Fi y yea s esea ching Roma:
In e iew wi h Will Guy
Ma ek Jakoubek— Lenka J.Budilo á
WILL GUY — Ma ek Jakoubek — Lenka J.Budilo á
Will Guy, B.A. PhD (b. 29.11.1940 in London) is aResea ch Fellow in he School o So-
ciology, Poli ics and In e na ional S udies (SPAIS) and pa o he Cen e o he S udy
o E hnici y and Ci izenship a he Uni e si y o B is ol, UK, whe e he augh in he
ields o esea ch me hods, social an h opology, di e si y and ci izenship in Eu ope
and o Roma. A e li ing and wo king in Czechoslo akia du ing he la e hal o he
1960s he comple ed aPhD in he 1970s on he Communis egime’s a emp o assim-
ila e Czechoslo akia’s Roma mino i y. This in ol ed analysis o go e nmen policy
documen s as well as ex ensi e ield wo k, li ing in seg ega ed Romani se lemen s
in Slo akia and also among Roma mig an s in he ci ies o he Czech lands. A his
ime he was wo king oge he wi h he Gypsy-Rom Associa ion in he Czech Lands
and accompanied hei delega ion as in e p e e o he i s Wo ld Romani Cong ess,
held nea London in 1971.
Since hen he has con inued o make egula esea ch ips o Eas -Cen al Eu ope
and he Balkans and has published widely, mainly on Roma, edi ing in 2001 acom-
p ehensi e olume on he si ua ion o Roma in hese egions and co-edi ing in 2004
as udy o Roma mig a ion o he E hnological Ins i u e o he Czech Academy o Sci-
ences. As well as academic esea ch he has ca ied ou Roma- ela ed in es iga ions
o a ious in e na ional NGOs and also o he Eu opean Commission, e alua ing
EU- unded Roma p og ammes in he Czech Republic, Slo akia, Hunga y, Bulga ia,
Spain and C oa ia. He is amembe o he edi o ial boa d o he E hnici ies jou nal and
o he edi o ial boa d o Český lid.
How did you come o be in Czechoslo akia in he 1960s?
My a i al in Czechoslo akia in ea ly 1966 a he age o wen y- i e had no hing o do
wi h Roma. A ha ime he Czechoslo ak go e nmen was seeking o mode nise he
economy and had ecen ly bough some compu e s om he UK. The B i ish manu-
ac u e , o which Iwas wo king as asys ems analys , p oposed o send me a sho
no ice o he No h Mo a ian ci y o Os a a as on-si e suppo . Iwas gi en he week-
end o make adecision and impulsi ely accep ed he o e .
The e was no ime o do any esea ch in hose p e-Google days, so Iwen o he
Czechoslo ak a el agency (Čedok) in London and asked i hey had any ou is b o-
chu es o Os a a. The young man behind he desk paused o a ew momen s, hen
summoned his colleagues om he back o ice o join him be o e asking me o epea
OPEN
ACCESS
148 STUDIA ETHNOLOGICA PRAGENSIA 1/2018
my ques ion. When Idid, hey all bu s ou laughing. Ila e lea n ha his hea y
indus ial cen e, wi h i s s eelwo ks, coal mines, chemical wo ks and slag heaps,
was he mos pollu ed ci y in Czechoslo akia— ha dly a ou is des ina ion. My ole
he e would be o gi e ad ice o wo o he la ges s eelwo ks in Eu ope— he No á
hu ’ Klemen a Go walda and he Ví ko ické železá ny.
Why did you decide o ca y ou esea ch in Czechoslo akia in he 1970s? How did you cope
wi h he Czech language?
E en ually Ispen h ee and ahal yea s a my compu e job in Os a a, P ague and
hen B no, wo king wi h Czechs and g adually lea ning hei language. My i s
Czech boss had alsely assu ed my company ha he unde s ood English bu he e-
used o use any o his subo dina es as in e p e e s. This made e ec i e communica-
ion be ween us almos impossible bu o una ely some o he s spoke F ench, Ge -
man o English. In he mean ime Is udied my poli ically app o ed Czech g amma
book and deligh ed my wo kma es by declaiming examples om i , such as: ‘Čes
p áce, soud uzi! Ten o měsíc musíme přek oči ý obní no my’ (Hail wo k, com-
ades! This mon h we mus exceed he p oduc ion no ms’). Taking my cue om his,
Ibough aMao Tse-Tung sui and, equipped wi h he li le ed book o his quo a ions
and wea ing abadge om he Chinese es au an in P ague, appoin ed mysel poli i-
cal commissa o ou depa men .
These we e he umul uous yea s o g adual libe alisa ion, he P ague Sp ing and
he Wa saw Pac in asion, ollowed by he s ifling a e ma h o ‘no malisa ion’. Du -
ing his pe iod Isha ed my Czech iends’ deep emo ions o exhila a ion, pain and
subsequen disillusion. My deepening in ol emen wi h hese e en s led me o gi e
up my well-paid compu e job and use my sa ings o s udy o aPhD, d awing on my
expe ience in Czechoslo akia o a hesis. My ini ial idea was p omp ed by he oc-
casion when an Os a a mine iend had asked me o in e p e o a isi ing g oup
o Sco ish mine s. The Sco s— om he hen s aunchly Communis a ea o Fi e—
belie ed hey we e coming o asocialis p omised land, while he Czechs, o he con-
a y, we e eage o hea o li e in aconsume pa adise. These o ally con adic o y
pe cep ions did no make my in e p e e ’s ole an easy one.
