Towards a psychoanalytic migration studies: A son, a brother, a father, an American, and his house in a Cameroonian village

Abstract

Around the world, migrants are building houses in their countries-of-origin. For the women and men who create them, these houses are unambiguously significant. Yet, in academic migration studies, they are often seen as peripheral—interesting rather than important. This article follows recent work that aims to show why these houses really do matter. These houses are where migrants can seek to process the trauma of the disconnection that is inherent in migration and are how they repress the anxieties that arise from transnationalism. Migrants’ emotions are externalised onto the house. Based on ethnographic fieldwork in Cameroon between 2013 and 2018, this article develops a case study about one transnational migrant, his family, and his house. It uses the example to develop two arguments: first that these houses sit within transnational networks, but the networks are subject-centred so a theory of the subject is needed to analyse them. Secondly, that human subjects make a deal when they exchange infantile egocentrism for collective inter-subjectivity, which is similar to the deal made between transnational migrants and their ancestral home when they receive permission to leave in exchange for continuing to connect—a link that is materialised in the house. Both these arguments combine to support an underlying claim that migration studies in general, and studies of migrant housing in particular would benefit from building further on existing work that draws on psychoanalytical approaches.

Migrant homemaking in Sub-Saharan Africa: from self-help housing to conspicuous construction

“…Berry 2009;Coe 2016;Diko and Tipple 1992;Grant 2007;Kuuire et al 2016;Nieswand 2011;Obeng-Odoom 2010;Pellow 2003;Smith and Mazzucato 2009;Tipple and Wilis 1992). Other research on transnational house construction comes from Cameroon (Ndjio 2009;Page 2021;Page and Sunjo 2018), Senegal (Buggenhagen 2001;Hannaford 2017;Melly 2010;Sinatti 2009), Nigeria (Osili 2004), and Madagascar (Freeman 2013). To carve out similarities and differences between the findings of these studies, I use as heuristic devices the three dimensions introduced at the beginning of the chapter -the spatial, temporal, and social dimensions of houses.…”

“…While migrant housebuilding can be a form of investment (Grant 2007;Melly 2010;Page and Sunjo 2018;Sinatti 2009), much research stresses its non-monetary aspects, especially the desire to belong to a community (Berry 2009;Kuuire et al 2016;Obeng-Odoom 2010;Page 2021;Pellow 2003;Smith and Mazzucato 2009). The homemaking practices of transnational migrants communicate specific, often paradoxical forms of belonging.…”

“…In contrast to this research lacuna, some knowledge is available on how non-migrant, often economically destitute kin support migrants in their transnational housing projects (Page 2021;Pellow 2003;Smith and Mazzucato 2009). Kin that remain behind are often in charge of the building process and later help maintain the building as caretakers.…”