Identities and Subjectivities

523 Pages·7.195 MB·English

by  Nancy Worth, Claire Dwyer, Tracey Skelton (eds.)

Transnational Processes of Identification
and Belonging Among Children and Young
People of Migrant Descent
Rosa Mas Giralt
Contents
1 Introduction................................................................................... 2
2 Migration,Transnationalism,andIncorporationintoReceivingSocieties:Recognizing
ChildrenandYoungPeople.................................................................. 3
3 TheTransnationalPracticesofYoungChildrenofMigrants................................ 6
4 TransnationalFamilies:MigrantandLaterGenerationChildren’sRolesand
Experiences................................................................................... 7
5 TheEmotionalandSymbolicTransnationalismofYoungChildrenofMigrant
Descent........................................................................................ 10
5.1 EmotionalAttachmentstoTransnationalFamilyandFriends........................ 11
5.2 LaterGenerationChildren’sLivedExperiencesoftheInheritedHomeland......... 13
6 Conclusion.................................................................................... 16
References........................................................................................ 17
Abstract
Inordertorecognizeyoungpeopleasindependentsocialagents,agreatdealof
researchhasfocusedondevelopingunderstandingsoftheirsensesofidentityand
belongingoutsideoftherealmofthefamily.Asrelevantandnecessaryasthese
contributions are, they do not allow for an exploration of the role that relation-
shipswithinthefamilyoracrossgenerationsmayplayinyoungpeople’ssenseof
self. Taking into account the relational context of the family is necessary to
develop better understandings of the experiences and affiliations of children of
migrant descent who may live embedded in transnational families and their
extended social networks. The chapter starts by exploring the research which
has foregrounded the roles of children and young people in processes of trans-
migration and incorporation into receiving societies, illuminating the ways in
R.MasGiralt(*)
LifelongLearningCentre,UniversityofLeeds,Leeds,UK
e-mail:[email protected]
#SpringerScience+BusinessMediaSingapore2015 1
N.Worthetal.(eds.),IdentitiesandSubjectivities,GeographiesofChildrenandYoung
People4,DOI10.1007/978-981-4585-91-0_1-1
2 R.MasGiralt
which they actively negotiate experiences of inclusion and exclusion. It then
considers the contributions made by research on transnational families and
emotional and symbolic transnationalism that aid our understanding of the
cross-border connections of later generation young people. These contributions
highlighttherelevantrolesthattransnationalfamilynetworksandtheiremotional
circuitsplayinrecreatingattachmentswhichmayfiguresalientlyinthesensesof
self of young children of migrants. Paying attention to the roles that emotional
andsymbolictransnationalattachmentsplayinthesensesofidentityandbelong-
ing of children of migrant descent can enrich conceptualizations of transnation-
alism and contribute to understandings of children’s emotional and imaginative
agency.
Keywords
Children and young people of migrant descent (cid:129) Later generation children and
young people (cid:129) Transnational families (cid:129) Emotional transnationalism (cid:129) Symbolic
transnationalism (cid:129) Identity (cid:129) Belonging (cid:129) Emotional landscapes (cid:129) Emotional
agency(cid:129)Imaginativeagency
1 Introduction
This chapter explores existing scholarship on the transnationalism of the young
children ofmigrants (also referred toas1.5and second generation) andreflects on
the insights that can be gained from paying further attention to the roles that
transnational relationships or attachments may play in their senses of identity and
belonging.Itseekstoconsiderrelationalaspectsintheprocessesofidentityforma-
tionofchildrenandyoungpeopleofmigrantdescentbyfocusingonthecontextof
thefamilyanditsextendedmanifestations.
An examination of the relational context of the family is necessary in order to
complement predominant accounts which, in the effort to recognize children as
social subjects in their own right, have tended to consider them outside the realm
of the family (Holt 2011, p. 3). This emphasis is understandable as scholars have
beentryingtocompensateforformerapproacheswhichpositionedyoungpeopleas
passive members of the familial unit. Nonetheless, as Scott (2007, p. 122) has
argued,“[c]hildrenareagents,butagencyisnotindividual,itisrelational.Children’s
actionsandchoicesarecodependentonthelivesofothers,particularlytheirfamily
members.” The relationality of agency is crucial when considering the frames of
reference available to young people as they develop their senses of identity and
belonging.
