|

|
|
Leena Paaskoski
Naked masculinity?
Forest students portrayed in photographs and oral history
>>
pdf-version
A men’s profession
In 1908, the academic
education of foresters was transferred to the University from the
Evo Forest Institute, where foresters had been educated for almost
50 years. The first woman started her studies in forest sciences
in 1918 and by the end of the 1930s altogether four women had become
university-qualified foresters. During the Second World War there
were 16 female forest students at the University. After the war
and in the 1950s, 13 women were enrolled as forest students at the
University. In the 1960s it was already common to have a couple
of women in every course. [3] Before the 1970s women were only a small minority
in a male-dominated group of students. The last course of only men
started in 1961. Thus, for the first 60 years, students studying
for a degree in forestry were exclusively men, and almost exclusively
men 50 years after that. Women got jobs in forestry even more slowly;
before the 1970s many of them ended up as housewives or in other
professions, often after they had worked for a few years in the
field. [4]
The joint and distinctive
experience
In both the oral history
and photographs concerning the forest students’ studies the Hyytiälä
training period is the most commonly described.
[6] Forest studies were organised strictly as a course that
combined both theory and practise. It meant that in addition to
university lectures there were several on-the-job training periods
arranged outside the university and the capital city. The most important
of these, and common to everybody, was the so-called first summer
training at the Hyytiälä Forestry Field Station in Juupajoki.
This included a variety of practical forest activities in the area.
Hyytiälä was a kind of boarding school in the countryside where
the student group worked and lived together for three months.
In the interviews with
men Hyytiälä was seen as an opportunity to get experience in practical
work and the forest itself. The same wish had often already been
central when choosing the forestry profession. Part of the studies
consisted of forestry excursions made during the Hyytiälä summer.
There was also spare time for sport, playing cards, partying, brewing
alcohol, drinking, and building traditional course ”monuments” like
a jetty, a tennis court or a gate at Hyytiälä. The idea of members
of a course as a uniform unit became clear while staying together
for the whole summer: it was the time and place for the birth of
their feeling of togetherness, the forester spirit.
[7] The course photographs have almost the same contents as
the oral stories. The summer was spent in physical work, excursions,
celebrating and doing sports. There are plenty of photographs, for
example, of wood-cutting, ditch-digging or lecturing in forests.
Although the buildings and views of Hyytiälä were immortalized by
the camera course after course, most of the pictures illustrate
people, the particular student group itself, the group working,
resting, riding bikes to the practise area, entertaining in their
leisure time or posing in different group photographs.
Men
did not usually talk about their female fellow students in their
oral stories about their student days.
[8] If there were women in a group and an interviewer approached
the subject, the question was usually discussed briefly and neutrally.
The interviewer was told that women were treated equally, fairly
or in a gentlemanly way.
[9] A few men mentioned that the girls had to adapt themselves
to masculine ways. Other men noted for some reason or other that
the girls kept to themselves.
[10]
When women talked about
Hyytiälä, gender was always present. It had to be taken into consideration
even when telling about physical aspects of living, because the
girls lived in another building called “the castle of maids”. They
needed to express how they managed the heavy manual work and whether
they were treated equally or not. Sometimes they recollected some
military behaviour at Hyytiälä, something that men did not talk
about at all. [11]
Many of these women told about fair treatment and the feeling of
fellowship with the boys,
[12] but some considered the Hyytiälä summer almost a punishment
because they believed the boys tried to get rid of girls there. [13] Also men’s comments on being
“gentlemen” could mean giving girls special treatment and calling
them “miss”. When girls asked for equality instead of special treatment,
they ended up playing a masculine game: the same male rules for
everybody without any mercy or exception. [14] The familiar stories told
by the men concerning excursions, parties, drinking, sporting and
the forester spirit were seldom mentioned in the female oral history.
[15]
Although women also
have photographed the environment, themselves working, or their
own study group in Hyytiälä, something is lacking in their pictures.
It seems that leisure time especially distinguished the positions
of men and women before the 1970s. Spending leisure time together
demanded not only inventiveness but also the capability to co-operate,
and a consensus of opinion. What was done together was also decided
together. One cannot even imagine girls in certain photographs.
For the young men, Hyytiälä, despite the manual work, or because
of it, was “a paradise” [16] and “the last summer of young colts”. [17] The common brotherhood, warm relations and
freedom in a group of course brothers are seen especially in group
portraits or playing the fool in leisure time photographs. It is
often actually difficult to point at the concrete distinction between
photographs taken by men and women, but the feeling they
convey is obvious. [18]
At the beginning of
the 1920s one girl and 39 young men were practising in Hyytiälä.
Altogether 60 photographs documenting the summer were taken by one
of the boys. What do they tell about the position of Martta? She
is portrayed in ten pictures; many of them group portraits in the
training area and at work. Sometimes she is sitting or standing
a bit apart from the others. She did not (of course) according to
the pictures take part in the beach life of the naked boys, in the
nights of partying or in brewing alcohol.
