with the (so the anecdote goes) visual exposure to drying fishing nets, John Barnes was among the first to apply the moder concept of social networks.

Few Scandinavianists have, however, followed Barnes's and others' later formalizations and quantifications of network analysis (one exception is ref. 29). They have rather been interested in the content of social relations; what social networks do for people in terms of practical tasks and feelings of belonging (90, 136). Exchanges in so-called informal social networks may be seen as alternatives or supplements to the market or to state bureaucracies. Many social anthropologists have also been interested in how togetherness and distance are socially and culturally regulated (67, 69, 80, 81, 90).

These studies are inspired by the tradition of British-style social anthropology brought to Norway by Fredrik Barth.4 He emphasized the method of participant observation (with an emphasis on participation) and taught a set of action-oriented analytical perspectives. Above all he suggested that societies of different scale can be compared by looking at how social encounters are constructed on the micro-level (8, 9).

Fredrik Barth inspired a whole generation of students by his message of the community as an arena where people continually create and recreate their society and culture (see for instance 6, 17, 22, 119, 122). An early student of

'The main empirical example of Chapter I of Models of Social Organization (7) concerned the symbolic interaction on a Norwegian fishing vessel. In 1966 Barth edited a small volume entitled The Role of the Entrepreneur in Social Change in Northern Norway (6). The explicit focus of the volume is to demonstrate the usefulness of a theoretical perspective. Through a series of community studies, the risks of entrepreneurship in an egalitarian society are illuminated. Fredrik Barth's influence on the anthropology of Norway is evident in a Festschrift with this as a focus (28), but he has also inspired, directly or indirectly, social anthropologists and European ethnologists in Sweden and Denmark.


Barth, Ottar Brox, has in a series of books and publications about Northern Norway (22-25, 27) developed this theme further. Rather than treating the national political system and class relations as given external conditions, he attempts, as it were, to explain Norway by specifying the processes that could be studied empirically on the local level. The making of the working class (and thus one of the most important conditions for developing the Norwegian version of capitalist economy and socialist politics) depended upon local processes of succession, rights to resources, and household viability. The bargaining power of the industrial workers was related to the ability and opportunity of localized households to create their own adaptations. Through the very same processes local autonomy and national social and cultural variation were also maintained.

Not only the economic aspects of subsistence production and lower living costs, but also the social aspects of local ways of life, contribute to explain why "old fashioned" combinations of trade competed well with the opportuni- ties offered by the growth centers of the economy.

In his most recent book about the region, Brox has summed up his work in a bold model of Northern Norway's historical development "from commons to colony" (25). A point he emphasizes throughout his career (23) is that it makes no sense to treat Northern Norway as a bundle of separate economic sectors (fishing, farming, fish processing industry, construction work, etc). One has to look at the strategies of households for obtaining viability within the context of local communities, using a combination of many different resources. Northern Norwegians before the 1960s were not fishermen or farmers, but fishermen-farmers (fiskerbonder).

Brox is intimately familiar with the region he analyzes, but this information is often taken for granted rather than spelled out. What he provides is a way of thinking about households, communities, and regions that has inspired much discussion. Feminist anthropologists (52, 101) have, for instance, pointed out that the typical social pattern in Northern Norway until the 1960s was households consisting of male fishermen and female caretakers and farmers (omsorgsbonder), and that this is important for the understanding of the present changes in this region. In the 1970s local people were drawn into a regional job market linked to the growth in public and private service. In this process a North Norwegian regional identity was born (125).

While Brox gives an overall picture of regional processes in Northern Norway, Lisbet Holtedahl provides an ethnographic description and analysis of how individual women and men experience and creatively adapt to these changes (87-89). The local community she has studied went through dramatic changes because of a new bridge connecting the community to the mainland and the city of Troms0. Implicit in most community studies is often a sharp opposition between the community and the "big society" (state bureaucracies

76 GULLESTAD

of the capital). Holtedahl gives this conventional approach a new twist. According to her, women and men in the community have adapted to the recent changes in different ways, with the consequence that the boundary between the community and the larger society now cuts right through the household (89). In spite of the new bridge, the inhabitants have begun to feel isolated. Young women experience this isolation as they attempt to keep the school and other local institutions in the community. Young men experience it as frustration with local people whom they perceive as old fashioned. Women are unhappy with the surrounding "big society"; men are unhappy with the local community. Holtedahl describes a whole series of changes in the women's lives: They start working in the fish-processing industry, become interested in home decoration and new ways of cooking, start sewing circles for themselves instead of joining missionary associations to help others, go to restaurants in Troms0, and get new ideas about romantic love in marriage.

However, rather than seeing a fundamental change in the community, Holtedahl views the women as maintaining "traditional multiplex relationships." These kinds of relationships are maintained in the old women's missionary associations where everybody can participate, as well as in the younger women's sewing circles. An alternative interpretation is that both are expressions of different stages of modernity. The sewing circles may be seen as intimate and exclusive rather than as traditional and multiplex (70).

That intimacy and work are two conflicting foci for rural women is a view that is taken by Liv Emma Thorsen in her study of Norwegian farmer women (133-135). In addition, there are other studies of rural ways of life framed as community studies (16, 86, 91, 136, 142), regional studies (106, 114, 118), studies of ways of life (31), or studies of women (20, 143).

However, in spite of a pastoralist tendency, anthropologists and European ethnologists in Sweden and Norway realized early that contemporary cities are exciting places for doing comparative ethnography. Inspired by Ulf Hannerz (76), they turned to the cities. One of the Scandinavian pioneers was Ake Daun. Having published a local bestseller on a marginal community fighting for survival (34), he wrote Forortsliv [Life in a Satellite Town (35)], where he compared a satellite town in modem Stockholm to a working class neighborhood of the past. In the book he gives a detailed ethnographic portrayal of the familism of everyday life. One main contention is that inhabitants of modem cities typically develop what he calls "a culture of indifference." People are neither hostile nor friendly to their neighbors, just indifferent. Daun phrases his argument as a cultural critique of a deplorable trend, and this may be seen as both a reflection upon and a reflection of Swedish culture.

My own first book was based on field work in an old central area of the city of Bergen (65). The inhabitants belong sociologically to the working class (in


a wide sense of that term). What I have been interested in, however, is not economic class, but social and cultural class. This old neighborhood in a modem city exhibits many local traditions and extensive contacts among neighbors who are often also relatives. It exemplifies the fact that the mainte- nance of class cultures is not necessarily contradictory to a relatively ad- vanced national economy.

However, not all the nearest and dearest to people in this neighborhood live nearby. In the study on which the book Kitchen-Table Society is based, I therefore went to some satellite towns in Bergen and followed the network relations of young working-class women to friends and friends of friends. Using this snow-ball method, I was able to portray a way of life extending beyond one particular neighborhood. The ethnography is focused on the conversations of young women around the kitchen table (66).