Socially constructed conceptualizations of identity (including childhood and
youth) have also brought to the fore the ways in which identities develop and
function in relation to other identities, have multiple expressions and may change
over the life-course and according to social and geographical locations (e.g.,
Easthope 2009). In addition, research on notions of belonging both as personal
sentiments of feeling at home or being in place and as political experience, that is
TransnationalProcessesofIdentificationandBelongingAmongChildrenand... 3
being recognized or not as being in place by others or institutional structures, has
also foregrounded the multiplicity of scales and social locations to which it is
possible to belong, the diverse expressions that belonging can take, and the con-
straintsthatsocialactorsmayfacewhentryingtobelong(Antonsich2010).Increas-
ingly,person-centeredperspectiveshavebeenadoptedtoexplorehowmigrantsand
ethnicminoritiesperceiveandmakesenseoftheirmultiplyscaledandsimultaneous
sensesofidentityandbelonging.Theseperspectiveshaveincreasinglypaidattention
tochildrenandyoungpeopleofmigrantdescentprovidingnuancedaccountsoftheir
subjectivitiesandtheircomplexpersonal,social,andembodiedlives.
Itisimportanttonotethatconventionaltermssuchas“descendantsofmigrants”
and“1.5orsecondgeneration”(torefertochildrenwhomigratedatanearlyageor
to those who were born in the receiving society) are problematic as they do not
reflect the often blurred boundaries between generations and may “other” young
people by defining them primarily in terms of their familial migrant origins (e.g.,
Eckstein 2002; Gardner 2012). In this chapter, I use these conventional terms to
facilitate engagement with existing literature and, following other scholars (e.g.,
Gardner 2012), I employ the expression “later generation” as a collective term to
refer to children and young people who are the descendants of migrants (indepen-
dentlyoftheirgenerationalposition).Inordertosimplifythenarrative,Isometimes
usethewordschildrenandyoungpeopleinterchangeablytorefertotheexperiences
ofsocialactorswhoareupto18yearsofage(byconventionandduetotheagerange
focus of most of the studies considered). Nonetheless, this does not imply an
endorsementofachronologicaldefinitionofchildhoodoryouth,whicharecomplex
andcontestedconstructs,norofanessentialistapproachtothisdiversegroupwhich
includesamultiplicityofexperiences.
The chapter starts by considering the lack of attention that migration and popu-
lation studies have paid to the role of children and young people in processes of
mobility and incorporation into receiving societies. It continues by considering the
contributions made by scholarship on the senses of identity and belonging of
children of migrant descent or minority ethnic young people and then introduces
the perspectives and insights being progressively gained from a focus on familial,
emotional, and symbolic transnational attachments. It closes with an evaluation of
the achievements in this area of research and highlights the need to expand the
geographiesofchildrenwithin(transnational)families.
2 Migration, Transnationalism, and Incorporation into
Receiving Societies: Recognizing Children and Young
People
Migration research has been an area in which adultist approaches have neglected
children’s and young people’s experiences and perspectives. Conventionally, chil-
drenhavebeenconsideredpassiveelementsinthemigrationprocess,dependenton
their parents or guardians, and a source of adult anxiety (Dobson 2009). Further-
more, in population geography generally, children have typically been
4 R.MasGiralt
conceptualizedas“an‘object’(ameanstoanend)ratherthana‘subject’(worthyof
interest in their own right/for their own sake)” (McKendrick 2001, p. 462). The
introduction of transnational approaches to the study of migration and migrants’
lives, which have attempted to foreground the ways in which migrants and their
descendants create and sustain simultaneous, multifarious, and multi-sited social
fields and practices across borders (Basch et al. 1994), did not greatly disrupt this
tendencytooverlooktheperspectivesofchildrenandyoungpeopleinexperiences
oftransmigration(Whiteetal.2011).