[19] Only one photograph shows Martta alone: sleeping under
a tree beside a training area. The photograph is subtitled: “A woman
in forest work.” [20]
The position of men
in Hyytiälä was self-evident and founded on a long tradition of
brotherhood. Masculinity was a norm, which also meant the invisibility
of gender. [21]
A few women could not change the masculine culture, nor could they
alone create a culture of their own. Their alternatives were to
be isolated or to form a female group – or try to get the respect
of the masculine group by obeying its cultural rules. [22] Both male and female oral and illustrated
stories can be read as descriptions of the relations between men
and women. In both type of sources men are placed in the centre,
while the position of women is more marginal.
The three dimensions
Oral history and photographs
are connected in many ways. When a person tells his or her life
story, it is a question of memories. Between the moment of experience
and the moment of telling there is always a period of events that
inevitably has an influence on the story and the way of remembering
and telling it. [23]
One chooses what the story is and how it is told. Choice is
also involved in photographs. A photographer chooses the object,
and an owner of photographs chooses what is preserved. As contemporary
sources, photographs document a contemporary experience that is
worth remembering. [24]
The photographs are given meanings by organising and giving
subtitles to them. The photographs of the university years are often
placed in personal or collective [25] Hyytiälä photograph albums.
As illustrated stories they can in a way be considered equal to
oral stories. The photographs are also evidence of experiences:
they became meaningful as maintainers of the feeling of togetherness
and the professional culture – as a part of the collective memory.
The experiential environment
of an individual in everyday reality is like a three-dimensional
space around oneself. The past environments are often preserved
in one’s memory. The trace they leave in history and that a researcher
meets is only one of their dimensions. By analysing stories, speech,
texts or photographs a researcher can create a two-dimensional picture
of the past. The third dimension, however, is the private experience
itself and its individual meaning. This is what a researcher is
looking for – and may, if lucky, get a glimpse of. Jan Garnert [26] has said that with the aid
of interviews one can get near the recollections but seldom near
the experiences. The photographs can be seen similarly: they are
only pictures, which hide the real experiences. While trying to
find meanings a researcher can analyse the contents or the common
order of photographs. Sometimes the photographs or their subtitles
and explanations allow a researcher to get closer to the experience
and its meaning. Personal experiences, however, are stored in personal
memories. The two-dimensional picture, which a researcher has created,
includes, but often also hides, this third dimension.
The experience itself
and its individual meaning as a third dimension of a photograph
(or any object) also allow the individuals concerned to give different
meanings to the object. The same evidence of the past can easily
remind individuals of various memories and experiences. Things that
to men represented memories of tight-knit togetherness could to
women recall experiences of being on the outside or only on the
outskirts of the naked masculine culture.
M.A. Leena Paaskoski is a Ph.D. student
in Ethnology, at the University of Helsinki and is preparing her
Ph. D. research concerning the professional culture of Finnish university-educated
foresters.
Unpublished sources
Lusto, The Finnish Forest Museum,
Punkaharju, Finland
Forestry Professions in a Changing
Society, oral history project 1999–2002, A02001, Interviews of university-educated
foresters.
Photograph archives, V95013/H11, SM/H12,
V04032/H22, V95004/H23, V04031/H27, V95014/H31, V94012/H32, V01020/H33,
V02005/H36, V04003/H36, EB/H43, V03004/H53.
Bibliograpfy
Anttonen, Marjut, Etnopolitiikkaa
Ruijassa. Suomalaislähtöisen väestön identiteettien politisoituminen
1990-luvulla. Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seuran Toimituksia
764. SKS, Helsinki 1999.
Arvidsson, Alf, Etnologi. Perspektiv
och forskningsfält. Etnologiska skrifter nr 24. Studentlitteratur,
Lund 2001.
Brandth, B. & Haugen, M. S., “From
lumberjack to business manager: masculinity in the Norwegian forestry
press.” Journal of Rural Studies Vol. 16, No 3, July (2000).
Ehn, Billy & Löfgren, Orvar, Kulturanalys.
Ett etnologiskt perspektiv. Liber, Lund 1982.
Kuosmanen, Jari, Finnkampen. En studie
av finsa mäns liv och sociala karriärer i Sverige. Skriftserie
nr 2001:2. Institutionen för socialt arbete vid Göteborgs universitet.
Gidlunds 2001.
Garnert, Jan, Anden i lampan. Etnologiska
perspektiv på ljus och mörker. Carlssons, Stockholm 1993.
Kärkkäinen, Sirpa & Toivanen, Erja,
Uudistusalalla. Naismetsänhoitajien elämää vuodesta 1918.
Naismetsänhoitajat ry, Helsinki 1995.
Petersen, Anja, “Fotografiet som etnologisk
berättelse.” In Magnus Bergquit & Birgitta Svensson (ed.), Metod
och minne. Etnologiska tolkningar och rekonstruktioner.
Studentlitteratur, Lund 1999.