Soon a e wa ds, Icame ac oss Clébe ’s s udy The Gypsies whe e I ead: ‘Czecho-
slo akia seems in ac o be he i s coun y o sol e his delica e p oblem o [Gypsy]
in eg a ion in acco dance wi h humane s anda ds’.1 I hen ecalled he da k-skinned
labou e s Ihad seen in Os a a and aCzech colleague’s sa cas ic e m o hem—
‘uzení Slo áci’ (smoked Slo aks). This immedia ely sugges ed an en i ely di e en
esea ch opic.
When you we e ca ying ou you esea ch in Czechoslo akia, did you ge in o con ac wi h
any Czech schola s in ol ed in s udying Roma? Who we e hey and how did you coope a e
wi h hem?
Du ing my las six mon hs as asys ems analys Is ole as much ime as Icould away
om wo k o sea ch in bookshops o any books abou Roma. One o he mos im-
1 Clébe , J.-P. (1967) The Gypsies, Ha mondswo h: Penguin, 255.
OPEN
ACCESS
WILL GUY — MAREK JAKOUBEK — LENKA J.BUDILO Á 149
po an was E a Da ido á’s Bez kolíb ašia o . Meanwhile E a had hea d o as ange
Englishman seeking in o ma ion on he own opic. When we e en ually me we had
so much in common ha we en husias ically ag eed o collabo a e. Wi h he encou -
agemen , an an h opology p o esso p o ided ale e legi ima ing my esea ch ha
enabled me o ob ain as udy isa.
Now wo king wi h E a, his allowed us access o he Minis y o Labou and Social
A ai s whe e she and Iwe e in i ed o help ou sel es om heaps o documen s abou
Roma policy. Unde s andably I el e y app ehensi e walking pas he a med gua d
a he doo o he minis y building wi h abag ul o documen s, some o which we e
s amped ‘jen p o úřední po řebu’ ( o o icial use only) o ‘přísnĕ ajné’ (s ic ly sec e ).
Du ing he pe iod o my PhD esea ch Ime wi h he inspi ing Milena Hüb-
schmanno á and a ellow pos -g adua e s uden Tomáš Haišman, who hen wen on
o be a esea che a he E hnog aphic Ins i u e in P ague be o e becoming an o i-
cial in he Minis y o he In e io . Also, be o e s a ing my s udies in 1969, Ibecame
iendly wi h Ka el Holomek, la e P esiden o he Mo a ian Roma Associa ion. Bu
in he ea ly yea s my main con ac s we e o icials in ol ed wi h Roma policy a he
han academics. Much la e Ime many Czech and Slo ak academics, especially
Zdeněk Uhe ek and Rena a Weine o á wi h whom Iedi ed abook on Roma mig a-
ion, as well as Jiřina Šiklo á, Anna Ju o á and o he s.
Did Czechoslo ak au ho i ies limi you esea ch o publica ion ac i i ies in any way? Did
hey ollow you ac i i ies o con ac s?
F om 1958 onwa ds he o icial policy goal had been o assimila e Roma on he g ounds
ha hey we e insu icien ly de eloped o o m ana ionali y. Unlike Czechs and Slo-
aks, Roma we e deemed no o possess any cul u e wo h p ese ing. A1959 go e n-
men handbook o local au ho i ies a gued ha ‘all measu es which e i e gypsy na-
ional [sic] consciousness … p ese e he p esen isola ion and sepa a ion o gypsies
… and help conse e he old, p imi i e gypsy way o li e wi h all i s bad habi s’.2 The
plan was he e o e o dispe se he Roma popula ion bu his was us a ed by he mi-
g a ion o many Roma om Slo akia o o m new concen a ions in Czech indus ial
a eas and ci ies. Like mig an wo ke s elsewhe e, hei aim was simply o ob ain be -
e paid wo k han was a ailable in hei u al home a eas.
F om he documen s we had ob ained om he minis y, E a and Ilea n ha
Czech local au ho i ies had inc easingly denied esidence pe mi s o hese Roma
newcome s, making hem illegal squa e s. Howe e , as a1967 o icial epo poin ed
ou , he illegali y was on he pa o local au ho i ies since hei e usal o egis e
Roma was aclea b each o ci izens’ cons i u ional igh s. Ye , in ac ing in his way,
local au ho i ies we e only ollowing go e nmen guidelines.
Iwas soon made awa e o he p oblem o ying o publish such sensi i e ma e-
ial. In he mean ime Ihad me he head o he Na ional S a is ical O ice ha was
p oducing epo s on he Roma popula ion. He in i ed me o w i e agues a icle o
2 Czechoslo ak Go e nmen (1959) P áce mezi cikánským oby a els em (Wo k among he
gypsy popula ion), Edice časopisu Ná odní ýbo y (Handbook o local au ho i ies),
P ague: Úřad předsednic a lády, 28.
OPEN
ACCESS
150 STUDIA ETHNOLOGICA PRAGENSIA 1/2018
hei jou nal Demog a ie bu e u ned my con ibu ion, eg e ully in o ming me ha
i was comple ely unpublishable due o my o h igh c i icism o go e nmen policy.
