Embarking on a ‘(birth)rite of passage’: exploring the role of liminality and youth transitions in diaspora tourism motivation

ABSTRACT

Motivations to participate in diaspora tourism ‘birthright’ programs have widely encompassed themes of heritage exploration, including a desire to develop personalised attachments to people, places, and memories connected to ancestral heritage or a ‘homeland’. Despite the popularity of such programs among young members from the diaspora, the additional role that life course positioning plays in structuring motivation is less understood. In this paper, I analyse the motivations shared through semi-structured interviews with a group of young Hungarian-Australians who attended a 10-month ‘birthright’ diaspora program in Hungary. By applying a rite of passage lens to their stories, I highlight that uncertainties about the future, escaping the mundanity of everyday life, and the burden of impending adult responsibilities, were strong factors shaping their gap year motivations and overall view of the program. The paper thus encourages a more nuanced interpretation of diaspora tourism motivation through a liminal and youth transition context. It also prompts further thinking toward the role and representation of such programs as alternate rite of passage events, representing a critical point of transition between life stage endings and beginnings.

KEYWORDS:

• Liminality
• youth transitions
• diaspora tourism
• Hungarian-Australian
• rite of passage
• gap year

Introduction

The proliferation of diaspora policies by homeland states, especially since the 1990s, has seen a strategic shift in the conceptualisation of diaspora. The diaspora is now recognised as an ‘ongoing transnational network’ or ‘transnational community’, inclusive of a variety of generations of members. Accordingly, belonging to a diaspora community is maintained through a range of transnational engagements, policies, and strategies, such as through diaspora tourism. Diaspora tourism forms part of a collection of homeland-based travel including roots tourism, ethnic tourism, and personal heritage tourism (Basu, 2004; Coles & Timothy, 2004; Fowler, 2004; Kibria, 2002; King, 1994; Marschall, 2015; Prince, 2022). It may include self-guided travels and visits to the ‘homeland’, often described as ‘VFR travel’ (visiting friends and relatives), or include more organised forms of travel, including through birthright programs and homeland education tours, often facilitated or funded by government and non-government organisations.

Motivations for diaspora tourism are often analysed through desires to explore multiple belongings and identity dissonances, develop personalised attachments to ‘place’ and resolve questions about family heritage and culture (Basu, 2001, 2004; Duval, 2004; Hughes & Allen, 2010; Kasinitz et al., 2002; King et al., 2011; Nguyen & King, 2004; Ruting, 2012; Sala & Baldassar, 2017; Timothy & Teve, 2004). The focus of this paper is on motivations for participation in ‘state-led’ (or government supported) diaspora tourism programs, important because of their strategic intention to initiate and institutionalise ties with the diaspora, and often carefully planned to enhance their engagements with the homeland and culture in ways which reflect ethnonationalist agendas (Bloch, 2017; Délano & Gamlen, 2014; Gamlen, 2014).

Over the last decade, diaspora literature has analysed the ontological shifts which may be influenced by ‘time-specific events’ such as relationship breakdowns, job loss, oppressive family situations, marriage, or further study, which prompt desires to ‘escape’ to the homeland for shorter and longer-term periods (King et al., 2011; Ruting, 2012; Sala & Baldassar, 2017). The homeland thus becomes positioned both as an intense place of leisure and temporary ‘second home’ in which to escape the pressures of everyday life. However, few studies have focused on the significance of life course positioning on shaping young people’s motivations and choices to engage in diaspora tourism programs. Understanding the impact of youth transitions in this context becomes important when considering the significant representation of young members from diaspora communities in such programs. For example, the ‘Birthright Israel Foundation’ accepts young adults aged between 18 and 26, with the ‘Moroccan Summer University program’ inviting Moroccan youth from the diaspora aged between 18 and 25. In the Hungarian context, ‘ReConnect Hungary’ lists an age range of 18–28, with the Balassi program explored in this paper accepting Hungarian-origin individuals aged between 18 and 35. The popularity of these programs among young people throughout late modern times is unsurprising, given youth is a period of increased independence and identity exploration. Tourism has also become an extension of everyday life and popular youth cultural practice facilitating identity consumption (Prince, 2022).

