Social identity at work : career histories of higher educated Dutch-Turkish men of the second generation in the Netherlands

Social identity at work

Career histories of higher educated Dutch-Turkish men of the second generation in the

Netherlands

Suzanne Roggeveen Student number: 5609550 Supervisors: dr. Lindo & dr. Chauvin 15-07-2012 1

Preface

This thesis is about the role social identity plays during the careers of higher educated, Dutch-Turkish men of the second generation who are working in politics or business. Below, I will provide some insights about power distributions, framing, strategies and how these relate to the construction and influence of social identity. However, first I would like to thank the people who made it possible to write this thesis. First of all, I want to thank my respondents. It would not have been possible to write this thesis without their openness and interesting stories. I also want to thank my two supervisors, dr. M. P. Lindo and dr. S.M.G. Chauvin for their time and feedback. Their comments were always constructive and useful. Finally, I want to thank my partner, family and friends for their support and understanding1_.

Abstract

This article is about some of the ways social identity is constructed, perceived and framed by higher educated Dutch-Turkish men of the second generation in the Netherlands. First, I will show how in their specific cases power differences, emotional energy, norms and strategies can influence the way social identity is constructed (see Collins, 2004; Wimmer, 2008a). Ethnicity, for instance, seems to be quite contested and the way my respondents dealt with it can shed some light on how on the micro level people construct, contest and are influenced by social identity. These processes might influence the careers of my respondents, but their career in turn also influences their social identity. Second, this research is based on interviews. This has an effect on the research, as well as on the framing of my respondents. For that reason, I tried not to present the stories of my respondents as the “truth” and sometimes critique their way of framing. In the conclusion, I will pay attention to these framing practices and the problem of overexposing ethnicity.

Social identity in day to day life

During our lives we all make distinctions between the people we feel we belong to and “others”. These distinctions are made on the basis of social categorizations or labels, such as being religious, Dutch or female (see Barth, 1969; Nagel, 1994; Ono, 2002). Most groups and social movements base their mechanisms of inclusion on these social categorizations. Think for example about numerous ethnic, religious and gay movements, where people can find friendship, warmth and a feeling of belonging. However, these categories are also the foundation of boundaries between people, because including some always means excluding others (see Wimmer, 2008a). Therefore they can be the base for exclusion, conflict and even wars (see for example Castells, 2010).

These social categories, and the boundaries which are based on them, are not just important features of social movements, but are important for individuals in day to day situations as well (see Collins, 2004; Jenkins, 1994: 205). They are part of how individuals try to make sense of the world and of themselves. They identify themselves in relation to these categories and boundaries to create a sense of belonging and being. Without these categories it would be hard to describe the self, because the self is always in relation to others to whom an individual feels he or she does (not) belong to (see Jenkins, 1994).

The work floor is an interesting place to see how individuals form and express social identity or how these social identities influence their careers. Just think about ethnic discrimination of migrants or the gender discrimination of women. Moreover, work identity in itself is one of the most important identities people use to provide meaning to their lives (Jenkins, 1994: 205). For example, when people are asked to introduce themselves, most will tell you their names, how old they are and what kind of work they do.

This is the reason why, in this article, I will use my research of higher educated Dutch-Turkish men of the second generation in the Netherlands to show how social identity plays a role during their careers. This means that I am interested in how social identity influences the careers of these men. However, their social identities are also influenced by the situations they are in (see Collins, 2004; Wimmer, 2008a). Having colleagues who value economic knowledge can boost someone’s confidence to use this category in his advantage and identify as a financial specialist. If this

knowledge would not have been valued, it might have been harder to use this category and create an identity around it. Finally, I am interested in which strategies my respondents used to be able to create their identities, use their identities and change the boundaries they face (see Wimmer, 2008a).

To be more specific, I will try to show how power relations can influence the construction of social categories, boundaries and social identity. At the same time, I would like to show how my

respondents strategically use these categories, boundaries and identities to change the power relations. I am also interested in how emotional energy plays an intermediate role in these two processes (see Collins, 2004). These processes, which influence each other, might influence the careers of my respondents. By highlighting four of their stories I would like to show in detail how some of these processes can occur.

This does not mean the processes at stake always happen in the way I will describe or careers are always influenced by them in this way. It is just an example how these processes can occur. In addition, these men told me their stories in a certain way. Their stories were told with hindsight and they provided them with logic to make them understandable. Therefore, in this article there will be two layers. One concerning the way social identity played a role during the careers of my

respondents and is influenced by strategies and the situations they are in. The other layer is to see how they presented themselves in an interview and what this means for my research.

I will start this article with the theoretical debate about the differences and definitions of social identity, social categorizations, boundaries, labels and emotional energy. Second, I will discuss my data collection and methods. Thereafter, I will introduce my respondents and analyze the four “career histories” of Bulut, Melih, Kamil and Naïl. Finally, I will provide some insights about social identity, emotional energy and the power distributions at stake in the careers of my respondents. I will also provide some insights about the way people frame their stories.

What is social identity?

In social sciences the concept of social identity is widely used and can mean several things to different scholars. Moreover, social categorizations, (ethnic) boundaries, labels and performances are all concepts that are related to the concept of social identity (see Barth, 1969; Castells, 2010; Goffman, 1959; Jenkins, 1994). To make it even more confusing, identity is also used in day to day language, where it can mean something totally different, than in academic terminology. However, as social identity can have a lot of different meanings, there are some similarities in its use by

academics. Most scholars writing about social identity agree that it has something to do with separating “us” from “them” and these separations are made on base of social categorizations and boundaries (see Barth, 1969; Castells, 2010; Nagel, 1994; Ono, 2002).

Social categorizations are the labels people use to be able to separate themselves from others (see Jenkins, 1994: 200-201). They can for instance be; religion, ethnicity, nationality, gender or age (see Castells, 2010). These social categorizations are always constructed in relation to others. Jenkins ( 1994: 197-200), for instance, argues that internal labeling – how someone labels him or herself – is always connected to external labeling – in what way someone labels others and is labeled by others. Although social categorizations usually refer to labels, they can refer to a certain experience (Jenkins, 1994:202). For example, someone can be labeled as a migrant by others, but also feels what it means to be labeled as a migrant. The latter is what is meant by the experience of social categorization. This does not mean that someone who is labeled a migrant automatically will feel like a migrant. He or she can resist this image and feel differently.

Social categorizations form one part of ethnic boundaries (Wimmer, 2008a: 975). According to Wimmer a boundary “displays both a categorical and a social or behavioral dimension”. This means that, on the one hand, a boundary consists of categorizations which signify who belongs and who does not belongs to the group (the label). On the other hand, the boundary is created through “scripts of action”, which describe how someone should act in certain circumstances (norms). According to Wimmer, these boundaries are sometimes static, but can be quite flexible as well.