A he ime E a was wo king on a echnical epo abou Roma mig a ion o
Os a a o he Resea ch Ins i u e o Cons uc ion and A chi ec u e. This 300-page
documen was o be duplica ed on poo quali y pape and seemed o us asui able,
low-p o ile ou le . The e o e Iw o e ac i ical sec ion, bu ied nea he end. The nex
s age was mo e isky when E a was in i ed o w i e an a icle o he UK jou nal Race
Today. We w o e his oge he ci ing E a’s Os a a epo as he al eady published
sou ce bu also men ioning he ele an go e nmen documen s. In an a emp o
mask ou c i icism we en i led he a icle Czechoslo akia Sol es i s Gypsy P oblem and
he ambiguous conclusion was ‘Czechoslo akia’s … expe ience can se e as an ex-
ample o o he s a es’.
To ou elie hese publica ions did no esul in any e ibu ion om he au ho i-
ies, al hough ou o he ac i i ies did a ac hei a en ion.
The ailu e o he dispe sal p og amme coincided wi h he poli ical libe alisa ion
o he P ague Sp ing, allowing he 1958 assimila ion campaign o be eassessed. In
a e e sal o p e ious policy, Roma ac i is s we e allowed o o m hei own social
and economic o ganisa ions and in 1971 adelega ion was pe mi ed o a el o he
i s Wo ld Roma Cong ess nea London. E a wen as a ounde membe o he Czech
Roma associa ion and Iaccompanied hem o assis wi h in e p e ing.
A ew mon hs la e Iwas su p ised o be in i ed o he Czechoslo ak Embassy
o he annual celeb a ion o he ounding o he epublic bu his was ollowed by
amo e wo ying in i a ion o ape sonal mee ing wi h an embassy o icial. E iden ly
he Roma delega es mus ha e p aised my help and epo ed me as a‘ iend o he
epublic’. Puzzlingly, Iwas no asked any ques ions abou my Roma esea ch bu
only abou my posi ion a he Uni e si y o B is ol and my con ac s he e. App e-
hensi e ha Iwas being e ed as apo en ial ‘sleepe ’, I ied o minimise my im-
po ance while appea ing coope a i e. Imus ha e succeeded because al hough we
pa ed wi h mu ual assu ances o keeping in ouch, o my elie Iwas no con ac ed
again— no in i ed o u he embassy celeb a ions. Much la e Ilea n ha he
embassy had indeed been engaged in ec ui ing UK uni e si y s a as po en ial ‘ el-
low a elle s’.
Howe e , su eillance was no en i ely one-sided. Yea s la e Iwas old by a iend
ha , in his in e iew o p omo ion o ahighe UK minis y ank, he was asked ques-
ions abou me.
F om E a’s Os a a s udy we lea n ha almos 57 pe cen o he cu en Roma
inhabi an s had been bo n in Eas e n Slo akia and, o hese, o e a hi d came om
he dis ic o Spišská No á Ves. Following a ip o check on po en ial ieldwo k loca-
ions, we e en ually chose wo adjacen illages and booked ooms in anea by cheap
ho el. The manage ess was e y iendly and a e a ew weeks con ided ha , much
o he annoyance, asec e policeman was pe iodically sea ching ou ooms. Ihad
wi h me acopy o Lenin’s The Righ o Na ions o Sel -De e mina ion and le his on my
bedside able. Howe e , he coun yside is asmall wo ld and he manage ess no only
knew he policeman’s amily bu also ha he was a aid o his domina ing mo he .
A h ea o epo o he his i i a ing isi s was enough o b ing hem o an end.
OPEN
ACCESS
WILL GUY — MAREK JAKOUBEK — LENKA J.BUDILO Á 151
O e ayea la e we lea n o u he su eillance. We had been in i ed o aRoma
wedding in aneighbou ing illage and he bus d i e who had con eyed ou pa y o
he dance hall became ipsy and complained ang ily o us ha he and his ellow d i -
e s we e ed up a ha ing o eco d all ou bus jou neys. I was aho summe ’s nigh
and all he gues s we e in shi slee es o ligh d esses. A his poin amys e ious Slo-
ak, d essed incong uously in adouble-b eas ed, bel ed aincoa , walked b iskly up
o us and asked my opinion o he a ac ions o he Slo ak coun yside. Sho ly be-
o e, some o he Roma had nodded in his di ec ion and apped he side o hei noses
o indica e he was some o m o spy. He ce ainly looked like an a che ypal cha ac e
om aB-mo ie. E en ually someone managed o d ag away he ineb ia ed bus d i e .
Sho ly a e wa ds Iwas summoned o he dis ic police headqua e s, os ensibly
because Ihad ailed o egis e my s ay in hei a ea. Iexplained Ihad done his in
P ague and hough his was su icien . A e aco ee and ye ano he con e sa ion
abou he beau i ul landscape o he egion, he o ice d opped he gua d and ep-
imanded me, saying i had been ‘inapp op ia e’ (ne hodný) o me o ha e bo owed
asui om aGypsy o a end he wedding. Imain ained his was necessa y since Idid
no possess asui bu ha , in any case, as a ep esen a i e o socialis Czechoslo a-
kia, she should be p oud ha Gypsies in he coun y had a ained such high li ing
s anda ds ha hey we e in aposi ion o lend ine sui s o isi o s om he capi alis
Wes . The young woman ga e me ale el, cold look and he subjec was d opped.
Al hough hese inciden s appea ed comical— and we ea ed hem as such— hey
we e also unse ling as we we e awa e ha in Communis Czechoslo akia poli ical
joking ca ied isks, as Milan Kunde a’s 1967 no el Že (The Joke) made all oo clea .