This paper thus explores the motivations shared by 17 Hungarian-Australians who attended the 10-month Balassi ‘birthright’ diaspora tourism program between 2001 and 2018. It highlights that their social positions as middle-class emerging adults shaped their motivations and conception of the program as a ‘gap year’ escape, nurturing their uncertain feelings and transitions to adulthood. It also acknowledges the role that prior cultural education and social networks from the diaspora community play in supporting their motivations. In drawing from the sociology of tourism, rites of passage, and youth mobilities literature, the paper reveals that motivations for the Hungarian ‘birthright’ diaspora program were closely intertwined with broader life course feelings and conditions, foremost liminality.¹ Liminality is understood as ‘a movement between fixed points’ characterised as ambiguous and often unsettling (Turner, 1974, p. 274). The liminality experienced by participants from this paper relates to their movements between adolescence to adulthood as ‘emerging adults’ (Arnett, 2004, 2006). Their liminal feelings related to uncertainties about the future, dissatisfaction with current life circumstances, and the perceived burden of impending adult responsibilities. In applying a rite of passage lens to participant motivations, the initial or main ‘pull’ to the homeland becomes less connected to a desire to strengthen a diasporic consciousness,² and instead, is seen as a significant ‘once-in-a-lifetime’ event providing temporary disconnection from current life, as well as nurturing the various changes which accompany the youth experience. The paper thereby encourages a more nuanced consideration of motivations for diaspora tourism, as well as accentuates the diverse role these programs play outside the contexts of heritage exploration and place-attachment.

Understanding (diaspora)tourism motivation(s)

Motivations among later generations from diaspora communities to participate in diaspora tourism reflect a strong heritage exploration focus to discover multiple belongings, resolve identity dissonances, and develop personalised attachments to place. However, within youth mobilities and tourism literatures, motivations have been commonly conceptualised according to the two-dimensional ‘push-pull’ model, acknowledging the diversity of factors which prompt change and encourage travel. Push factors consist of various psychological forces which shape decisions for a departure from everyday life, with pull factors relating to destination attractiveness (Chen & Chen, 2015; Leong et al., 2015; Murdy et al., 2018). For example, sociologist Graham Dann (1977) highlighted ‘anomie’ and ‘ego enhancement’ as the two main push factors shaping impetus for travel, although other factors include ‘escape from routine, exploration and evaluation of self, relaxation, prestige, regression, enhancement of kinship relationships, facilitation of social interaction, novelty, and education’ (Vong et al., 2017, p. 222).

Tourist typologies have previously been popular ways to delineate between the different ‘types’ of travellers, categorising motivations based on expectations of travel and destination choices. For example, Cohen’s (1979) tourism typology examined five different types of tourists related to modes of travel, including recreational, diversionary, experiential, experimental, and existential modes. Of the five, the diversionary mode attracts tourists with a desire to escape from the mundanity of everyday life, with the experiential mode interpreted as travel facilitating re-enchantment of disenchanted individuals through the exploration and accumulation of new experiences (Cohen, 1979). Existential tourists intend to use travel as a journey to seek a transformative experience and transition from alienation to belonging. This category is most often applied to diaspora tourism, as existential tourists are driven by an innate desire to establish and maintain a sense of belonging to the homeland, usually from difficulties in adjustment and experiences of discrimination (see for example Nguyen & King, 2004 or Ruting, 2012).

Diaspora-specific typologies have also recently emerged to explore motivation. For example, Tingting and McKercher's (2016, p. 106) diaspora tourist typology consists of five different tourists categorised by intentions for homeland travel. First, their ‘Re-affirmative diaspora tourist’ represents individuals whose trip to the homeland is the result of a desire to maintain their existing national belonging. Second, ‘Quest diaspora tourist’ describes those who view return visits to the homeland as a personal quest to discover the nation and gain a spiritual and cultural connection. The ‘Reconnected diaspora tourist’ describes those whose return trip represented a chance to discover their roots, with the ‘Distanced diaspora tourist’ describing those who have had little attachment to the homeland and see it as an interesting place to visit. Lastly, the ‘detached diaspora tourist’ conceptualises individuals whose trips to the homeland are less significant to identity and rather, are an act of obligation, similar to the concept of ‘forced transnationalism’ (Lee, 2011). While such typologies are useful in categorising tourism intentions, they fail to account for some of the complexities of tourist motivation which do not fit neatly within these categories. For example, as will be shown, the motivations explored in this paper appear to cut across and complicate them.

Literature on diaspora tourism has also shown that establishing place-based attachments and subsequently, a stronger sense of national belonging is a dominant motivation among later generations. Likened to a ‘secular pilgrimage’ (Basu, 2001), participation in diaspora tourism results from individuals seeking to gain personal, direct experience with a territory and learn more about their heritage (and themselves) in the process (Kasinitz et al., 2002; King et al., 2011). This quest for belonging not only involves searching and developing emotional, and oftentimes nostalgic, attachments to people and places, but also an outcome of seeking to engage in reflexive identity work.

The level of prior cultural education and sense of curiosity can function as pull factors guiding decision making (King et al., 2011; Levitt, 2009; Mehtiyeva & Prince, 2020; Ruting, 2012; Stephenson, 2002). As Stephenson (2002, p. 416) succinctly states, engagement in diaspora tourism therefore emerges from a desire for participants ‘to construct and/or reconstruct an image of the homeland and also contemplate an identity for themselves’. Nostalgia and curiosity are important in this construction process, shaped by what ‘people have learned since childhood, through stories told by their parents, grandparents or others, about their ethnic and familial heritage’ (Timothy & Teye, 2004, p. 112). For example, Ruting’s (2012) research showed that second-generation Estonian-Australians’ interest in travelling to Estonia was shaped by their perception of the country as a distant place in which they were somehow connected. This perception was developed through stories about the homeland shared by parents and grandparents, prompting a desire to use their visit to resolve curiosities and accumulate personal in situ experiences.

