(Za)chachmęcenie (Poland)
| Zachachmecenie 🇵🇱 | ||
|---|---|---|
 |
||
| Location: Poland | ||
| Definition: Practices of self-help involving non-transparency and elements of rule-bending or free-riding | ||
| Keywords: Poland – CEE – Europe – EU – Survival – Shortage – Self-help – Trickster – Rule-bending – Moral ambivalence – Employment – Need – Getting things done | ||
| Clusters: Functional ambivalence – Gaming the system – Free-riding | ||
| Author: Alisa Musanovic | ||
| Affiliation: Alumna, School of Slavonic and East European Studies, University College London, UK | ||
By Alisa Musanovic, Alumna, School of Slavonic and East European Studies, University College London, UK
|
(Za)chachmęcenie (verbal form (za)chachmęcić) is a Polish colloquial term for behaviours ranging from dishonesty to small-scale theft. Broadly defined as doing something ‘vague, indistinct, blurred’, the inclusion of the prefix –za denotes the more specific act of purposefully ‘confusing something […] with the intention of concealing some dishonesty’ (Online Dictionary, translations by the author). The same Dictionary defines zachachmęcenie as an ‘appropriation of someone else’s property, using someone’s inattention.’ The concept therefore assumes a dual meaning. All definitions commonly capture the notion of non-transparency and an element of free-riding. Under Communism, the practice was perceived as a coping mechanism constituting a form of self-help. However, the political system today means that the practice may no longer be interpreted as such. |
Many became excluded from the utopian Communist project, which meant that far from the projected ideal of equality, Polish society became highly stratified (Pobłocki 2012: 73). Małgorzata Mazurek’s interviews with Polish families demonstrate how people responded to scarcity. They directly refer to their use of chachmęcenie, noting how informal taxi drivers’ engagement with the practice meant that they were able to obtain extra fuel at petrol stations (Mazurek 2012: 303). While Mazurek translates chachmęcenie as ‘swindling’ (Mazurek 2012: 304) – which captures the deceptive element of the practice – the term is perhaps too strong. According to Cambridge Dictionary, swindling can also include larger-scale theft or fraud, while chachmęcenie relates predominantly to small-scale dishonest interactions for gaining access, or obtaining goods, material benefits, or services in short supply.
(Za)chachmęcenie is associated with small-scale theft – routine practices of petty pilfering, workplace or part-time crime, siphoning out and hoarding – and with nesuny (ʻcarryout peopleʼ) – employees who steal things from their workplaces. The ‘economics of shortage’ experienced under Communism (Kornai, cited in Mazurek 2012: 299) normalised the range of behaviours and attitudes of ‘honesty, which [also] enabled […] petty stealing from the workplace’ (Kochanowicz 2004: 75). Indeed, a Polish newspaper pointed out that “theft” from factories had become so common that it had almost ‘achieved the respectability of custom’ (Landy 1961: 20). The gap between the official projection of common ownership and people’s actual access to resources means that (za)chachmęcenie can be conceptualised as “repossession” of what people were entitled to have. (Za)chachmęcenie’s casual nature thus suggests that it was an accepted practice among citizens disillusioned with state failure – a response to shortages and uncertainty. This is reflected in ethnographic observations made by Janine Wedel, who noted that ‘the system encourages people to behave dishonestly’, demonstrating flexibility of the (il)legality line (Wedel 1986: 151).
Today, continued preoccupations with resourcefulness in Poland suggest that the erosion of state socialism has not equated to an erosion of the mindset, or practical sense, inherent in practices of (za)chachmęcenie (Bourdieu 1986). Mazurek’s interviews with the same families thirty years later indicate that the logic of chachmęcenie was ‘passed on from one generation to the next’ (Mazurek 2012: 306). Such psychological dimensions of the practice can be linked to Kochanowicz’s conception of strategies of calculation as sometimes taking place ‘at the subconscious level’, suggesting that practices became ingrained during socialism and preserved during its political transformation (2004: 76). However, similar practices may be traced back beyond socialism.
The etymological origins of the concept relate to the old Polish noun chachmęt or chachmęć – dating back to the seventeenth century – which denoted a forest thicket or bush (Online Dictionary). The figurative sense of the word which followed – with chachmęt becoming synonymous with chaos or confusion – has likely shaped the meaning of the verb as it is understood today: as becoming ‘entangled’ in a difficult situation (Karaś 2011: 62). The alternative meaning of zachachmęcenie which emerged in the twentieth century can be defined as theft in its least serious form. Indeed, “theft” in Polish can be described as ‘combining (kombinować), organising […] in the best case to zachachmęcić’ (Piętkowa 2014: 158). The more morally neutral idea of obtaining rather than stealing suggests a less calculated thought process and more legitimate practice.
