Reflection on the Analysis

68

because it represents a kind of stumbling block or a basis for political inaction in relation to fishery management reform.

Although it is not surprising that fishery is an important industry in The Faroes – considering its geographical location and its relatively lucrative fishing banks – a pervasive cultural preference for fishery compared with other activity may be inopportune, because it influences politics in a way, which on some occasions is detrimental to the industry itself and to Faroese society as a whole. For example, the impact of the epic fishery discourse on politics may take the form of political action, which seeks to preserve the short term interests of ailing businesses, while ignoring the long term wellbeing of the Faroese economy. It may also take the form of a general disregard for scientific advice on fishery itself given the background of an unswerving loyalty to the prevailing attitudes in the fishing community, and a consequent political inaction with regard to potential reform. Add to this that the Faroese economy is small and vulnerable, as demonstrated by the crisis in the early 1990s, and that several North Atlantic fish stocks have been threatened by overfishing over the past few decades (FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department, 2012), and the situation is such that an exaggeration of the value of fishery, and the over reliance on this particular industry may have serious implications in the future. This is not to say, for example, that providing subsidies or other types of support to the fishing industry is never a good decision, or that listening to and acting on scientific or academic advice is always the right thing to do. The aim here is to inject a dose of ambivalence into the fishery management debate, so that authorities would be more wary of making decisions, which seem to be based purely on a historical and cultural penchant towards a particular industry.

69

genealogy of history, seemed most conducive to an examination of the Faroese fishery experience. The choice of theory meant that the empirical data used in the thesis was a combination of texts and images, which demonstrated both the historical and contemporary experience of fishery in The Faroes. Since the discourse in focus concerned an epic dimension of fishery, a particular emphasis was put on illustrating the emergence and contemporary existence of what can be called the epic fishery discourse. A deliberate attempt was made to make use of a wide variety of signification, so as to demonstrate the representativeness of the alleged experience. It is important to note that genealogical analysis is not comprehensive, but highly selective in relation to empirical material. It consciously prioritizes certain events and significations, which may not have been given particular importance in conventional historical analysis. Therefore, this thesis should neither be viewed as objective nor as neutral.

It is not an attempt to locate objective truths about Faroese fishery. It is undeniably subject to prior knowledge, experiences and perceptions of its author. In this context it is worth noting that an alternative analysis could have highlighted the way fishery is experienced and articulated, for example, by economists or other academics. Such an analysis of “expert”

knowledge would be relevant, because, as Foucault says, the point is not that “everything is bad, but that everything is dangerous [...]. If everything is dangerous, then we always have something to do” (Foucault, 1984c, p. 343). In other words, one should always look to unsettle modes of thinking which are dominant and taken-for-granted. Economic science, may, depending on the problematic, also be viewed as a dominant way of thinking, and should in that case be subjected to analytical scrutiny.

The analysis divided the Faroese fishery experience into three different themes:

household fishery, commercial fishery and epic fishery. Such a fragmentation of the fishery experience allowed a perspective, where fishery is seen as having been experienced in a variety of ways in Faroese history. For example, the often proclaimed truth that The Faroes is a fishery society, would certainly not have been regarded as true prior to the 19^th century. The overall historical fishery experience was thus presented as a fragmented phenomenon, and the contemporary fishery experience was seen as a temporary stage in an unceasing chain of developments. The analysis also revealed that different rationales are more observable at certain points in time. For example, a commercial experience of fishery in the late 19^th century leads to an increased microeconomic logic (cf. chapter 5.1.2), but the commercial dimension coupled with the danger of fishery seems to give rise to an intensified experience

70

of fishery as epic in the 20^th century (cf. chapter 5.1.3). The relationship between different experiences is noticeable, as the perception of the heroism and self sacrifice of skippers and fishermen is also linked with their apparent economic success.

