One of the major justifications for professional national culture is the constant reflecting of the identity of the nation: (re)creating, criticising and innovating it. The heart of the Estonian identity is the Estonian language. Estonian literature and theatre are strongly language-centred - characters of other nationalities mostly speak Estonian. The tradition of Estonian feature film, on the other hand, differs radically from literature and theatre. The dialogues of Estonian films often present several languages. The necessity for linguistic diversity is caused by the involvement of various nations in the stories depicted in Estonian-language films. Using several languages helps to convey historical conflicts more honestly and, through linguistic diversity, to stress and sharpen the oppositions referred to below.

On the other hand, Estonian scriptwriters have frequently relied on the classics of Estonian literature and drama, a reliance which most directly shapes and elaborates national identity. Producing a full-length feature film after an original script has been an exception rather than a rule. Of the films examined in this article, only one was made on the basis of an original script - Noored kotkad (The Young Eagles). In tackling nationally significant topics and depicting Estonians, our films more often than not adapt and remodel the characters and stereotypes known from Estonian (drama) literature, as well as amplifying them by new circulation.

shooting of men in military coats

Historical oppositions on the big screen
When our film critics try to determine to what extent foreign viewers can understand our feature films without any background knowledge, they usually point out the too specific intertwining of the treated topics with other manifestations of Estonian culture. In order to understand a film, one should thus know quite a bit about Estonian history. Reviving history on the screen could aspire to further an emotional, but balanced, understanding of history. The latter, however, does not exist as a story until we try to understand and interpret a past which derives from a later point in time. Therefore history is always told from the point of view of a person or persons with certain interests. A film dealing with historical events, thus, also has to help the viewer grasp the present moment: to show the radical events that led to something in history, to select which events to show and, consequently, to emphasise. The group of people financing a film who wish to continue the existing power relations (e.g. the leadership of the Communist Party during the Soviet occupation) can justify the current social order and criticise the previous one.

The main influence on the historical and cultural development of Estonians as a small nation has been the colonisation of surrounding alien cultures in the geographical and mental space of Estonia. On the one hand, the historical habit of opposing the ruler from another culture has resulted in the fact that, as with other texts of Estonian national culture, the films too have often tackled the topic of freedom fighting and sovereignty. The tensest ethnic relations have thus been shown in Estonian films containing significant armed conflicts. On the other hand, ethnic Estonian characters do more than merely opposing characters of other nationalities. On several occasions they wish to belong to the same group, hoping to further their case in power relations and social standing, but earning the contempt of nationally-spirited Estonians. Relations with other nations or cultures are key components in determining the identity and self-determination of Estonians as a nation.

shooting of life in a citadel

Difficult choices of Estonians
The first Estonian feature film was the 10-minute Bear-Hunt in Pärnumaa, produced in 1914, an allegorical and ironic pictorial tale about the conflict between the Baltic-German mayor of Pärnu and an Estonian journalist named Karu (bear). The film clearly supports Estonian candidates for the upcoming elections and ridicules Baltic Germans. It is symbolic that the national feature film tradition began with a film that reflects strong national feelings and a hostile attitude towards another national group.

Depicting problematic relations between different nationalities in Estonian films has continued with amazing regularity to this day. I will briefly discuss four films that present possible choices in conflict situations for Estonians, and point out common methods of depicting the enemy. The first two films - The Young Eagles (1927) and Names in Marble (2002) - examine the only military success of Estonians - the War of Independence (1918-1920). The other two - Life in a Citadel (1947) and Men in Military Coats (1968) - deal with WW II, which failed to bring Estonians their desired independence. In the second case, the conflict between Estonians themselves emerged in the clash of alien ideologies (e.g. national socialism and communism), where ethnic and ideological opposition intertwined; the notion of the enemy was vague, as it could be either a stranger or a compatriot who had chosen the wrong side.

In similar conflict situations, Estonians usually had three choices:
1) try to protect the interests only of Estonia as part of its national armed forces. This choice is shown in the films about the War of Independence.
2) join the army of one big nation and serve there in the hope of founding an independent Estonia if the chosen side won, or at least of establishing a state administration that suits one's world view. The problems of this choice are tackled in Men in Military Coats, and to a lesser extent in Life in a Citadel; it is mentioned in passing also in Names in Marble.
3) avoid any military activity and try to save self and family, remaining ideologically neutral. Citadel criticises this choice, as does Names in Marble.
Relying on these inevitable choices, Estonians depicted in films that reconstruct the turmoil of history cannot be shown on their own, separately, but always involve Germans and Russians, who have influenced their fate most strongly and aggressively. Latvians and Chinese fighting in the Red Army have had a small role as well. Our kinsmen the Finns have often been depicted as allies who have done the most to support and help Estonians.

the young eagles

The enemy of Estonians and an Estonian as an enemy
In war films the representatives of different sides oppose one another acutely and resolutely. Besides, all characters are divided on the 'good-bad' evaluation scale much more clearly than in films tackling other topics.