All the studies I have mentioned so far rely on the analysis of household, neighborhood, and/or social network processes. Many good analyses of household activities have been done in Norway and Sweden. One beginning was made by Ingrid Rudie in a paper from 1969-1970 (122) and has been followed up by her and others (105, 123). Instead of taking the ideological boundary between the private family and its social surroundings for granted, it is possible to examine carefully what clusters of personnel actually do different household tasks. This approach integrates analytically studies of social networks with studies of households, insofar as household members mobilize network relations to perform specific household tasks.

One example is the activity of young girls who regularly take care of an unrelated neighborhood child for a fee. This activity system integrates the particular substantial units of home (especially the homes of the child and the caretakers), peer group, and neighborhood (72). Other studies have focused on the relations between paid work and household activities. At the Work Research Institute in Oslo, a group of researchers have examined carefully the relationship between the organization of household tasks, on the one hand, and on the other hand the husbands' work as sailors (19) and employees in the offshore oil industry (128). In both cases the husband's periods at home are as challenging to the other family members as the periods when he is at sea. The wife's main dilemma consists in being fully independent and competent while at the same time constantly keeping a place ready for the family father (19, 128).

Much research has centered around notions of work (138-140) and how to conceptualize the important and intangible household tasks (like ceremonial and care work) that are least comparable to traditional production (33, 100, 123). This has led to discussions of how the division of tasks is negotiated between husband and wife in marriage and how certain tasks are given special symbolic value as either masculine or feminine (15, 66, 123). Changing the division of tasks is therefore much more than a purely practical and organiza-

78 GULLESTAD

tional endeavor. Practical tasks have important consequences for feelings of identity and self-respect, and are related to expressions of love and care as parts of a system of gift exchange between spouses.

More studies have focused on household tasks than on sexuality (117, 120). It is, however, possible to bring sexuality and household tasks into relation by suggesting an implicit contradiction or field of tension between the new expectations of romantic sexuality and equality of household tasks. When spouses negotiate their division of tasks, a new form of legitimacy is now used. The idea of equality as sameness, formerly applied between individuals belonging to different families, is now also applied between spouses within families. However, spouses have also come to value falling in love and to have high expectations of sexual gratification. There are strong expectations that romantic love last over time and that it be monogamous. On the basis of these changes it is possible to trace a logical contradiction between romantic love and the desired equality as sameness in the division of tasks, because romantic love implies imagination, mystery, and therefore some cultivation of otherness (68, p. 49).

Apart from an important book by Asa Boholm (18), the study of kinship is so far almost nonexistent in the anthropology of contemporary Scandinavian society. (In the anthropology of Iceland more work has been done on kinship). The reason is probably not that kinship is unimportant but that it is taken for granted, and this provides one illustration of the much-noted difficulty local anthropologists have in transcending their own pragmatic pre- conceptions. This is a condition that should be corrected in the near future. A focused study of family and kinship would help to bring the emic distinctions back into the analytic deconstruction of household processes and household forms, and thereby to provide a more complex cultural understanding. The study of kinship is of course also culturally important insofar as symbols and metaphors in many fields of discourse ultimately derive from kinship.

The study of identity management within households, communities, and ways of life is one main tendency in modem Scandinavian anthropology. In addition, anthropologists and European ethnologists have over the years also entered a wide variety of other modem contexts to do ethnographic field work. They turn in ever larger numbers to the study of social and cultural processes of factories (41, 64, 121) and offices (32), labor organizations (62), nursery schools (12, 42-44), tourism (141), sports (46, 104), the art world (49), punk groups (98, 99), homeless people (50), museums (45), hospitals (48, 92, 129), old people's homes (14), cultural and physical planning (60), ethnic confrontations (39, 44, 63, 124, 126), political rhetorics (26), and the folklore of the media and mass entertainment (96). Of particular interest is a number of studies of children's social and cultural development (10- 13, 86, 119).

The field is today characterized by a promising variety of field sites and


theoretical problems. The studies reviewed so far should be seen as analytical and ethnographic building blocks for the three recent attempts to create a more comprehensive understanding of social and cultural wholes that I discuss in the following sections. Each totalizing perspective incorporates to a greater or lesser extent these building blocks, but especially the first one has a different point of departure.

SOCIETY SEEN AS A SET OF INTERRELATED LIFE MODES

The first perspective that can be used to draw together isolated studies into a more comprehensive pattern comes from Denmark. Among -social scientists in Copenhagen, there has for the last 10-15 years been a strong interest in developing a consistent and coherent mode of analysis based on historical materialism. Exemplifying structuralist traditions in Copenhagen, particularly the school of the linguist Louis Hjelmslev, and building on the work of continental theoreticians such as Louis Althusser, Thomas H0jrup (84, 85) develops a theory of social structures that can clarify certain aspects of the conflicts between local communities and central authorities. H0jrup sees society as composed of a number of contrasting "life-modes" that cannot be defined independently of each other. The three main types are the self- employed, the ordinary wage-worker, and the career oriented life-modes. A fourth type, the bourgeois life-mode, is not analyzed. These life-modes are fundamentally different in terms of their place in the economic and political structure, and each has its own outlook on life. Their interrelationship is one of opposition, competition, and mutual misinterpretation.

The main differences among the life-modes is expressed in the meanings of work, leisure, and family. The self-employed life mode is related to simple commodity production, with work and leisure considered as a conceptual unity; work is geared to constant production on the part of and on behalf of the family, as an independent unit.

The life-mode of the ordinary wage-worker is dependent on the capitalist mode of production. The worker does not own the means of production, and the time spent working has no intrinsic value for him or her. The purpose of work is the consumption of leisure time. Since the family is not a unit of production, family life takes on a meaning different from that of the self- employed, where the whole family is involved in production.

The career oriented life-mode is also directly dependent on the capitalist mode of production but is located in relation to it differently from the life-mode of the ordinary wage-worker. While the wage-workers sell time, the career oriented sell human capital. But unlike the wage-workers, who make demands on the business by making common cause with colleagues, the

80 GULLESTAD

career oriented strive to be irreplaceable, and make demands on themselves to surpass colleagues. In this life-mode it is not considered meaningful to divide human activity into work and leisure. Work and leisure are joined, but in a way different from that in the self-employed life-mode.

H0jrup sees empirically existing ways of life as variations on this basic scheme. Lone Rahbek Christensen (30) follows up by discussing the variations brought by women's new adaptations to work outside the family. Women may be housewives, ordinary wage-workers, career oriented, or self-employed (often together with their husbands on a family farm or in a family firm). The fact that women now have more choice augments the possible internal combinations in a family. Christensen's more specific analysis is, however, so far too schematic to be convincing.

To H0jrup and Christensen life-modes are conditioned by specific economic, legal, and political circumstances as well as by corresponding ideological conceptions. When the special circumstances are changed, the life-mode is threatened and can be transformed. The ideological content of the life-mode may in such cases dictate people's efforts to preserve various material and organizational circumstances or to find new niches that allow the life-mode to continue in a new form. This H0jrup calls "neoculturation." The process of neoculturation may result in the life-mode's being recreated or combined with others in new mixed forms. Fishermen who have to earn a wage in order to survive are typical of a mixed form, containing possibilities for self-defense in conflicts with the "purer" wage-earners. H0jrup's empirical illustrations come from the Skive and Limfjord regions of northern Jutland.

