On Subjectivity and the Relationship with the Other: Qualitative Results of an Interview-Study with 50 Young Muslims

INTRODUCTION

This quote demonstrates the dynamic between the subject and the other, showing how the participant has to find her way to personal identity. To examine these processes, we refer to Lacan's scheme L. In this scheme, we find a strong connection between the big Other and the subject of the unconscious, that is, the part of the subject being unconscious (Lacan, 1991a, pp. 142 − 3, 1991b, p. 243; Evans, 2006, pp. 173, 198). Figure 1 shows Lacan's L-Scheme.

In our example, the German acquaintances took the place of the big Other by determining the participant's subjectivity: they claimed to know her roots and who she was. In the unconscious, the Germans become the big other who linguistically determines the identity of the Turkish participant. In order to evade this powerful determining influence, the participant fled back to the primordial determination, that is, being primarily Turkish.¹

The second vector (in the L-scheme) is the imaginary connection between the ego (a) and its mirror image (a’). The ego (a) recognizes itself in the others (a’), like in a mirror, and the others seem to be nothing more than imaginary copies of the ego. In his early writings, Lacan understood ‘structure’ to be ‘external social structures’, for example, the emotional relationships between family members (Evans, 2006, p. 195). In assuming that these social relations become internalized, Lacan shuffled his formerly superficial view: ‘Structure’ includes now both the intersubjective and intrasubjective dimensions: The big Other (A) is now understood intersubjectively (as family, religious or social institutions) as well as intrasubjectively (as the ego-ideal, i.e. the superego). The ‘structure’ is also doubled on the second, imaginary axis: The imaginary intersubjectivity of our participants may be shown by the fact that almost all of them chose a partner from their own cultural background. Moreover, the imaginary intrasubjective structure is reflected in the participants’ ideal ego that requires a high degree of professional performance and social success. These ideas refer exactly to the questions concerning the relationship between subject and structure in the context of migration. In our example, the young lady represents the subject. The structure (or system) is represented by the other people, the acquaintances, who give her the feeling of being a second-class citizen. The dialectical relationship between subject and structure shows itself in the non-recognition and the participant's withdrawal of accepting the German identity. This libidinous de-cathexis can be understood as a typical answer to the social non-recognition as autonomous individual.

As the literature suggests, Islamic migrants experience profound processes of cultural or political transformation. An important and widely acknowledged psychoanalytic work on migration comes from León and Rebeca Grinberg (2009). In this work, the authors primarily deal with the conscious and unconscious effects of migration on identity, that is, how the migrant's subjectivity is established. They provide a compact overview of the broad spectrum of various disorders that can occur as a consequence of migration. Migration may trigger different types of anxieties: separation anxiety, persecutory anxieties arising from confrontation with the new and unknown, and depressive anxieties affecting the loss of the former world. Migration is therefore associated with fear of separation, loss and abandonment (Schaich, 2012, p. 522). In Lacanian terms, the split subject is confronted in a more or less frightening way with a newly emerging big Other (A) as well as with the loss of the familiar imaginary other (a’). It could be that after the attacks of 9/11, the hostility of the Western societies made this confrontation even tougher. Above all, migrants from the Islamic world currently experience profound processes of political, cultural and social transformation in their countries (Benslama, 2017). In this respect, the big Other, represented by the Islamic-Turkish culture, may be in a state of critical upheaval being characterized by conflicts between progressive and conservative forces. Morel (2018) describes how the Islamic subject radicalizes in extreme cases. Radicalization could be seen as a revenge against a society that is viewed as unjust. It is the answer to extremely painful non-recognition. From this point of view, radicalization could be discerned as a possible outcome of a predominantly failed integration.

In this context, this study aimed to examine the relationship between the subject and various aspects of the structure in the integration of young Muslims in Germany. We understand structure and system as synonymous representations of the other (including the big Other). On the basis of our results, we will conceptualize the idea of integration in terms of Lacan's subject theory. Our main questions revolved around the topics: What attitudes and feelings do young Muslims express in connection with their socio-cultural integration in German society? Which tendencies towards objectalization and disobjectalization can be seen? Are there any gender-specific differences? The results on (dis)objectalization and gender specificity will be published in a different paper.

