*I would like to thank Professor David McCrone and Dr Michael Rosie from the University of Edinburgh, and Dr Vello Pettai from the University of Tartu, as well as the anonymous referees for their helpful comments on the earlier drafts of this paper. I also wish to thank the ESRC for their post-doctoral fellowship PTA-026-27-0446 that enabled me to write up this article.
1469-8129/asset/NANA_centre.gif?v=1&s=f6f188fb7159a8191ccf329bc3047ccff1e01b7d)
1469-8129/asset/NANA_right.gif?v=1&s=54ed690fa90e4ec1ced14e3bc2144792801f908f)
Reconsidering otherness: constructing Estonian identity†
Article first published online: 24 JAN 2007
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8129.2007.00276.x
Additional Information
How to Cite
PETERSOO, P. (2007), Reconsidering otherness: constructing Estonian identity. Nations and Nationalism, 13: 117–133. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8129.2007.00276.x
- †
Publication History
- Issue published online: 24 JAN 2007
- Article first published online: 24 JAN 2007
- Abstract
- Article
- References
- Cited By
ABSTRACT. The concept of the Other is increasingly popular in nationalism and ethnicity literature, which usually proposes the existence of one significant Other for any national Self, and that this Other is usually threatening and negative. This approach is one-sided and in need of revision. I suggest that any nation may have many simultaneously existing Others, and more importantly, these Others need not be negative – they may also be positive. By exploring how (1) ‘the Other’ matters in identity construction; (2) there can be several Others at any one time; (3) the Other can be positive as well as negative; (4) the role of any given Other can change during various phases of national identity construction and maintenance; and (5) the particular ‘otherness’ of the Other has social and political consequences, this article will reconsider the role of otherness in the construction, transformation and maintenance of Estonian national identity.