You wanna be where you can see, troubles are all the same : a case study to the sociability within a gentrifying neighbourhood

(1)

You wanna be where you can see, troubles are all

the same.

A case study to the sociability within a gentrifying neighbourhood.

Name: Jule Geeris UvA ID number: 11724749 Date: 28-06-2018

Program and track: Master Urban Sociology Supervisor: dhr. prof. dr. J.C. Rath

Second reader: mw. dr. O. Sezneva Email adress: jjjmgeeris@gmail.com

(2)

2

(3)

3

Acknowledgements

When graduating at Tilburg University for my bachelor of Sociology, I never would have thought I would end up writing a master thesis at the University of Amsterdam three years later. After having struggled a lot past year. I never would have thought being able to write this thesis. Moving to a new city, working twenty hours a week and focussing on a Master Urban Sociology, might have not been the best combination for me. A lot of problems were feared and many hours were spent on not knowing how. Still, it was worth every struggle, the academic skills I have learned this year together with personal skills, will be of big

importance the rest of my life. In front of you lies the result, my master thesis focusing on the sociability of Het Badhuis within the context of gentrification in Indische Buurt in Amsterdam.

I want to express my appreciation to all persons who were willing to participate in my interviews and share their lovely stories, insights, ideas and perceptions. I would not have been able to write the thesis without their enthusiastic participation. Next to my boss giving me the possibility of using Het Badhuis as a case of research.

I am grateful to my thesis supervisor Jan Rath, who supported me with helpful feedback and helped me completing this thesis. He always had tips and material helping to create my own project.

Furthermore, I would also like to thank my second reader Olga Sezneva, her valuable feedback led me in the right direction.

Lastly, I would like to express gratitude to my family and friends who kept believing in me even when I did not and kept encouraging me every single moment during the process. Their unlimited support, kindness and hospitality were of big help.

Thank you,

Jule Geeris

(6)

6

Summary of the research

Indische Buurt in Amsterdam is a context of gentrification leading to new inhabitants and catering establishments fitting their needs. Mostly leading to social inequality and segregation, a place for both the old residents as the new residents, might lead to more social cohesion. Purpose of this thesis is trying to come to a full understanding of the sociability of Het Badhuis, within a gentrifying context. Theories that were used to build a theoretical framework were to understand sociability, Simmel (1949) and Goffman (1966). Furthermore, the third place concept of Oldenburg (1999), complied with Rosenbaum (2006) were used leading to the research question: what is the sociability of Het Badhuis within a gentrifying neighbourhood? The concept of sociability is understood as facilitating an open atmosphere supporting social interactions between people visiting that place.

In order to give a comprehensive answer to the research question, qualitative research has been used. Observations and in-depth interviews among visitors that visited Het Badhuis at least two times a month were conducted. The respondents consisted of 19 visitors, 3 waiters and the owner of Het Badhuis, the ages variated from 21 to 70 years old. After analysing the transcripts by using Atlas.ti turned out the sociability of Het Badhuis is rather limited. The diversity of visitors is still big and the place has deeper meanings and leads to social contacts. However, the residents living in Indische Buurt were not all represented, the visitors were considered as ‘whiter’ than the neighbourhood.

Based on this conclusion is implicated to find out what the reason could be some groups are not making use of a place next to study the case again in five years to see to what extent the process of gentrification leads to more changes in the sociability.

(7)

7

A big building in the middle of a gentrifying neighbourhood

When entering Javaplein in Amsterdam from one of the five possible directions, the building in the middle of the square is immediately catching the eye. The building is built in the architect style of the Amsterdam School in 1941 for a bath house for the entire neighbourhood. This imposing building has been used as such for 40 years until it closed in 1982.

In 1942, Indische Buurt consisted of council housing for the working class, mostly Dutch, inhabitants. The council houses did not include bathrooms which was the reason bath houses popped up in the neighbourhood. The neighbourhood association plead to build a bath house central in the neighbourhood, eventually it was built in the centre of the Javaplein (Heijdra, 2013). In a flyer, written by the neighbourhood association, stated just three percent of the 13.000 houses had a proper bath, 40.000 inhabitants did not have an opportunity to bathe in their own house (ibid, p47).