METHODOLOGY OF OUR PSYCHOANALYTICALLY ORIENTED RESEARCH

We initially carried out a test coding of the first 10 interviews. Based on this coding, we created a codebook that served as the basis for coding of all interviews. Therefore, elements of the qualitative content analysis, which contains the deductive/structural codes, were linked with the inductive/open approach of grounded theory. Structural and open codes were designed, and ideas and observations recorded in memos during the analysis process.

The structural codes (SCs) were derived from Lacanian theory. We established these before the coding of the interviews. They include the subject and the relationship between subject and structure. There are several definitions in psychodynamic literature describing what a subject is. Freud (1915, 1920) understands it to be the psychological reality of a person. Lacan (1993) regards the subject as the precipitate of the big Other and speaks of the subject of the unconscious (Žižek, 2001, 2008). In our study, the term subject initially refers to the interviewed person who reports about himself/herself and his/her world (including the possibility that the unconscious is determined by the big Other). Furthermore, the subject is always in a constitutive reciprocal relationship to the structure (Lacan, 2015; Mura, 2014; Recalcati, 2000): The structure helps the subject to create a linguistic, social, political and cultural order (Greshoff & Schimank, 2006; Srubar, 2005). The forms (SCs) of the relationship between subject and structure used for this work are subject-family, subject-culture Germany, subject-culture Turkey, subject-religion Christian, subject-religion Islamic, subject-social Germany, subject-social Turkey, subject-institutional Germany and subject-institutional Turkey.

During the data analysis of the first 10 interviews, we also developed open codes (OCs) that were directly related to the participants’ statements. We then designed a codebook for the structural and open codes with a definition and anchor examples. The following 40 interviews were coded with the help of this codebook. In memo writings, all ideas, associations and mini-theories are recorded in the form of memos during the coding process (Glaser & Holton, 2004). This is where the actual grounded theory process takes place, which also allows the connection to a psychoanalytically oriented approach.

The methodological approach of the grounded theory methodology is based on the premise ‘all is data’ (Glaser, 2001). According to this premise, any data material can be checked and used within the framework of the research process (Glaser, 2007). The grounded theory methodology (GTM) according to Glaser and Holton (2004) is not a theory in the conventional sense. Rather, the GTM provides the basis for discovering, working out and generating hidden theories from diverse data (Glaser & Holton, 2004; Mey & Mruck, 2011, 2014).

For the present research, the Glaser approach plays an important role, especially with regard to open coding and notation. Emerging ideas, associations, hypotheses and theories were recorded during the coding process in the form of memos. The participants’ verbal statements were linked with inductive codes (OCs) in accordance with the grounded theory methodology in the sense of open coding. In the final steps of the analysis, the simultaneous occurrence of structural and open codes (‘co-occurrence’) was examined. Furthermore, the interrater agreement was determined for the structural and open codes used. According to Mayring (2015), intersubjective agreement is an important prerequisite for qualitative research. This correspondence between two raters was calculated using the statistical measure Cohen's kappa (κ). In the present study, all codes display good to excellent (M = 0.72; SD = 0.11) interrater agreement (Landis & Koch, 1977).

RESULTS: WHAT HAVE WE IDENTIFIED TO BE IMPORTANT FOR SUCCESSFUL INTEGRATION?

For the presentation of the results, we selected the three open codes (OCs) which most frequently occur together with the structural codes of subject and relationship between subject and structure.

The open codes are: ‘taking-responsibility’, ‘feeling-held’ and ‘being-able-to-process-experiences’. This triad occurred most frequently both in the subject and in the relationship between subject and structure. In the following, we first describe the co-occurrence of the three open codes both with the structural code ‘subject’ and with the structural code ‘relationship between subject and structure’ in their facets mentioned above. This selection is based on the extensive text material of the interviews. Table 1 gives an overview of the co-occurrence analysis of deductive/structural codes (SCs) and inductive/open codes (OCs).