However,morerecentaccountshavecometorecognizeyoungpeopleasagential
actorsinmigration processes and,therefore, havedrawnattention totherolesthey
play in family decisions to migrate, on their own mobilities or in transnational
practicesandorientations(NíLaoireetal.2010).Forinstance,apioneeringcontri-
butiontothisliteraturecamefromOrellanaetal.(2001),whoundertookthetaskof
bringingchildrentotheforefrontofthetransnationalexperience.Bylookingatthe
case of Central American and Mexican families and Korean and Yemeni children
residingintheUSA,theseauthorsaimedtostarttoaddressthegapintransnational
families’ literature which, with few exceptions, had generally ignored children’s
rolesinprocessesoftransmigration.Theseauthorsfoundthatsecuringthewellbeing
andfutureofchildrenisoftenatthecenteroffamilies’migrationdecisions(e.g.,who
moves,whoremains,andwhoissentback),howtheystayconnectedandthetypeof
relationshipstheymaintainacrossborders.Childrenhavetheirownopinionsabout
thesemigrationdecisionsandfindwaystoasserttheirviews(activelyorpassively);
they may even take the lead to migrate, as in the case of Korean “parachute kids”
whomoveontheirownatanearlyagetostudyintheUSA.Thesefindingshighlight
thatchildrencanplayimportantrolesinfamilies’decisionsandinhowexperiences
ofuprooting,re-rooting,andfamilyorganizationarefaced.
A similar adultist condition affected early research on the “integration” into
receiving societies of immigrants and their descendants. Incorporation models
such as assimilation or segmented assimilation rely on the children of immigrants
as “agents of integration,” as they are based on the notion that subsequent genera-
tions will progressively become more adapted into their receiving society (Olwig
2003,pp.218–219).Thus,childrenhaveagainbeenanimplicitobjectofresearch,
“ever-present”ineffortsto“profileapopulation”withsocioeconomicindicatorsbut
“neverreallythere”(McKendrick2001,p.466).However,therecognitionofyoung
peopleassocialagents,whoareactivelyengagedincreatingtheirownsociocultural
worlds,hascontributedtothedevelopmentofa“bodyofresearchwhichexplores,
fromdifferentperspectives,howchildrenandyoungpeopleformandnegotiatetheir
identitiesand belongings”(NíLaoire,etal.2010,p.156).Thisworkhasprovided
deeperinsightsintochildren’sattitudestowardsculturalandethnicdiversityandhas
enhanced understandings of their experiences of incorporation into receiving
societies.
Scholarship on young people and ethnicity, for instance, has provided rich
perspectives on how they are involved in everyday processes of othering and
“racialization” or how they reproduce sameness, actively negotiating similarities
anddifferencesversustheirpeersandwidersocialrelationships(e.g.,Castro2004).
TransnationalProcessesofIdentificationandBelongingAmongChildrenand... 5
Thesedynamicshavebothnegativeandpositiveexpressions.Ontheonehand,they
showthepersistingincidenceofracismandstereotypinginthelivesofyoungpeople
(e.g.,Connolly1998);ontheother,theydocumenttheabilityofchildrentonavigate
thevisualregimesofethno-“racial”differencewhichpermeatetheirsocialworldsby
resistingorsubvertingstereotypingoradopting“in/visibility”strategies(i.e.,hiding
orrevealingdifferences)toaffirmtheirsensesofself(e.g.,MasGiralt2011b).
Infact,thedynamicnegotiationsofdifferenceandsamenessandtheirentangle-
ment with wider societal power have also been considered critical when trying to
understand how young people experience processes of inclusion and exclusion in
theireverydaylives(e.g.,Devineetal.2008).Withinthisresearch,thesocialworlds
ofmigrantandlatergenerationchildrenandtheirexperiencesof“integration”have
capturedtheattentionofresearchers,whohavestartedtodocumentthedevelopment
ofidentitiesamongtheseyoungpeopleasstrategiestonegotiatemembershiporto
copewiththeconditionstheyfaceinthereceivingsociety(e.g.,Griffiths2002).For
example, it has been shown that migrant and later generation young people in
Western societies adopt trans-ethnic and trans-class identities in order to gain
membershipandprotectthemselvesfrom“racial”orgenderstereotypingandalterity
(i.e., being othered or made the object of differential treatment, see for example
Hazell2009).ThiswasthecaseforyoungerSomalirefugeesinBritainwhoadopted
Black-Caribbeanorworking-class“laddish”culturalformstorenegotiatebelonging
intheirlocalities(Griffiths2002;Rutter2006)andLatinAmericanyoungpeoplein
thenorthofEnglandwhousedtheirmarked(butunknown)embodimentsinrelation
to majority British young people to enact membership of non-Latin American
minority ethnic groups (Mas Giralt 2011b). Muslim identity has also been found
tobearelevantframeofreferenceforyoungrefugeesanddescendantsofmigrants,
whoperceivetheirfaithasawaytobelongtoawidersocialgrouporasamainframe
ofreferenceforidentification(e.g.,Valentineetal.2009).