In 1969 an English colleague om my compu e company was a es ed and expelled
as an agen p o oca eu o igno ing aba ie a ap o es demons a ion in B no. He
had claimed ace iously ha he could no unde s and i s wa ning no ice in Czech.
Social science in Czechoslo akia had been la gely isola ed om he de elopmen s in he Wes
o se e al decades. Some disciplines, e.g. social an h opology, we e comple ely absen . How
did his a ec Czech (Slo ak) Roma s udies?
1969 was agood ime o s a esea ch on Roma. Se e al impo an books had ap-
pea ed sho ly be o e, including Clébe ’s 1967 s udy The Gypsies. Al hough social an-
h opology— as adis inc discipline— was no ecognised in Czechoslo akia a ha
ime, a ew yea s ea lie Emilie Ho á ho á had published he comp ehensi e his o -
ical s udy Cigáni na Slo ensku3 and o he his o ical s udies included Zdenka Jamnická-
Šme glo á’s Dĕjiny našich cikánů.4 Mo eo e , o he esea che s based hei w i ings
on e hnog aphic ieldwo k, such as E a Da ido á’s 1965 Bez kolíb ašia o 5 and a -
ious publica ions o Milena Hübschmanno á. Howe e , al hough an h opological-
ype co e age o Roma in Czechoslo akia was e y limi ed, much he same was ue
o he B i ish Isles whe e he oman icised iews o olklo is s we e p e alen .
3 Ho á ho á, E. (1964) Cigáni na Slo ensku, B a isla a: Vyda a eľs o Slo enskej akadémie
ied.
4 Jamnická-Šme glo á, Z. (1955) Dĕjiny našich cikánů, P aha: O bis.
5 Da ido á, E. (1965) Bez kolíb ašia o , Košice: Východoslo enské yda a eľs o.
OPEN
ACCESS

152 STUDIA ETHNOLOGICA PRAGENSIA 1/2018
In he 1960s he e was asu ge o in e es in esea ching Gypsies and T a elle s. In
England and Wales he go e nmen commissioned a esea ch s udy o T a elle s o
p o ide mo e insigh o imp o e policy in he a e ma h o he i s na ional census
o his popula ion in 19656 and he subsequen 1968 Ca a an Si es Ac . This e en ually
led o abook in 19757 and a ew yea s la e ano he by he p incipal esea che , he
an h opologis Judi h Okely.8 This was based on he ex ensi e ield wo k. In Sco land
asimila policy s udy was led by Hugh Gen leman9 and he i s Sco ish local au ho -
i y ca a an si e was es ablished in 1975. Meanwhile, in 1959 he I ish go e nmen
had es ablished aCommission on I ine ancy, which epo ed in 1963.10 This based
i s policy ecommenda ions on p ac ice in he Ne he lands, which was o assimila e
T a elle s by se ling hem in ixed dwellings. The p ac ice o o icials deciding wha
was in he T a elle s’ bes in e es s was e en ually eplaced by he T a elling People
Re iew Body (1981–83). This body included T a elle membe s and ad oca ed in eg a-
ion a he han assimila ion, wi h p o ision o se iced hal ing si es.11 A he same
ime Geo ge and Sha on Gmelch we e ca ying ou an h opological ield esea ch
wi h I ish T a elle s12.
Judi h Okely asse s ha i was you who in oduced he o F ed ik Ba h’s ‘E hnic G oups and
Bounda ies’. Wha was he impac o his publica ion on he s udy o Roma?
In 1971 Thomas Ac on con ened acon e ence a Ox o d o in e na ional schola s ca -
ying ou esea ch on Roma, Gypsies and T a elle s in a ious coun ies. He had been
wo king wi h he (English) Gypsy Council since 1967.13 Ap incipal issue was whe he
we we e s udying he same people since he cul u es o di e en g oups bea ing hese
and o he ela ed names appea ed qui e di e en . In pa icula , he p edominan pa -
e n in Wes e n Eu opean coun ies was o hese people o pu sue anomadic way o
li e, while in Eas e n Eu ope he as majo i y had long been se led. This dicho omy
aised ques ions abou whe he he e we e any de ining cha ac e is ics o Gypsies.
Some Wes e n Eu opean w i e s p oclaimed he ‘ ue Gypsy’ as nomadic, whe eas
se led Gypsies we e seen as debased. In spi e o acknowledging he di e ences in
6 Minis y o Housing and Local Go e nmen /Welsh O ice (1967) Gypsies and O he T a el-
le s, London: HMSO.
7 Adams, B., Okely, J., Mo gan, D. and Smi h, D. (1975) Gypsies and Go e nmen Policy in Eng-
land: AS udy o he T a elle s’ Way o Li e in Rela ion o he Policies and P ac ices o Cen al and
Local Go e nmen , London: Heinemann.
8 Okely, J. (1983) The T a elle -Gypsies, Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess.
9 Gen leman, H. and Swi , S. (1971) Sco land’s T a elling People: P oblems and Solu ions, Ed-
inbu gh: Sco ish O ice.
10 Commission on I ine ancy (1963) Repo , O icial publica ions P .7272, Dublin: S a ione y
O ice <h p://opac.oi each as.ie/AWDa a/Lib a y3/Lib a y2/DL013441.pd >.
11 T a elling people e iew body (1983) Repo , O icial publica ions Pl.1520, Dublin: S a io-
ne y O ice <h p://opac.oi each as.ie/AWDa a/Lib a y3/Lib a y2/DL035416.pd >.