DISCUSSION

In our study, we asked 50 young Muslims questions about the subject constitution and the relationship between subject and the intra-subjective as well as inter-subjective structure. The most common open codes that we assigned were constructive: ‘feeling-held’, ‘being-able-to-process-experiences’ and ‘taking-responsibility’. Many participants describe intact and close family relationships, calling the family the most important thing in their life. They describe how they can deal with positive and negative experiences. They need to take responsibility for their own lives and others. Concerning the successful educational status of our participants, we would like to derive the hypothesis from this finding that this triad represents typical features for successful professional integration: those who feel they are at home in their Turkish family or in the Islamic religion can process (negative) experiences and have (mature) superego structures. A person being-able-to-take-responsibility both for him-/herself and for others will also be able to deal with the challenges of migration more easily than a person who does not have these resources. Since we have not aggregated enough data for the group of young people affected by some form of disintegration, a possible theoretical link should be considered. In discussing radicalization, Benslama (2017) notes that these young people (predominantly being male) have given up their freedom in order to relieve themselves from confusing feelings, fears about life, and disorientation. They begin to use religion to eradicate everything feminine in themselves and to disguise themselves with a toxic masculinity. In doing so, the reduction of the Islamic religion to the political issues abuses the idealism of the young people and leads to the erasure of their individuality. Being a member of a radicalized group, the subject attains a sense of ‘infinite power’ (see also Freud, 1921).

This leads to a self-hating and inhuman ideology. It seems understandable that this group of young people would not have felt addressed by an invitation to participate in a scientific study. Nevertheless, future studies should be conducted with these groups, as the description of their inner lives can provide valuable insights.

The interviews show that the ability to triangulate between the subject and two structures or systems may be helpful for a successful integration. This is our first hypothesis. Many participants reported that they were able to maintain a good relationship with their Turkish culture and their family as well as with German culture and society. They can use the advantages of both Turkish and German structures. This development is initiated by an atmosphere in which the participants feel that they are being held by the others, that is, by the social environment of the family. In this safe atmosphere, a basis is formed on which they can process their experiences. The reflection process allows them to take on responsibility. They can reach a mature position in which the subject is able to integrate into both countries.

This sets up the second hypothesis: Those who can shape their world triadically have a greater chance of integrating themselves successfully. It is the oedipal triad in which the child (subject) has an individual relationship to both the mother and the father, that is, can integrate two early objects and recognize them as independent and individual (Rohde-Dachser, 1987). However, some participants tend to have dyadic relationships. They experience the outer world as more or less divided, that is, into ‘familiar’ and ‘foreign’, into ‘appreciative’ and ‘devaluing’. A study by social scientist Ruud Koopmans (2015) carried out with Muslims in six European countries revealed that around half of the respondents are convinced that the West wants to destroy Islam. A mature resolution to the Oedipus complex would be to abstain from incestuous (dyadic) relationships and to love the parent with whom the child had rivalled (Freud, 1924; Rohde-Dachser, 1987). Applying this to migration means renouncing the incestuous relationship with one culture/society and loving or recognizing the other, alternative culture. This resolution of the Oedipus allows the participant to obtain what they need from both cultures. We suggest that this process is the real integrative effort that young Muslims need to achieve.

Above all it seemed that the participants experienced verbal discrimination. However, subjects with a triadic model perceive racism as less threatening or place positive aspects of German structures at the forefront. Racial discrimination means castration. André Green (2001) distinguished between a ‘narcissistic’, dyadic castration and an ‘oedipal’ castration belonging to the triad. For the participants who reported dyadic constellations, racial discrimination represents a higher burden as ‘narcissistic’ castration. Accordingly, they react angrily and prefer Islamic culture and religion or distance themselves from the German culture. While participants reported that there certainly are experiences of discrimination in Germany, their visit to Turkey conveyed experiences of alterity: they are not of less value in Turkey but nonetheless feel to a certain extent a bit foreign. Despite these experiences of alterity, the environment in Turkey is described as rather positive and affectionate.

