Fifty years researching Roma: Interview with Will Guy

Fifty years researching Roma: Interview with Will Guy Marek Jakoubek— Lenka J.Budilová WILL GUY — Marek Jakoubek — Lenka J.Budilová Will Guy, B.A. PhD (b. 29.11.1940 in London) is aResearch Fellow in the School of Sociology, Politics and International Studies (SPAIS) and part of the Centre for the Study of Ethnicity and Citizenship at the University of Bristol, UK, where he taught in the fields of research methods, social anthropology, diversity and citizenship in Europe and of Roma. After living and working in Czechoslovakia during the latter half of the 1960s he completed aPhD in the 1970s on the Communist regime’s attempt to assimilate Czechoslovakia’s Roma minority. This involved analysis of government policy documents as well as extensive field work, living in segregated Romani settlements in Slovakia and also among Roma migrants in the cities of the Czech lands. At this time he was working together with the Gypsy-Rom Association in the Czech Lands and accompanied their delegation as interpreter to the first World Romani Congress, held near London in 1971. Since then he has continued to make regular research trips to East-Central Europe and the Balkans and has published widely, mainly on Roma, editing in 2001 acomprehensive volume on the situation of Roma in these regions and co-editing in 2004 astudy of Roma migration for the Ethnological Institute of the Czech Academy of Sciences. As well as academic research he has carried out Roma-related investigations for various international NGOs and also for the European Commission, evaluating EU-funded Roma programmes in the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Spain and Croatia. He is amember of the editorial board of the Ethnicities journal and of the editorial board of Český lid. How did you come to be in Czechoslovakia in the 1960s? My arrival in Czechoslovakia in early 1966 at the age of twenty-five had nothing to do with Roma. At that time the Czechoslovak government was seeking to modernise the economy and had recently bought some computers from the UK. The British manufacturer, for which Iwas working as asystems analyst, proposed to send me at short notice to the North Moravian city of Ostrava as on-site support. Iwas given the weekend to make adecision and impulsively accepted the offer. There was no time to do any research in those pre-Google days, so Iwent to the Czechoslovak travel agency (Čedok) in London and asked if they had any tourist brochures of Ostrava. The young man behind the desk paused for afew moments, then summoned his colleagues from the back office to join him before asking me to repeat OPEN ACCESS 148 STUDIA ETHNOLOGICA PRAGENSIA 1/2018 my question. When Idid, they all burst out laughing. Ilater learnt that this heavy industrial centre, with its steelworks, coal mines, chemical works and slag heaps, was the most polluted city in Czechoslovakia— hardly atourist destination. My role there would be to give advice to two of the largest steelworks in Europe— the Nová hut’ Klementa Gottwalda and the Vítkovické železárny. Why did you decide to carry out research in Czechoslovakia in the 1970s? How did you cope with the Czech language? Eventually Ispent three and ahalf years at my computer job in Ostrava, Prague and then Brno, working with Czechs and gradually learning their language. My first Czech boss had falsely assured my company that he understood English but he refused to use any of his subordinates as interpreters. This made effective communication between us almost impossible but fortunately some others spoke French, German or English. In the meantime Istudied my politically approved Czech grammar book and delighted my workmates by declaiming examples from it, such as: ‘Čest práce, soudruzi! Tento měsíc musíme překročit výrobní normy’ (Hail work, comrades! This month we must exceed the production norms’). Taking my cue from this, Ibought aMao Tse-Tung suit and, equipped with the little red book of his quotations and wearing abadge from the Chinese restaurant in Prague, appointed myself political commissar for our department. These were the tumultuous years of gradual liberalisation, the Prague Spring and the Warsaw Pact invasion, followed by the stifling aftermath of ‘normalisation’. During this period Ishared my Czech friends’ deep emotions of exhilaration, pain and subsequent disillusion. My deepening involvement with these events led me to give up my well-paid computer job and use my savings to study for aPhD, drawing on my experience in Czechoslovakia for athesis. My initial idea was