In social scientific literature we also see that boundaries, and therefore social identities, are either seen as “hard” or “soft” (see Barth, 1969: 33; Baumann, 1996; Crenshaw, 1991; Gans, 1979: 205; Soysal, 2001: 8; Van Der Welle & Mamadouh, 2009: 28-29). Soysal, in his work on Berlin youth culture, explains: “in the context of unified Berlin, the struggle over identity goes beyond the simple dichotomy of Us (Germans) against Them (Migrants = Turks)”. His respondents are “participants at several social and cultural borders” and therefore cross all kinds of lines of inclusion and exclusion (Soysal, 2001: 8-9). Conversely, Castells (2010: 7) or Van der Welle & Mamadouh (2009: 29) do think boundaries can change, but there is usually one primary identity that is more fixed and does not change that much in different places and time.

These differences in flexibility might be explained because in some empirical situations the boundaries are more flexible than in others (see Wimmer, 2009: 250-253). Castells studied people who belong to strongly defined social movements. This might cause his respondents to define themselves quite powerfully as part of the social movement. In Soysals work, the “groups” are not that strongly defined. People might cross these boundaries more easily and incorporate other forms of social categorizations as well. In accordance with Wimmer, I leave the question if boundaries are “hard” or “soft” open to empirical investigation. I will come back to this in the conclusion.

A problem with Wimmer’s definition of boundaries is that it includes labels, but does not include the experience of social categorization. This is problematic, because studying boundaries without the experience of a label, ignores the feelings people have about these boundaries. This way it seems like actors do not act on feelings and are not emotionally involved in group making processes (see

Hochschild, 1979: 555-557 for a similar argument). While not explicitly writing about social identity, Collins’ (2004) work can shed some light on the emotional part of social boundaries. He explains that situations, in which people are together, trigger them to create meaning to the situation. Together, they create symbols, which capture an emotional energy present in the moment. These feelings, when repeated in interaction, can be held on to.

This might also happen with social categorizations. They can be seen as labels, which in some situations become important and loaded with emotional energy. This emotional energy determines how people experience a label and identify with it or not. At the same time, there are norms

attached to certain situations that determine how someone should act (Wimmer, 2008a: 990). These restrict the amount of categories people can choose from. The labels, experience of labeling and norms solidify into boundaries between groups. If they are repeated and will stay important in several interactions they become part of the self image. When they are getting attached to the self-image, we can speak of social identity. Again, this does not mean that the boundaries or social identities that emerge from them are always firmly defined or static. People can relate to several boundaries, create multiple identities and switch between boundaries in various situations, but can also identify quite strongly with them (Wimmer, 2008a).

An example of different kinds of social identities can be found in the work of Castells (2010). He shows that identities can be divided in three types, which all have a different relation to the dominant norms in a situation. The first one is a legitimizing identity, which is an identity in

accordance with the dominant norms. The second is a resisting identity, which as the word suggests, resists the dominant rules. Finally, there is a project identity that uses old structures to create a new identity. This new identity does not only resist the old structures, but can change them too (Castells, 2010: 8).

As is clear from this example identities and boundaries relate to the norms of a situation. For

example, if someone is the boss of a company, he or she is restrained by institutional rules previously apparent in the company or in other companies. However, the creation of a form of identity is also

dependent on the amount of power someone has over the definition of the situation (see Collins, 2004; Goffman, 1959). This means that if someone is the boss of a company he or she has, within the normative field, more possibilities to change the rules, than employees. Employees have less power and therefore are more likely to create a legitimizing identity towards these norms (see Collins, 2004; Castells, 2010; Wimmer, 2008a).

If all social identities were determined by powerful individuals and by the institutional norms, change and social mobility would be hard, not to say impossible. Powerful individuals, while having more space to change the rules, usually want to reproduce the structures that made them powerful. This restrains the opportunities for change (see Bourdieu, 1984). To acquire change individuals use all kinds of boundary making strategies to put the situation to their hand (Wimmer, 2008a; 2008b). They are sometimes aware of these strategies and sometimes they are not (see Barth, 1969: 33; Douglas, 1983). Sometimes these strategies can be seen as “routine rituals” (Collins, 2004: 20). This means that in day to day interaction they act on developed routines that they think are appropriate in the situation. People wake up, greet some people and not others, go to their work, act as professionals (or not) and go home to adjust to another situation. They might be aware of some of the routines they carry out and strategically use them (see Goffman, 1959). On the other hand, they can be unaware of these rituals and just perform them, because they seem to benefit them.

Scholars described all kinds of strategies people use to be included – or excluded – from an ethnic boundary and acquire social mobility or change (see Ehrkamp, 2012; Jiménez, 2010: 1759-1761; Wimmer, 2008b). Wimmer (2008b), for example, claims to have developed a universally applicable typology of boundary making strategies. According to him, there are five types of boundary making strategies, which he identifies as expansion, contraction, transvaluation, blurring and positional moves. Expansion means that existing boundaries are stretched to fit in more people. Contraction is the opposite and means that a boundary is made more exclusionary. Transvaluation means that the hierarchy of the boundary is turned on its head or people try to put their own group on an equal level with the dominant group. Blurring is a strategy that distracts people from the dominant division by focusing on other social categories. And finally, positional moves are strategies that do not

challenge the dominant norms. They are used to try to become part of the higher valued groups, by for example, passing as someone from the dominant group.

These strategies can sometimes create boundaries and inform someone’s identity. In the story of Melih, below, this will be made clearer. Nonetheless, as we will see below, these identities do not always emerge out of strategies. Sometimes they emerge out of interactions that are slightly or not associated with strategic behavior. In this article, I will use the typologies of Castells (2010) and Wimmer (2008b) to explain how certain identities can be influenced by power distributions, the norms in a situation (such as a work environment) and the strategies my respondents used. I will also provide some insights in how these identities can in turn influence the careers of my respondents. Finally, I will show some of the ways they framed their stories. But first, I will discuss my data collection and methods and introduce my respondents.

Data collection and methods

To explore some of the ways social identity, categories and boundaries are constructed, used and influence the careers of higher educated Turkish men of the second generation who are working in politics or business in the Netherlands, I conducted twenty in-depth interviews2_{. I found my}

respondents through “ethnic” (student) organizations, websites of political parties, my personal network and through my initial respondents. By using snow ball sampling, combined with purposive sampling I tried to find people with different stories (see Bryman, 2004).