12 Gmelch, G. (1977) The I ish Tinke s: The U baniza ion o an I ine an People, Menlo Pa k: Cum-
mings Pub. Co.; Gmelch, S. (1975) Tinke s and T a elle s: I eland’s Nomads, Dublin: O’B ien
P ess.
13 See: Ac on, T. (1974) Gypsy Poli ics and Social Change, London: Rou ledge and Kegan Paul.
OPEN
ACCESS
WILL GUY — MAREK JAKOUBEK — LENKA J.BUDILO Á 153
appea ance, occupa ions and cus oms, Clébe had decla ed: ‘The Gypsy is p ima ily
and abo e all else anomad. … The seden a y Gypsies a e gene ally ‘excluded’ people
… who ha e been banned om he clans o made ma ime, ha is, ‘unclean’, because o
se ious iola ions o he T adi ion’.14 This disquali ied mos Roma inhabi an s li ing
in Eas e n Eu ope and Spain om legi ima e claims o be ‘ ue Gypsies’.
In his con ex , he app oach in F ed ik Ba h’s 1970 book was a e ela ion o i
add essed he p oblem o e hnic communi ies ha unde go adical cul u al change
and ye main ain hei iden i y. Ba h a gued ha his appa en di icul y could be
a oided i , ins ead o adop ing he con en ional iew ha e hnic g oups ha e dis-
inc cul u es ha dis inguish hem om o he s, ‘ he c i ical ocus o in es iga ion
… becomes he e hnic bounda y ha de ines ag oup, no he cul u al s u i en-
closes’.15 In his way he ole o cul u al ea u es is he eby ans e ed om pas-
si e o ac i e, whe e hey become capable o manipula ion by g oup membe s and
by hose wi h whom hese mino i ies in e ac . The e o e, he c i ical ea u e o an
e hnic communi y is ha i possesses ‘amembe ship which iden i ies i sel , and is
iden i ied by o he s, as cons i u ing aca ego y dis inguishable om o he ca ego ies
o he same o de ’. Consequen ly, ‘ he sha ing o acommon cul u e is … an implica-
ion o esul , a he han ap ima y and de ini ional cha ac e is ic o e hnic g oup
o ganisa ion’.16
You coope a ed wi h aCzech pho og aphe Jose Koudelka, and w o e an in oduc ion o his
book Gypsies.17 Wha was i like o coope a e wi h his pho og aphe , who was al eady in-
e na ionally well-known as amembe o he p es igious pho og aphic coope a i e Magnum
since 1971? How did you mee him?
Iam no su e how Jose i s hea d o me bu he had sough poli ical asylum in B i -
ain in 1970 ollowing he anonymous publica ion o his s unning images o he 1968
Wa saw Pac in asion o Czechoslo akia. Mos p obably, he hen chai o he Gypsy
Council, G a an Puxon, had old him abou my esea ch on Roma in Czechoslo akia
leading o ou mee ing in he ea ly 1970s.
Jose had b ough wi h him nega i es o Roma whom he had pho og aphed be-
ween 1962 and 1968 in Czechoslo akia and Romania and wan ed a ex o his p o-
posed book ha would be qui e di e en o oman ic musing abou ‘mys e ious ye
ca e ee Gypsies’. Ins ead, his model was he commen a y accompanying Do o hea
Lange’s pho og aphs o he in e nmen o US Japanese Ame ican ci izens du ing he
Second Wo ld Wa . This ga e an objec i e accoun o he en o ced eloca ion o hese
amilies o emo e camps— e en hough in some cases hei men olk we e se ing
wi h US o ces igh ing agains Japan. Appa en ly he publishe s we e unhappy abou
his d y, ac ual app oach bu Jose insis ed ha his was how i had o be.
Jose usually le s his images speak o hemsel es, es ic ing his cap ions o jus
place names and he da e on which he pic u es we e aken. Bu in his case he wan ed
14 Clébe (op. ci .), 246.
15 Ba h, F. (1970) E hnic G oups and Bounda ies, London: Geo ge Allen and Unwin, 15.
16 Ibid. 11.
17 Koudelka, J. (1975) Koudelka Gypsies ( ex by W.Guy), London: Thames and Hudson.
OPEN
ACCESS
154 STUDIA ETHNOLOGICA PRAGENSIA 1/2018
ahis o ical accoun a he end, no a he beginning, and in e oga ed me on he p e-
cise meaning o my ex . This was p oblema ic as ou wo king language was Czech
since a ha ime his English was limi ed. We wo ked e y in ensi ely o pe haps
aweek o wo in he London fla o aMagnum colleague, only b eaking o simple
wo king lunches o his a ou i e boiled po a oes wi h ca away seeds and sou c eam.
In spi e o Jose ’s clea ideas abou he layou o he i s e sion o he book, i
was no p oduced o his sa is ac ion and so he was de e mined ha he new edi-
ion18 would be en i ely as he had o iginally in ended. This ime we communica ed
by phone bu once mo e Jose had p ecise que ies— his ime in English— abou
wha Ihad w i en. By now, he Communis egime had long collapsed and Iwas able
o include he sca hing 1979 e dic on Communis Czechoslo akia’s Gypsy policy by
he Cha e 77 mo emen 19— led by he u u e Czech p esiden Václa Ha el. Sadly
he successo pos -Communis go e nmen s did no sha e Ha el’s humanism. By
ac uel i ony he ad en o libe al democ acy made he si ua ion o Roma e en wo se
in many ways, d i ing many o hem o emig a e o Wes e n Eu opean coun ies
and some o Canada. No has he in e en ion o he Eu opean Commission— o
which Iwo ked as an ad iso o o e adecade— been e ec i e in u he ing he
in eg a ion o Roma.