It is important to note that curiosity can also be shaped by involvement in the diaspora community and extent to which families prioritise cultural education and engagement with the homeland and homeland politics. As referenced in transnational migration literature, many second (and later) generation migrants have grown up in transnational social fields (Basch et al., 1994; Levitt & Glick-Schiller, 2004), where friends and relatives shape both participation and the regularity of homeland travel and contribute to enhancing the likelihood of developing place-based attachments (Duval, 2004; King et al., 2011; Nguyen & King, 2004; Ruting, 2012; Timothy & Teye, 2004). For example, Sala and Baldassar’s (2017), research on homeland visits among Italian-Australians showed that visiting family in the homeland was the catalyst for regular transnational activity and represented a strong source of social identity for the second generation, enabling them to ‘get in touch with their roots’.

Lastly, generational positioning has also been explored as a key factor shaping how later generations have interpreted the purpose, experience, and impact of homeland travel. For example, Herner-Kovács (2014) showed that generational positioning and pre-existing Hungarian cultural knowledge shaped interpretation and experiences within the Hungarian birth right program, ‘ReConnect Hungary’. The first and second-generation Hungarian-Australians appeared less aware of the program’s value, and more likely to enjoy social aspects. In comparison, the third and fourth generations were more likely to have a greater appreciation of the educational aspects of the program. In another example, Andits’ (2020) analysis of return journeys to Hungary by first and later generation Hungarian-Australians revealed that generational positioning influenced the extent of tourist gaze adopted while in Hungary. Drawing on the case of dirt and decay of buildings in Hungary, second-generation Hungarian-Australians were conceptualised as diaspora backpackers, where decay resembled examples of Hungarian ‘authenticity’, as opposed to migrant returnees who perceived them as indicative of troubled, historical pasts (Andits, 2020).

Diaspora tourism motivation through a liminal lens

As has been established, while heritage exploration remains a consistent theme in diaspora tourism motivation, the sociology of tourism and youth mobilities literature can offer additional insight into the diversity of decisions for homeland travel and its conception as a rite of passage event. The rite of passage framework for understanding motivation among young backpackers and ‘gappers’³ reveals travel as a transitionary device. According to Matthews (2014, p. 158) rite of passage is used to capture those ‘ritual experiences, behaviours, or events that are engaged with as a means of signifying an individual or group’s passing from one life stage or fixed socio-cultural state to the next’. Life stage transitions within the context of conclusions and endings are thus central within a rite of passage context, where travel marks the transitionary period and the beginning of a new chapter of life, referred often through the escape-seeking dichotomy regularly explored within gap year and backpacker contexts (Leong et al., 2015). For example, Maoz’s (2007) Israeli backpacker tourists viewed their travel experiences as a rite of passage into early adulthood, with backpacking providing a temporary break from routine and an opportunity to rebel from cultural and familial expectations before returning home.

Turner’s (1974) anthropological concept ‘liminality’ is also key to understanding these transitionary dynamics, used to describe the movement and status which exist when one is positioned ‘in-between’ specific life stages. The liminal space is the middle stage of a rite of passage when individuals no longer hold their pre-ritual status and are yet to acquire their new status, thus being a period of ambiguity and, for some, a period of increased change which prompts ontological shift (Matthews, 2014; Shields, 2013). While liminality may ebb and flow throughout the life course, it is a condition acutely experienced by young people during adolescence and early adulthood. Young people's stage in their life course and status in society places them in a space of uncertainty, impacting not only their political status and civic participation, but, as this paper will show, shaping how they navigate changes to identity and homeland engagement (Turner, 1974; Wood, 2012).

According to theories of late modernity, today’s contemporary social conditions present new ways of understanding people’s lived realities, especially those of young people (Giddens, 1991). Oscillating between flexibility and precarity, the experiences of young people have been characterised by risk and uncertainty, with pathways to adulthood no longer pre-given or fixed (Bauman, 2000; Furlong et al., 2011). Jeffrey Arnett’s ‘emerging adulthood’ concept brings together liminality and youth experience, comprising a cohort of young adults who are positioned in-between life stages, having left adolescence but not yet entered adulthood (Arnett, 2004, 2006). This positionality can be characterised as a period of endings and new beginnings, resulting from anticipating, and preparing for, the achievement of milestones and roles often associated with adulthood. Milestones may include the commencement of one’s career, homeownership, and marriage. The changing socio-political and economic conditions over the last few decades have further complicated the attainment and feasibility of such milestones, having the potential to increase feelings of liminality experienced by young people. For example, in Australia, young people have witnessed a prolonged housing unaffordability crisis, as well as a greater volatility of the labour market, which has seen an increased number of people remaining at home and within higher education, for longer periods of time.