H0jrup argues, among other things, that the self-employed life-mode is not at all a dying species in Denmark. Recent technological developments have contributed to its vigorous survival in transformed forms, in mixed forms, as well as in traditional forms. Simple commodity production plays an important role in the agricultural sector, in fishing, in handicrafts, in the service sector, in trucking, and also in wholesale and retail trade. According to H0jrup's estimates, one third of the Danish population carry on this life-mode. He estimates that another third of the population are pure wage-earners, while the career oriented comprise about one sixth of the population.

In the self-employed life-mode, freedom and independence are important values. The values of self-sufficiency, frugality, and pragmatism are equally important yet they are often impaired by adverse circumstances. Therefore this life-mode, not least in combination with wage-work, has been a particular obstacle to the ideology of equality and levelling of centralist welfare state policies. The pure forms of the wage-earner and the career life-modes have proven easier to reconcile with these goals.

This argument is close to the argumentation in works by people such as Brox and Daun, reviewed in the previous section. I therefore think that


H0jrup's analysis of the far-reaching revitalization of the self-employed life-mode could to some extent be extended to Norway and Sweden, even if the agricultural sector is smaller there.

The life-mode perspective is a new way of chopping up society that extends a traditional economic-class analysis. Since the concept of the life-mode unifies socially very different economic classes in society (84, p. 1979), it yields some fresh insights. However, in addition to the explicit logical approach, H0jrup also slips into the analysis insights derived from social anthropological perspectives oriented toward social practice. The fact that such perspectives are not built into the mode of analysis is its weakest point.

Even if H0jrup warns against reifying the concepts (84, p. 188), he himself presents and discusses them as a set of ideal types. Contradictory empirical material does not falsify the three main types but leads to further divisions into subtypes and mixed forms. People "carry" life-modes, they do not create them, and life-modes are seen as competing with each other (85, p. 30).

H0jrup sees no ideological similarities among the life-modes. To him and Christensen the values and outlooks of each life-mode are never subvariants of a common culture but are solely rooted in that life-mode itself. Ideological differences are seen as given (by the modes of production), not really as created and maintained by social actors, the result being that the life-mode is treated as a "thing," a concrete and measurable entity. Denmark is seen as a collection of parts-in this case not communities or classes but life-modes.

Contrary to the stated aim, the study therefore leads to an atomistic interest in life-modes rather than in patterns of cultural and social interrelationships. For planners and politicians it will be only too convenient to overlook the subtleties of the subdivisions and mixed forms and to grasp the main division of society into a set of life-modes. By reifying life-modes into types, it may give planners the illusion of knowing the people, instead of giving them tools with which to analyze the changing subtleties and variations of ways of life.

What is needed is to incorporate into the method not only social actors and social practice but also a more sophisticated theory of culture. If people are seen as social actors, then life-modes display patterns not because they have an essential logical existence outside people's lives but because men and women with characteristic dispositions continuously shape and reshape these patterns.

It will, for instance, be useful to distinguish analytically between on the one hand life-mode or way of life and, on the other hand, life-style. A life-mode may be defined more comprehensively as including economic, organizational, and cultural aspects of a way of life, while a life-style may be defined as the expressive or communicative aspects of a way of life (75, Ch. 5).

82 GULLESTAD

CLASS FORMATION AND CULTURE BUILDING

Compared to the heavy hand of the Danish life-mode analysis developed by Thomas H0jrup and his associates, Swedish European ethnology is much more prolific, eclectic, and light-hearted (though no less ambitious). In Lund, Orvar Lofgren, Jonas Frykman, and their associates are not only excellent scholars but have also been given the necessary institutional backing to develop cumulative research projects of some scale. Ten researchers are involved in a project that so far has resulted in several books and articles (1, 53-58, 93, 107-112).

Like Thomas H0jrup they want to study society and culture by approaching the totality rather than the local variations. Unlike H0jrup, however, they argue explicitly for an emphasis on agency rather than structure. With the Scandinavian elaborations of British social anthropology I outlined above they have combined influences from American cultural anthropology, Marx- ism, the French Annales school in history, and (not least) the civilization studies of Norbert Elias. The theoretical foundation of the project is discussed in a paper by Orvar Lofgren (111) and in a small book in Swedish by Billy Ehn and Orvar Lofgren (47).

The Lund group brings a historical perspective to the study of contemporary Scandinavian society. Starting in the present, the whole project may be seen as an ongoing dialog between past and present. Unlike most other Scandinavian projects the empirical focus is neither inhabitants of marginal regions nor working-class people, but the transformations of the Swedish bourgeoisie into what these scholars see as the Swedish middle class. To analyze the cultural roots of the present, they move first a century (57) and then 50 years (56) back in time. Their aim is to focus on relations between culturally distinct groups and the dialectic processes whereby different classes and strata develop their identities and cultures.

The project's first book, Culture Builders (57), is an exploration of the formative period of Swedish bourgeois culture from 1880 to 1910. Bourgeois culture is contrasted to peasant culture and working-class culture. Orvar Lofgren contrasts the very different attitudes toward time and timekeeping, as well as the uses and perceptions of nature; he compares gender constructs and patterns of child socialization, looks at the new polarization of work and leisure between public and private life, together with the new ideology of home and family life. Jonas Frykman describes and analyzes notions of dirt, pollution, and orderliness (discussing the emergence of a new ideology of health and cleanliness), as well as changing perceptions of sexuality and bodily functions. Together Lofgren and Frykman seek to demonstrate con- cretely the way the bourgeoisie constructed its cultural dominion through the rituals and routines of everyday life.


A sequel to Culture Builders was published in Swedish in 1985 (56). It deals with the remaking of the middle-class and working-class cultures during the interwar years, the period of the making of the Swedish welfare state. As part of the project one of the authors, Lissie Astr0m, has done a separate study of how women receive, use, and transmit a cultural heritage in this century (1).

Even if they take great care not to view working-class respectability in terms of embourgeoisement, a copying of middle-class standards (111, p. 89), their main thesis is that bourgeois conceptions and ideologies become reified as "natural" common sense. Other social groups participated in this building of culture only insofar as bourgeois culture was developed in depen- dence upon and opposition to them. On the one hand they tend to see bourgeois culture as hegemonic by definition, in the Gramscian sense; thus the outcomes of the culture-building processes are seen as given. On the other hand, through the analysis of class struggles they seem to apply a more critical notion of hegemony. For my part, I see good reasons to question whether the contributions of other classes to "Swedishness" have not been more substantial. I return to this point in the next section.

