Identity

Fuck, this blog writing thing is a nightmare. When my good friend K started writing hers, with a truthfulness and eloquence only she could manage, it seemed so easy. However, its gone midnight on Sunday and this is the second consecutive night I've been battling my thoughts and self doubt over what to write and how to write it. Having procrastinated for long enough however, I now present to you the first of many (I hope) entries I intend to share with you.

It seems apt to begin on the subject of identity, something that has had both a personal and political resonance in recent times. Only last week I was at an art exhibition, to see the work of an art teacher friend. It displayed both her and her students work from the past year, tackling the subject of identity. It gave me a great insight into the personal perceptions of self identity from both adults and children alike. What was most inspiring however, was the visual representation of peoples self image, both positive and negative. This at a time where national identity has been at the forefront of political debates both here and across the channel in France.

At home the British National Party (BNP) success in the European elections has been much discussed, dissected and by now (hopefully) digested. What interests me most is their (BNPs) very peculiar sense of Britishness and this purported existence of a specific white British identity. If you take a visit to their website (I wont provide the link) you cannot help but notice the references made to how 'immigrants' 'Muslims' and 'liberals' have eroded away the indigenous Britain's way of life. This is linked to conservative conceptions of traditional family life, respect and a strong work ethic. This is combined with an evocation of war time victory and the associated 'British bulldog' spirit . The arrived conclusions therefore are that indigenous British people have an identity uniquely informed by a history of grafting and a collective unity to defeat enemy invaders. What is suggested then is how this supposed flood, stream or wave (note use of water based analogies) of immigration has had negative consequences for the 'white British' identity. Yet, from a 'white British' perspective, this conclusion is both puzzling, but more importantly wrong.

Identity is first and foremost a fluid concept, it is a product of experience, therefore to suggest there is a homogeneous 'white British' identity is to assume our lived experiences are either irrelevant to our own identity or monolithic. Similarly, my own identity, despite technically being 'white British' is heavily influenced by other cultures, which is to my benefit. For instance, by knowing people from all four corners of the earth my awareness of politics, society and culture been has greatly enriched and enhanced my understanding of the world. To follow the BNPs line though, it would consider my 'foreign' influences detrimental and perhaps even have radicalised me, heaven forbid. While I may not represent the 'average' 'white British' individual, I feel it necessary to contest some of frankly ignorant and simplistic framing of the immigration debate. It is my view that immigration has improved this country no end, making the UK a hub for all sorts of economic and social activity. This has been enabled by the dynamic demographic make up of modern Britain, which while difficult to accept by parties such as the BNP is undoubtedly a reality and is something to be heralded not rejected.

In line with the BNP attack on immigration and the perceived danger of Islam in the UK, it is sad to see similar sentiments being expressed in France recently. Most alarming is the source of this attack, Nicholas Sarkozy aka Monsieur President. In a recent speech, he declared the Muslim veil 'not welcome', on the basis it represented the repression of women and threatened the secular nature of the French republic. While from a personal point of view I still find the sight of the hijab or niqab to be a touch odd, this is more because its a rare sight, as opposed to something threatening or symbolically misogynistic. I imagine the number of women wearing such veils in France is slim, therefore such a statement by the countries leader seems irresponsible, and insensitive. While the sight may seem threatening or regressive to some, surely the more repressive action is to outlaw an individuals right to recognise their own religion. Although some may point to the fact wearing the veil is no prerequisite of the Islamic faith, I doubt wearing a St Christopher is written down in the bible either.

I included this discussion of religious symbols as its something a close friend of mine will also be contending with in the near future. As a Muslim who currently does not wear a headscarf their switch to wearing one will perhaps draw comment, even condemnation from friends and strangers. What should be remembered however, is they are still the same individual, headscarf or no headscarf, sadly in this climate of religious sensitivity, people are often to quick to ostracise, so here's hoping their transition will be assisted by supportive friends not spiteful ones.

I will finish by saying then identity defines us all, whether consciously or not. Sadly at the present time identity is being framed in a way that is divisive, being used to further exacerbate religious and political divides. However, as I witnessed at the school art exhibition, peoples own expression of identity is what matters, not the politicians, not the journalists, just yours.