prompted by the occasion when an Ostrava miner friend had asked me to interpret for avisiting group of Scottish miners. The Scots— from the then staunchly Communist area of Fife— believed they were coming to asocialist promised land, while the Czechs, to the contrary, were eager to hear of life in aconsumer paradise. These totally contradictory perceptions did not make my interpreter’s role an easy one. Soon afterwards, Icame across Clébert’s study The Gypsies where Iread: ‘Czechoslovakia seems in fact to be the first country to solve this delicate problem of [Gypsy] integration in accordance with humane standards’.1 Ithen recalled the dark-skinned labourers Ihad seen in Ostrava and aCzech colleague’s sarcastic term for them— ‘uzení Slováci’ (smoked Slovaks). This immediately suggested an entirely different research topic. When you were carrying out your research in Czechoslovakia, did you get into contact with any Czech scholars involved in studying Roma? Who were they and how did you cooperate with them? During my last six months as asystems analyst Istole as much time as Icould away from work to search in bookshops for any books about Roma. One of the most im1 Clébert, J.-P. (1967) The Gypsies, Harmondsworth: Penguin, 255. OPEN ACCESS WILL GUY — MAREK JAKOUBEK — LENKA J.BUDILOvÁ 149 portant was Eva Davidová’s Bez kolíb ašiatrov. Meanwhile Eva had heard of astrange Englishman seeking information on her own topic. When we eventually met we had so much in common that we enthusiastically agreed to collaborate. With her encouragement, an anthropology professor provided aletter legitimating my research that enabled me to obtain astudy visa. Now working with Eva, this allowed us access to the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs where she and Iwere invited to help ourselves from heaps of documents about Roma policy. Understandably Ifelt very apprehensive walking past the armed guard at the door of the ministry building with abagful of documents, some of which were stamped ‘jen pro úřední potřebu’ (for official use only) or ‘přísnĕ tajné’ (strictly secret). During the period of my PhD research Imet with the inspiring Milena Hübschmannová and afellow post-graduate student Tomáš Haišman, who then went on to be aresearcher at the Ethnographic Institute in Prague before becoming an official in the Ministry of the Interior. Also, before starting my studies in 1969, Ibecame friendly with Karel Holomek, later President of the Moravian Roma Association. But in the early years my main contacts were officials involved with Roma policy rather than academics. Much later Imet many Czech and Slovak academics, especially Zdeněk Uherek and Renata Weinerová with whom Iedited abook on Roma migration, as well as Jiřina Šiklová, Anna Jurová and others. Did Czechoslovak authorities limit your research or publication activities in any way? Did they follow your activities or contacts? From 1958 onwards the official policy goal had been to assimilate Roma on the grounds that they were insufficiently developed to form anationality. Unlike Czechs and Slovaks, Roma were deemed not to possess any culture worth preserving. A1959 government handbook for local authorities argued that ‘all measures which revive gypsy national [sic] consciousness … preserve the present isolation and separation of gypsies … and help conserve the old, primitive gypsy way of life with all its bad habits’.2 The plan was therefore to disperse the Roma population but this was frustrated by the migration of many Roma from Slovakia to form new concentrations in Czech industrial areas and cities. Like migrant workers elsewhere, their aim was simply to obtain better paid work than was available in their rural home areas. From the documents we had obtained from the ministry, Eva and Ilearnt that Czech local authorities had increasingly denied residence permits to these Roma newcomers, making them illegal squatters. However, as a1967 official report pointed out, the illegality was on the part of local authorities since their refusal to register Roma was aclear breach of citizens’ constitutional rights. Yet, in acting in this way, local authorities were only following government guidelines. Iwas soon made aware of the problem of trying to publish such sensitive material. In the meantime Ihad met the head of the National Statistical Office that was producing reports on the Roma population. He invited me to write aguest article for 2 Czechoslovak Government (1959) Práce mezi cikánským obyvatelstvem (Work among the gypsy population), Edice časopisu Národní výbory (Handbook for local authorities), Prague: Úřad předsednictva vlády, 28. OPEN ACCESS 150 STUDIA ETHNOLOGICA PRAGENSIA 1/2018 their journal Demografie but returned my contribution, regretfully informing me that it was completely unpublishable due to my forthright criticism of government policy. At the time Eva was working on atechnical report about Roma migration to Ostrava for the Research Institute of Construction and Architecture. This 300-page document was to be duplicated on poor quality paper and seemed to us asuitable, low-profile outlet. Therefore Iwrote acritical section, buried near the end. The next stage was more risky when Eva was invited to write an article for the UK journal Race Today. We wrote this together citing Eva’s Ostrava report as the already published source but also mentioning the relevant government documents. In an attempt to mask our criticism we entitled the article Czechoslovakia Solves its Gypsy Problem and the ambiguous conclusion was ‘Czechoslovakia’s … experience can serve as an example to other states’. To our relief these publications did not result in any retribution from the authorities, although our other activities did attract their attention. The failure of the dispersal programme coincided with the political liberalisation of the Prague Spring, allowing the 1958 assimilation campaign to be reassessed. In areversal of previous policy, Roma activists were allowed to form their own social and economic organisations and in 1971 adelegation was permitted to travel to the first World Roma Congress near London. Eva went as afounder member of the Czech Roma association and Iaccompanied them to assist with interpreting. Afew months later Iwas surprised to be invited to the Czechoslovak Embassy to the annual celebration of the founding of the republic but this was followed by amore worrying invitation to apersonal meeting with an embassy official. Evidently the Roma delegates must have praised my help and reported me as a‘friend of the republic’. Puzzlingly, Iwas not asked any questions about my Roma research but only about my position at the University of Bristol and my contacts there. Apprehensive that Iwas being vetted as apotential ‘sleeper’, Itried to minimise my importance while appearing cooperative. Imust have succeeded because although we parted with mutual assurances of keeping in touch, to my relief Iwas not contacted again— nor invited to further embassy celebrations. Much later Ilearnt that the embassy had indeed been engaged in recruiting UK university staff as potential ‘fellow travellers’. However, surveillance was not entirely one-sided. Years later Iwas told by afriend that, in his interview for promotion to ahigher UK ministry rank, he was asked questions about me. From Eva’s Ostrava study we learnt that almost 57 percent of the current Roma inhabitants had been born in Eastern Slovakia and, of these, over athird came from the district of Spišská Nová Ves. Following atrip to check on potential fieldwork locations, we eventually chose two adjacent villages and booked rooms in anearby cheap hotel. The manageress was very friendly and after afew weeks confided that, much to her annoyance, asecret policeman was periodically searching our rooms. Ihad with me acopy of Lenin’s The Right of Nations to Self-Determination and left this on my bedside table. However, the countryside is asmall world and the manageress not only knew the policeman’s family but also that he was afraid of his dominating mother. Athreat to report to her his irritating visits was enough to bring them to an end. OPEN ACCESS WILL GUY — MAREK JAKOUBEK — LENKA J.BUDILOvÁ 151 Over ayear later we learnt of further surveillance. We had been invited to aRoma wedding in aneighbouring village and the bus driver who had conveyed our party to the dance hall became tipsy and complained angrily to us that he and his fellow drivers were fed up at having to record all our bus journeys. It was ahot summer’s night and all the guests were in shirtsleeves or light dresses. At this point amysterious Slovak, dressed incongruously in adouble-breasted, belted raincoat, walked briskly up to us and asked my opinion of the attractions of the Slovak countryside. Shortly before, some of the Roma had nodded in his direction and tapped the side of their noses to indicate he was some form of spy. He certainly looked like an archetypal character from aB-movie. Eventually someone managed to drag away the inebriated bus driver. Shortly afterwards Iwas summoned to the district police headquarters, ostensibly because Ihad failed to register my stay in their area. Iexplained Ihad done this in