After all, when Frykman and Lofgren speak about bourgeois culture and working-class culture, the meanings of those terms are not so far from those of terms like part-culture, subculture, life-mode, or way of life. Each class has its "culture." They address how these cultures are interrelated in historical terms, but they do not address the question of what it is that ties them together, in cultural terms. While they do continually contrast the classes on all matters they consider, they do not really discuss to what extent the differences are system-related cultural differences.

Such a discussion is necessary in order to make a more precise analysis of the nature of specific cultural processes-i.e. the extent to which specific class differences are either superficial variations or form part of more fundamental changes of mentality. The notions of life-modes or class-cultures logically presuppose more inclusive cultural schemes, but these are missing not only in H0jrup's structural life-mode analysis but also in Frykman and Lofgren's perceptive analysis of cultural processes.

OVERARCHING CULTURAL CATEGORIES

This question may be more directly addressed through a recent intellectual trend in which Frykman and Lofgren also participate. There is a growing interest in cultural processes in general and in particular for what at first glance appear to be national cultures. Many researchers are interested in what they think is typically Swedish (78, 82), typically Norwegian (95), and typically Danish (51, 79, 115, 127, 137) patterns of behavior, ideas, and

84 GULLESTAD

values. The trend has resulted in both popular books and more scholarly presentations. Since the beginning of the 1970s many people from Asia, Latin America, and southern Europe have immigrated to Scandinavia, particularly to Sweden, where about 10% of the population are now immigrants or descendants of immigrants. Confronted with marked otherness at home, the indigenous Scandinavians feel both the need and the possibility of cultural self-reflection.

In a recent paper (113), Orvar Lofgren sets out to provide a foundation for the study of what he calls the nationalization of culture. He is looking for the processes whereby cultural elements are turned into national symbols. Since most other researchers are in fact not interested in the nationalization of culture but in typical patterns of behavior, ideas, and values on an everyday level, I suggest that a distinction should be made between (a) cultural processes within a nation and (b) national cultural processes. Typical phe- nomena within a nation are not necessarily typical only for that nation. It is useful to distinguish between implicit symbols, categories, and meanings of everyday life and explicit national symbols and ideologies. When creating and using national symbols and stereotypes, people generally use as cultural resources modes of thinking and modes of living in everyday life. To a certain extent creating national symbols and stereotypes implies transforming the continuities of everyday life into the contrasts and symbolic inversions of stereotypes and explicit symbols. National symbols tend to be explicit cultural constructs, while what is shared on an everyday level may take the form of implicit cultural knowledge. National symbols are designed to be national and discontinuous-even if the "language" for creating them is international- while what is shared on an everyday level may also be shared by inhabitants of neighboring nations and may thus be continuous across nations.

Ake Daun builds on journalistic reports and interviews with foreign workers in studying concrete ways of behaving and psychological personality characteristics. He emphasizes that Swedes are quiet, use few words, and make many pauses in conversations. Quietness (tystlatenhet) is a central value. Other central characteristics according to Daun are seriousness (allvar), avoidance of conflict, and rationality (foirnufts-orientering) (36-40).

Daun's method for generalizing about Swedish culture consists mainly in providing a list of culture traits by summarizing foreigners' observations and in comparing nations by using statistical survey data (38, 40). Other researchers rely on reflection and imaginative speculation (102). Personally, I find these methods less satisfying than working through detailed contextualized ethnography to make explicit the frameworks of implicit meanings (the way Daun himself worked in the book Forortsliv). Both interethnic encounters and ethnic stereotypes may then be among the strategic sources of data.

When I studied various urban Norwegian working-class subcultural ways


of life, I was after some time led to formulate questions about the nature of the cultural frames organizing subcultural differences. The result of this quest may be regarded as a third kind of comprehensive approach. The approach is based on the analysis of roles, identities, encounters, and activity systems outlined in the section about building blocks, as well as on influences from the interpretative tradition in American cultural anthropology. I have formulated hypotheses about what I see as some central themes in Norwegian (and perhaps Scandinavian or northern European) culture: equality defined as sameness; home-centeredness; desire for peace and quiet; love of nature; stability; independence; self-sufficiency; and self-control (66-69, 73-75). The hypotheses are made in terms of the relevant sets of oppositions in which these categories occur. It is central to the approach that a culture should not be described by a list of traits but by tracing explicit and implicit relations between categories as well as between categories and social action. The analysis is done by identifying and spelling out the meaning of cultural categories (like "peace and quiet") that are used to justify, legitimate, and induce social action without themselves needing justification. This op- erationalization enables one to avoid assumptions about total sharing: Many people may use the categories in roughly the same ways without necessarily investing them with exactly the same concrete meanings in social action (73, 75).

The Norwegian egalitarian tradition involves not necessarily actual sameness but ways of under-communicating difference during social encounters (2, 6, 17, 67, 75). In their personal lives, Norwegian men and women like to "fit in with" friends, neighbors, and relatives. Two people define each other as alike by being accessible to each other. Inaccessibility, on the other hand, is a sign of perceived dissimilarity. Social boundaries between classes and groups do not disappear but become subtler and more hidden through graded distancing and avoidance (69, 75). The idea of equality as sameness is not incompatible with a very pronounced individualism: Norwegian men and women are individualists by being independent and self-sufficient. In this way individualism and conformity are brought together. While Norway (like the other Scandinavian countries) is undergoing extensive social and cultural changes, the ideas of equality defined as sameness and individualism defined as independence seem to be reinforced (67, 75).

This approach complements the other two totalizing perspectives on an important point: Through the analysis of central cultural categories, it is possible to draw together the analysis of different life-modes or class cultures in cultural terms. It is possible to highlight to what extent the differences of ways of life and life-styles are system-related differences, in terms of being the product of an overarching culture and social order that create and legitimate (directly or indirectly) these differences.

86 GULLESTAD

The way to do such an analysis is, in Scandinavia as elsewhere, through painstaking attention to ethnographic detail. This procedure allows researchers in the long run to commute back and forth between, synthesis on the one hand and ethnographic detail and embeddedness on the other. It is the main task and the main thrust of anthropological work to present contextualized and embedded analyses of social organization and cultural meanings. In addition to and based upon this primary task, we should not be afraid to make a leap into bold hypotheses formulated as well-informed and well-qualified guesses about cultural schemes in a larger region, even if this region is both close to home and contains complex structures and systems. Anthropologists may choose either to be "scientific" by bolstering their imaginations with statistics or to cultivate and discipline their analytical concepts and intuitive in- terpretations. I think we should opt for the latter choice.

Several recent studies exemplify this method. Billy Ehn has published a number of well-written and insightful books based on fieldwork in a varied set of institutions in contemporary Swedish society (41, 43-45). In Ska vi leka tiger? [Let's Play Tiger!] (43) he generalizes about Swedish culture from fieldwork in a nursery school. He sees striving for order (orden) as well as a fundamental doubt and insecurity (tveksamhet) as two central characteristics of what goes on in child pedagogies as well as in Swedish society at large.