Above all, integration appeared to be an intra-psychic process and not only the external adaption to the demands of the big Other. Most of the young Muslims we interviewed reported a very pronounced adjustment. They were rather well adjusted to the Western system or structures. They displayed a strong willingness to perform successfully and a high level of commitment and enthusiasm. This shows the double-faced nature of the Oedipus: On the one hand, it enables successful social integration. On the other hand, the Oedipus stands for the patriarchal structure that requires adaptation, in that case to the Western capitalist system. There is a wide range of ‘Oedipus-critical’ literature (Deleuze & Guattari, 1977; Tutt, 2014) that problematizes this adaptation in the sense of subjection. This point of view addresses the problems of the goals of today's strongly propagated ‘integration’, which should not be limited to a mere adjustment, but should rather promote the subject's freedom, self-determination and autonomy. To initiate this development, the ‘host country’ should realize a tolerant and cosmopolitan culture of recognition.

All in all, the oedipal constellation which is maintained by the threat of castration in both the Freudian and Lacanian perspectives, allows the passage from the Imaginary to the Symbolic, and it prevents at the same time the subject's return to the dyad. In this respect, the Oedipus complex is the guardian of a successful psychosocial integration, which takes place both intra-subjectively (as a psychodynamic prerequisite) and inter-subjectively − in the German or, as generally spoken, in the Western society. By imposing this oedipal triangulation, the incestuous as the final consequence of an extremely close relationship with ‘Turkey’ or ‘Germany’ is rendered impossible. On the other hand, however, opportunities for identification are subsequently opened up.

It seems to us that the big Other, which in one way or another can be traced back to the primary objects, unfolds with various facets in terms of the German and Turkish structures. The ‘German big Other’ seems to be secular: This structure is characterized by the demand for punctuality, reliability and diligence. In the interviews, these German or Prussian ‘secondary virtues’ (‘Sekundärtugenden’) were mentioned again and again, mostly with praise. However, the big Other that unfolds in Turkish culture is religious. In this case the big Other is the Islam, God or an imam. Or the big Other functions politically: As a powerful, warlike person, from Mehmed I, who conquered Constantinople, to the current Turkish President. Lacan made no distinction with regard to the threat of castration from Freud's conception of the Oedipus complex. His opinion was that the child, regardless of its gender, desires the mother, and the father stands in the way of such incestuous wishes (Evans, 2006, p. 130). From this perspective it is conceivable that the big Other (be it the secular-German or the spiritual-Turkish) prevents an incestuous-amalgamating relationship to the other country or culture.

So, the subject could strike a balance between adapting to the intrasubjective/intersubjective structure and developing a self-determined and autonomous attitude. This is one of many experiences that could be used to raise awareness among mental health professionals about the specifics of what is going on within this potential patient group. This could be done in book or app form, and thereby provide professionals additional leverage on establishing a good therapeutic relationship with their patients.

Finally, we want to place our results and hypotheses explicitly in the context of Lacan's subject theory, as laid down in Scheme L. Lacan conceptualized the relationship between the subject and the structure, that is the imaginary or symbolic other (big Other) with the graph of the ‘Lambda schema’ or ‘Scheme L’ (Lacan, 1991a, pp. 142–3, 1991b, p. 243; see Figure 1). In our study there is the big Other (A): The parental laws that determine the unconscious of the subject (S), as well as the social, normative and religious ideas in both Turkish and German structures/systems (culture, society). The laws of the big Other (A) generate the ‘symptoms’ in the subject (S). It seems to be beneficial for the integration if the subject can form a triad with the big Other by using the ‘Turkish-influenced’ big Other (the ‘Turkish big Other’) as well as the ‘German-influenced’ big Other (the ‘German big Other’). Subjects who can triangulate themselves with the help of the triad are more often able to integrate both parts. They don't have to split off their Turkish-German world. The big Other of the West, however, is today among other things determined by the decline of Oedipus, that is, of the patriarchal-religious system and the enjoyment of the surplus-value being staged by the Western-capitalistic way of life (Mura, 2014; Žižek, 2000, 2017).