Be ween 2000 and 2010 you wo ked o he Eu opean Commission.20 How do you hink aca-
demic discou se abou Roma di e s om poli ical discou se abou hem? In you opinion, do
hese sphe es coope a e o con lic ? In wha ways?
My aim— in p oducing epo s o he Eu opean Commission on he Czech Repub-
lic, Slo akia, Hunga y, Bulga ia, C oa ia, Spain and G eece— was o e iew exis ing
policy owa ds Roma, o e alua e he ex en o which his was leading o g ea e in-
eg a ion o indigenous Roma popula ions and o make ecommenda ions. This was
a a ime when he o me Communis coun ies we e applying o join he Eu opean
Union and we e app ehensi e ha he mul iply disad an aged si ua ion o Roma i-
ola ed he en y c i e ion ha candida e coun ies should ha e es ablished ins i u-
ions ‘gua an eeing democ acy, he ule o law, human igh s and espec o and p o-
ec ion o democ acy’.21
In he case o he Czech Republic and Slo akia Iwas able o supplemen docu-
men a y esea ch, isi s o speci ic loca ions and in e iews wi h key pe sonnel wi h
my ea lie pa icipan obse a ion ieldwo k. Simila ly wi h my esea ch on Sco ish
T a elle s in he mid-1970s, as well as con ibu ing o go e nmen epo s and help-
ing o es ablish he i s local au ho i y campsi e o T a elle s in 1975, Ili ed among
18 Koudelka, J. (2011) Koudelka Gypsies, ( ex by W.Guy), London: Thames and Hudson.
19 Cha a 77 (1979) ‘Dokumen 23 osi uaci Cikánů Českoslo ensku’, Lis y 2, 47, P ague:
Cha a 77. (English ansla ion by Jackson, M. (1979) Labou Focus, Ma ch/Ap il and May/
June).
20 E.g. Guy, W., Liebich, A. and Ma ushiako a, E. (2010) Imp o ing he Tools o he Social In-
clusion and Non-Disc imina ion o Roma in he EU, Luxembou g: Eu opean Commission.
21 Eu opean Commission (1999) Enla gemen B ie ing: EU suppo o Roma communi ies in cen-
al and eas e n Eu ope, B ussels: Eu opean Commission, Decembe , 4.
OPEN
ACCESS
WILL GUY — MAREK JAKOUBEK — LENKA J.BUDILO Á 155
hem, wo ked wi h hem a ui picking and po a o li ing and a elled wi h hem
be ween win e and summe camping g ounds.
Ap oblem wi h poli ical discou se abou Roma is ha heo e ical a gumen s a e
some imes no su icien ly g ounded in he di e se eali ies o Roma expe ience.
Unsu p isingly, hose adop ing poli ical science o policy ela ed pe spec i es can
igno e empi ical e idence incon enien o hei o e simpli ied models. Acase in
poin is he common assump ion ha nomadism is an in insic cul u al cha ac e -
is ic o all Roma. This can ha e se ious consequences, as when aCouncil o Eu ope
spokespe son was misled in o cha ac e ising he mig a ion o Roma om o me
Communis coun ies o Wes e n Eu ope in he 1990s as ‘me ely a e u n o he no -
mal mobili y o Gypsies’ a he han fligh om moun ing acis a acks.22 Such an
analysis nega ed he legi ima e claims o hese Roma o poli ical asylum. Aco ec-
i e iewpoin emphasised ha ‘ he ex ao dina y ea u e o Romani mig a ion is
ha so many [Cen al and Eas Eu opean] Roma a e p epa ed o ake he isks o
mig a ing despi e hei lack o nomadic adi ions’.23
Academic discou se abou Roma is ex emely di e se bu much is na owly o-
cused on deba es wi hin he discipline. While his can be ele an o poli ical deba es
and policy issues— as in he example o nomadism— i o en seems as hough he e
is li le o e lap be ween disciplines, which inhabi hei own sepa a e wo lds.
Many schola s/in ellec uals see auni e sal emedy o he ‘Roma issue’ in he Roma na ional
emancipa ion. Don’ you hink ha in his way many ai s would be los o he adi ional
Roma cul u e, o which he mode n p inciple o na ionali y is alien? Is i no ue ha many
Roma would be le in he posi ion o double ma ginali y— ma ginal o bo h he majo i y
socie y and o he Roma na ional socie y?
Toge he wi h E a Da ido á, Iwas p esen a he i s Wo ld Romani Cong ess in 1971
whe e Roma delega es om ou een coun ies p oclaimed hei sha ed iden i y and
ma ked his by adop ing aflag and he an hem Geľem, geľem (We a elled on). This
landma k e en led o he ounda ion o he In e na ional Romani Union.24 In 2000
Ialso a ended he i h Wo ld Romani Cong ess in P ague, whe e E a was adelega e.
Sho ly a e wa ds he IRU P esiden , he Czech Roma Emil Ščuka, issued his Decla a-
ion o aNa ion. This documen called o all Roma o be ecognised as anon- e i o ial
na ion, ha is a‘[n]a ion which does no wan o become as a e’.25
In pa his demand was adelayed eac ion o he widesp ead, bu no uni e sal,
o icial policy du ing much o he Communis e a o a emp ing o e adica e Romani
22 Ve spage , G. (1995) The Si ua ion o Gypsies (Roma and Sin i) in Eu ope, S asbou g: Council
o Eu ope, 13.