Case study: Hungarian-Australians and a diaspora tourism program in Hungary

This paper focuses on the experiences of second- and third-generation Hungarians⁴ from the Hungarian diaspora community in Australia and their participation in a 10-month state-led diaspora tourism program in Hungary. Globally, it is estimated that the total number of Hungarians in the countries bordering Hungary (transborder or kin-minority diaspora) is 2.1 million, with an estimated 2 million Hungarians living in the West (diaspora communities abroad) (Kovács, 2020).⁵ The most significant Hungarian diaspora communities abroad outside of Europe with the most active Hungarian cultural centres include Sao Paulo (Brazil) and Toronto (Canada), Chicago and Cleveland (United States), as well as Sydney (Australia) (Ludányi, 2014).

The Hungarian diaspora today represents an interesting interplay between territorialisation and de-territorialisation. While the Hungarian diaspora is considered a transnational community, territory still plays a significant role in promoting a diasporic understanding of nationhood. Hungary as a homeland thus remains a territorial construct, where national belonging continues to be promoted as strongly tied to ethnonational conceptions of roots, anchored in place, and reproduced through myths of common origin. State-led diaspora tourism programs like the one explored in this paper thus represent key nation-building and diaspora engagement strategy(ies) for homeland governments, because they encourage second-, third- (and later) generation members to strengthen their emotional attachments and overall relationship with the nation.

The diaspora community in Australia grew out of several waves of forced migration,⁶ especially during the decades of Hungary’s communist dictatorship. In Australia, the Hungarian diaspora consists of a heterogeneous and diverse community of people who were born and migrated from Hungary as well as from neighbouring countries, including Austria, Slovakia, Romania, Ukraine, and Croatia. Due to decades of separation from Hungary, forced migrants in Australia ‘developed a de-territorialized sense of Hungarian identity nurtured by memory and imagination’ (Andits, 2015, p. 313). The formation of various Hungarian community organisations functioned to maintain their personal images of Hungary and build co-ethnic networks, ‘becoming hubs for performing and maintaining Hungarian language and culture’ (Kantek et al., 2019, p. 83). Hungarian social clubs, church groups, scouts, community language schools, and folkdance groups were introduced from the mid-1950s onward, many of which remain active in Hungarian communities, particularly in Melbourne and Sydney. These organisations have been significant ‘local’ resources used by later generations to receive regular, flexible cultural education, enhance Hungarian language competency, and nurture Hungarian identity development. The Hungarian-Australian diaspora now also includes later generations, as well as economic and lifestyle migrants.

The program

The Hungarian diaspora program in this paper – commonly called the ‘Balassi program’ – exists as part of a growing number of diaspora programs embraced by governments and cultural institutes to enhance engagements with diaspora communities (Paschalidis, 2009). The program is the longest government-subsidised program for the diaspora provided by Hungary’s leading cultural diplomacy institute; the Balassi Institute, running for ten months, and offered at the headquarters in Budapest, Hungary. It invites young people of Hungarian origin aged between 18 and 35 years, born outside of Hungary, to improve their language skills and cultural knowledge through experiencing contemporary Hungarian life, inviting Hungarians from diaspora communities including Australia, Canada, England, Brazil, Argentina, America, Germany, Russia, and Croatia. The program (and overall work of the institute) has significantly contributed to maintaining a Hungarian diaspora consciousness⁷ abroad, seeing small, yet consistent groups of young Hungarian-Australians annually travel to Hungary since 2001.

Program length, eligibility criteria, scholarship offerings, and formal curriculum mark the Balassi program as distinct from other diaspora programs.⁸ Eligibility for the program is assessed along the lines of pre-existing language proficiency (verbal and written) and extent of engagement with the diaspora community, namely, membership and participation in Hungarian community organisations, such as the Hungarian Scouts. The Scholarship is funded by the Hungarian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Training, covering basic living expenses and accommodation. The program’s scholarship plays a significant role in incentivising participation, providing a stipend to cover basic living costs and on-campus dormitory accommodation in Budapest, with ease of access to the inner-city culture of Hungary, including cafes, clubs, bars, scenic views of the Danube River and famous heritage sites.

The program’s curriculum is divided into two semesters, which includes a study period of 13 weeks, involving class attendance (28 hours per week) as well as a requirement to attend two fieldtrips. Key subjects in the program include language training, history, geography, poetry, and folk culture. The program forms a significant part of Hungary’s diaspora politics, contributing to the (ethno)nation-building project of the Hungarian government by seeking to institutionalise transnational ties with participants and extend upon the work of local ethnic organisations abroad (Kantek et al., 2021). The structure of the program provides participants with ‘free’ time available outside the curriculum, which, when paired with government scholarship, has made the program a popular and pragmatic option for Hungarian-Australians to consider as a type of gap year in Hungary with multiple benefits on personal and collective identity construction (Kantek et al., 2022).