We see the feeling of being held primarily situated on the imaginary axis. Many of the young Muslims we interviewed felt appreciated and indeed admired by their families. Winnicott (1960) described the feeling of being held as an expression of a primary maternal function, emphasizing the bodily aspect of the children's security. We think that the feeling of being held arises mainly from the positive mirroring on the imaginary axis, but also from the influence of a benevolent big Other which uses a tender language. In this sense, our participants also had a strong desire for the imaginary acknowledgment from German society. On the other hand, the desire of the (native) racist (a) to devalue the other (a’) may be fed by the wish that the other (i.e. the migrant) should be like himself. If the other not like him, they must be destroyed or devaluated because there is no chance of mirroring (for the native racist). This may be the psychological mechanism that the migrant is not mirrored by the native other (a’) or condemned by the big Other (A).

This conflict is exacerbated by forcing Muslims to commit themselves as Muslims or Europeans. From this point of view, it may be difficult to develop an ambiguous, multi-faceted ego (a) and come to terms with the big Other (A) of their own or the foreign culture. Abdel-Samad (2018, p. 23) states: ‘The mainstream theology of Islam and the tribal mentality force Muslims to define themselves either as Muslim or as European’. The individual is thereby forced to decide for or against the Islamic imaginary identity (a’) − as well as for or against the European or Islamic big Other. Participant 48, for example, switched from the profession of teacher to the field of pharmacy because she feared that she would not be hired (i.e. not recognized) as a teacher while wearing a headscarf. In fact, the German Constitution (Bundesrepublik Deutschland, 2020) states (Article 4 GG): ‘(1) The freedom of belief, conscience and the freedom of religious and ideological confession are inviolable … The undisturbed practice of religion is guaranteed’ and in Bavarian Law (Recht, 2015) (Article 59 BayEUG) ‘External symbols … which express a religious … conviction, may not be carried by teachers … if … [they are not compatible with] the Christian-Western educational and cultural values’.

In contrast to a pharmacist, a teacher with a headscarf does not correspond to the imaginary conceptions of the ‘Christian population’. The headscarf destroys the mirror effect and must be banned. The participant seems to be well aware of the racism she will be subjected to by the German Other. It is, however, precisely a sign of triadic flexibility that this young lady swiftly responds to this discrimination by deciding to pursue an alternative profession. She does not feel abandoned, processes her experiences and bears responsibility for her professional career. Overall, we saw that both imaginary and symbolic aspects play a role in the integration process, corresponding to the aspects of Lacan's Borromean knot.

Religion as a good and nourishing introject can been seen as a part of the Imaginary. Religion – in the shape of words, prayers or Quran verses – is also part of the symbolic big Other. The real, predominantly unrepresented aspects of the migration experience cannot be directly inferred from a qualitative-linguistic investigation. We believe, however, that the emotional powerful intensity of some reports about discrimination or the bodily symptoms (e.g. dizziness) might be the felt echoes of Lacan's real.

Regarding the study's limitations, it should be mentioned that the majority (74%) of the participants were students. Therefore, a sample bias exists. This reticence is well known. Abdel-Samad (2018) cites reasons such as fears that the participants’ reports could perhaps be abused by a security service or that the participants may get in trouble with the judiciary. There is also a fear within the community of being stigmatized as a ‘net polluter’ (Abdel-Samad, 2018, p. 104). ‘In the end’ according to Abdel-Samad (2018, p. 29), two types remain: The ‘cosmopolitan Muslims’ who had nothing to hide and those who answered the questions in the sense of social desirability. Most of our participants embraced their dual national heritage. This has a direct impact on our study: those young Muslims living in ghettos, parallel societies, struggling with social misery, crime, unemployment, and under the observation of ‘moral guards’ (Abdel-Samad, 2018, p. 95) could not be included in our study. Thus, we present a group of young Muslims who have mostly managed to enthusiastically progress in Western society with a high level of commitment, while still having an awareness of the problems. It should therefore be emphasized that the results of this study are to be understood as statements about this sample of well-integrated Muslims. Further studies should investigate whether these phenomena can also be found within the group of less well-integrated Muslims. At a first glance, we have distinguished between subject and social structures. With the help of Lacan's subject theory, however, we were able to understand that the integration of young Muslims is not a matter of external versus inner processes. In contrast, however, the subjective structure in which the integration processes take place includes the positions of the subject of the unconscious (S), the ego (a) as well as the symbolic big Other (A) and the imaginary other (a’). These four cornerstones mark the playing field on which young Muslims move and are thereby shaping their lives today.