The analysis was intended as a history of contemporary Faroese fishery, and it revealed that the way in which fishery is experienced and discursively represented in the present is not a natural and linear progression towards the attainment of essential Faroese values, but has been formed through a somewhat erratic and discontinuous history. The critical element of the analysis lies in its capacity to show, that the dominant mode of thinking about fishery in the present is not an inevitable and natural “end product” of Faroese fishery history, and that the asceticism associated with fishery as an activity is the result of a series of interpretations and recycling of past experience. This interpretation and recycling of the past gives an impression of a continuous and predestined path on which Faroese society progresses. However, by employing an analytical gaze, where the materialization of that impression takes the form of an epic fishery discourse – made possible through a coincidental convergence of a variety of historical elements – it is possible to unsettle the conventional

“truth” that The Faroes is an inherent “fishery society” and that its inhabitants are, in essence,

“fisherfolk”. The Faroese are not natural fisherfolk, as the proverb on the first page of this thesis seems to indicate. For instance, the inferior technology mentioned by the Løgting in the 17^th century (cf. chapter 5.1.1), the Faroese opposition to the attempts by Ryberg to introduce new fishing methods and equipment in the late 18^th century (cf. chapter 3.2.2), and Pløyen’s 1840 assessment that the Faroese were vastly behind their neighbours with regard to fishery (cf. chapter 5.1.2) suggests that methods and equipment had to be imported before it was possible to establish a successful fishery in The Faroes. Therefore, the experience of fishery in The Faroes was not, and is not, a discovery or rediscovery of “Faroeseness”; such as it is suggested on an almost daily basis in contemporary Faroese public and political life (cf.

chapter 5.1.5). The Faroes adopted fishery and made it its own. It is therefore far from a representation of Faroese values, but is undeniably foreign and other (cf. chapter 2.1). It has, as Foucault would say, been “fabricated in a piecemeal fashion from alien forms” (Foucault, 1984b, p. 78).

Following on from the exposition of a discursive problem, the analysis also made a connection – or at least argued for the plausibility of a connection – between the epic fishery discourse, and the way in which politics are carried out in The Faroes. In doing so, it went

71

from an examination of an ideational problem to an examination of some of the hands on political actions and inactions deemed to be a result of that ideational problem (cf. chapter 5.2.2). It is in the combination between an exposure of the discursive problem of the epic fishery discourse and the practical consequences of that discourse, where this thesis engages directly with its primary objective: to supersede a dominant way of thinking about fishery in The Faroes. However, it is also with regard to that combination, where the thesis’ limitations are most evident, since a case for the causal relationship between ideas and actions are epistemologically tricky. Nevertheless, the preceding chapter on political implications was an endeavour to do just that.

Another issue with the analysis, which may be regarded as a limitation or inadequacy, is its rather paradoxical relationship with conventional Faroese history. Although it seeks to distance itself from mainstream historical perspectives by generating a counter-memory, it is simultaneously reliant on the very history it seeks to distinguish itself from. The

“effect” of mainstream history on the analysis is alleviated by the attempt to avoid retrospective analysis and to investigate primary sources in their own context. Or, in Foucault’s words, to “maintain [them] in their proper dispersion” (Foucault, 1984b, p. 80).

In short, the conclusion of the analysis is that contemporary Faroese politics is often characterized by an epic experience of fishery, formed through a coincidental confluence of events in Faroese history, which imposes itself on the way fishery and Faroese society are perceived, and on the way politics are performed. Although qualitative studies have been conducted on Faroese society, where the experience of fishery has been described in passing (Gaini, 2011; Wylie, 1982, 1987), there has, to my knowledge, been no examination of the connection between Faroese fishery culture and fishery politics. This thesis has sought to remedy the analytical deficiency of that connection. Although the analysis and conclusion may be relevant for the specific issue of Faroese fishery and politics, a pertinent question is whether it says anything useful in a wider context of cultural and social studies. It would be wrong to assume that The Faroes is the only society in which cultural and historical associations play an important role in politics. Therefore, this analysis can be taken as an example of how a society recycles and interprets its past to such a degree that it comes to play an active role in that society’s political domain. It is through an increased awareness of such a historical and cultural dimension that its detrimental effects on political actions may be

72

mitigated. The following chapter sums up the principal conclusions of this thesis, and will respond to the questions set out in the problem formulation (cf. chapter 1.3).

73