Prague and thought this was sufficient. After acoffee and yet another conversation about the beautiful landscape of the region, the officer dropped her guard and reprimanded me, saying it had been ‘inappropriate’ (nevhodný) for me to have borrowed asuit from aGypsy to attend the wedding. Imaintained this was necessary since Idid not possess asuit but that, in any case, as arepresentative of socialist Czechoslovakia, she should be proud that Gypsies in her country had attained such high living standards that they were in aposition to lend fine suits to visitors from the capitalist West. The young woman gave me alevel, cold look and the subject was dropped. Although these incidents appeared comical— and we treated them as such— they were also unsettling as we were aware that in Communist Czechoslovakia political joking carried risks, as Milan Kundera’s 1967 novel Žert (The Joke) made all too clear. In 1969 an English colleague from my computer company was arrested and expelled as an agent provocateur for ignoring abarrier at aprotest demonstration in Brno. He had claimed facetiously that he could not understand its warning notice in Czech. Social science in Czechoslovakia had been largely isolated from the developments in the West for several decades. Some disciplines, e.g. social anthropology, were completely absent. How did this affect Czech (Slovak) Roma studies? 1969 was agood time to start research on Roma. Several important books had appeared shortly before, including Clébert’s 1967 study The Gypsies. Although social anthropology— as adistinct discipline— was not recognised in Czechoslovakia at that time, afew years earlier Emilie Horváthová had published her comprehensive historical study Cigáni na Slovensku3 and other historical studies included Zdenka JamnickáŠmerglová’s Dĕjiny našich cikánů.4 Moreover, other researchers based their writings on ethnographic fieldwork, such as Eva Davidová’s 1965 Bez kolíb ašiatrov5 and various publications of Milena Hübschmannová. However, although anthropologicaltype coverage of Roma in Czechoslovakia was very limited, much the same was true of the British Isles where the romanticised views of folklorists were prevalent. 3 Horváthová, E. (1964) Cigáni na Slovensku, Bratislava: Vydavateľstvo Slovenskej akadémie vied. 4 Jamnická-Šmerglová, Z. (1955) Dĕjiny našich cikánů, Praha: Orbis. 5 Davidová, E. (1965) Bez kolíb ašiatrov, Košice: Východoslovenské vydavateľstvo. OPEN ACCESS 152 STUDIA ETHNOLOGICA PRAGENSIA 1/2018 In the 1960s there was asurge of interest in researching Gypsies and Travellers. In England and Wales the government commissioned aresearch study of Travellers to provide more insight to improve policy in the aftermath of the first national census of this population in 19656 and the subsequent 1968 Caravan Sites Act. This eventually led to abook in 19757 and afew years later another by the principal researcher, the anthropologist Judith Okely.8 This was based on her extensive field work. In Scotland asimilar policy study was led by Hugh Gentleman9 and the first Scottish local authority caravan site was established in 1975. Meanwhile, in 1959 the Irish government had established aCommission on Itinerancy, which reported in 1963.10 This based its policy recommendations on practice in the Netherlands, which was to assimilate Travellers by settling them in fixed dwellings. The practice of officials deciding what was in the Travellers’ best interests was eventually replaced by the Travelling People Review Body (1981–83). This body included Traveller members and advocated integration rather than assimilation, with provision for serviced halting sites.11 At the same time George and Sharon Gmelch were carrying out anthropological field research with Irish Travellers12. Judith Okely asserts that it was you who introduced her to Fredrik Barth’s ‘Ethnic Groups and Boundaries’. What was the impact of this publication on the study of Roma? In 1971 Thomas Acton convened aconference at Oxford of international scholars carrying out research on Roma, Gypsies and Travellers in various countries. He had been working with the (English) Gypsy Council since 1967.13 Aprincipal issue was whether we were studying the same people since the cultures of different groups bearing these and other related names appeared quite different. In particular, the predominant pattern in Western European countries was for these people to pursue anomadic way of life, while in Eastern Europe the vast majority had long been settled. This dichotomy raised questions about whether there were any defining characteristics of Gypsies. Some Western European writers proclaimed the ‘true Gypsy’ as nomadic, whereas settled Gypsies were seen as debased. In spite of acknowledging the differences in 6 Ministry of Housing and Local Government/Welsh Office (1967) Gypsies and Other Travellers, London: HMSO. 7 Adams, B., Okely, J., Morgan, D. and Smith, D. (1975) Gypsies and Government Policy in England: AStudy of the Travellers’ Way of Life in Relation to the Policies and Practices of Central and Local Government, London: Heinemann. 