Interviewing Hungarian-Australian Balassi participants

This paper draws from a larger project which explored Hungarian state-diaspora politics between the Hungarian-Australian diaspora community and the Balassi Institute.⁹ The project used a community-based participatory research (CBPR) design, given the author’s Hungarian-Australian background. Alongside semi-structured interviews, focus groups were conducted with Hungarian community leaders, as well as analysis of program-related material including application forms and curriculum documents. The focus on the Hungarian-Australian community (and Hungarian-Australian program participants) contributes to the overall paucity of research exploring the role and impact of Hungarian diaspora engagement strategies on Hungarian diaspora consciousness in Australia. Existing research on Hungarian diaspora tourism has centred on VFR travel by domestic and transborder Hungarians (Iorio & Corsale, 2013; Zátori et al., 2019), second- and third-generation migrant Hungarians from the United States (Herner-Kovács, 2014; Palotai et al., 2019; Pintz, 2011) and recently, a comparative cross-generational case study analysis of return journeys by migrants and their descendants from Australia (Andits, 2020). The Balassi program is one of a few diaspora programs which invite the participation of Hungarian-Australians, especially for a longer duration, where participation appears as a realistic option, given geographically related constraints such as length and cost of travel.

The analytic focus on the Hungarian-Australian community also acknowledges the differential experiences and diversities of diaspora communities (Anthias, 1998). Each community has been subject to different social (local) conditions and opportunities, as well as developed under different circumstances, where experiences of Hungarian culture and identity have been tailored to meet their own local needs (Gazsó et al., 2016; Palotai et al., 2019). For example, research by Palotai et al. (2019) suggests that motivations for Hungarian language learning differs between communities in Australia, South America, and the United States due to varying socio-political contexts and resource availability. For those in the United States, Hungarian language learning was motivated by a desire to improve rank in the scouting communities. By contrast, South Americans saw Hungarian language learning as an opportunity to acquire Hungarian citizenship and move abroad to work, thereby pulled by possibilities for socio-economic mobility. Finally, in Australia, Hungarian language competency was viewed as a form of cultural capital which could enable educational opportunity, as second language subjects were ranked favourably and rewarded in both the Higher School Certificate (HSC) and university applications. These insights thus reveal that the broader national contexts within which diaspora communities are situated provide unique backdrops to analyse perceptions of diaspora policies and motivations for engagement.

This paper analyses insights shared by 17 Hungarian-Australians who had completed the Balassi program between 2001 and 2018, aged between 18 and 30 at the time of their participation.¹⁰ Participants were recruited via the snowball sampling strategy via key Hungarian community organisations on the basis of their successful prior participation in the program, their identification as second- or third-generation Hungarian-Australians, and their involvement in at least one Hungarian community organisation in Australia. The participants came from Australian cities including nine from Sydney (New South Wales), three from Melbourne (Victoria), three from Perth (Western Australia), one from the Gold Coast (Queensland), and one from Adelaide (South Australia). Seven of the interviewees were aged between 18 and 23 at the time of their interview, followed by four between 24 and 29, three between 30 and 35 and finally three aged between 36 and 41. They were all – to varying degrees – involved in a selection of Hungarian community organisations in Australia. Most had attended Hungarian language schooling at a primary and secondary level, as well as maintained weekly to fortnightly membership within Hungarian scouting and/or folk dancing groups since a young age. Most participants had also travelled sporadically to Hungary to visit family from a young age, though much of their Hungarian cultural engagements, networks, and education were regularly received through their participation in local Hungarian organisations and cultural events in Australia. All were at least conversational in Hungarian, given that a minimum level of conversational Hungarian language competency was a prerequisite for program participation.

The semi-structured interviews were conducted in English, though welcomed Hungarian references (if naturally occurring), given my own Hungarian background and language fluency. Interviews were conducted online and face-to-face, ranging between one and two hours in duration. Participants were asked to reflect and detail their initial motivations and interest in applying for the program,¹¹ share their personal highlights and challenges during their time in the program, and reflect on their feelings of belonging upon program conclusion and return to Australia.¹² This paper specifically analyses the pre-program motivations shared by the participants. For the Hungarian-Australians interviewed, the Balassi program was overwhelmingly viewed as an opportunity to embark on a gap year before resuming their transitions to various markers of adulthood, including pursuing further education, beginning their careers, saving for home ownership, and developing serious romantic relationships. The following sections analyse their motivations.