23 Ma as, Y. (2000) ‘Roma mig a ions in he pos -Communis e a: Thei his o ical and po-
li ical signi icance’, Camb idge Re iew o In e na ional A ai s, ol.13, no.2, 32, emphasis in
o iginal.
24 Ac on, T. and Klímo á, I. (2001) ‘The In e na ional Romani Union: An Eas Eu opean an-
swe o Wes Eu opean ques ions’, in W.Guy (ed.) Be ween Pas and Fu u e: he Roma o Cen-
al & Eas e n Eu ope, Ha ield: Uni e si y o He o dshi e P ess, 58.
25 Ibid: 216–7.
OPEN
ACCESS
162 STUDIA ETHNOLOGICA PRAGENSIA 1/2018
WILL GUY’S PUBLICATIONS ON ROMA-RELATED ISSUES
Guy, W. (1975) ‘Ways o looking a Roma: he
case o Czechoslo akia’, in F.Reh isch (ed.)
Gypsies, Tinke s and O he T a elle s, London:
Academic P ess.
Guy, W. (1975) His o ical ex in J.Koudelka
Gypsies, London, Pa is, New Yo k: Ape u e
Inc. (un i led and no pagina ion)
Guy, W. (1977) The A emp o Socialis
Czechoslo akia o Assimila e i s Gypsy Popula ion.
Ph.D. Thesis, Uni e si y o B is ol.
Guy, W. (1998) ‘A e wo d 1996: Ab a e new
wo ld’, in D.Tong (ed.). Gypsies: ABook o
In e disciplina y Readings, New Yo k: Ga land
Publishing Inc., pp.48–68.
Guy, W. (1998) Ways o looking a Roma: he case
o Czechoslo akia, in: D.Tong (ed.) Gypsies:
ABook o In e disciplina y Readings. Ga land,
pp.13–48; [a ep in o Guy 1975].
Guy, W. (ed.) (2001) Be ween Pas and Fu u e: The
Roma o Cen al and Eas e n Eu ope, Ha ield:
Uni e si y o He o dshi e P ess.
Guy, W. (2001) ‘Romani iden i y and pos -
Communis policy’, in Guy, W. (ed.) (2001)
Be ween Pas and Fu u e: The Roma o Cen al
and Eas e n Eu ope, Ha ield: Uni e si y o
He o dshi e P ess, pp.3–32.
Guy, W, (2001) ‘[The Roma o ] he Czech lands
and Slo akia: Ano he alse dawn?’ in: Guy,
W. (ed.) Be ween Pas and Fu u e: The Roma o
Cen al and Eas e n Eu ope. Ha ield: Uni e si y
o He o dshi e P ess, pp.285–323.
Guy, W. (2002) ‘La e a i als a he na ionalis
games: Romani mobilisa ion in he Czech
lands and Slo akia’, in S.Fen on and S.May
(eds.) E hnona ional Iden i ies, London:
Macmillan, pp.48–83.
Guy, W. (2003) ‘“No so ouch”: Romani
mig a ion o he UK a he u n o he 21s
cen u y’, Na ionali ies Pape s, Vol.31, no.1,
Ma ch, pp. pp.63–79.
Guy, W. (2003) Ši ší kon ex edukácie Rómo o
ýchodnej as ednej Eu ópe, in V.Fabiano á.
and S.Ma ulay. (eds) Empi ické pozna ky
zedukácie omských de í ply odiny a ola
ma ky o ýcho e a zdelá aní omských de í,
Spišská No á Ves: Uni e zi a Konš an ína
Filozo a Ni e, pp.170–186.
Guy, W., Uhe ek, Z. and Weine o á, R. (eds.)
(2004) Roma Mig a ion in Eu ope: Case S udies,
Ins i u e o E hnology o he Academy o
Sciences o he Czech Republic (P ague),
Müns e : Li Ve lag/New B unswick &
London: T ansac ion Publishe s.
Guy, W. (2004) ‘Recen Roma Mig a ion o he
Uni ed Kingdom’ (Asylum in pe spec i e:
Roma mig a ion o he UK), in: W.Guy,
Z.Uhe ek and R.Weine o á (eds.) Roma
Mig a ion in Eu ope: Case S udies. Li -Ve lag,
pp.165–210.
Hyde, A. and Guy, W. (2004) F om P e-accession
o Accession: Re iew o he Eu opean Union Pha e
Assis ance o Roma Mino i ies (1999–2003),
Thema ic E alua ion Repo ZZ/MIN/03082,
B ussels: Eu opean Moni o ing Se ice
(EMS)/EC Di ec o a e-Gene al Enla gemen ,
Decembe . <h p://ec.eu opa.eu/enla gemen /
pd / inancial_assis ance/pha e/ e ised_
mino i ies_ hema ic_ aw_161204_en.pd >
Guy, W. (2006) ‘Cul u al Policy and Cul u al
Di e si y: The Roma o Cen al and Eas e n
Eu ope’, in Robins, K. (ed.) The Challenge o
T anscul u al Di e si ies: Cul u al Policy and
Cul u al Di e si y, S asbou g: Council o
Eu ope Publishing.