In an innovative and important study of a Swedish church, the American anthropologist Peter Stromberg (132) concludes by comparing the church- members' symbols and experiences of grace with Ingmar Bergman's movies. He finds similar cultural patterns and sees a tension between individual and community as central to Swedish culture. According to his analysis, many cultural representations elaborate the theme of the personal and social struggle involved in desperate swings between reserve and release, between isolation and social contact.

The study of cultural categories also includes developing an understanding of the historical background of current themes. Here the European ethnologists in Lund have alerted us to the fact that some classes or groups may be more typical than others. One of the starting points of the project in Lund was the popular stereotypes of Swedishness, common to outside observers and natives alike. These stereotypes portray the typical Swede as a nature-loving and conflict-avoiding person, obsessed with self-discipline, orderliness, punctuality, and the rational life. Most of these are middle-class virtues, according to Frykman and Lofgren. It is their view that the formerly bourgeois, now middle-class life-style has become the mainstream Swedish culture in public discourse as well as in private life.

In my view, there are reasons to question their contention, at least in its strongest formulation. Anthropological work in Norway has demonstrated how much Norwegian culture is influenced by the rural life-modes of its


recent past. The reason for this could be the fact that people in the Norwegian upper class have been less wealthy and more divided among themselves than the upper classes in Denmark, the southern part of Sweden, and other European countries, both in the past and today.

However, Thomas H0jrup's analysis of the revitalization and ideological importance of the self-employed life-mode in Denmark may also be used to back up such an argument. Many ideas and values regarded as typically Scandinavian may perhaps be analyzed as extensions and transformations of the self-employed life-mode.

In fact, in a recent paper Jonas Frykman (55) suggests that it may be the class-traveller who embodies most of what is regarded as typically Swedish today. Swedes exhibit the highest social mobility of any nationality in Eu- rope. Educated people thus constitute by far the most heterogeneous stratum in society. The way of life of each class-traveller will be influenced by at least two life-modes, the one left behind and the one entered into. According to Frykman it is the insecurity of the class-traveller that is expressed in what is often considered typically Swedish.

In the analysis of the roots of "national" cultures and implicit cultural frameworks within and across nations, the study of religion should be much more important in the future than it is today. I see religion not only as a subfield of society where 10% of the population are active, but as a general cultural force. Some outside observers, such as Barnes, have written brief papers on religious life (4), but only Peter Stromberg has done a study with this as a focus (132). Most inside observers are completely silent on this point, thus revealing a local intellectual folk ideology in which religion is not regarded as important. I see the examination of connections between secular domains of life (like family, sports, international relations, social planning) and religion as a fertile field for anthropological research in this region. The interconnections may work both ways. On the one hand, since church religion to many people has lost its value as legitimation and integration of everyday activities, they have to find their "ultimate meanings" elsewhere. According to one hypothesis Scandinavians create unity, continuity, and integration by working on the home as a physical frame that embodies a whole set of central cultural values (75). On the other hand, church religion may be transformed and revitalized into secular ideas and values. The meanings of the Norwegian notions of equality as sameness, self-control, and peace and quiet may, for instance, be related to the asceticism and the egalitarianism of Lutheran pietist lay-organized churches (71).

Peter Stromberg (131) points to certain similarities among the various popular movements in Sweden in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The local labor party, the free church, and the temperance lodge preached global messages that instilled new value scales in their adherents.

88 GULLESTAD

Jonas Frykman (55) notes in passing that this may be one background factor for the extensive social mobility in Sweden: The free church made the members homeless in their communities but at home with God and the congregation, and thus prepared to break away.

The question remains, however, to what extent the traits described as "typically Swedish," "typically Norwegian," or "typically Danish" are ex- clusively Swedish, Norwegian, or Danish. There are, for instance, obvious similarities among the egalitarian notions in the three countries and between the value placed on silence in Sweden and the cultural category "peace and quiet" in Norway.

The problem is how to treat such similarities-as the same, as different versions of something similar, or as different cultural constellations with some family resemblance. This problem has to be confronted in the future anthropology of the region. Equality as sameness and peace and quiet may then turn out to be comparable to honor and hospitality in the Mediterranean world, where such questions have been discussed for a long time.

It is also high time anthropologists started discussing in what ways, to what extent, and for what kinds of research questions the nation state is or is not a relevant frame of analysis in this region. There is a need to discuss explicitly the possibility of a wider culture area and how it would have to be defined- Scandinavia, the Nordic countries, or some wider unit. This step is necessary if studies in this region are to develop into full-fledged contributions to comparative anthropology.

CONCLUSION

Taken together, the studies reviewed here demonstrate that in a double sense the small facts of everyday life constitute a fruitful entry point into an understanding of larger social and cultural processes. This fact is also re- flected in the emerging use within Scandinavia of "everyday life" as a political symbol that has utopian overtones and that replaces more worn-out symbols like "community" and "neighborhood" (75, Ch. 10).

Another theme running through most of the literature is how to deal analytically with social and cultural differences. These themes reveal that the relationship between anthropology and state is extremely complex: Even while criticizing bureaucratic centralization and standardization, anthropological studies tend both to reflect and to reflect upon some of the central ideas underpinning and informing the Nordic welfare states.

The three totalizing attempts I have dealt with are dramatically different in terms both of the academic traditions involved and of the empirical points of anchorage; but there are also striking complementarities and large overlapping areas. In my view it is both desirable and feasible to integrate the three


perspectives. Here I can only sketch a few lines along which such an integration might take place.

Starting with the action-oriented perspectives reviewed in the first section, the concept of life-mode provides a more precise structural anchoring for the analysis of processes of culture-building within and between what have so far been termed class-cultures. The Lund approach provides a historical perspective, as well as a perceptive analysis of cultural class struggles. This analysis could both profit from and contribute to a growing understanding of overarching cultural categories. One useful linking concept is, I think, the concept of life-style. Individual persons create and recreate their identities through their life-styles. These processes may be related to overarching cultural categories, on the one hand, and anchored to structural life-modes on the other (75).

An integration of the three approaches could provide an even more forceful anthropological perspective on the relationship between small facts and the large issues in modem large-scale societies.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The writing of this paper has been supported by a generous grant from the Norwegian Research Council for Science and the Humanities (NAVF). I also thank Ottar Brox, Jan Terje Faarlund, Thomas H0jrup, Janet Hoskins, David Koester, Orvar Lofgren, Raymond T. Smith, Peter Stromberg, and Terence Turner for helpful comments to the first draft.