Social identity is not only formed during someone’s career, but also in the periods before or after a career and in private spheres as well. So, I conducted semi-structured life history interviews, focused on the careers of my respondents, which I would like to call career histories. Conducting the

interviews, I had a list of topics I talked about. Sequence of these topics could vary and there was room to deviate from these topics. Though, I tried to start out with questions related to education and finish with questions about future ambitions. This approach gave respondents the opportunity to tell their stories, while still covering the different stages in their career histories. Topics we discussed were; early youth, educational trajectory, start of career, progress in career, current family situation and future ambitions. Moreover, I asked them how they perceived personal characteristics played a role during their careers3_{. The interviews lasted an hour on average. Most were conducted in offices}

or a place that was preferred by my respondents.

Since it enables people to talk about emotions, sensitive or normative topics more easy, I wanted to make use of a visual prompt (Babbie, 2007: 158; Bryman, 2004: 158-159; Strangleman, 2008: 1500). Furthermore, including a visual method could trigger people to tell me other stories, than during the interview. I considered bringing photographs or images to the interview and let people select a few that would fit their “working I”, but decided against it. If I had done so, my respondents had to select their identities, from my predetermined categories. Even if I had put down a blank image with

“other” on it people probably would have been tempted to choose the ones that were already there. During my first interviews I saw pictures, posters, paintings and images on the walls of the buildings my respondents worked in. This made me come up with an idea. I assumed that most of the pictures on my respondents’ desks and walls of their offices were selected by them and not by others. In most cases, my respondents confirmed this. These images have a “museum-like” quality. This means that they are usually put down by the respondents to represent themselves (see Hammersley & Atkinson, 2007: 135). I decided that I could use these images as my prop. I would ask my respondents why they put down certain pictures and if they symbolized something of themselves they found meaningful during their work.

This resulted in conversations which gave me insights into how people wanted to express – or did not want to express – their social identities at work. Furthermore, in some cases people were hesitant to tell something personal about themselves. They expected me to think they had to act as a

professional at their work. Talking about their pictures made them feel more comfortable telling me about other, more personal, details of their working lives. Unfortunately, I cannot describe these pictures, images and photos in great detail or display them, because I promised my respondents anonymity. For the same reason, I changed all of the names and occupations of my respondents. They do work in business and/or politics, but I changed the specifications of their jobs.

Introduction of respondents

During my research I spoke to ten politicians and ten businessmen. They are between 28 and 49 years old. All, but two, worked in the big cities in the Western part of the Netherlands4_{. The}

politicians were joining right wing as well as left wing. Some joined parties which are considered to be in the middle of the political spectrum. Most of them were also entrepreneurs or businessmen next to their political career. Others who had a full time job in politics, usually worked in business before they started working as full time politicians. The businessmen and politicians who also worked in business occupied high-end jobs in big companies – such as banks and phone companies. Others had their own businesses, such as a consultancy bureau or a book shop. Some of them first worked for a company and later started their own businesses.

While all my respondents’ stories were interesting in itself and all influenced my research, I chose to highlight four of them. In these stories I will sometimes relate to the stories of my other respondents

as well. Describing four of their stories in detail, enables me to show the micro world of these four men in great detail, as they told me their stories. I chose the stories of Kamil, Bulut, Naïl and Melih, because they all show different aspects of identity and boundary construction, the role of power distribution and the way they use strategies to pursue their own interests. Naïl’s case highlights the construction of an ethnic resistance identity through the experience of being excluded. It shows some of the situations in which he could express this identity and in which he could not, because of a lack of power. Melih’s story shows how not only ethnicity, but expectations surrounding class could inform the construction of a resistance identity as well. Additionally, his story shows how he feels he has to act (strategically) “Dutch” at his work. Kamil’s story is one of the most clear examples of how power distributions can change, which in turn might be one of the reasons why he was able to create a project identity. Finally, Bulut’s story highlights how he feels contradictory norms in the same situation put him in a difficult position. It also shows how he tries to use blurring strategies to overcome some of these difficulties.

As mentioned in the introduction, these accounts will not provide the reader with a complete overview of the role of social identity during the careers of all higher educated Turkish-Dutch men of the second generation in the Netherlands. They are in no means representative. My respondents also cannot be seen as a group, as in being an ethnic group. That is because they are not necessarily in contact with each other or see themselves as a group (although they might be perceived as one by others) (see Brubaker, 2002: 169-170). What I hope to accomplish by describing these stories, is that I can provide more insight in the different ways social identity can play a role and is constructed during the careers of these men. Moreover, I hope to complement the theoretical insights described above with this empirical exercise (see Soysal, 2001: 9, for a similar argument).

One note of caution is appropriate before reading the stories. The stories my respondents told me are representations of how they perceived their career histories. Therefore they had to rely on their memory and tried to tell their stories in a cohesive way. By making sense of their stories they probably seem more cohesive and understandable, than what actually happened. Additionally, how they told their career histories to me might differ from how they would tell it to someone else. I consider myself to be a “native” Dutch, young, female student. If I were an older, Dutch-Turkish man my respondents might have told their stories in a different way. In other words; in an interview people provide a presentation of self. That is why I will pay attention to the way people framed their stories. This is the second layer I talked about in the introduction. Nonetheless, their presentation of self reflects the things they remembered as important. Therefore their frames show some clues of what happened behind these frames. Moreover, some people showed me not only their “front stage”, but sometimes allowed me to know something about their “backstage” as well (see Goffman, 1959: 32-33).Therefore, their stories will still give me an insight in the processes at play.

Four career histories

Naïl (42 years): getting a grip on the definition

Naïl begins his story by telling me he was three years old when he came to the Netherlands. His parents were guest laborers and, according to Naïl, did not make a lot of money. But, he says, they stimulated him to go to school and supported him whenever they could. This support was usually expressed as an urge to do his homework or as a shoulder to cry on. With the content of his

homework, however, his parents could not help him, because they did not speak the Dutch language very well.

In the Netherlands, Naïl went to a primary school he labels as being a “Turkish” primary school. Most of the pupils at his school had a Turkish background. Naïl remembers there were some harassments from pupils of other schools in the neighborhood. For example, when they had a sports day, the

other schools teamed up and turned against the “Turkish” school, instead of playing school against school. Apart from these incidents, Naïl perceived his time in primary school as a happy time, being amongst, what he considers, likeminded pupils with a Turkish background.

When finishing primary school, Naïl tells, he was the only pupil in his class who was allowed to go to havo-vwo5_{. Times changed for him. Already at the first day of school it became clear to him that he}

was perceived as different in a negative way:

“At a certain moment the teacher and the director [of the school] were talking softly. He [the

director] said something in his [the teacher’s] ear. So, I sat behind the director in the hall way. And he coolly said that there were a few parents, Dutch parents, who objected to having a Turkish boy in the class. And I had to leave and go to a different class. (…) They told this to a twelve year old, as if it was of no importance! But my life, my world collapsed at that moment. I became even more insecure. And then you arrive in a new class and they perceive you as half an alien or something. (…) Well, if you start your year like that, you can imagine what the rest of the year looked like.”