Before becoming a general Polish colloquialism, the word belonged only to the Warsaw dialect. The dual meanings of the concept, as well as its Warsaw origins, are depicted in an apt illustration sourced from the website of the Polish National Centre for Culture. Entitled ‘To steal something (while) in a bush’, it portrays a fox entangled in leaves, while carrying the (presumably “stolen”) Palace of Culture and Science in its arms, an allusion to Warsaw.
(Za)chachmęcenie bears resemblance to the Polish practice of kombinacja (kombinowanje, see also combina). Loosely translated as ‘finagling’, kombinacja, much like (za)chachmęcenie, centres around finding creative ways of coping with difficult situations. The Polish peasants’ strategic use of kombinacja helped them to negotiate power in their localities following the Second World War (Materka 2017: 1). However, the practice of (za)chachmęcenie is more specific because of its association with the distinct act of appropriation or theft. Peasants’ employment of kombinacja as a ‘key method’ to ‘shift the balance of power into peasant hands’ also suggests a more long-term, organised strategy operating on a collective level (Materka 2017: 149), as opposed to the more individual and opportunistic act of (za)chachmęcenie. Thus, the smaller-scale nature of (za)chachmęcenie means that it has a less political connotation. Finally, (za)chachmęcenie does not imply an exchange in ‘good kombinacja relations’ (Materka 2017: 8). The ideas of being evasive, confusing or manipulative (or simply a thief) inherent in (za)chachmęcenie suggest that the practice is more concerned with self-help than it is with mutual interest and accommodation (see also gorroneo).
The articulation of knowledge surrounding the practice today suggests that the existence of (za)chachmęcenie is firmly established in the Polish popular imagination. Thus, one online platform includes users’ views and comparisons of their understandings of the nuances of zachachmęcenie, with the discussion thread being viewed 204,239 times (Maziek 2017)! One user suggests that in their locality, the word can be a ‘humorous term’ to describe ‘moving or hiding something, […] it is not being used seriously in the event of real theft’ (Stanisław Lem Forum 2017).
The practice has also been alluded to in the literature of the socialist period. In his 1966 poem Lament Wysokiego Dygnitarza (Lament of a High Dignitary), Janusz Szpotański mockingly explores the grievances of a party official who is outraged at having lost his lavish lifestyle. His hero blames this on ‘comrade G,’ a likely reference to Władysław Gomułka, the leader at the time, who ‘zachachmęcił’ his situation (Szpotański 1966). ‘Comrade G’ is portrayed as responsible for having meddled with the effortless life previously enjoyed by the speaker, who is no longer allowed to socialise with intellectual elites. Overall, the variety in the usage of the term indicates the wealth of interpretations of the practice and multiple contexts that continue to be relevant in present-day Poland.
Entries in the online encyclopaedia linking to zachachmecenie
References
Cambridge Dictionary, ‘Swindle’, https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/swindle
Karaś, H. 2011. Polska leksykografia gwarowa (‘Polish Lexicography of Dialects’). Warsaw: Faculty of Polish Studies at the University of Warsaw
Kochanowicz, J. 2004. ‘Trust, Confidence and Social Capital in Poland: A Historical Perspective’, in I. Markova (ed.), Trust and Democratic Transitions in Post-Communist Europe. New York: Oxford University Press: 63-84
Landy, P. 1961. ‘What Price Corruption’, Problems of Communism, 10 (2): 18-25
Materka, E. 2017. Dystopia's Provocateurs: Peasants, State, and Informality in the Polish-German Borderlands. Bloomington: Indiana University Press
Maziek. 2017. ‘Pytam:’ [Discussion post]. Stanisław Lem Forum, 9th June, https://forum.lem.pl/index.php?topic=1107.1005
Mazurek, M. 2012. ‘Keeping It Close to Home: Resourcefulness and Scarcity in Late Socialist and Postsocialist Poland’, in P. Bren and M. Neuburger (eds.), Communism Unwrapped: Consumption in Cold War Eastern Europe. New York: Oxford University Press: 298-320
Online Dictionary, Malinowski, M., ‘Polszczyzna od Ręki Pana Literki: Chachmęcić’ (‘Polish from the Hands of Mr. Letter: Chachmęcić), obcyjezykpolski.pl
Piętkowa, R. 2014. ‘Pudelek? Polityka? Przybora? Dobór Tekstów do Analizy na Zajęciach Językoznawczych’ (‘Pudelek? Polityka? Przybora? Selecting Texts for Analysis on Linguistics Classes’), Forum Lingwistyczne, 1: 149-162
Pobłocki, K. 2012. ‘The Struggle over Collective Consumption in Urbanizing Poland’, in P. Bren and M. Neuburger (eds.), Communism Unwrapped: Consumption in Cold War Eastern Europe. New York: Oxford University Press: 68-86
Szpotański, J. 1966. ‘Lament Wysokiego Dygnitarza’ (Lament of a High Dignitary’), Literatut.ug.edu.pl, https://literat.ug.edu.pl/szpot/lament.htm
Wedel, J. R. 1986. The Private Poland. New York.