Additionalperspectiveshaveconsiderednotionsofbelongingofminorityethnic
children, foregrounding the multiplicity of social locations that may figure promi-
nentlyintheirsensesofself.Forexample,Olwig’s(2003)studyfocusingonthecase
of children from Caribbean backgrounds living in the USA, Canada, and Britain
showsthattheseyoungpeopledidnotreferprimarilytotheirethnicityorancestral
homeland when considering their places of belonging but directed their attention
insteadtotheireverydayspacesandrelatedspheresofsocialinteraction.
Theexperiencesofmobilityandtransnationalismofmigrantchildrenbothinthe
majority and minority world have also received increased attention (e.g., White
et al. 2011). For instance, research conducted in rural areas of the majority world
hasshowntherelevanceofyoungpeople’sworkandfamilyrolesintheirsensesof
identity and belonging (e.g., Ansell and Van Blerk 2007). Punch (2007) has
highlighted how Bolivian children, who seasonally migrate to neighboring Argen-
tina to work, share a “migrant identity” when back in their home community; an
identity which socially empowers them through their increased personal indepen-
dence and access to consumer products but also through their contribution to
householdmaintenanceandfamilylivelihood.However,theintegrationexperiences
and senses of identity and belonging of latergeneration young people in receiving
6 R.MasGiralt
societies of the majority world continues to be an underdeveloped area of study
(existingresearchfocusesmainlyonaccess toeducationand withinschool experi-
encesofimmigrantandlatergenerationchildren,e.g.,SánchezBautista2014).
In summary, although adultist approaches characterized earlier scholarship on
migration, “integration,” and transnationalism, subsequent studies have brought to
the fore migrant and later generation children’s active roles in transmigration and
shown the agential ways in which they negotiate identifications and processes of
inclusion and exclusion. In addition, a diversity of factors such as family and
productive roles, peer and wider social relationships, and multiply scaled places
and spaces have been found to be significant influences on how migrant and later
generationyoungpeopleconstructtheirselfhood.Theseperspectivespointtowards
the need to take into account the multiple frames of reference available to young
migrantsandlatergenerationchildrenwhennegotiatingtheirownsensesofidentity
and belonging, including (but not privileging) their potential transnational affilia-
tions. The next section considers insights which have been gained through a
transnationalperspective.
3 TheTransnationalPracticesofYoungChildrenofMigrants
There has been a long (and continuing) debate regarding the extent to which
transnational activities and connections will be sustained by the descendants of
contemporarytransmigrants,thatisinthesecondandsubsequentgenerations(Levitt
2009).Researchonthematerialtransnationalactivities(e.g.,visiting,remitting,and
participation in kin networks) of the second generation in the USA has concluded
that these practices are only pursued by a minority of the descendants of migrants
andthatinvolvementintheseactivitiesdiminishesovertime.Forexample,Rumbaut
(2002) conducted a decade-long longitudinal study of the material and subjective
transnational attachments among 1.5 and second generation young adults from
Mexico,ThePhilippines,Vietnam,China,andotherLatinAmericancountriesliving
intheUSA.Heconcludedthattheleveloftransnationalactivityofthesegroupswas
rather low, involving less than 10 % of individuals from all the groups studied –
despite significant differences across groups (Rumbaut 2002, p. 89). However,
scholars have become increasingly aware that conceptualizing generations as dis-
cretepopulationgroupswithcommonexperiencesandsuccessivetimeframesdoes
notcapturetherealityoflivingwithintransnationalsocialfields.Theconstantcross-
bordermobilitiesthatcharacterizethesefieldsblurgenerationalboundariesandthe
existenceof“ethnifiedcommunities”inreceivingsocietiesmaybringadiversityof
culturalreferentstothelivesoflatergenerationyoungpeople(e.g.,Eckstein2002).