At his high school, Naïl tells me, he was one of the few pupils with a Turkish background. Because of that he felt he was “marked”, in a negative way by the parents of his classmates. In addition, he felt that some of the teachers and his classmates discriminated him. During the year, Naïl goes on; pupils at school kept on telling him that all Turkish people were stupid. This negative labeling and

discrimination, he explains, made him question himself. Moreover, he tells, because he saw no role models in his environment, he began, almost, to believe that maybe Turkish people were less smart. While he received some good grades, he also started failing some of his classes. He explains he failed the ones in where he felt discriminated by the teachers. At the end of the year, the teachers at his school decided that Naïl should go to a lower educational level (mavo) and to a different school. Thus far, Naïl’s story can provide us with an example of how an identity is constructed in line with what is perceived as being the dominant norms of an ethnic boundary, because of differences in power distributions (see Wimmer, 2008a: 975). Most boys and girls of that age are dependent on their teachers and Naïl had the feeling not only his classmates, but also his teachers discriminated him. In addition, as he experienced it, he was one of the few migrants in school, which made him feel alone. Having no one who countered these norms this is probably why he felt he could not have resisted them and started to believe in the exclusionary power of this ethnic boundary. In other words; Naïl’s self-image became in line with the dominant norms, because, based on his story, he had no power over the definition of the situation (see Collins, 2004: 41). That is why in this stage of his life; Naïl’s identity can be described as legitimizing towards the dominant norms (see Castells, 2010: 8). This can also be an explanation why he felt quite insecure. The interactional ritual between him and the other pupils was perceived by Naïl as negative and the emotional energy in the

interaction put him down (see Collins, 2004).

Going to a new school, Naïl told me he felt more at home, because there were more pupils who had a migrant background. The atmosphere seemed to be better than it was in the first high school. Naïl perceived there were more migrants at this new school and because they were with a larger group they probably had more power to define who were smart and who were not. When he came in contact with these migrants, Naïl started to realize that not all Turkish people are stupid. Because he realized others did not fit this image, he gained some confidence. He was also able to finish his mavo quite easily, which I think contributed to his self-confidence as well. By gaining some confidence, he says he created, what he calls, an “almost natural drive” in opposition to the image people held up to him before. He says he wanted to show that he could make it, studied hard and took every task as serious as possible.

After completing his mavo degree Naïl told me he went to the mts6_{. He could have gone to the havo}

again, but decided against it. If he wanted to go to the havo he had to go back to his first high school and he really disliked this idea. So, he avoided this situation and went to the mts. After completing his mts, he went to hts and in the end he received his diploma at a university. During his educational trajectory he says he still felt discriminated once in a while, but also made (Dutch) friends who supported him.

The realization that not all Turks fitted the image of “being stupid” can be seen as a “disruptive event” in Naïl’s life, where he realized others and he did not fit this negative image7 _{(see Goffman,}

1959: 23). Being together with other migrants who together had more power to decide who were smart and who were not, might have created the opportunity to change his self identity from a legitimizing one into a resistance identity (see Wimmer, 2008a). This changing power balance might be one of the reasons why Naïl transformed his bad experiences into a positive energy to prove others wrong. This, among other things, helped him to pursue his dreams (see Castells, 2010: 8; Collins, 2004). This resistance, or drive as he calls it, is something some of my other respondents also developed in relation to negative experiences surrounding an ethnic boundary (see Wimmer, 2008a: 975). For them the disruptive event was usually not the realization that others did not fit a negative image, but their teachers or significant others telling them they could achieve a lot in life.

Just because some of my respondents experienced a positive disruptive event does not mean that other migrants, have the same experiences. Moreover, it is not a given that a disruptive event is the only cause of creating an identity, which contributes to (educational) careers. For example, Fordham & Ogbu (1986) argue that the feeling of being excluded can lead to a distancing towards school and the labor market. These institutions are being associated with discrimination and exclusionary feelings. What we can say is that it seems to help people who felt excluded on basis of their ethnicity in their youth, to help them see they are part of a society and they can contribute to it in a positive way. My respondents liked this if done in an informal way, but not by positive discrimination. Most of my respondents found being hired because of their ethnicity uncomfortable and patronizing,

because they wanted to be hired because of their competences.

Continuing his story, after his studies Naïl found a job at a big, international company in the

Netherlands. He traveled a lot and says he enjoyed working in this international environment. He felt that because of his drive he made career pretty fast. He described this period as follows:

“… because I was totally liberated from ethnicity. I became part of an international environment, where ethnicity was not important any more. Your personality and competences were important. Everybody was internationally oriented.”

In this international environment Naïl could hold on to his positive emotional energy, through interaction rituals in which ethnicity was not seen as a bad thing (see Collins, 2004). However, when the company wanted to work together with a Turkish company, Naïl explains he was immediately seen as the “Turkey expert”. He was the one who had to pick one of these companies to work with. This indicates that he was not liberated from ethnicity all together, as he claimed before. Others still saw him as having a Turkish background and therefore being a “Turkey expert”. He explained he felt a bit surprised to be labeled as a Turkey expert, because he did not feel like one. He only went to Turkey three times in his life. Nonetheless, he decided that he wanted to be the one working in Turkey, as an entrepreneur. He went to his boss and asked if he could start his own business and become the partner of the company. According to him, he started quite soon in Turkey. When I asked him why he wanted to start a business in Turkey he told me he had the feeling all of his bad experiences came from dependency on people who had power over him. So, he took the first opportunity to get rid of these dependencies.

Interestingly, we see here how Naïl tries to explain why he has become an entrepreneur and gives meaning to it by pointing towards his bad experiences. While this might not be the only reason why he “chose” to be an entrepreneur, it shows how he uses a, what I like to call, avoidance strategy. This means that he tried to stay away from situations in which his ethnicity can be labeled in a negative way (see Raijman & Tienda, 2000 for a similar argument). Yet, Naïl while being opposed to

stereotypical notions of ethnicity, he contributes to and uses these notions strategically if it benefits him. He did not see himself as a Turkey expert, but even convinced his boss he was. This does not mean his identity is all of a sudden completely changed into a legitimizing identity. For Naïl uses these notions of ethnicity as a strategic means, instead of something he will repeat in other

interactions or feels intrinsically. By giving in to these images he was able create a space of his own where he could avoid these stereotypes. Avoiding a situation to create your own space, where you can define the definition of the situation can also be seen as a form of resistance (see Ehrkamp, 2012 for a similar argument). As, for one thing, he can define the definition of the situation now, instead of being dependent on others who have more power over this definition. This example shows how conformity and resistance can happen at the same time (see Ehrkamp, 2012). But also means that by creating a new definition, Naïl is not just resisting, but moving from a resisting identity to a project identity (see Castells, 2010: 8).