8 Okely, J. (1983) The Traveller-Gypsies, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 9 Gentleman, H. and Swift, S. (1971) Scotland’s Travelling People: Problems and Solutions, Edinburgh: Scottish Office. 10 Commission on Itinerancy (1963) Report, Official publications Pr.7272, Dublin: Stationery Office <http://opac.oireachtas.ie/AWData/Library3/Library2/DL013441.pdf>. 11 Travelling people review body (1983) Report, Official publications Pl.1520, Dublin: Stationery Office <http://opac.oireachtas.ie/AWData/Library3/Library2/DL035416.pdf>. 12 Gmelch, G. (1977) The Irish Tinkers: The Urbanization of an Itinerant People, Menlo Park: Cummings Pub. Co.; Gmelch, S. (1975) Tinkers and Travellers: Ireland’s Nomads, Dublin: O’Brien Press. 13 See: Acton, T. (1974) Gypsy Politics and Social Change, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. OPEN ACCESS WILL GUY — MAREK JAKOUBEK — LENKA J.BUDILOvÁ 153 appearance, occupations and customs, Clébert had declared: ‘The Gypsy is primarily and above all else anomad. … The sedentary Gypsies are generally ‘excluded’ people … who have been banned from the clans or made marime, that is, ‘unclean’, because of serious violations of the Tradition’.14 This disqualified most Roma inhabitants living in Eastern Europe and Spain from legitimate claims to be ‘true Gypsies’. In this context, the approach in Fredrik Barth’s 1970 book was arevelation for it addressed the problem of ethnic communities that undergo radical cultural change and yet maintain their identity. Barth argued that this apparent difficulty could be avoided if, instead of adopting the conventional view that ethnic groups have distinct cultures that distinguish them from others, ‘the critical focus of investigation … becomes the ethnic boundary that defines agroup, not the cultural stuff it encloses’.15 In this way the role of cultural features is thereby transferred from passive to active, where they become capable of manipulation by group members and by those with whom these minorities interact. Therefore, the critical feature of an ethnic community is that it possesses ‘amembership which identifies itself, and is identified by others, as constituting acategory distinguishable from other categories of the same order’. Consequently, ‘the sharing of acommon culture is … an implication or result, rather than aprimary and definitional characteristic of ethnic group organisation’.16 You cooperated with aCzech photographer Josef Koudelka, and wrote an introduction to his book Gypsies.17 What was it like to cooperate with this photographer, who was already internationally well-known as amember of the prestigious photographic cooperative Magnum since 1971? How did you meet him? Iam not sure how Josef first heard of me but he had sought political asylum in Britain in 1970 following the anonymous publication of his stunning images of the 1968 Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia. Most probably, the then chair of the Gypsy Council, Grattan Puxon, had told him about my research on Roma in Czechoslovakia leading to our meeting in the early 1970s. Josef had brought with him negatives of Roma whom he had photographed between 1962 and 1968 in Czechoslovakia and Romania and wanted atext for his proposed book that would be quite different to romantic musing about ‘mysterious yet carefree Gypsies’. Instead, his model was the commentary accompanying Dorothea Lange’s photographs of the internment of US Japanese American citizens during the Second World War. This gave an objective account of the enforced relocation of these families to remote camps— even though in some cases their menfolk were serving with US forces fighting against Japan. Apparently the publishers were unhappy about this dry, factual approach but Josef insisted that this was how it had to be. Josef usually lets his images speak for themselves, restricting his captions to just place names and the date on which the pictures were taken. But in this case he wanted 14 Clébert (op. cit.), 246. 15 Barth, F. (1970) Ethnic Groups and Boundaries, London: George Allen and Unwin, 15. 16 Ibid. 11. 