Inthissense,Levitt(2009,p.1226)arguesthatweshouldnotignorehowgrowing
upinhouseholds,families,andcommunitiesembeddedintransnationalsocialfields
mayaffectthelivesofthechildrenofmigrants.
Indeed,analternativeperspectiverelatingtothetransnationalorientationsoflater
generation youth has come from research focusing on the increasingly ethnified
communities that can be found in the cities of Western immigrant receiving
TransnationalProcessesofIdentificationandBelongingAmongChildrenand... 7
countries. It has been pointed out that the children of migrants may be developing
transnational identifications which do not rely on their parents’ homelands but
instead on the ethnocultural specific environments (e.g., localities with numerous
cultural and ethnic specific shops, businesses, restaurants, cultural, and religious
institutions) in which they are growing up and on global cultural flows (e.g.,
Gowricharn2009).Thisperspectiveprovidesamorecomplexpictureofthepoten-
tialtransnationalismofsecondandsubsequentgenerations,drawingattentiontothe
importanceoflocalethnoculturalinfrastructuresinfomentingtransnationalorienta-
tionsandbehaviors.
Although there has been more interest in the adult second generations when
studying transnational practices amongst the descendants of migrants, a growing
numberofstudieshavealsofocusedonchildrenandyoungpeoplewithimmigrant
backgrounds (Gardner 2012). Increasingly, scholars are highlighting that transna-
tionalpracticesandperspectiveshavesalientrolesforyoungpeople’severydaylives
andmaybecomeimportantsitesofidentificationandbelongingfortheirpresentor
futurelives(Gardner2012;Haikkola2011;MasGiraltandBailey2010).Inmanyof
theseaccounts,therelationalcontextofthetransnationalfamilyhasbeenconsidered
asoneofthemaineverydaysocialspacesthroughwhichchildrenandyoungpeople
experience their lives. The next two sections continue exploring the knowledge
gained through a focus on the transnationalism of later generation young people.
Theydosobypayingattention,firstly,tothecontextofthetransnationalfamilyand,
secondly, to the emotional and symbolic transnational attachments of the young
children of migrants. The emphasis in these two sections is on contributions that
bring to the fore the perspectives of children within transnational families and the
potential relevance of transnational attachments for the senses of identity and
belongingoflatergenerationyoungpeople.
4 Transnational Families: Migrant and Later Generation
Children’s Roles and Experiences
Bryceson and Vuorela describe transnational families as those “that live some or
mostofthetimeseparatedfromeachother,yetholdtogetherandcreatesomething
that can be seen as a feeling of collective welfare and unity, namely ‘familyhood’,
evenacrossnationalborders”(BrycesonandVuorela2002,p.3).Theseauthorshave
explored in depth the configuration of families organized in this manner and
emphasizedtheirrelationalnature.Theyproposeusingtheconceptof“relativizing”,
“torefertothevarietyofwaysindividualsestablish,maintainorcurtailrelationalties
withspecificfamilymembers”(BrycesonandVuorela2002,p.14).Inthissense,the
physical absence or proximity of some members and not of others dictates the
reconstruction and transformation of family relationships and dynamics; further-
more,individualsmustcontinuallyrevisetheirownrolesandfamilyidentitythrough
their life cycle. Importantly, considering the relational dimensions of transnational
families also brings to the fore the simultaneous nature of “living lives that incor-
poratedailyactivities, routines,andinstitutionslocated bothindestinationcountry
8 R.MasGiralt
andtransnationally”(LevittandGlickSchiller2004,p.1003).Ithasbeensuggested
that there are several instances in which such simultaneity of relations may have
significant impacts on the senses of identity and belonging of transnational family
members (Ariza 2002). One is the tension between processes of assimilation and
belonging,forinstance,inthe“hybridization”dynamics(i.e.,mergingofculturesor
identities, Bhabha 2004) that may underpin transnational belongings. Another
instance can be found in the increasing heterogeneity of identities which may
characterize the members of transnational families; for example, the adoption of
fluid identities as a defensive response to the difficulties of social integration and
pressuresofsegregation(Ariza2002).