‘Filling the gap’: analysing gap year motivations

Liminality and escape

The gap year motivations of participants were embedded in liminal narratives of ‘escape’ from their lives in Australia. Escaping the mundane, everyday routines and dissatisfactions with current work or education commitments were imperative in many of the participants’ decisions to participate in the program:

I wasn’t very happy with what I was doing at work. I was using it as an escape from here [Australia] and so I applied. I sort of looked at it as twelve months to start afresh … I didn’t know what I was going to do [after the program] but it was twelve months of not having to worry about that. (Ákos)

I wasn’t sure about what I was studying at university, and I had my doubts, and I just wanted a year off – a gap year to give myself time to think about what I really wanted to do later on. (Noémi)

Things weren’t going right emotionally for me, and I felt like I needed to just get away. I always wanted a gap year. I wasn’t really working anyway. (Nora)

Rather than being planned as part of the transition to higher education, the desire for a gap year in the stories above is driven by widespread uncertainty about current and future life circumstances, and to pause current or foreseeable commitments. Discussions of ‘gap year’ motivations are linked to the liminal life course position occupied by many young people, which brings instability due to changing social status (King, 2011; King & Christou, 2011). The Balassi program then, as a gap year, represents a transitionary state, providing space for participants to ‘ponder what to do in life’, facilitating their ‘eventual transitioning from significant life stages’ (Vogt, 2017, p. 48). Similar ideas have been examined within the context of migration and transnational literature, where transnational mobility patterns occur in relation to moments of life transition and change (Conradson & Latham, 2005; Robertson et al., 2018; Smith, 2005).

In another reflection, Béla spoke of his dislike for his course at university and doubts about future job prospects. He saw the program as an opportunity to ‘reset his life’ and visit Hungary, having never visited before:

This will sound bad, but I was sort of in a hole in my life. I was doing nothing, working a casual job and I was thinking about what I was going to do with myself. A friend had mentioned Balassi [the program] and I thought that it would be a good opportunity to reset my life and it’s not like I was necessarily stopping anything. (Béla)

While discussing his motivation, Béla shared his observations about the Balassi program often attracting people with similar reasons and circumstances:

When you go there [attend the Balassi program in Hungary] and you talk to everyone, you find that everyone there is also in some sort of hole in their life – they’re either in between studying or don’t know what they want to do. (Béla)

It is clear from Béla’s accounts that shared feelings of liminality connected to uncertainty and/or dissatisfaction with their current lives are observably popular among many participants from the program. Similar types of motivation have been explored in the sociology of tourism literature, through the desire for difference and rupture of routine, often bound up in narratives of escaping the mundanity of everyday life, where mobility represents self-discovery and maturation through seeking new experiences. Temporary relocation is therefore viewed as a method enabling personal exploration without disrupting current and future plans at home (Conradson & Latham, 2005). Béla’s account thus supports the role of liminality in triggering transnational mobility and escape, where temporary relocation to Hungary was seen as posing little risk to current life in Australia. Additionally, his personal admission related to his motivation ‘sounding bad’ also signifies an awareness that his motivation appears incongruent with the program objectives: attending to enhance one’s Hungarian language skill and cultural knowledge through a commitment to, and interest in, the program’s curriculum. It also accentuates how prior cultural education and capacities (e.g. second language competency) can be leveraged during deliberation and program application, as a form of capital in exchange for personal gain.

Tamás and Gábor both share their motivations, framed by dissatisfaction with current life circumstances, as well as their interests in accumulating fun life experiences:

I got really sick of my minimum wage job, and I wasn’t sure of what I wanted to do and so it [the program] was a change to buy time and a chance to gain experience life, I guess. From what I had seen from some of my friends, they were in their final years of university and they were kind of worried about when they finish their course whether they want to get straight into the workforce and then they were worried that they wouldn’t have time afterwards to live a little, so I guess I didn’t want to miss out on living and having some fun, so I guess that was another factor. (Tamás)

Honestly, initially it wasn’t to do with a strong desire to learn anything or anything like that. It was literally a chance to go and live somewhere else for a year. I wasn’t interested in learning; I was interested in partying (laughs). (Gábor)

Motivations shared by the participants above are thus connected to the desire to prolong their temporary ‘emerging adulthood’ status, delay their transition to adulthood, and enjoy a period of fun, freedom, and independence before making decisions about their future(s). Both Gábor and Tamás have similar views on their engagement with the program as a ‘Balassi gap year’, an opportunity enabling space and time for self-exploration and accumulating life experiences (Bagnoli, 2009; King, 1994; Snee, 2014). These accounts reveal the influence of life stage transitions is particularly pertinent in late modernity, where individualisation rhetoric related to self-responsibility has a significant hold on how young people curate their futures and navigate life changes, opportunities, and transitions (Beck, 1992; Giddens, 1991).