17 Koudelka, J. (1975) Koudelka Gypsies (text by W.Guy), London: Thames and Hudson. OPEN ACCESS 154 STUDIA ETHNOLOGICA PRAGENSIA 1/2018 ahistorical account at the end, not at the beginning, and interrogated me on the precise meaning of my text. This was problematic as our working language was Czech since at that time his English was limited. We worked very intensively for perhaps aweek or two in the London flat of aMagnum colleague, only breaking for simple working lunches of his favourite boiled potatoes with caraway seeds and sour cream. In spite of Josef’s clear ideas about the layout of the first version of the book, it was not produced to his satisfaction and so he was determined that the new edition18 would be entirely as he had originally intended. This time we communicated by phone but once more Josef had precise queries— this time in English— about what Ihad written. By now, the Communist regime had long collapsed and Iwas able to include the scathing 1979 verdict on Communist Czechoslovakia’s Gypsy policy by the Charter 77 movement19— led by the future Czech president Václav Havel. Sadly the successor post-Communist governments did not share Havel’s humanism. By acruel irony the advent of liberal democracy made the situation of Roma even worse in many ways, driving many of them to emigrate to Western European countries and some to Canada. Nor has the intervention of the European Commission— for which Iworked as an advisor for over adecade— been effective in furthering the integration of Roma. Between 2000 and 2010 you worked for the European Commission.20 How do you think academic discourse about Roma differs from political discourse about them? In your opinion, do these spheres cooperate or conflict? In what ways? My aim— in producing reports for the European Commission on the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Croatia, Spain and Greece— was to review existing policy towards Roma, to evaluate the extent to which this was leading to greater integration of indigenous Roma populations and to make recommendations. This was at atime when the former Communist countries were applying to join the European Union and were apprehensive that the multiply disadvantaged situation of Roma violated the entry criterion that candidate countries should have established institutions ‘guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of democracy’.21 In the case of the Czech Republic and Slovakia Iwas able to supplement documentary research, visits to specific locations and interviews with key personnel with my earlier participant observation fieldwork. Similarly with my research on Scottish Travellers in the mid-1970s, as well as contributing to government reports and helping to establish the first local authority campsite for Travellers in 1975, Ilived among 18 Koudelka, J. (2011) Koudelka Gypsies, (text by W.Guy), London: Thames and Hudson. 19 Charta 77 (1979) ‘Dokument 23 osituaci Cikánů vČeskoslovensku’, Listy 2, 47, Prague: Charta 77. (English translation by Jackson, M. (1979) Labour Focus, March/April and May/ June). 20 E.g. Guy, W., Liebich, A. and Marushiakova, E. (2010) Improving the Tools for the Social Inclusion and Non-Discrimination of Roma in the EU, Luxembourg: European Commission. 21 European Commission (1999) Enlargement Briefing: EU support for Roma communities in central and eastern Europe, Brussels: European Commission, December, 4. OPEN ACCESS WILL GUY — MAREK JAKOUBEK — LENKA J.BUDILOvÁ 155 them, worked with them at fruit picking and potato lifting and travelled with them between winter and summer camping grounds. Aproblem with political discourse about Roma is that theoretical arguments are sometimes not sufficiently grounded in the diverse realities of Roma experience. Unsurprisingly, those adopting political science or policy related perspectives can ignore empirical evidence inconvenient for their oversimplified models. Acase in point is the common assumption that nomadism is an intrinsic cultural characteristic of all Roma. This can have serious consequences, as when aCouncil of Europe spokesperson was misled into characterising the migration of Roma from former Communist countries to Western Europe in the 1990s as ‘merely areturn to the normal mobility of Gypsies’ rather than flight from mounting racist attacks.22 Such an analysis negated the legitimate claims of these Roma for political asylum. Acorrective viewpoint emphasised that ‘the extraordinary feature of Romani migration is that so many [Central and East European] Roma are prepared to take the risks of migrating despite their lack of