Boundaries and Border Work: Where Inside and Outside Worlds Meet
Like any open system operating in a turbulent environment, the Holmes County Settlement is a community that is unavoidably influenced by outside forces, but it is a system trying to maintain closure at its boundaries to ensure predictability, smooth operation, and cultural integrity.3 However, the boundaries involved in Amish social and cultural life are not simple. The boundaries that separate Amish and English communities, for example, are not like the single borderlines that appear on a map. As table 8.1 shows, there are several types of boundaries because there are multiple domains that separate communities, and the permeability of boundaries may vary with the domain.
For example, the boundary with respect to automobiles is very clear and distinct, whereas the boundary that relates to certain technologies and to birthing techniques is more porous and much fuzzier. Some boundaries may be continuously impermeable, that is, set and fixed over time, while others may be malleable and become more or less porous over time. To avoid the military draft during the Civil War and maintain their posture of nonresistance, for example, Holmes County Amish almost always paid an exemption fee or occasionally even found substitutes to serve in the army for them.4 The continuing impermeability of that boundary is reflected currently in the National Amish Steering Committee’s discussion of plans for alternative service in case the draft is reinstated.
Different types of boundaries may also vary in their significance for different affiliations, church districts, and individuals. In addition, some boundaries are more often the sites of controversy or turf battles than others, again suggesting that they vary in their degree of permeability. While some boundaries are defined primarily by external factors (for example, laws regarding safety), others are created more by internal decisions (for example, adoption of technology).
The boundaries within the Holmes County Settlement also vary in strength and in the degree to which they separate groups from each other. The boundary distinguishing the Swartzentruber Amish from other Amish is especially strong and distinctive, while that separating the Old and New Orders appears to be becoming weaker. The separation between the Beachy Amish (a liberal group whom many do not really consider Amish) and the English is smaller, because the Beachy Amish drive cars. In sum, the boundaries that impinge upon Amish life are numerous and vary in their complexity and constancy.
Table 8.1. Dimensions of boundaries that shape Amish diversity
* * *
Type: Economic, Educational, Religious, Kinship, Political
Permeability: Impermeable, Semipermeable, Porous
Location: Between Amish affiliations, Between Amish and Ex-Amish, Between Amish and English
* * *
The roads traveled across Amish-English boundaries are, more often than not, viewed as if they were one-way streets, with modern and other pressures from the English world imposing themselves on the Amish community, pushing it to adapt. The contacts may involve government-mandated safety requirements, licensing by the mainstream medical establishment, or contract requirements in economic exchanges. This image reflects the dominant view of the modern (for example, as in law or technology) as re-shaping or dissolving the traditional, or tradition collapsing in the face of a more powerful and relentless modernity. Tradition and modernity are seen as antagonistic and mutually exclusive. But this perspective is too simplistic.
The path between modernity and tradition, the English and the Amish communities, goes both ways; it is a two-way rather than a one-way street. When traditions are redefined or negotiations take place with modernity, tradition becomes an amalgamation of the old and the new, and the modern is mixed with traditional elements. In other words, the diffusion of ideas and artifacts works in both directions. We tend to think of modern technology, for example, as a Trojan horse that will undermine traditional Amish culture and identity. But conversely, as more Amish enter modern workshops or become employees in modern factories, it may be that they will re-shape these settings, revamping and reinvigorating traditional values and ways of working within them. The very attractiveness of some aspects of the Amish lifestyle to outsiders suggests that Amish ways of living and working can influence the English.
The Amish may be a “reverse Trojan horse” for many modern institutions, helping to inspire change within them. In some cases, Amish employers may only have “weak” ties with other groups, as when an Amish businessman visited the Kentucky Toyota plant to see how the Japanese operation works. The contacts between them may be infrequent, superficial, and impersonal, as one would find between mere acquaintances rather than between close friends. Nevertheless, these weak ties affect Amish business structures and work arrangements, arrangements that Amish workers, in turn, can then carry along into their jobs in English companies. These workers then become social carriers of new ideas. “When a man changes jobs, he is not only moving from one network of ties to another, but also establishing a link between these.”5
In addition to the workplace, education is an arena in which amalgamation of ideas and structures between English and Amish cultures has occurred. Each community often has something the other needs or wants. Because of the nature of school funding in the English community, rural public schools have sometimes catered to Amish needs so that their enrollments can remain high enough to receive adequate funding. Since the Amish tradition requires that students go to school through the eighth grade, some local elementary public schools have added on seventh- and eighth-grade “attached classrooms” to allow Amish children to finish out their schooling. In this case, a modern English institution has been dependent upon the more traditional Amish, but both sides have benefited from the arrangement. The site of this negotiated settlement can be seen as a border terrain where representatives of both cultures temporarily meet and conflicts between them are worked out.