Literature Cited

I. Astrom, L. 1986. 1 kvinnoled. Om kvin- nors liv genom tre generationer. Malmo: Liber. 212 pp. English summary

2. Barnes, J. A. 1954. Class and com- mittees in a Norwegian island parish. Hum. Relat. 7:39-58

3. Barnes, J. A. 1957. Land rights and kinship in two Bremnes hamlets. J. R. An- thropol. Inst. 87:31-56

4. Barnes, J. A. 1971. The righthand and lefthand kingdoms of God: a dilemma of pietist politics. In The Translation of Culture, ed. T. 0. Beidelman, pp. 1-18. London: Tavistock

5. Barnes, J. A. 1978. Neither peasants nor townsmen: a critique of a segment of the folk-urban continuum. In Scale and So- cial Organization, ed. F. Barth, pp. 13- 40. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget

6. Barth, F., ed. 1963. The Role of the Entrepreneur in Social Change in North- ern Norway. Oslo: Universitetsfor- laget

7. Barth, F. 1966. Models of social organization. Occas. Pap. Roy. Anthropol. Inst. 23.

8. Barth, F. 1972. Analytical dimensions in the comparison of social organizations. Am. Anthropol. 74:207-19

9. Barth, F. 1978. Scale and network in urban Western society. In Scale and So- cial Organization, ed. F. Barth, pp. 163-83. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget

10. Berentzen, S. 1979. Et samhandling- sperspektiv p'a studiet av barn. Tidsskr. Samfunnsforsk. 20:394-415

11. Berentzen, S. 1981. Venninnerelasjoner og konfliktm0nstre. En sammenligning av to pikemilj0er. Pigeliv, pp. 49-67. Forum for kvinneforskning, samrnummer I, Roskilde

12. Berentzen, S. 1984. Children constructing their social world: an analysis of gender contrast in children's interaction in a nursery school. Dept. Soc. An- thropol. Occas. Pap., 36. Univ. Bergen (First published in Norwegian 1980)

13. Berentzen, S., Berggreen, B., eds. 1987. Barns sosiale verden. Per- spektiver pd kontroll og oppvekst. Oslo: Gyldendal

14. Bjelland, A. K. 1982. Aldring og iden-

90 GULLESTAD

titetskrise. Dept. Soc. Anthropol. Occas. Pap. 27. Univ. Bergen

15. Bjeren, G. 1981. Female and male in a Swedish forest region: old roles under new conditions. Antropol. Stud. 30-31: 56-85

16. Bjerring, B., Haslebo, G., Villadsen, S., eds. 1974. Lokalsamfund. Utvikling eller avvikling. En debatbog om samfundsutvikling og lokalsamfunn i Danmark. Esbjerg: Sydjysk Universit- etscenter

17. Blom, J. P. 1969. Ethnic and cultural differentiation. In Ethnic Groups and Boundaries, ed. F. Barth, pp. 74-85. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget

18. Boholm, A. 1983. Swedish kinship. An exploration into cultural processes of belonging and continuity. Gothenburg Studies in Social Anthropology, Volume 5. Gothenburg: Acta Univ. Gotho- burgensis. 252 pp.

19. Borchgrevink, T., Melhuus, M. 1985. Familie og arbeid. Fokus p'a sj0mannsfa- milier. Rapport Nr. 27. Oslo: Work Res. Inst. 252 pp.

20. Bratrein, H. D., et al., eds. 1976. Dri- vandes kvinnfolk. Troms0: Universitets- forlaget

21. Bringeus, N. A. 1972. Swedish ethnology today. Ethnol. Euro. 6:203-26

22. Brox, 0. 1964. Natural conditions, in- heritance and marriage in a North Norwegian Fjord. Folk 6(1):35-46

23. Brox, 0. 1966. Hva skjer iNord-Norge? En studie i norsk utkantspolitikk. Oslo: Pax Forlag

24. Brox, 0. 1972. Strukturfacismen och andra essder. Stockholm: Bokforlaget Prisma

25. Brox, 0. 1984. Nord-Norge. Fra allmenning til koloni. Oslo: Universi- tetsforlaget

26. Brox, 0. 1988. Ta vare pd Norge. Oslo: Gyldendal

27. Brox, 0. 1988. The common property theory: epistemological status and analytical utility. Paper presented at the 12th ICAES, Zagreb

28. Brox, O., Gullestad, M., eds. 1988. Pd Norsk grunn. Hyllest til Fredrik Barth. Oslo: Ad Notam

29. Caulkins, D. 1980. Community, subculture, and organizational networks in Western Norway. J. Volunt. Action Res. 9:1-4

30. Christensen, L. R. 1987. Hver vore veje. Livsformer, familietyper kvindeliv. Odense: Etnologisk Forum

31. Christiansen, P. 0. 1982. En livsform pd tvangsauktion? Copenhagen: Gyl- dendal

32. Conradson, B. 1988. Etnologiska bilder

av livet pa kontor. Nordiska museets Handlingar 108. Stockholm: Nordiska museet

33. Danielsen, K. 1984. Identitetsforvaltn- ing blant gamle damer pa Frogner. See Ref. 123, pp. 123-35

34. Daun, . 1969. Upp till kamp i Bats- kdrsnds! En etnologisk studie av ett samhdlle infor industrinedlaggelse. Stockholm: Bokf6rlaget Prisma

35. Daun, A. 1974. Fo6rortsliv. En etnologisk studie av kulturellfordndring. Lund: Bokf6rlaget Prisma

36. Daun, A. 1984. Swedishness as an obstacle in cross-cultural interaction. Ethnol. Euro. 14:95-109

37. Daun, A. 1986. The Japanese of the North-The Swedes of Asia. Ethnol. Scand. 1986:5-17

38. Daun, A. 1989. Svensk Mentalitet. Stockholm: Raben & Sjogren Bokforlag. In press (with English summary)

39. Daun, A., Ehn, B., eds. 1988. Bland- sverige. Kulturskillnader och kultur- moten. Stockholm: Carlssons

40. Daun, A., Mattlar, C.-E., Arlanen, E. 1989. Personality traits and characteristics for Finns and Swedes. Ethnol. Scand. In press

41. Ehn, B. 1981. Arbetets Flytande Grdn- ser. En Fabriksstudie. Stockholm: Prisma

42. Ehn, B. 1982. Daghemmets ordningar. Antropol. Stud. 33:9-33

43. Ehn, B. 1983. Ska vi leka tiger? Daghemsliv ur kulturell synvinkel. Lund: Liber F6rlag

44. Ehn, B. 1986. Det otydliga kulturm0tet. Om innvandrare och svenskar pad ett daghem. Stockholm: Liber Forlag

45. Ehn, B. 1987. Museendet. Stockholm: Liber Forlag

46. Ehn, B. 1988. National feeling in Swed- ish sport. Paper presented at the seminar "National Culture as Process: Hungarian and Swedish Experiences," Budapest, May 1-3