An additional aspect of these identity struggles comes from potential
intergenerational tensions when migrants try to transfer homeland cultural values
to their children who are growing up in the receiving societies. Examples of these
tensions can be observed in the changes in family and gender roles caused by a
transnationalconfigurationofthefamilyandinthewaysinwhichintergenerational
family relationships are recomposed by the need to undertake social and cultural
reproductionacrossborders.Forinstance,aprolificscholarshiphasfocusedonhow
the transnational organization of the family redefines family and gender roles.
Transnational motherhood has received a great deal of attention with studies
highlightinghowtheroleof“breadwinner”hasbeenaddedtothetraditionalcaring
andnurturingrolesofmanywomenwholeavetheirchildrenbehindandmigratein
searchofbetterlivelihoods.Thissituationhasbeenfoundtohavesignificantimpacts
onbothmothers’andchildren’semotionalwellbeing,intergenerationalbonding,and
relationships(e.g.,Hondagneu-SoteloandAvila1997;Parreñas2005).Similarly,in
the case of transnational fatherhood, scholars have explored how men renegotiate
their father and/or partner roles in response to their migration circumstances (e.g.,
low-skilled jobs) which may erode traditional sources of identity and masculinity
(e.g.,Pribilsky2001,2004).
Inmanyoftheseaccounts,however,childrenhavecontinuedtobeever-present
but rarely have their perspectives been considered alongside those of theirparents.
AnexceptionisPribilsky’s(2001)studyonchildren’slivesintheEcuadorianAndes.
Theauthorexploredhowthemigrationofparentsandthechangesintroducedinthe
family by their absences impacted negatively children’s opportunities to perform
reproductive roles within the household and to meet their parents’ expectations. In
fact,agrowingscholarshipisforegroundingchildren’sandyoungpeople’sperspec-
tives of being left behind, of their own responsibilities within their transnational
families,oroftheirowntransmigrationforlabororeducationalreasons,andhowall
these processes may impact on their family roles and wider social identities (e.g.,
AnsellandVanBlerk2007;Punch2007;Whiteetal.2011).
Inaddition,intergenerationalperspectiveshavestartedtodeepenourunderstand-
ing of the extended nature of family and kin obligations and the provision of care
withintransnationalfamilies(e.g.,Hondagneu-SoteloandAvila1997;Nesterukand
Marks2009).Thesecontributionsaresignificantduetotheinsightstheyprovideinto
the practices and activities that migrant parents undertake to maintain and transfer
transnationalkinrelationshipsandculturalandsocialheritagetotheirchildren.For
TransnationalProcessesofIdentificationandBelongingAmongChildrenand... 9
instance, Nesteruk and Marks (2009) explore how middle-class Eastern European
immigrantsintheUSAbringtheirownparentstospendtimewiththeirchildrento
provide the younger generation with the possibility to develop relationships with
theirextendedfamilyandinheritedcultureand,atthesametime,maintaintraditional
modelsofintergenerationalchildrearingandfamilyobligations.
Otherdocumentedcommonactivitiesamongmigrantfamiliesareregularreturn
visitstosendingcountriesthroughwhichparentshopetosocializetheirchildreninto
their family values and society of origin. The basic aims of these visits are for
children and young people to nurture their own family relationships, learn cultural
rules of behavior and intergenerational hierarchies, and create their own senses of
belonging to the family and inherited society (e.g., Vathi and King 2011; Zeitlyn
2012).However,ithasbeenshownthatreturnvisitsareexperiencedinamultiplicity
ofwaysbylatergenerationchildrenandyoungpeopleandcanhavemixedoutcomes
for their senses of identity and belonging both in relation to sending and receiving
societies. For instance, Zeitlyn (2012) explores the reactions and experiences of
BritishBangladeshichildrenduringvisitstotheirparents’homeland.Heshowsthe
diversity of ways in which some of these children may resist or even reject social-
izationinBangladesh,experienceswhichinsteadasserttheirsensesofbelongingto
London.