Both The Young Eagles and Life in a Citadel create black-and-white oppositions. The first, completed in 1927, was the first Estonian feature film and it even managed to attract some international attention - it was bought by German and Scandinavian cinemas. Modern film experts still regard this overwhelmingly patriotic piece, which nevertheless had a thrilling plot and excellent battle scenes, as a sound medium-quality film of its time. The Estonian main characters are embodiments of all the virtues mentioned in the last paragraph of the current article. The enemies are always Russian (although in reality the Red Army fighting against Estonian troops contained Estonians, Russians, Latvians and even a number of Chinese soldiers) and, via the manner of portraying them (grotesque expressions and make-up) and their activity, they have all the negative qualities listed below.

Life in a Citadel narrates a story in autumn-winter 1944 about the family of an Estonian scientist. The family tragically splits between three conflicting sides: the scientist-father and his young wife who seek neutrality, his elder son and uncle, who collaborate with the Germans, and his younger son and daughter, who fiercely support the Soviet cause. Characters working in German prison camps are embodiments of evil, and the Soviet supporters are noble souls positively bursting with everything positive.

Both Eagles and Citadel can be regarded as propaganda films that tackle conflicts in a highly simplistic manner, always emphatically biased towards one side - the first examining things from the aspect of the national spirit of the first independence period and the second from the extreme intolerance of Stalinist ideology.

Names in Marble and Men in Military Coats are less straightforward, revealing the complexity of a conflict but nevertheless quite clearly leaning towards one side. These films show quite a few warring nationalities without explaining the reasons for their hostility. There are many questions: why are the Latvians and the Chinese fighting against the independence of Estonians? Why are the Finns supportive? Why are the Estonians fighting on the side of both Russians and Germans? There is, in addition, the problem of characters who change sides. Instead of tackling these questions here, I recommend reading no I/MMIII of Estonian Culture, which analyses the film Names in Marble quite thoroughly.

During WW II the Estonian territory was controlled, in turn, by the Third Reich and the Soviet Union, both of whom forced Estonians into their armies. Exchanging the Red Army uniform for the grey outfit of the Wehrmacht is bitterly disapproved of in Men in Military Coats - the Estonian Red Army officer who has defected to the German side dies at the end of the film by a bullet fired by his former subordinate in the Red Army.

In the three last mentioned films, the ethnically Estonian characters are arrayed along the entire extent of the whole 'good-bad' scale. It is interesting that the most monstrous characters are not part of another nationality but, rather, are Estonians who had chosen the wrong side and are thus traitors from the point of view of the filmmakers.

life in a citadel

A good Estonian
So what constitutes a (real) Estonian? The films made during the Soviet occupation (Life in a Citadel and Men in Military Coats) and the films of the democratic state (Young Eagles, made between the two world wars, and Names in Marble, made during the new independence period) both use pretty similar methods in depicting a negative character. This is proof of the consistency of the essential values in Estonian culture. Their opposites then are qualities which are given to a character by means of remarks, appearance and action, thus making him thoroughly alien: arrogance, rudeness, lack of respect for the domestic peace and dignity of local people, physical violence against the weaker and defenceless minority, excessive consumption of alcohol, sloppiness, little vigilance, sexual harassment of women, stupidity, lying, covering up, cowardice, changing ideological sides, and not knowing the local language, knowing it very badly or ruining it with foreign-language phrases.

These qualities are by no means exclusively typical of the value system of Estonian culture. As negative characters stand out by deviating from the norm and for the purpose of being condemned, Estonian war films offer quite a clear picture of what a (real) Estonian is not like.

The declared national identity as a positive image of self is determined by what is characteristic of a nation, as well as by what it should definitely not be. The national self-image not only describes real Estonians, but also largely dictates and fixes the ethical ideal. The enemy is in the service of depicting the ethical ideal by showing, simply and clearly, what is not characteristic of one's own people - those who belong among us.

Although the aesthetic canons of filmmaking have developed over time, technology has improved and ideological circumstances have shifted from restrictive totalitarianism to an almost totally permissive liberalism, Estonian war films still present the same ethical ideal of a hard-working, honest, sensible, brave, self-sacrificing and peace-loving nation which is willing to learn and dreams of freedom.

Alo Joosepson (1981) studied semiotics and cultural studies at Tartu University, and is currently doing his MA in semiotics and cultural studies at Tartu