Nowadays, Naïl has a flourishing international computer business, in the Netherlands and other countries. He says he now makes use of his perceived ethnicity in a positive way. He explains that because of growing up in a “Turkish” family and going to school and studying in the Netherlands, he feels he can grasp the differences of what he and others perceive as Western and Eastern discourses. An example of Naïl’s switching is that he feels he acts professional in business deals, which he

considers as a “Western” way of doing business. But treats his clients more personal, which he considers to be “Eastern”. He explains:

“In our segment it is important that you have good contact with your clients. If you translate this to us [his company], I know everybody. Every client I know personal. I have been at people’s homes. I know their children, I know their wives and I know the environment.”

Important to note here, is that since he avoided situations where he is dependent on people, he can more or less define what is ethnic. While he is dependent on his clients for having work, his clients are also dependent on him. He can define ethnicity in a positive way now, because he can influence the definition of the situation way more. Yet, his clients are usually internationally oriented, business owners themselves. Comparing his story to a story of one of my other respondents we can see that in a different situation it might be harder to define the situation, even if you are a business owner. Fikrit told me a story about the construction company of his parents. They purposely put Dutch employees at the front desk, so their clients do not immediately have the feeling it is a Turkish company. Fikrit claims they would otherwise lose a lot of their clients at first sight. Naïl has a mixed staff at his front desk. This might indicate a more internationally oriented clientele. So, I think not just being an entrepreneur, but also the norms present in the field gives Naïl space to express parts of his “Eastern” discourse.

Ethnic boundaries are not the only boundaries that are important in Naïl’s working life. When asking about a picture on his desk Naïl tells that he is a father. When he talks about his children his voice becomes softer and less agitated. When looking at his picture he explains it as follows:

“That is my pride. It is my future. It will keep me with both legs on the ground. I find it really important, because I am such an extremist [when it comes to being an entrepreneur] (…) that I can go on forever. But now, I think okay these are my children. The power of young children to put things into perspective is huge. When you think oh gosh, all my world problems! But on a Saturday morning you have to go to soccer practice with your kids.”

Where this drive, Naïl explains, can make him spend all of his time on his business, expectations surrounding fatherhood can slow his drive down and put things into perspective for him. Here we see that Naïl’s self-image as a father – and the norms surrounding these boundaries, such as spending time on your children – changes his resistance identity (see Ehrkamp, 2012; Soysal, 2001). He says he feels he needs to slow down sometimes. Even talking about his children his voice becomes warmer and softer. Being a dad might have reduced the need to prove that he can make it all the time. Other priorities seem more important. In other words; it changed the emotional energy in some of his interactions (see Collins, 2004). His resistance identity also might be less strong, because Naïl having created his own space faded the need to prove he can make it all the time. Furthermore, he is in charge and can define more or less what is valued positively.

Continuing, Naïl says he values his drive and wants to teach this attitude to his daughters, because it belongs to his “cultural heritage”. Being a migrant, he says, has taught him to not be afraid of losing anything, because poverty has taught him to build things from scratch. He feels that his drive, or as I would call it resistance identity, is not just stimulated by his bad experiences with being labeled negatively. He explains his migration history and the experience of being poor, which he perceives as something different than ethnicity, have stimulated his drive to pursue his dreams:

“It is just a struggle you have been through [his migration history]. That will give you this drive. You are not afraid to lose anything. Look at the Dutch, the regular “native” Dutch man, the white Dutch man, he is doing so well, that he becomes scared to lose something (…) The new Dutch people, the migrants, are still in this flow of building something. We do not have anything. [So], we cannot lose something [either]. I do not own estates. I did not build anything in the Netherlands in the past one hundred years. So I do not have anything to be scared of [losing].”

Interestingly, Naïl frames his drive as a form of his cultural heritage, while earlier on he explains it, foremost, comes from negative experiences in his youth. This might be a way to frame being an entrepreneur as a choice, instead of something that just happened to him. As something he is proud of and comes from positive experience as well as struggles. It can also be a form of “proving” to the researcher he is a real entrepreneur, who dares to take risks. On the other hand, it does not mean this is not true. Naïl might have experienced poverty in his youth and his parents might have encouraged him to keep on going, which influenced his drive.

Another part of how Naïl frames his career history is a “from rags to riches” story. He grew up in a poor, ethnic family and got discriminated during his educational trajectory. Still he made it to the top of the labor market. Through this kind of frame he provided meaning for himself and me, as a researcher. Again, this does not mean that Naïl’s story is not true. On the contrary; he experienced it this way when I interviewed him. Him framing his story like this can indicate how strongly his identity is influenced by these experiences in his life. It might also be influenced by some other practices, but these clearly did not make such a big impact on him.

Melih (29 years): the resistance of poverty and ethnic switching

Melih is born and raised in the Netherlands. Like Naïl, he perceives his family as being poor and unable to support him with his homework. Unlike Naïl’s parents, Melih says his parents could also not support him financially during his educational trajectory. He says he had to work in shops from a pretty young age to support his family financially and feels the experience of being poor had a big impact on his attitude on life. He tells me about a moment he remembers as being important in creating this attitude:

“I just booked a holiday with my friends and because I had to pay for everything myself I did not have 12

a lot of money left. (…) When my books had to be paid my parents did not have this money. (…) That was the moment when I thought, I cannot rely on others anymore. That is really bad you know, because you are in a situation in which you do not trust your own parents anymore.”

This experience, Melih says, made him lose his faith in others. Fortunately, he had a group of friends during high school that he says “were in the same position” as he was. They supported each other whenever they could. And while it was hard to help their parents financially at a young age, Melih feels this group of boys became quite independent and learned a trade at the same time. He explains:

“And the funny thing is that we as young, let’s say, young dogs8_{, were responsible for the money we}

earned and that we were held responsible for what we had to do at school. So, we were responsible from A to Z for our own paths. (…) We had to support our own parents. And it shows how it is a world upside down. At a young age we realized that if we wanted to make something of our lives and we did not want to have the same kind of life as our parents, well, we had to do some things

differently.”

Interesting to see is that although Melih frames his story as not trusting anyone, he still trusted the group of boys in high school (who are still his best friends today). While this might be true, he told me during the interview that he did trust his friends in high school and also on an emotional level he connected with several people. So, while Melih said he did not trust anyone, it seems that he did connect to people. Saying he did not trust anyone might be a way of framing his dislike of depending on others financially, because of his bad experiences with this financial dependency.

