Lakes, presidents and shopping on mental maps: children’s perceptions of the Finnish–Russian border and the borderland

Abstract

The Finnish–Russian borderland has transformed in the last three decades from two isolated national territories into a transition zone, where the ‘other’ culture and society is ever more present. This paper analyses what kinds of perceptions Finnish and Russian children have of the border and the borderland today. It also examines children’s territorial identifications in the borderland. The research is based on 263 mental maps collected from 9–15-year-old children in the cities of Lappeenranta (Finland) and Vyborg (Russia) and the village of Pervomayskoe (Russia) between 2013 and 2017. The analysis of the maps illustrates that the children participating in the study perceive the Finnish–Russian border mainly as a place for border crossings, although they continue to use the border as a tool for constructing socio-spatial distinctions. In this way, the children actively participate in processes of bordering and play an important part in the social life of the borderland. The participants’ perceptions of the borderland are connected to the national and local contexts that they live in but vary widely between individuals. The paper argues that the local border-related phenomena and children’s border-crossing experiences are increasingly relevant for their national and local identification processes. Besides providing novel information regarding Finnish and Russian children’s perceptions and identifications in the Finnish–Russian borderland, the paper adjusts the mental mapping method to a borderland context and enhances our understanding of the complexity of the bordering processes taking place in borderlands.

The aesthetic turn in border studies: Visual geographies of power, contestation and subversion

“…More recently, however, sketch maps have been revitalised in more qualitative capacities. For Kaisto and Wells (2021), sketches are well suited for exploring how borders shape identities across multiple scales and especially in borderlands, where residents display multiple territorial affiliations deriving from complex interactions between national imaginations and local experiences (see also Kaisto & Brednikova, 2019). Brambilla (2007) similarly used sketch maps to study how pre‐colonial territorial identifications are differently mobilised in the cross‐border narratives and practices of Kwanyama communities along the Angola‐Namibia borderlands.…”

Suomen nykynuorten käsityksiä Karjalasta

“…Pirkkoliisa Ahponen osoitti tutkimuksessaan (2011), että kun suomalaiset, hänen tutkimuksessaan yliopisto-opiskelijanuoret ylittivät Suomen ja Venäjän välisen rajan entiseen Suomen Karjalaan ja pohtivat kokemustaan, heidän käsityksensä "toisesta" ja "Karjalasta" monimutkaistuivat. Tuoreessa tutkimuksessa, joka selvitti mentaalikarttojen avulla Suomen ja Venäjän rajaa lähellä Etelä-Karjalassa ja Leningradin alueella asuvien 9-15-vuotiaiden nuorten näkemyksiä, havaittiin, että osallistujat Suomessa ja Venäjällä sekä kuvasivat rajaa rajanylityspaikkana ja näkivät yhtäläisyyksiä "heidän ja rajan toisen puolen" välillä että rakensivat eroavaisuuksia rajan eri puolten välille (Kaisto & Brednikova 2019). Sitä vastoin suomalaisia ja venäläisiä rajaseudulla eläviä nuoria 1990-luvulla tutkinut Pirjo Jukarainen (2003) sai selville, että Suomen Pohjois-ja Etelä-Karjalassa sekä Venäjän Viipurissa asuvat nuoret pitivät rajan eri puolia kulttuurisesti ja kielellisesti selvästi erilaisina, ja heidän asenteensa rajanaapureita kohtaan olivat hyvin ennakkoluuloisia ja varautuneita.…”

Switching Cars with the Militsiya and Other Ways the Finnish–Russian Borderland is ‘Lived’ by People in Their Everyday Lives

“…This boundary has been, and continues to be, a popular research area among border scholars. Most studies in recent years have focused on economics and the development of the borderland (see for example: Smętkowski et al 2017;Kolosov et al 2018;Stepanova & Shlapeko 2018), tourism and second-home ownership (see for example : Izotov & Laine 2013;Hannonen et al 2015;Kondrateva & Shlapeko 2021), cross-border interaction and collaboration (see for example : Eskelinen et al 2013;Makkonen et al 2018) and perceptions of the border and the other side (see for example : Kaisto & Brednikova 2019;Prokkola 2019).…”