Participant motivations must also be considered in view of their privileged positionalities in Australia. As middle class, young, Anglo-Saxons, their Hungarian identities have often functioned on very symbolic levels (Gans, 1979), operating as a type of ‘optional ethnicity’ or ‘invisible identity’ (Waters, 1990). As such, the pull and push factors for program participation were less orientated to identity or adjustment problems as commonly expressed by other young people from different diaspora communities (Nguyen & King, 2004). The cultural construction of the gap year in Australia is also relevant to consider. The desire for self-exploration often experienced throughout emerging adulthood is structured by the cultural norms and values of a particular social or national context and socio-economic positioning, shaping the agency of young people in how they spend their time during this period. For most of the Hungarian-Australians interviewed, their relative privilege as white, middle class young people, alongside Australia’s own cultural acceptance of the gap year (as an accepted middle class youth practice) enhanced program appeal and feasibility of participation.

It is important to note that during the interviews, themes of heritage exploration were indeed shared in participant motivation, though often secondary to gap year interests. József’s story is a typical example:

I wanted to take a gap year, but this was a legitimate reason to gap year. I didn’t have any money to spend on travelling and I didn’t want to take a gap year and do nothing, so I thought, ‘I’ll be in Hungary, I’ll be doing something’. I’m still taking a gap year, but I will be studying, and, plus, I wanted to live in Hungary for a year and see my close family there. (József)

József is engaging in a form of moral boundary drawing to differentiate and distance himself from stereotypes of gap years as directionless (as Béla recounts earlier in the paper), or from participants who hold ‘partying’ focused gap year motivations (such as that expressed by Gábor earlier). As Snee (2014, p. 845) points out, there is an increasing responsibilisation of gap year participants to make their time ‘worthwhile’ and meaningful, with the nature of this choice ‘predetermined and limited by particular conditions’. In the case of the Balassi program, this may include program aims, mandatory curriculum requirements, and eligibility criteria. As an act of impression management (Goffman, 1959), József’s motivation is also shaped by what the cultural context expects of him (Prince, 2021). By referring to the benefits of the gap year through the program (including studying, living, and visiting family, in Hungary), his desire for a ‘year off’ is framed as a goal-orientated endeavour which intends to support the objectives of the program and influence the perception of authenticity connected to his intended participation (Prince, 2021). His account thus reveals that while gap year motivations remain strong among participants, they are not always devoid of heritage exploration and self-presentation factors.

Social networks as endorsing motivations

Previous program attendees also played an important role in spreading positive messaging about the program, shaping in turn, participant motivations to apply. These previous attendees included siblings and friends and other social networks from Hungarian community organisations throughout Australia. Positive messaging was often spread by word of mouth, as well as through social media, where memorable social experiences were shared and documented online by participants. The impact of this messaging on motivation has been highlighted by participants such as Sándor and Vivien:

Well, I knew a fair few people who had already gone and said it was a great experience for a million and one reasons, like having a year in Europe, partying, seeing new places, meeting new people, and I mean, if you’re already in Europe, it’s a lot easier to travel to other countries. (Sándor)

My brother kept saying how it was the most fun he had ever had and that I had to do it and plus, I wanted to have a gap year. I knew so many people that were taking a gap year but not a lot of people I knew were going to Europe yet, so it was something which none of my friends have done yet. (Vivien)

As is apparent, gap year motivations remained consistent. However, more centrally, the contribution of community members in facilitating an ongoing cycle of program promotion becomes evident (i.e. Vivien’s brother or Sándor’s friends and relatives). By emphasising practices which are synonymous with gap year experiences, previous program participants become key in the construction of the program as a ‘diaspora gap year’ and resource to navigate liminality. By extension, they also contribute to the growing appeal and attractiveness of the Hungarian homeland as a ‘fun’ place enabling intense leisure consumption. In many ways, the social bonds which develop from collectively experiencing a rites of passage event – what Turner (1994) calls ‘communitas’ – can be detected as emerging as early as before participation in the Balassi program. With multiple members from the community conveying similar positive experiences of the program, the collectively held view that Sándor (among others) will also likely share in a similar overwhelmingly positive gap year experience and reap the similar benefits associated with program participation (including further travel, partying, and meeting new people), becomes mutually supported and strengthened. Community members thus re-affirm the role of the program as a rite of passage and ‘once-in-a-lifetime’ event commonly enjoyed among – and supported by – members from the diaspora community. As a result, gap year motivations and liminal feelings are sustained and legitimated through processes of social interaction and communication across the diaspora community.