The situation they were in, was according to Melih, quite similar and was valued negatively. Because of that they created a group identity in resistance to the experienced poverty (see Castells, 2010: 8). To escape this poverty the emotional energy in these interactions became encouraging. Especially when encouraging each other to do well in school and start a career (see Collins, 2004). For Melih this might have created a kind of resistance identity or drive – like Naïl – that resulted in working hard, achieving good school results and having a positive attitude towards making a career. Creating a resistance identity loaded with this energy might have been more difficult if Melih had been the only one trying to resist this label or if he had been stigmatized by his classmates, as Naïl was. Melih always stayed in touch with his former class mates. So, repeated emotional energy created an in-group with an attitude that was reaffirmed in multiple interactions, which reaffirmed the resistance identity over and over again (see Castells, 2010:8; Collins, 2004).

This might be one of the reasons why Melih created a positive attitude towards school and pursuing a career. After completing his vwo he went to university. He remembers his start was a bit rough, because he did not have the financial means to pay for four years of university. He decided to work for a year and then start again. When he did so, his start was still a bit rocky. He explained this by saying almost no one in his family went to university and he was not familiar with the way of acting and studying (see Bourdieu, 1984; Goffman, 1959). Eventually, he said he still found his way and graduated.

After graduating he became a manager in health care. He feels he made career pretty fast. However, Melih decided, together with one of his best friends from high school, to start his own consultancy bureau for hotels, next to his job as manager. In this company he advised hotels how to sell their products. He explained his attitude of “not trusting anyone” and wanting to be independent made him long for a company of his own and might be one of the reasons Melih “chose” entrepreneurship. As we have seen in the first story, Naïl felt the need to be independent from the people who could exert power over him in a negative way. For Melih, this might be the same. However, Melih resists

notions of class boundaries; while Naïl tries to escape negative notions of ethnicity (see Wimmer, 2008a). Interestingly, this resulted in the same kind of drive or resistance identity.

Continuing Melih’s story, he tells me another reason why he longed for a company of his own. He explains he already knew the tricks of the trade from retail shop owners who he befriended in his youth. He explains he really enjoyed using these tricks in his work as a manager and he would like to use them more in a company of his own. Finally, Melih thinks not being afraid to lose his wealth drove him towards entrepreneurships. He explains this attitude as follows:

“What I like about my business partner [one of his old friends], we all come from a similar situation, and he always says: “what do I have to lose? I came with nothing and I might leave with nothing. But what is in between is where I can make a difference.” So we all have an attitude like, okay, I might be broke next year. Well, I will make it through. And I am a type of person who just goes on. (…) We are not afraid to lose things. And I think that is the attitude what made us… If we had not had this attitude we would never have made it.”

It seems strange that while on the one hand Melih is resisting the label of being poor, while on the other hand he explains he is not afraid to lose all his wealth again. As we have seen above, Naïl also framed his story like this. As well as Naïl, Melih frames his story towards a researcher. One of the traits of being an entrepreneur people mentioned to me was the ability to take risks. Melih and Naïl saying they are not afraid to lose their wealth again might be a form of proving that they are real entrepreneurs. On the other hand, it can also mean something more intrinsic. It can be read as Melih trying to resist poverty, but still having a relation towards his youth that values the lessons he

learned from being poor and the ability to build it up again.

Though, when I asked Melih what kind of characteristic helped him the most during his career he answered:

“Hm that is a good question. Knowledge of human behavior I think… I am the person who always smiles at everybody, but meanwhile I am thinking what is that person thinking about? There are not a lot of people who I do not get along with, that is because…. It is funny, my friends used to call me the chameleon. Because I always try to put myself in the place of others. What would someone else think? And then I always try to comfort them. I think that is the most important.”

He tells me he gained this knowledge through his work in retail, because he had to be nice to a lot of different people in the shops he worked. In addition, he told me:

“It might be because of balancing between two cultures. I think in this conversation you did not notice anything Turkish about me.”

He was quite right about that and goes on telling me he never expresses his “Turkish identity” when he is working as a manager. He, for example, would not show his colleagues he is a practicing Muslim, because he thinks society expects him not to show these parts of himself. He explains it as follows:

“In that kind of situation [at home] I am quite Turkish. And the funny thing is, if I show people my one side or my other, they are always shocked. And for me, it is just who I am, because I am just who I am. (…) I have talked about it with my mum and she said she struggled with these issues in her younger years. And that is what I notice and experience and hear that the first years were a bit of a struggle. Well, I have not experienced it like that. I notice that, that switching, I do not find it

problematic, no one who sees or hears about it. But my wife sometimes notices. That I can turn like a leaf and go into another role and I will not notice. That can be hard once in a while.”

Here, as Melih tells it, his ethnic identity is perceived differently in various situations. At home, he feels he needs to act “Turkish”, while he feels he needs to act “Dutch” at his work. Therefore, he brings his ethnic identity in coherence with the dominant norms of the two ethnic boundaries (see Wimmer, 2008a). In both situations Melih has a legitimizing identity (see Castells, 2010: 8). It might be hard for Melih to create a resistance identity at his job, because while he has a quite senior position, he just works for the health care institute for a few years. He might not have the room to express some things of his Turkish identity.

On the one hand, Melih is quite aware of the expectations in different situations. Him saying society expects him to not express his “Turkish” identity might reveal a “hiding” strategy. This means he hides a part of his ethnicity to avoid being judged by others and not get promoted. A hiding strategy comes close to what Wimmer calls positional moves, which means trying to become part of the dominant ethnic group by being secretive about some aspects of the self (Wimmer, 2008b). On the other hand, Melih sees his two ethnicities as part of his identity. When he told me his story he emphasizes he really feels like himself at work and at home. He created what he considers to be a “Dutch” identity and a “Turkish” one. He believes in both his identities and he says this does not make him feel uncomfortable. Melih also separates his private and public life quite strongly. He told me he does not tell his wife a lot about his troubles at work. For him, this is a strategy to keep enough time for his wife. But, in my opinion, it contributes to separating his “Dutch” work identity from his “Turkish” private identity. This too makes it easier to believe these two identities for others and himself.

These two ethnic identities might help his career, because as mentioned above he feels society expects him to “be Dutch” at his work. Having a legitimizing identity might avoid some of the problems he would face if expressing his “Turkish” identity at work. While he does not seem to have a problem with these identity changes in different situations it might cause some problems. As I have heard from other respondents this might lead to problems to keep up what they perceived as

“Dutchness” at all times. However, for those other respondents being totally “Dutch” was more like a strategy to be accepted by their colleagues, than an identity. They perceived themselves as “being part of two cultures”. Expressing one, but not the other made them feel uncomfortable. They saw this as hiding some aspects of their “Turkishness” and acting “Dutch”, as something they had to keep up and not as an internalized social identity. While Melih says he does not really hide something but feels different in various situations, he also expresses that acting differently can make his

environment feel uncomfortable. So, on the one hand he feels he needs to be perceived Dutch and it helps his career by doing this. But, on the other hand, these two identities might trouble his career; because people do not believe his performance of identity (see Goffman, 1959). In the next story, Kamil deals with these issues as well. For him, hiding was a strategy. One he could not cope with anymore.