Guy, W. and Ko a s, M. (2006) EU- unded Roma
P og ammes: Lessons om Hunga y, Slo akia
and he Czech Republic, London: Mino i y
Righ s G oup In e na ional.
Guy, W. (2006) Coun y Repo : Czech Republic,
London: Mino i y Righ s G oup In e na ional.
Guy, W. (2006) Coun y Repo : Slo ak Republic,
London: Mino i y Righ s G oup In e na ional.
Guy, W. (2006) Discussion Pape o EC pee
e iew o Spanish Roma p ojec : ‘The
e adica ion o shan y owns in A ilés’, o
EC Di ec o a e-Gene al Employmen , Social
A ai s and Social Inclusion, Vienna: ÖSB
Consul ing, Oc obe .
Guy, W. & F esno, J.M. (2006) Syn hesis Repo
o EC pee e iew o Spanish Roma p ojec :
‘The e adica ion o shan y owns in A ilés’, o
EC Di ec o a e-Gene al Employmen , Social
A ai s and Social Inclusion, Vienna: ÖSB
Consul ing, Decembe .
OPEN
ACCESS

WILL GUY — MAREK JAKOUBEK — LENKA J.BUDILO Á 163
Guy, W. (2007) ‘Roma economic con ibu ions:
Pas and u u e’, keyno e speech a Roma
Employmen Wo kshop— Decade o Roma
Inclusion, So ia: Bulga ian Minis y o Labou
& Social Policy.
Guy, W. (2009) ‘Li ing condi ions, social
pe cep ion and s a e policy in he mac o-
egion o “Eas e n Eu ope” be o e and a e
1989’, Südos eu opa Mi eilungen, 49 (2): 54–65.
Guy, W. (2009) Discussion Pape o EC pee
e iew o In eg a ed P og amme o Social
Inclusion o G eek Roma, o EC Di ec o a e-
Gene al Employmen , Social A ai s and Social
Inclusion, Vienna: ÖSB Consul ing, May.
Guy, W. (2009) Syn hesis Repo o EC pee
e iew o In eg a ed P og amme o Social
Inclusion o G eek Roma, o EC Di ec o a e-
Gene al Employmen , Social A ai s and Social
Inclusion, Vienna: ÖSB Consul ing, May
<ec.eu opa.eu/social/BlobSe le ?docId=8325
&langId=en>
Guy, W. (2009) Význam odinných azeb p o
mig aci českých aslo enských Romů, in:
Jakoubek, M. and Budilo á. L. (eds.) Cikánské
skupiny ajejich sociální o ganizace, B no:
Cen um p o s adium demok acie akul u y,
pp.267–285.
Guy, W., Liebich, A. and Ma ushiako a, E. (2010)
Imp o ing he Tools o he Social Inclusion
and Non-Disc imina ion o Roma in he EU,
Luxembou g: Eu opean Commission.
Guy, W. (2010) ‘EU ini ia i es on Roma:
Limi a ions and ways o wa d’, in N.T ehan
and N.Sigona (eds.) Romani Poli ics in
Con empo a y Eu ope: Po e y, E hnic
Mobilisa ion, and he Neo-libe al O de ,
Basings oke: Palg a e Macmillan, pp.23–50.
Guy, W. (2011) His o ical ex in J.Koudelka
Koudelka Gypsies, new edi ion, London,
Thames and Hudson (un i led and no
pagina ion).
Guy, W. (2011) in: Koudelka, J.Cikáni. P aha:
To s (un i led and no pagina ion).
Guy, W. (2011) ‘Roma inclusion a he c oss oads:
Can he lessons om PHARE be lea ned?’
Roma Righ s 2011: Funding Roma Righ s:
Challenges and P ospec s, Budapes : ERRC,
Decembe .
Guy, W. (W. Guy & I.Gabal eds.) (2012) The
Si ua ion o he Roma Mino i y in Selec ed New
Membe S a es o he Eu opean Union, B ussels:
Eu opean Libe al Fo um.
Guy, W. (ed.) (2013) F om Vic imhood o
Ci izenship: The Pa h o Roma In eg a ion,
Budapes : Paki Eu opean Roma Fund/
Kossu h Publishing Co po a ion.
Guy, W. (2014) ‘Residen ial seg ega ion’— asel -
explana o y e m?’, Gypsy Lo e Socie y Websi e,
<h ps://docs.google.com/a/b is ol.ac.uk/ ile/
d/0BwF qsBgQJK1WW5jS0ZQOExzZ1N Mkd
2anJ RkF5eVBMc3Nn/edi ?pli=1>
Guy, W. (ed.) (2015) The Challenge o An i-Roma
Poli ics, Open Socie y Founda ions, New Yo k,
B ussels & Ams e dam: IDEBATE P ess.
Guy, W. (2015) In oduc ion: The Challenge o An i-
Roma Poli ics, in W.Guy (ed.), pp.1–21.
Guy, W. (2015) ‘Why Roma Mig a e’, Beyond
T a icking and Sla e y, openDemoc acy,
30June <h ps://www.opendemoc acy.ne /
beyondsla e y/will-guy/why- oma-mig a e>
Guy, W. (2017) ‘An i-Roma Violence, Ha e Speech
and Disc imina ion in he New Eu ope:
Czech Republic, Slo akia and Hunga y’, in
Bhabha,J., Mi ga, A. & Ma ache, M. (eds.)
Realizing Roma Righ s, Philadelphia: Uni e si y
o Pennsyl ania P ess.
OPEN
ACCESS