Conclusion

Overall, a rite of passage lens has provided greater scope to consider the effects of liminality and youth transition on diaspora tourism motivation. As this paper has shown, while the Balassi program was viewed as an opportunity to enjoy a diaspora journey to Hungary, a rite of passage lens has explored a deeper connection between homeland engagement and life-stage related circumstances. According to the participants interviewed, engagement with the program was viewed as providing a temporary, transitionary, and fun space to delay and grapple with various present and future dissatisfactions and uncertainties in Australia. The paper highlighted that participants’ positions as emerging adults, as well as their possession of cultural knowledge and skills (including Hungarian language competency), communication with social networks in the diaspora community, and Australia’s cultural endorsement of the gap year, provided a critical contextual backdrop through which liminal feelings and gap year motivations for the program were realised (and legitimised). The experiences shared by participants have also affirmed liminality as both an individual and shared experience among people from similar social positions in the diaspora. The Balassi program, much like gap years, has attracted young second- and third-generation Hungarians seeking to engage in forms of self-evaluation and introspection through participation in a ‘once-in-a-lifetime’ opportunity, enabling access to an array of pro-social youth cultural practices and experiences in Hungary. Therefore, this paper has provided greater insight into how young people react to their liminal experiences and feelings through tourism, and how this reaction motivates greater homeland engagements. The impact of liminality and gap year motivations are not to be underestimated, having real consequences on homeland attractiveness, engagement(s) with diaspora policy, and diasporic nationhood. Lastly, the motivations explored in this paper have challenged some of the dominant assumptions across diaspora tourism literature, contributing to conversations on the diversity of diaspora program participants. The paper has shown that not all participants fit neatly within tourist typologies, nor seek to engage with such programs wholly with the aim to enhance their diaspora consciousness, learn about ancestral pasts and culture, and/or grapple with identity dissonances. Rather, they cut across these typologies. Overall, the paper highlights the value of a rite of passage lens in understanding the complexities of diaspora tourism motivation and the perceived popularity of such programs among young people. It also prompts further thinking into the widening impact and role these programs can have as conduits facilitating life course transitions.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Julia Kantek

Julia Kantek is a Lecturer in the School of Social Sciences at Western Sydney University. Her research focuses on the impacts of Hungarian diaspora politics on identity and sustainability efforts in the Hungarian-Australian community. Julia’s recent publications explore how cultural diplomacy can be soft powered to engage multiple state and non-state diaspora actors in the construction of youth leaders as good-will ambassadors (2021), and the impact of pro-social youth cultural practices in complementing top-down diaspora engagement strategies (2022).

Notes

1 The sociology of tourism and youth mobilities literature offers additional insight into the reasons for mobility among young people, focusing on short-term travel, such as for summer holidays, and long-term travel for working holidays (Conradson & Latham, 2005), backpacking and gap year experiences (Maoz, 2007; Matthews, 2014) and student migration (Robertson et al., 2018).

2 A diaspora consciousness refers to a shared identity and sense of belonging to an ethnic group/community (Sökefeld, 2006; Vertovec, 1999). The existence of a diaspora community is dependent on the extent to which a strong diaspora consciousness is achieved.

3 ‘Gappers’ is the colloquial group label applied to young people who embark on gap years.

4 Klok et al. (2020, p. 2) provide a simple distinction between both generation cohorts. The second generation include the descendants of the first generation (migrants) who were born in the migration country, while the third generation, like their parents, were born in the residence country. Broader terms including ‘post-migrant’ generations have also emerged as popular labels used to conceptualise participants in the diaspora tourism literature (see Mahieu, 2019). While these terms are not without criticism (see Rumbaut, 2004), their usage in this paper reflects the category of participants often targeted by diaspora tourism programs based on factors including specific cultural origin, as well as migration status and birthplace of parents and/or grandparents.

5 The Hungarian ethnic diaspora is widely understood as communities of persons who are Hungarian born or of Hungarian origin residing outside Hungary (Hatoss, 2008), described in Hungarian State policy as the ‘Hungarian diaspora communities abroad’ (see Semjén, 2013).

6 The earliest migration of Hungarians to Australia has been traced from the 1850s during the gold rush period. Migrants arrived in relatively small numbers during the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in the War of Independence (1918), after the Treaty of Trianon (1920) and acute anti-Semitic persecution (1930–1945). According to Kovács (2005, p. 320), 'between 1936 and 1940, only 800 people migrated from Hungary to Australia, mostly Hungarian Jews and liberal or social democrats'. Following this intake, migration to Australia increased significantly, sparked by the 1948–1949 revolution, the first and second World Wars and the failed communist revolution of 1956 (Hatoss, 2008).

7 The Balassi Institute belongs to the growing group of cultural institutes sharing aims to promote and strengthen national culture abroad. Examples of such institutes are Germany’s Goethe Institute, the United Kingdom’s British Council, Spain’s Instituto Cervantes, and China’s Confucius Institute.

8 It is important to note that the extent of institutionalisation of diaspora tourism provides an important analytic layer, as motivation is structured by program eligibility, duration, scheduling, and scope of activities, as well as adherence to minimum curriculum requirements.

9 This research received full ethics approval by the Western Sydney University Human Research Ethics Committee in 2018 [H12981].

10 All participant names in this paper have been de-identified and replaced with pseudonyms.

11 Participants were asked the open-ended question ‘what motivated you to participate in the program?’. They were also provided opportunities to share copies of their motivation letters which were submitted with their application documents. These documents were thematically analysed and used for cross-comparison purposes. The data presented in this paper focuses only on what was shared during the semi-structured interviews.

12 All interviews were transcribed by the author and thematically analysed through descriptive coding using NVivo software.