Portelli, Alessandro, “What makes oral
history different?” In Robert Perks & Alistair Thomson (ed.),
The oral history reader. Routledge, London & New
York 1998.
Saarimaa, Riikka, “Nainen metsänhoitajan
ammatissa.” Työelämän tutkimus – Arbetslivsforskning No
2–3/2004. Työelämän tutkimusyhdistys ry, Tampere 2004.
Ulkuniemi, Seija, Valotetut elämät.
Perhevalokuvan lajityyppiä pohtivat tilateokset dialogissa katsojan
kanssa. Acta Universitatis Lapponiensis 80. Lapin yliopisto,
Rovaniemi 2005.
Notes
[2] My Ph. D. thesis is based on a long historical perspective
and from the point of view of individuals. My main material is
oral history, 226 biographical interviews of university-educated
foresters, which cover about a 70 years’ period of their experiences
in studies and work. Additionally, I also use photographs and
student magazines. In my research I consider the professional
culture as a process where a professional group of individuals
not only creates but also maintains common manners, values and
ideas by recreating common experiences and reminding themselves
of professional aims. The professional culture of foresters can
be seen as an institution of experiences and memories: it is built
up during the student years and maintained in professional life.
Arvidsson 2001, pp. 16–17; Ehn & Löfgren 1982, p. 90; Anttonen
1999, pp. 198–210.
[3] With “a course” (kurssi) I mean a group of students
that have been studying together and that have been considered
as a tight-knit group also later in the profession.
[4] See Kärkkäinen & Toivanen 1995; Saarimaa 2004.
[5] The material of the paper consists of 10 female and 30
male foresters’ interviews and of 12 foresters’ private photograph
collections. Two of the collections were photographed by women.
The informants, photographers and owners of the photographs were
born between the 1910s and ‘40s and studied between the 1930s
and ‘60s.
[6] The training period at Hyytiälä is brought up in many
contexts in the interviews. Photographs were seldom taken in the
University or in the capital; almost all the pictures are from
different training periods and excursions. Lusto. V95013/H11,
SM/H12, V04032/H22, V95004/H23, V04031/H27, V95014/H31, V94012/H32,
V01020/H33, V02005/H36, V04003/H36, EB/H43, V03004/H53. ‘H’ in
the signum means Hyytiälä and the subsequent number is the year
of the training period.
[7] Lusto. A02001: 10/m37, 24/m44, 25/m43, 67/m45, 68/m34,
70/m36, 80/m17, 83/m22, 86/m39, 107/m47, 113/m42, 115/m35, 126/m15,
158/m45, 161/m46, 163/m43, 172/m46, 206/m21, 225/m24. ‘M’ or ‘f’
in the signum means ‘male’ or ‘female’ and the subsequent number
is the year of birth.
[8] Lusto. A02001:80/m17, 83/m22, 119/m21, 122/m19, 134/m21,
144/m20, 158/m45, 163/m43, 213/m45, 224/m23. Only two informants
mentioned the girls as forest students without being asked, though
very neutrally. 70/m36, 126/m15.
[9] Lusto. A02001:5/m18, 10/m37, 24/m44, 25/m43, 67/m45,
69/m37, 86/m39, 116/m14, 161/m46, 172/m46, 174/m43, 182/m41, 206/m21,
225/m24.
[10] Lusto. A02001:68/m34, 107/m47, 113/m42.
[11] Lusto. A02001: 16/f46, 20/f23, 38/f22, 49/f43, 66/f21,
105/f14, 203/f47.
[12] Lusto. A02001: 4/f38, 11/f21, 16/f46, 49/f43, 66/f21,
228/f40.
[13] Lusto. A02001: 11/f21, 38/f22, 66/f21, 105/f14.
[14] Lusto. A02001:49/f43, 105/f14.
[15] Lusto. A02001:see 16/f46.
[16] Lusto. V94012/H31:23.
[17] Lusto. A02001:225/m24.
[18] Lusto. For example V95013/H11:12, 18; V04032/H22:60,
103; V95004/H23:75; V04031/H27; V94012/H32:72; V04003/H36:488.
According to Anja Petersen (1999, pp. 140–141) it is interesting
how photographs are considered objective but analysing them is
seen as very subjective. Photographs should also be analysed on
different levels, not only considering what a picture concretely
denotes, but what it connotes on a symbolic level.
[19] Lusto. V04032/H22: for example 77–80, 83–84, 88, 97.
[20] Lusto. V04032/H22:74.
[21] Brandth & Haugen 2000, p. 345; about homosociality
and brotherhood, see also Kuosmanen 2001, pp. 41–43.
[22] Lusto. A02001:4/f38, 11/f21.
[23] Portelli 1998, pp. 68–69.
[24] As Seija Ulkuniemi (2005, p. 105) has shown, snapshots
concentrate on special events and experiences. They do not portray
everyday life as it really is, but as it is wished to be.
[25] Lusto. For example V94012/H32. The photographs taken
at Hyytiälä were later copied, organised and subtitled in an album
for all course members.
[26] Garnert 1993, p. 29.
|