244 Humanitarian, hospitable and generous: Turkish Public Diplomacy’s ‘story’ [...]
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 15, n. 2, 2020, p. 238-263
Identities are enacted
5
by linguistic resources and by “repertoires of action”
(Aradau et al 2015, 4), or practices: “embodied, materially mediated arrays of
human activity centrally organized around shared practical understanding”
(Schatzki in Aradau et al. 2015a, 3). Meanings do not emerge from an inherent
relationship between an object and the word used to make reference to it, or
between the signified and signifier, “but from a contingent relationship between
the signifiers” (Epstein 2008, 7). Signifiers form linguistic chains, which refer to
other signifying chains (Stavrakakis 1999, 57). The infinite possible combinations
of signifiers mean that, in principle, an infinite number of significations can be
produced. However, political and societal actors attempt to fix the meaning of
signifying chains through nodal points: words, terms or phrases that attempt to
fasten groups of words together into meaningful narratives (Laclau and Mouffe
2001, 112). The potential never-ending flow of signification can, thus, be arrested
and partial fixity and stability of meanings can be achieved through nodal points.
The linguistic and the material are mutually constituted: materiality acquires
meaning through language; language has material effects, since “what is said about
[objects] is intimately tied to what is done with them” (Epstein 2008, 5); and
material practices are also “loci where meanings are produced” (Epstein 2008, 5).
Through linguistic and non-linguistic practices “meanings are produced, identities
constituted, social relations established, and political and ethical outcomes made
more or less possible” (Campbell 2013, 234, 235). In other words, these practices,
both linguistic and non-linguistic, define and constitute subjects, objects and the
relations between them; and normalize certain ways of being and certain courses
of action (Epstein 2008; Milliken 1999).
In the next section, we will provide an overview of the many institutions
engaged in public diplomatic activities in Turkey, in order to identify the material
5 In this article we prefer to say that identities are “enacted”, instead of “constructed” or “performed”, following
the suggestion of authors working on Actor-Network Theory. The term has the double connotation of both
putting something into action, as in “enacting a law”, and of performing something, as in a play or story. This
suggestion is offered as an alternative to both “construction” and “performance”, two of the most widely used
terms for implying that the entity being constructed or performed is contingent and not natural (Magalhães
2018). One of the criticisms to which “construction” is subjected is that, while the term tries to convey such
contingency, its use risks implying that the “construction” is supervised by an “architect”, whose existence is
previous to the construction actively acting for its concretization (Ibid., 114). “Construction” also implies that
there is a process that by its end the entity being constructed “becomes”. If states and other entities are always
in a process of “becoming” (Campbell 1992, 56), identities can never be finished. If such process actually had
an end, if constructions actually reached a conclusion, such that no more enacting was necessary, it would
mean the existence of a pre-discursive realm. However, the lack of pre-discursive foundations is precisely the
reason why states need to — and do — constantly and infinitely enact their identities (Ibid., 11).