47. Ehn, B., ULfgren, 0. 1982. Kulturana- lys. Ett etnologisk perspektiv. Stock- holm: Liber Forlag

48. Elsass, O., Hastrup, K. 1986. Sykdoms- billeder. Medicinsk antropologi og psy- kologi. Copenhagen: Gyldendal

49. Ericson, D. 1988. In the Stockholm art world. Stockholm Stud. Soc. Anthropol. 17. Univ. Stockholm. 179 pp.

50. Espeland, W. 1981. Blommor fran r'ann- stenen. In Tradition och Milj6, ed. L. Honko, 0. Lofgren. Lund: Liber

51. Finsen, H. C. 1986. Den danske smag. (Publishers catalogue). Copenhagen: Christian Ejlers Forlag

52. Flakstad, A. G. 1984. Kan endring i

CONTFMPOR A R Y SCA NDIN AVI A N SROCIETY 91

kvinnearbeidet utl0se strukturendringer? pp. 64-83 See Ref. 123

53. Frykman, J. 1979. Ritual as com- munication. Ethnol. Scand. 1979:54- 62

54. Frykman, J. 1981. Pure and rational. The hygienic vision: a study of cultural transformations in the 1930s. Ethnol. Scand. 81:36-62

55. Frykman, J. 1989. Social mobility and national identity. Ethnol. Euro. In press

56. Frykman, J., Lofgren, O., eds. 1985. Moddrna tider. Vision och vardag folk- hemmet. Stockholm: Liber Forlag

57. Frykman, J., Lofgren, 0. 1987. Culture Builders: A Historical Anthropology of Middle Class Life. New Brunswick: Rutgers Univ. Press (First published in Swedish 1979).

58. Gaunt, D., Lofgren, 0. 1984. Myter om svensken. Stockholm: Liber Folag

59. Geertz, C. 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books

60. Gerholm, L. 1985. Kulturprojekt och projektkultur. En fall-studie av en kul- turpolitiskforsoksverksamhet. Lund: Li- ber. 197 pp. (English summary)

61. Gerholm, T., Hannerz, U. 1982. In- troduction: the shaping of national anthropologies. Ethnos 1-2:5-35

62. Gerrard, S. 1985. Kvinners makt og avmakt. Et kj0nnsrolleperspektiv pa forvaltning av faglige interesser. Arbeidsnotat Nr. 3. Alta: Finnmarks Distriksh0gskole

63. Gr0nhaug, R., ed. 1979. Utvikling, mig- rasjon og minoriteter. Oslo: Universit- etsforlaget

64. Gulbrandsen, 0. 1976. Samarbeids- ideologi og interessekonflikt. Ardals- prosjektet, rapport Nr. 7. Oslo: NIBR/ ISO

65. Gullestad, M. 1979. Livet i en gammel bydel. Livsmilj0 og bykultur pad Verftet og en del av N0stet. Oslo: Aschehoug. 170 pp. (An earlier version published 1975)

66. Gullestad, M. 1984. Kitchen-Table Society. A Case Study of the Family Life and Friendships of Young Working Class Mothers in Urban Norway. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget; Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. 357 pp.

67. Gullestad, M. 1985. Livsstil og likhet. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. 162 pp.

68. Gullestad, M. 1986. Equality and mari- tal love. The Norwegian case as an illustration of a general Western dilemma. Soc. Anal. 19:40-56

69. Gullestad, M. 1986. Symbolic fences in urban Norwegian neighborhoods. Eth- nos 51(3):52-70

70. Gullestad, M. 1987. Samfunnsforsker pai leting etter en "gr0nn plett." Sosiologi idag 1:55-80

71. Gullestad, M. 1988. Religious perspectives on secularized everyday life in Norway. In Religion as a Social Phe- nomenon, ed. E. Karlsaune, pp. 17-44. Trondheim: Tapir Forlag

72. Gullestad, M. 1988. Agents of modernity: children's care for children in urban Norway. Soc. Anal. 23:38-52

73. Gullestad, M. 1988. The meaning of peace and quiet in Norwegian everyday life. Paper presented at the Am. An- thropol. Annu. Meet., Phoenix, Ariz., Nov. 16-20

74. Gullestad, M. 1989. The meaning of nature as a cultural category in Norwegian everyday life. Folk. In press

75. Gullestad, M. 1989. Kultur og hver- dagsliv. Pad sporet av det moderne Norge. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

76. Hannerz, U. 1980. Exploring the City, Inquiries toward an Urban Anthro- pology. New York: Columbia Univ. Press

77. Hannerz, U. 1982. Twenty years of Swedish social anthropology; 1960- 1980. Ethnos 1-2:150-73

78. Hannerz, U. 1983. Den svenska kul- turen. Rapport Nr. 9. Prosjektet kultur- teori for komplexa samhdllen. Univ. Stockholm. 28 pp.

79. Harbsmeier, M. 1986. Danmark: Na- tion, kultur og k0n. Stofskifte 13:47- 73

80. Haugen, I. 1978. Om forvaltning av utilgjengelighet. Tidsskr. samfunnsforsk. 19:405-14

81. Haugen, I., Holtedahl, L. 1982. Regulating togetherness. Acta Sociol. 25(1):3-20

82. Hjort, A., ed. 1983. Svenska livsstilar. Om naturen som resurs och symbol. Stockholm: Liber

83. H0jris, 0. 1986. Antropologien i Dan- mark, Museal etnografi og etnologi 1860-1960. Copenhagen: National- museet

84. H0jrup, T. 1983. Det glemte folk. Copenhagen: Inst. Euro. Folkelivsforsk. Statens Byggeforskningsinstitut (SBI)

85. H0jrup, T. 1983. The concept of life- mode. A form-specifying mode of analysis applied to contemporary Western Europe. Ethnol. Scand. 1983:15-50

86. Hollos, M. 1974. Growing Up in Flathill. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget

87. Holtedahl, L. 1977. Jenter og gutter i skole og lokalsamfunn. Om utviklingen av ulike roller. Forskningsnytt 22 (1- 2): 13-21

88. Holtedahl, L. 1978. Kan forhold mellom

92 GULLESTAD

mennesker planlegges? Plan og arbeid 4:174-80

89. Holtedahl, L. 1986. Hva mutter gj0r et alltid viktig. Om d vere kvinne og mann i en nord-norsk bygd i 1970-adrene. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget

90. Holter, H., ed. 1982. Kvinner i felles- skap. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget

91. H0st, I. C., Wadel, C., eds. 1980. Fiske og lokalsamfunn. Oslo: Universitetsfor- laget

92. Jensen, S. S., Nielsen, H., Samuelsen, H., Steffen, V. 1987. "Hvad er mening- en med kreft?" En antropologisk un- ders0gelse blandt danske patienter og behandlere. Copenhagen: Kraeftens Be- kaempelses Forlag

93. Johansson, E. 1989. Free sons of the forest. Story-telling and the construction of identity among Swedish lumberjacks. In The Myths We Life by, ed. S. R. Thompson. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. In press

94. Klausen, A. M. 1981. Antropologiens historie. Oslo: Gyldendal

95. Klausen, A. M., ed. 1984. Den norske veremadten. Oslo: Cappelen

96. Klausen, A. M. 1986. Med Dagbladet til tabloid. Oslo: Gyldendal

97. Klein, B. 1986. Swedish folklife research in the 1980s. J. Am. Folklore 99(394):461-69

98. Krogstad, A. 1985. Fra gata til Skipper- gata. Antropolognytt 7(3/4):24-54

99. Krogstad, A. 1989. Punk symbols on a concrete background: from external provocation to internal moralism. Soc. Anal. In press