Furthermore, research focusing on “the emotional complexities of transnational
familylife”providesinsightsintothepracticeswhichaimtosustainacross-border
sense of familyhood and into the ways in which transnational intergenerational
relationshipsmaybereproduced(Skrbiš2008,p.236).Bytakingintoaccountthis
transnational emotional dimension, scholars are acknowledging “the existence of
emotionaltiesthatinevitablylinkindividualstofamilies”(positiveornegative)and
contemplatingtheemotionalconnotationsoftheprocessofmigration,e.g.,separa-
tionfromfamily,friends,andsocialreferents(Skrbiš2008,p.236).Thus,agrowing
literaturefocusesontheemotionaldimensionsoftransnationalrelations.Forexam-
ple, theways inwhichphysicallydistant family members negotiatepossibilities of
co-presence through communications (i.e., being together virtually, physically, by
proxy,orthroughimagination)hasattractedagreatdealofattention,aswellashow
familymemberscontinuetoprovidemoralandemotionalsupportandcarefortheir
relatives across borders by “staying in touch” via long distance communication
routines and by negotiating feelings of absence and longing (Baldassar 2008).
Children and young people in transnational families participate in these communi-
cation routines and “celebrations” of special dates to different degrees and their
involvement is often mediated by their parents’ own practices, sometimes with
negative consequences when children feel “forced” to take part in these activities
(e.g., Mand 2010; Orellana et al. 2001). However, other accounts have shown that
children and young people may also establish their own independent connections
withfamilyandkinthroughthepossibilitiesofferedbycommunicationtechnologies
and their greater affordability in some countries, particularly those provided by
mobile phone technologies and social media applications (e.g., Haikkola 2011).
Regular and routine communications allow the recreation of familyhood across
borders and the maintenance of emotional and caring relationships (Baldassar
10 R.MasGiralt
2008).Forsomelatergenerationchildrenandyoungpeople,thesecommunications
mayenhancetheirsenseofconnectiontoabsentfamilyandnurturetheirbondswith
cousinsorotherrelativesinthesendingcountry,relationshipsthat,asIwilldiscuss
in the next section, may underpin a sense of belonging to the family and, by
extension,totheinheritedhomeland.
5 The Emotional and Symbolic Transnationalism of Young
Children of Migrant Descent
Earlycontributionstothestudyofthetransnationalismofthesecondandsubsequent
generations highlighted the relevance of emotional and symbolic perspectives to
deepen our understanding of the types of transnational bonds and orientations that
may characterize the lives of the young descendants of migrants. For example, Le
EspirituandTran(2002)proposedthinkingoftransnationalismnotonlyintheliteral
sense but also at the symbolic level through their research with second generation
Vietnamese American university students in San Diego (USA). These authors
suggest that memories, idealized images of the homeland, and imagined returns
can act as powerful symbols through which the second generations develop their
own transnational attachments. In addition, Wolf (2002) conducted research with
second generation Filipino youth in California who live embedded in different
cultural frames of reference provided both by their present home but also by the
homeland values of their parents and grandparents, frames of reference that can
easily be conflictive. She proposes the concept of “emotional transnationalism” to
describe the transnational emotional obligations which characterized her young
participants’ lives. She advocates “a cultural transnationalism that plays itself out
in the realm of emotions” (Wolf 2002, p. 279), which despite being located in one
geographicalsettinghastransnationalemotionaldimensions.
Subsequentscholarshipinthisareahasstartedtoelaborateonthemeaningsand
experiences of these emotional and symbolic dimensions and how they may man-
ifest themselves in the transnational attachments of children and young people of
migrantdescent.Forinstance,Gardner(2012,p.905)hasarguedthatmovementsare
intrinsically physical and emotional experiences and when trying to understand
children and young people’s perspectives, it is necessary to pay attention to the
feelings that they attach to these experiences. An emerging literature provides
significant insights into two particular areas in which emotions and imaginings
illuminatethetransnationalperspectivesoflatergenerationyoungpeople.Thefirst
area relates to the emotional bonds that, as was discussed in the previous section,
connectchildrentotheirrelatives(andsometimesfriends)intheinheritedhomeland,
and the second area refers to the physical events, resulting feelings, and related
imaginingsthatshapechildren’sexperiencesofspendingtimewiththeirrelativesin
theenvironmentsofsendingsocieties.Thesetwodimensions,whichareinterrelated,
areexploredinthenextsubsections.