In health care as well, there have been mixtures of Amish and English elements to accommodate the needs of Amish patients. Birthing centers provide a clear example of the attempt to blend traditional and more mainstream medical approaches into an effective health care delivery system. While some centers balance the two components more evenly than others, each of those in the Holmes County Settlement contains some proportion of mainstream and traditional elements. Not surprisingly, those that are viewed more positively by the English medical establishment are more likely to have medical doctors and nurses on their staffs and have close ties to local hospitals. The more traditional birthing centers are more likely to be directed and operated by professional or lay midwives, or both, and have weaker ties to hospitals and physicians.
In the political realm, the ties between the Amish and English communities tend to be one-sided, with the Amish generally reacting to legal requirements imposed upon them by local, state, and national governments. But even here, negotiation between the parties often occurs and compromise results. That is, the connection is usually not a reciprocal, voluntary, or frequent one, and thus it is consistent with the broadly held Amish belief that a minimalist and nonintrusive government is best.
As in other Amish communities, citizens of the Holmes County Settlement do not get heavily involved with governmental matters, regardless of their church affiliation. A study of Amish voting patterns in the 2004 presidential election revealed that while 43 percent were registered to vote, only about 13 percent of Amish adults in Holmes County voted. Most endorsed George W. Bush, whose conservative views appeared to be more consistent with Amish values. The low rate of voting among the Amish is linked to their belief in keeping the spiritual and material “kingdoms” separate.
The low rates of voting among Americans in general have been cited by critics as a sign of weakness in our civil society.6 The fact that most Amish do not vote could easily be construed to mean that they are contributing to weakness in our civil society by not exercising their duty to vote. But in contrast to many English citizens who do not vote, the Amish community and its leaders do tend to
get involved in legal matters that have a direct bearing on their culture and lifestyle. Public issues like zoning, safety, and hunting, for example, have drawn Amish voters into the political arena. Their selective involvement suggests that most Amish feel that they can make a difference when it counts.
The desire to remain separate by minimal political involvement in government extends to social relationships with outsiders as well. To measure the extent to which Amish social capital involves outsiders, we asked our survey respondents about the “social distance” they felt with respect to English people and also to racial and ethnic minorities in our society. Only a minority of the Amish individuals in our study spent at least half their time each week with English individuals, but this result varied by order. Of the New Order participants, 41 percent said that they had this much contact with the English, compared to only 21 percent of the Old Order members in our sample. Given the differences in lifestyles and language abilities between these groups, this finding was not very surprising. Moreover, many of these social connections are due to work activities and requirements.
However, very few in any church affiliation had many close relationships with English persons. Only about 10 percent said that one-third of their close relationships were with English individuals. When it comes to their children’s contacts with English children, most Amish parents say it would be okay to play at an English child’s house but not to have a “sleepover” there. While it may seem counterintuitive, it is especially New Order respondents in our study who appear to be hesitant for their children to cultivate close friendships with English children. However, this position is consistent with that group’s deep personal conviction that they need to be directly involved in cultivating their children, as reflected in their greater tendency to homeschool their children.
The wish to remain separate or to establish only superficial or business relationships with outsiders is even greater when racial and ethnic minorities are considered. A 2007 Gallup Poll found that 77 percent of Americans felt that marriages between blacks and whites were okay.7 In contrast and regardless of affiliation, nine out of ten Amish respondents in our survey said they would not admit a black, Hispanic, or Native American person into their families by marriage. A slightly smaller majority of all affiliations also responded that they would not accept these individuals into their social circles. The differences between the Amish and Americans in general might suggest that the Amish are more prejudiced, but this contrast should be interpreted very carefully, because the principal reason appears to lie elsewhere. A prominent local Amish leader told us that admission of outsiders into Amish families, regardless of their race, would be more likely if “they embraced the Amish faith.” In other words, it is more likely the case that the Amish participants in our survey are responding to a desire for their children to marry others of their faith and tradition than that they simply desire to keep individuals of another race out of their families. A comment by one of our respondents further clarifies their position: “In our church fellowship there is an older girl who has adopted an African American boy. If he would grow up and be a faithful member of our church, I would feel he would be eligible to marry my daughter. Now if a Black would come from the outside and want to marry our daughter I would probably be against it. This would go for Hispanics or American Indians [too]. In our area I know of an Amish [who] married [a] Hispanic. My desire would be to see my children marrying faithful Christians in our church fellowship.”