100, Kugelberg, C. 1987. Allt eller inget. Barn, omsorg ochfoirvdrsarbete. Stock- holm: Carlsson Bokforlag

101. Larsen, S. S. 1980. Omsorgsbonden-et tidsnyttingsperspektiv pa yrkeskombi- nasjon, arbeidsdeling og sosial endring. Tidssk. samfunnsforsk. 21:283-96

102. Larsen, T. 1984. B0nder i byen. Pa jakt etter den norske konfigurasjonen. In Den norske veremadten, ed. A. M. Klausen, pp. 15-44. Oslo: Cappelen

103. Liep, J. 1987. De l'histoire de la culture a la culture et a l'histoire: l'evolution de l'anthropologie Danoise. Anthropol. Soc. 11(3):35-55

104. Lithman, Y. 1988. Kampande kroppar, moraliska kroppar-retorik och sosial kontroll i den tidiga gymnastiken. In Idrott, historia och samhdlle. Stock- holm: Svenska idrottshist. foreningens arsskrift

105. Lofgren, 0. 1974. Family and household among Scandinavian peasants: an exploratory essay. Ethnol. Scandi. 1974:17-50

106. Lofgren, 0. 1980. Historical perspectives on Scandinavian peasantries. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 9:187-215

107. Lofgren, 0. 1981. On the anatomy of culture. Ethnol. Euro. 12(1):26-46

108. Lofgren, 0. 1984. The sweetness of home: class, culture and family life in Sweden. Ethnol. Euro. 14:44-64

109. Lofgren, 0. 1985. Wish you were here! Holiday images and picture postcards. Ethnol. Scand. 1985:90-107

110. Lofgren, 0. 1985. Our friends in nature: class and animal symbolism. Ethnos 3- 4:184-213

111. Lofgren, 0. 1987. Deconstructing Swedishness: culture and class in modem Sweden. In Anthropology at Home. ASA Monogr. 25, ed. A. Jackson, pp. 74-93. London: Tavistock

112. Lofgren, O., ed. 1988. Hej. det erfrcdn ftirsdkringskassan. Informaliseringen av Sverige. Stockholm: Natur och kultur

113. Lofgren, 0. 1989. The nationalization of culture: constructing Swedishness. Ethnol. Euro. In press

114. Nilsen, R., Reiersen, J. E., Aarsaether, N., eds. 1982. Folkemakt og regional utvikling. Oslo: Pax Forlag

115. 0stergard, U. 1984. Hvad er det "Dan- ske" ved Danmark? Tanker om den "Danske veg" til kapitalismen, Grund- tvigianismen og "Dansk" mentalitet. Den Jyske Historiker 29-30:85-137

116. Palsson, G., Durrenberger, E. P. 1989. Introduction: Towards an anthropology of Iceland. In The Anthropology of Ice- land, ed. G. Palsson, E. P. Durrenber- ger. Iowa City: Univ. Iowa Press. In press

117. Park, G. K. 1962. Sons and lovers: char- acterological requisites of the roles in a peasant society. Ethnology 1(4):412- 24

118. Park, G. K. 1972. Regional versions of Norwegian culture: a trial formulation. Ethnology 11(1):3-24

119. Rasmussen, A. 1979. Om 'a bli voksen. Tidsskr. samfunnsforsk. 20:473-93

120. Rasmussen, A. 1984. "Darlig rykte" er kvinneskjebne. See Ref. 123, pp. 253- 73

121. Rosendahl, M. 1985. Conflict & com- pliance. Class consciousness among Swedish workers. Stockholm Stud. Soc. Anthropol. 14. Univ. Stockholm. 203 pp.

122. Rudie, I. 1969/70. Household organization: adaptive process and restrictive form. A viewpoint on economic change. Folk 11-12:185-200

123. Rudie, I., ed. 1984. Myk start-hard landing. Om forvaltning av kj0nnsiden- titet i en endringsprosess. Oslo: Univer- sitetsforIaget


124. Sachs, L. 1983. Evil eye or bacteria. Turkish migrant women and Swedish health care. Stockholm Stud. Soc. An- thropol. 12. Univ. Stockholm

125. Saugestad, S. 1983. The emergence of a regional identity. Antropolognytt 83(2- 3):67-79

126. Schwartz, J. M. 1985. Reluctant hosts: Denmark's reception of guest workers. Kultursociologiske Skrifter, Nr. 21. Copenhagen: Akademisk

127. Schwartz, J. M. 1986. A note on anthropology and childhood: the latent and manifest Danishness of Erik H. Eriksen. Paper presented at the Nordic Ethnogr. Meet. in Stockholm

128. Solheim, J., Heen, H., Holter, 0. G. 1986. Nordsj0liv og hjemmeliv. Del I og II. Rapport, Nr. 35/36. Oslo: Work Res. Inst. 270 pp.

129. S0rhaug, H. C. 1982. Ansatte og inn- satte pa et psykiatrisk sykehus. Oslo Occas. Pap. Soc. Anthropol. 6. Dept. Soc. Anthropol., Univ. Oslo

130. Stoklund, B. 1979. Europaeisk etnologi. In K0benhavns Universitet 1479-1979, Vol. 2:87-120. Copenhagen: Univ. Copenhagen

131. Stromberg, P. G. 1983. An anthropological approach to a Swedish popular movement. Ethnos 1-2:69-84

132. Stromberg, P. G. 1986. Symbols of Community. The Cultural System of a

Swedish Church. Tuscon: Univ. Ariz. Press. 127 pp.

133. Thorsen, L. E. 1986. Work and gender. Ethnol. Euro. 16:137-48

134. Thorsen, L. E. 1987. Farmer women and intimacy. Ethnol. Scand. 1987:97- 109

135. Thorsen, L. E. 1988. Farmer women and the cultural meaning offood. Paper presented at the 7th World Congr. Rural Sociol., Bologna, June 26-July 2

136. Thuen, T., Wadel, C., eds. 1978. Lokale samfunn og offentlig planleg- ging. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget

137. Vestergaard, T. A. 1986. Blod og sinde- lag. En dansk grenselere. Stofskifte 13:5-22

138. Wadel, C. 1979. The hidden work of everyday life. In Social Anthropology of Work. ASA Monogr. 19, ed. S. Walman, pp. 365-83. London: Academic

139. Wadel, C. 1983. Dagliglivets organiser- ing. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget

140. Wadel, C. 1984. Det skjulte arbeid. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget

141. Wagner, U. 1977. Out of time and place-Mass tourism and charter trips. Ethnos 42(1-2):38-52

142. Yngvesson, B. 1978. Leadership and consensus: decision-making in an egalitarian community. Ethnos 1-2:73-90

143. Zenius, M. 1983. Landbokvinden i det 20. adrhundrede. Copenhagen: G.E.C. Gad. 246 pp.

small facts large issues

Documents