Kamil (48 years): dealing with a double ethnic identity

Kamil says he arrived in the Netherlands when he was seven years old. His parents were factory employees and did not have a lot of money to spend. Again, as in the stories of Naïl and Melih, they could not help Kamil with the content of his homework. Unlike Melih’s parents, they did support Kamil financially during his education. He explains:

“And they push you to be the best… My dad was illiterate himself, but he bought me the most expensive books. He saw education as something important. He never came to school, because he did know the language. I had to do it all by myself. I suffered from that. My parents were not involved during my education. If I had an argument with a teacher I had to solve it myself. (…) But when I needed the right bags or books, they facilitated me. And you notice it is important.”

After primary school Kamil went to the vwo. He did well in school, but explains he failed to get his diploma because of problems with mathematics. He tried to finish his degree during the evenings and started to work during the day at a Dutch bank. He failed to get his math, but received his certificates for the vwo instead. At the bank he kept on studying during the evenings to get his hbo diploma. Again, he failed one class and did receive certificates, but not a diploma.

When Kamil worked at the Dutch bank, he made promotion, but he felt that he was given this promotion at a slower rate than his Dutch colleagues. He explains it as follows:

“And then you think maybe it has some effect. There is no discrimination, but I think it is just like a glass ceilingfor women, they have this ceiling for migrants. So you have to work extra hard. You have to really push it, to make it as far as I did. I had to work very hard. I worked for ten, twelve hours a day.” [my italics]

Fortunately for Kamil, it did not stop him from making promotion at all. He goes on:

“I have worked together with a colleague for two years. And I got a phone call from a Turkish

colleague, who did not know I was Turkish. So, I have never represented myself as a Turkish migrant. I did not think this was an interesting thing to know. And it might have helped me, because I made it quite far within the bank. I think I was the only Turk who made it this far. That is what lies behind the surface.”

So, at the beginning of his career Kamil tried to hide his “Turkish” ethnic identity more or less. As is seen in the quote above, to make the most of his career he felt it was necessary to adjust to the norms of an ethnic boundary and not express his “Turkishness” (see Wimmer, 2008a). For him this was more a strategy, than expressing his identity. Comparing his story with Melih’s, Melih says he really feels Dutch in one situation and Turkish in another, while Kamil hid a part of his identity. A few disruptive events eventually caused Kamil to express his “Turkish” ethnic identity (see Goffman, 1959: 23). One of these events was when Kamil was watching soccer together with his colleagues. He tells me he sometimes called the Turkish team “we”. His colleagues would ask him in these situations if he considered himself to be Turkish. They considered Kamil’s “we” as the only “we” Kamil belonged to. Kamil answered he considered himself to be both Dutch and Turkish. He tried to explain to his colleagues that he cheered for the Dutch team too. After some of these events, Kamil stopped hiding his Turkish identity.

By combining available discourses as “being Turkish” or “being Dutch” Kamil created a, for his work environment, broader ethnic boundary, which was more inclusive. By “being Dutch ánd Turkish” he could relate to his colleagues more, than by not expressing what he considers to be his Turkish part of his identity. In other words; he created a project identity. This means he not just resisted certain norms, but he actively tried to change these norms and stretch the ethnic boundary (see Castells, 2010: 8; Wimmer, 2008b).

The strategies Kamil is using to get some space for expressing his identity are what Wimmer (2008b) calls “expansion”, and something I would like to call “bridge building” strategies. This means that, instead of hiding, Kamil actively tried to create a new category which is more inclusive (expansion) and tried to explain why he is feeling and acting in a certain way (bridge building). Through these strategies the emotional energy in the interactions between Kamil and his colleagues improved, although he said he still sometimes felt the Turk among the Dutch employees (see Collins, 2004). In interviews with other respondents who used these bridge building strategies this resulted in better relations between themselves and their colleagues as well.

It is important to note that these disruptive events happened in later stages of Kamil’s career. He already made some promotion and worked at the bank for a few years. His seniority might have given Kamil more room to express his identity, than he had in former years (see Collins, 2004: 41). Younger people or people who did not work for more than twenty years in the same company, like Melih, might have more difficulty expressing a double ethnic identity in an environment where people are not used to these kind of identities. One of my other respondents, Ayberk, called this the “allowance factor”9_{. He meant that after a while, if people like you, they permit you to express and}

do things.

What is important to notice is that Kamil’s project identity is something he feels belongs to him. He sees it as two groups he has always felt he belonged to. While this might be so, framing his story by saying these two cultures always belonged to him makes his claim to an inclusive ethnic boundary stronger and more legitimate towards his colleagues. This is no overt strategy, but can be seen as a kind of discourse he developed. Sometimes Kamil does use his identity in a strategic way. For example, he uses what he perceives as characteristics of both of his “cultures” to get on with his career. He says he works in an ethical way, which he sees as a Dutch way of doing business. Though, he says he works in a pragmatic and fast way as well, which he perceives as a Turkish way of doing business.

Continuing his story, Kamil’s bosses offered him to go abroad. He decided to refuse this offer. He explains his children went to college in the Netherlands and he did not want to sacrifice their happiness for the job abroad. Here we see how expectations surrounding fatherhood had an influence on Kamil’s career. The boundary for him and his family was that he, as a father, has a duty to secure the happiness of his children. His “fatherhood” identity is legitimizing to these norms in his family (see Castells, 2010: 8).

From that moment on, Kamil explains he decided it was time to do something different. The decision not to go abroad meant that he had to quit his job and this created the opportunity to do something different. He got a job at a Turkish company in the Netherlands. Working at the Turkish company, he again was confronted with his ethnic identity. He did not like the hierarchical style and the tight control system on his employees, which he considered to be Turkish aspects of doing business. He tells me that if he would be less strict, his employees would take advantage of him, because they were not used to “Dutch” ways of doing business. Moreover, he told me, his boss considered himself to be the “big boss” and did not allow him to change a lot of things in the business. After a while he perceived himself as being “too Dutch” to work for this company and decided to quit.