This argument indicates that the boundary defining kinship between insiders and outsiders is at least semipermeable. The responses also reflect a desire to keep intimate contact with the English world under control and to maintain an attitude of self-effacement and humility. On numerous occasions during our interviews with Amish men and women, respondents would comment offhandedly that they were “no better than anyone else” or that “they’re human like everyone else,” or that “they’ve got problems like everybody.” Our survey showed that most would accept blacks, Hispanics, and Native Americans as neighbors and as partners at work. The roads along which Amish-English border clashes occur constitute “bridges” that connect the world outside with the world inside the Amish community. Each bridge is a “weak” tie or narrow road along which travel ideas and artifacts between the two worlds.8 The road is often narrow or weak because the contacts between representatives of the two cultures are generally one-dimensional, limited in time, and not intimate in nature. It is along these border roads that contradictory pressures surface.
Terrains of Tension on the Border
Regardless of whether or not specific affiliations within the Amish community change or do not change in reaction to these pressures, the intersection of external and internal forces creates dilemmas for the persons who are affected. We call these dilemmas “terrains of tension.” Three of the main areas of tension involve (a) conflicts between a community’s cultural values and an individual’s material interests, (b) control over the behavior of the individual by the community’s structure versus control by the individual as the agent of his or her own actions, and (c) the security provided by the community versus the freedom desired by the individual.
As figure 8.1 suggests, because these dilemmas may call forth different responses by individuals, they encourage the development of multiple interpretations of tradition and corresponding variations in behavior. The ultimate result is a dynamic and diverse community.
In the first instance, a delicate dance takes place when the values of the community confront the interests of the individual. The potentially divisive effects of economic inequality and the occasional tense relationship between the individual and the community are tempered by rules that are designed to keep the individual in check. There are clear expectations about behavior and attitudes enunciated by church Ordnung and enforced by church leaders. To borrow a phrase from the social scientist Erving Goffman, the institution of the church creates a “mortification of the self” with the goal of producing a kind of individual who is respectful and hardworking and who humbles himself or herself before the community.9 In the Amish crucible, individuals “make do” to adjust to pressures and difficulties. Some adjust well to the personal difficulties, while others may withdraw (for example, leave the Amish), rebel (i.e., create schisms), or negotiate or reinterpret their situation in a way that allows them to see it as acceptable or favorable (for example, interpreting some new technologies as consistent with traditional values).
Fig. 8.1. Causes of diversity and change in Amish communities. Different kinds of boundaries with varying permeability and significance separate Amish and English society as well as Amish affiliations from each other. When these different groups come into contact because of the operation of external and internal forces, tensions can arise and border work has to be carried out to address these dilemmas. Courtesy of David McConnell.
The notion that the relationship between the Amish individual self and his or her community is, by definition, harmful, however, is misleading. Self and community are “twin born”; each grows and maintains its integrity by its connection to the other. Like others, Amish individuals gain their identities and selfhoods by their interaction with others, including those in the English community. To a large extent, who they are depends on how others have acted toward the Amish historically. The Martyrs’ Mirror surveys a large part of that history. The lengthy text recalls the stories and final testimonies of Christians, largely Anabaptists, who lived during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries in Europe and who suffered and were martyred for their faith. The book also recounts the deaths of earlier Christians, including the first apostles. As part of their past, that history is also a part of who the Amish are; it is part of their identity.
Personalities are shaped when individuals are tested by outside pressures. That is, the self develops through the community; one’s relationship to the community helps define who one is as an individual. Within an Amish church, the Ordnung suggests how success
ful individuals are to define their wealth and dispose of it in ways that make the use of “personal” wealth less selfish. In so doing, the church helps to shape who these individuals become. The conflicts and pressures imposed on individuals steel them and help them to grow. Within the Amish community, the interface of the individual and the community has been a locus for both constancy and change.
There has been a long-standing debate among social thinkers about the relative importance of values versus interests as motivations for decisions on how to behave. Like many either-or dichotomies, this one fails to accurately reflect the complexity of concrete decision-making. The Amish are practical and grounded, but also idealistic and traditional. Consequently, decisions on how to proceed with economic or other alternatives are informed by a mixture of cultural-religious (often communal) values and material (often individual) interests. Although values and interests can be compatible and serve each other, they can also be at odds, as in cases where adherence to a community’s values does not serve an individual’s immediate economic interests. The controversy over whether or not to accept unemployment compensation is one illustration of this dilemma. This is one terrain upon which external and internal forces collide.
The point on the continuum where the weight tips more heavily toward values or interests as a motivating force depends in part on the nature of the decision being considered. In some cases of economic exigency, interests may be more important in making a decision than in decisions involving, for example, school curricula or types of family vacations. In most cases, however, decisions incorporate a blend of motivations based on values and interests. For example, in trying to adapt to outside economic pressures, Amish farmers and manufacturers in the Holmes County Settlement have formed cooperative organizations among themselves to compete successfully with non-Amish groups. Amish values clearly encourage cooperation among their own Amish brothers and sisters, while Amish interests invite the cooperation so that they can compete effectively.
An Amish Paradox Page 32