nomadic traditions’.23 Academic discourse about Roma is extremely diverse but much is narrowly focused on debates within the discipline. While this can be relevant to political debates and policy issues— as in the example of nomadism— it often seems as though there is little overlap between disciplines, which inhabit their own separate worlds. Many scholars/intellectuals see auniversal remedy for the ‘Roma issue’ in the Roma national emancipation. Don’t you think that in this way many traits would be lost of the traditional Roma culture, to which the modern principle of nationality is alien? Is it not true that many Roma would be left in the position of double marginality— marginal to both the majority society and to the Roma national society? Together with Eva Davidová, Iwas present at the first World Romani Congress in 1971 where Roma delegates from fourteen countries proclaimed their shared identity and marked this by adopting aflag and the anthem Geľem, geľem (We travelled on). This landmark event led to the foundation of the International Romani Union.24 In 2000 Ialso attended the fifth World Romani Congress in Prague, where Eva was adelegate. Shortly afterwards the IRU President, the Czech Roma Emil Ščuka, issued his Declaration of aNation. This document called for all Roma to be recognised as anon-territorial nation, that is a‘[n]ation which does not want to become astate’.25 In part this demand was adelayed reaction to the widespread, but not universal, official policy during much of the Communist era of attempting to eradicate Romani 22 Verspaget, G. (1995) The Situation of Gypsies (Roma and Sinti) in Europe, Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 13. 23 Matras, Y. (2000) ‘Roma migrations in the post-Communist era: Their historical and political significance’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, vol.13, no.2, 32, emphasis in original. 24 Acton, T. and Klímová, I. (2001) ‘The International Romani Union: An East European answer to West European questions’, in W.Guy (ed.) Between Past and Future: the Roma of Central & Eastern Europe, Hatfield: University of Hertfordshire Press, 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 of looking at Roma: the case of Czechoslovakia’, in F.Rehfisch (ed.) Gypsies, Tinkers and Other Travellers, London: Academic Press. Guy, W. (1975) Historical text in J.Koudelka Gypsies, London, Paris, New York: Aperture Inc. (untitled and no pagination) Guy, W. (1977) The Attempt of Socialist Czechoslovakia to Assimilate its Gypsy Population. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Bristol. Guy, W. (1998) ‘Afterword 1996: Abrave new world’, in D.Tong (ed.). Gypsies: ABook of Interdisciplinary Readings, New York: Garland Publishing Inc., pp.48–68. Guy, W. (1998) Ways of looking at Roma: the case of Czechoslovakia, in: D.Tong (ed.) Gypsies: ABook of Interdisciplinary Readings. Garland, pp.13–48; [areprint of Guy 1975]. Guy, W. (ed.) (2001) Between Past and Future: The Roma of Central and Eastern Europe, Hatfield: University of Hertfordshire Press. Guy, W. (2001) ‘Romani identity and postCommunist policy’, in Guy, W. (ed.) (2001) Between Past and Future: The Roma of Central and Eastern Europe, Hatfield: University of Hertfordshire Press, pp.3–32. Guy, W, (2001) ‘[The Roma of] the Czech lands and Slovakia: Another false dawn?’ in: Guy, W. (ed.) Between Past and Future: The Roma of Central and Eastern Europe. Hatfield: University of Hertfordshire Press, pp.285–323. Guy, W. (2002) ‘Late arrivals at the nationalist games: Romani mobilisation in the Czech lands and Slovakia’, in S.Fenton and S.May (eds.) Ethnonational Identities, London: Macmillan, pp.48–83. Guy, W. (2003) ‘“No soft touch”: Romani migration to the UK at the turn of the 21st century’, Nationalities Papers, Vol.31, no.1, March, pp. pp.63–79. Guy, W. (2003) Širší kontext edukácie Rómov vo východnej astrednej Európe, in V.Fabianová. and S.Matulay. (eds) Empirické poznatky zedukácie romských detí vplyv rodiny arola matky vo výchove avzdelávaní romských detí, Spišská Nová Ves: Univerzita Konštantína Filozofa vNitre, pp.170–186. Guy, W., Uherek, Z. and Weinerová, R. (eds.) (2004) Roma Migration in Europe: Case Studies, Institute of Ethnology of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic (Prague), Münster: Lit Verlag/New Brunswick & London: Transaction Publishers. Guy, W. (2004) ‘Recent Roma Migration to the United Kingdom’ (Asylum in perspective: Roma migration to the UK), in: W.Guy, Z.Uherek and R.Weinerová (eds.) Roma Migration in Europe: Case Studies. Lit-Verlag, pp.165–210. Hyde, A. and Guy, W. (2004) From