In the Dutch company Kamil felt he could express his “double ethnic identity” after a while. At the Turkish business, while having a senior position as well, he experienced being “too Dutch” and he quit after a year. What we can see here is an example of how power over the definition of the situation can allow someone to express certain forms of identity, while a lack of it, can prevent it (see Collins, 2004: 41; Goffman, 1959). In the Dutch company Kamil first held a junior position and

decided to hide a part of what he considers to be his ethnic identity. After a while, he could exercise some power over the norms, because of his strategies, seniority and time he worked at the company. In other words; at the Dutch bank he was in the position to change the emotional energy in

interactions and contribute to defining the norms (see Collins, 2004; Goffman, 1959). At the Turkish company on the other hand he felt less at ease. Working there for just one year could be a reason. An explanation can also be found in his clarification of having no power compared to his boss. Additionally, he felt he could not change the rules, without people taking advantage of it. Kamil tells me, this was not the only reason he wanted to quit. Next to his job at the Turkish company, he had started his own bookshop. His bookshop did not do well and he felt he wanted to

do something he really liked, instead of something he could make a lot of money with. Moreover, he got tired of working extra hard. He describes it as follows:

“Well, because I worked really hard for the last twenty-six years. (…) I had to travel a lot. I was getting tired. It was just like I was retiring, I reached a certain period in my life. I do not have a midlife crisis, but I have worked hard and I do not need to do it anymore.”

He goes on:

“I can still do all of it, but I am not going to step up anymore. I am not that much of a career person, who wants it all. I already accomplished a lot. So, that will give you some peace in your life. That you do not have to… I did not complete any of my educational tracks. But I have done things that people with two academic degrees did not do. Only by working hard. That is great, right?”

Nowadays, he spends all of his time on his bookshop, which was his dream for almost thirty years. His bookshop is more successful and he can make a living out of it.

It is interesting to see how Kamil frames his reasons to quit. While he tells me becoming older and more experienced are reasons for him quitting his job he starts with an “ethnic” reason. Kamil might have thought a researcher would be interested in ethnicity and therefore starts with this kind of explanation. However, Kamil then comes up with other reasons to quit his job. This is a good example of how ethnicity is not always the only aspect in every decision migrants make (see Crenshaw, 1991; Soysal, 2001). Becoming older and more experienced became new boundaries of Kamil’s identity and he acted on them. Yet, he tells me his environment is sometimes surprised that he quit his high end job, for something they consider being less prestigious. Therefore, he states he accomplished a lot during his career, although he did not get his diplomas. Hence, he allows himself to quit his high end job and start his own business and tries to explain this to his environment. Again, by explaining his position, he is making use of bridge building strategies by making his position understandable to others. Instead of expanding the boundary, like he did at the Dutch bank, he now blurs the boundary by pointing at his achievements, instead of his loss of status (see Wimmer, 2008b). As we will see in the story of Bulut, blurring can have the advantage of being valued for things, instead of being excluded on a boundary that is difficult to change.

Next to his business career, Kamil tells me he became active as a politician for what he considers to be a leftist party. Now, being a politician he still feels like the financial manager he was during most of his career. He tells me his colleagues come to him with financial problems and he has to deal with the financial work in his party. Next to using his financial knowledge he also acts like a financial manager in the political arena. He explains it as follows:

“I do not like the strategic aspects [of politics], like if you do this for me, than I will… What do you want to accomplish with that? I am more pragmatic. Considering, I am a real financial manager. My colleagues say this to me as well. I want to do things. It should not be all about talking. What do you want to accomplish? So, everything needs to be measurable. And if I want to know something, I will just ask [instead of playing political games].” [my italics]

Feeling, acting and being labeled as a financial manager could potentially help Kamil’s career. He acts, in his view, in accordance with the expectations people have of him and creates a legitimizing financial manager identity. Thus, at first sight, it seems like there is a shared definition of the situation (see Goffman, 1959:23). However, still feeling and acting like a financial manager might contradict the political norms that are at play in a political arena. Kamil told me, his colleagues sometimes wanted to play political games, while he refused to do this. He calls this a new form of

politics and says it has not created that much tension yet. Here, what is at first sight considered to be a legitimizing identity is becoming a project identity (see Castells, 2010: 8).

While he might succeed in changing the political norms, his story reveals some problems to acquire this. For example, Kamil told me someone got quite offended as he did not stick to the traditional political rules. This means that while Kamil in some way sticks to the expectations people have of him, his identity might also challenge other norms and values, which signify what it means to be a good politician. Thus, acting as a financial manager and not sticking to the rules, can cause problems for Kamil. For some of the other politicians, I spoke to, their business way of acting caused problems as well. While on the one hand valued because of their financial knowledge, they were accused of financial acting, instead of political acting.

Bulut (39 years): the case of representation and blurring

Bulut tells me he is born in a middle class family in the Netherlands. His father came from Turkey as a guest laborer, but made career as a teacher. Bulut’s mother is born and raised in the Netherlands. During a part of Bulut’s youth she was a school teacher at a primary school. Bulut perceived his childhood as a happy one. The only thing he found annoying, he tells me, was his primary school teacher who gave him the advice to go to the mavo. Fortunately, he said, his parents did not agree with this advice and send him to the gymnasium instead.

Bulut says he liked his high school period. He tells me he was one of the popular boys and made a lot of friends. He remembers his school performance as being quite good and finished high school after six years. After high school he had to decide what he wanted to do next and his first choice was to study hotel management. He tells me his parents objected and wanted him to choose a “real educational track”. A friend of Bulut’s parents was a teacher in economics and whenever he was around he talked about economics with Bulut. Bulut remembers this was the time he became interested and decided to study economics. His parents approved of this choice and he went to university.

Bulut experienced his studies as quite successful. In his second year he became active in a student organization. He says being busy in this organization caused him some delay in finishing his studies, but he also thinks he gained a lot from the experience. After spending some time abroad for a specialization Bulut decided to go to some job interviews. He tells me a Dutch telephone company looked for someone with his specific specialization and he got hired. Yet, he still had to complete some courses before he could graduate. He labels this period as “the hell of his life”, because he felt he was really busy. Except for needing to work hard to graduate, it is remarkable how Bulut’s story depicts a smooth educational trajectory. Especially compared to the stories of Naïl, Melih and to some extent Kamil. While this might be a way of framing his story in a positive way, it is important to note that Bulut’s parents were both teachers and therefore quite knowledgeable about the Dutch school system. In addition, Bulut’s parents could help him with his homework and support him financially and he never felt discriminated. This might be some of the reasons why Bulut experienced his school trajectory as a good time.

When he graduated Bulut kept on working for the telephone company and moved to the city it was situated. Being a resident of this new city, he felt he wanted to meet some new people. The way in which he wanted to do this, was by joining a political party. However, Bulut had some other reasons to join a political party. He mentions his father’s family was always quite active in Turkey. According to Bulut, his father also stayed involved in the Netherlands. During his youth Bulut tells me, he was always told it was important to be responsible for society. In these interactions being a responsible citizen became loaded with positive emotional energy and this might be the reason why Bulut ascribes his identity of “responsible citizen” to his childhood upbringing (see Collins, 2004). So, by