Pre-accession to Accession: Review of the European Union Phare Assistance to Roma Minorities (1999–2003), Thematic Evaluation Report ZZ/MIN/03082, Brussels: European Monitoring Service (EMS)/EC Directorate-General Enlargement, December. <http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/ pdf/financial_assistance/phare/revised_ minorities_thematic_raw_161204_en.pdf> Guy, W. (2006) ‘Cultural Policy and Cultural Diversity: The Roma of Central and Eastern Europe’, in Robins, K. (ed.) The Challenge of Transcultural Diversities: Cultural Policy and Cultural Diversity, Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing. Guy, W. and Kovats, M. (2006) EU-funded Roma Programmes: Lessons from Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic, London: Minority Rights Group International. Guy, W. (2006) Country Report: Czech Republic, London: Minority Rights Group International. Guy, W. (2006) Country Report: Slovak Republic, London: Minority Rights Group International. Guy, W. (2006) Discussion Paper for EC peer review of Spanish Roma project: ‘The eradication of shantytowns in Avilés’, for EC Directorate-General Employment, Social Affairs and Social Inclusion, Vienna: ÖSB Consulting, October. Guy, W. & Fresno, J.M. (2006) Synthesis Report for EC peer review of Spanish Roma project: ‘The eradication of shantytowns in Avilés’, for EC Directorate-General Employment, Social Affairs and Social Inclusion, Vienna: ÖSB Consulting, December. OPEN ACCESS WILL GUY — MAREK JAKOUBEK — LENKA J.BUDILOvÁ 163 Guy, W. (2007) ‘Roma economic contributions: Past and future’, keynote speech at Roma Employment Workshop— Decade of Roma Inclusion, Sofia: Bulgarian Ministry of Labour & Social Policy. Guy, W. (2009) ‘Living conditions, social perception and state policy in the macroregion of “Eastern Europe” before and after 1989’, Südosteuropa Mitteilungen, 49 (2): 54–65. Guy, W. (2009) Discussion Paper for EC peer review of Integrated Programme for Social Inclusion of Greek Roma, for EC DirectorateGeneral Employment, Social Affairs and Social Inclusion, Vienna: ÖSB Consulting, May. Guy, W. (2009) Synthesis Report for EC peer review of Integrated Programme for Social Inclusion of Greek Roma, for EC DirectorateGeneral Employment, Social Affairs and Social Inclusion, Vienna: ÖSB Consulting, May <ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=8325 &langId=en> Guy, W. (2009) Význam rodinných vazeb pro migraci českých aslovenských Romů, in: Jakoubek, M. and Budilová. L. (eds.) Cikánské skupiny ajejich sociální organizace, Brno: Centrum pro stadium demokracie akultury, pp.267–285. Guy, W., Liebich, A. and Marushiakova, E. (2010) Improving the Tools for the Social Inclusion and Non-Discrimination of Roma in the EU, Luxembourg: European Commission. Guy, W. (2010) ‘EU initiatives on Roma: Limitations and ways forward’, in N.Trehan and N.Sigona (eds.) Romani Politics in Contemporary Europe: Poverty, Ethnic Mobilisation, and the Neo-liberal Order, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp.23–50. Guy, W. (2011) Historical text in J.Koudelka Koudelka Gypsies, new edition, London, Thames and Hudson (untitled and no pagination). Guy, W. (2011) in: Koudelka, J.Cikáni. Praha: Torst (untitled and no pagination). Guy, W. (2011) ‘Roma inclusion at the crossroads: Can the lessons from PHARE be learned?’ Roma Rights 2011: Funding Roma Rights: Challenges and Prospects, Budapest: ERRC, December. Guy, W. (W. Guy & I.Gabal eds.) (2012) The Situation of the Roma Minority in Selected New Member States of the European Union, Brussels: European Liberal Forum. Guy, W. (ed.) (2013) From Victimhood to Citizenship: The Path of Roma Integration, Budapest: Pakiv European Roma Fund/ Kossuth Publishing Corporation. Guy, W. (2014) ‘Residential segregation’— aselfexplanatory term?’, Gypsy Lore Society Website, <https://docs.google.com/a/bristol.ac.uk/file/ d/0BwFvqsBgQJK1WW5jS0ZQOExzZ1NfMkd 2anJvRkF5eVBMc3Nn/edit?pli=1> Guy, W. (ed.) (2015) The Challenge of Anti-Roma Politics, Open Society Foundations, New York, Brussels & Amsterdam: IDEBATE Press. Guy, W. (2015) Introduction: The Challenge of AntiRoma Politics, in W.Guy (ed.), pp.1–21. Guy, W. (2015) ‘Why Roma Migrate’, Beyond Trafficking and Slavery, openDemocracy, 30June <https://www.opendemocracy.net/ beyondslavery/will-guy/why-roma-migrate> Guy, W. (2017) ‘Anti-Roma Violence, Hate Speech and Discrimination in the New Europe: Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary’, in Bhabha,J., Mirga, A. & Matache, M. (eds.) Realizing Roma Rights, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. OPEN ACCESS