Information evenings about bathing habits and hygiene were planned and pictures of the bath house were distributed in the local shops, to make people aware of the new facility within the neighbourhood. For the children special plates were drawn to make the information illustrative. The bath house started to get used from 1942 on, thanks to the propaganda of the neighbourhood association, in the first week 3000 inhabitants came to take a bath (ibid, p47). Eventually the entire neighbourhood met in the bath house to take their weekly baths, which not only led to the function of a bath house, but to the function of a meeting place within the neighbourhood (Badhuis Javaplein (bathhouse).

After showers were built in the houses in Indische Buurt, the bath house lost its usability. Afterwards this building has been used for various purposes amongst others a Hindu temple and a thrift shop. An initiative of the district of Amsterdam Oost led to the new function of the bathhouse. Since the middle of the 1990s the building started to be used for catering purposes. Ten years ago, Het Badhuis opened its doors as a café-restaurant, where people are able to eat or drink something and enjoy the buzz on Javaplein while sitting on the terrace (Heijdra, 2013). Together with the renovation of the square as a whole Heijdra (2013) calls it the new hart of the Indische Buurt. Het Badhuis states at their website to be ‘The Living Room

(8)

8

of East1_{’(badhuis-javaplein.com). Not attached to any other buildings, Het Badhuis is stand} alone, situated on the busy Javaplein surrounded by apartments, a vintage shop, a Turkish coffee bar, two restaurants, the Coffee Company, a brown café, a public library and a fitness centre.

My first months working as a waitress at Het Badhuis indicated the wide range of different people visiting the place. In my first week working I got introduced to a couple of regular visitors. I first got introduced to a mother, grandmother and daughter, based on the spoken dialect I assumed they all had been born and raised in Amsterdam. Nonetheless, the daughter was wearing a headscarf, contrasting the platinum blonde and white grey hair of her mother and grandmother not covered by a headscarf. They told me that they knew the place long before current owner started her café-restaurant, they were long term residents apparently. After noticing my spoken dialect, they were asking where I was from. Consequently, I explained that I was born and raised in ‘s Hertogenbosch and came to live in Amsterdam to do my Master of Urban Sociology. Initially, I thought the feeling of being inspected was something I made up. Eventually I found out that they just wanted to know who I was, since it was perspicuous I was an outsider. From the first moment entering Het Badhuis on, I was observing everything that was going on. As a waiter you are supposed to, but I quickly noticed instead of observing as a waiter I was observing as a sociology student.

Cafes and coffeehouses have been subject of academic interest for many scholars (Rosenbaum, 2006; Thompson & Arsel, 2004; Tumanan & Lansangan, 2012; Waxman, 2006; Bell, 2007; Cuthill, 2007; Burnett, 2014; Karsten, 2014). The first one writing about the importance of informal public gathering places for a functioning civil society, democracy and civic engagement was Ray Oldenburg (1999). The term he coined for these places was third places. Social levelling is one of Oldenburg’s criteria for third places. Interesting to note that the English coffeehouses were acclaimed as social levellers, yet Biderman showed that people are self segregated by class within the coffeehouse (2013). Today, hipster coffee shops are considered indicators of gentrification rather than levelling spaces (Papachristos et al, 2011; Zukin, 2009).

For many young professionals’ neighbourhoods such as Indische Buurt are some of the most attractive urban living places within the city (Oudenampsen, 2005). The area that used to

(9)

9

be an isolated, out-of-the way corner of Amsterdam is now gradually adopting many of the characteristics of middle-class neighbourhoods closer to the city centre. One of the wider transformations in the neighbourhood is reflected in the changes in food and drink amenities. Many of the establishments that have closed were smaller and aiming at the lower income segment of the market. Often these were small Dutch snack bars. The new restaurants that emerged cater to a higher-income clientele and are concentrated on the neighbourhoods’ main square, Javaplein. Like the opening of trendy restaurants in architectonic remarkable buildings. The decline of pubs is slower in Indische Buurt comparing to national trends (Ernst and Doucet, 2014). In 2007 renovation started in Indische Buurt. Het Badhuis was opened in 2008 which means it opened just at the start of the, so called, gentrification process.

The researches done so far on gentrification within Indische Buurt were about how this leads to different experiences of citizens in making use of commercial places (Palmboom, 2015; Ernst, 2011; Ernst & Doucet, 2014; IJpma, 2012). Het Badhuis was used as a case in the researches, IJpma argued in her research the only café-restaurant were the three groups she focussed on (house buyers, renters and people of which the income to rent ratio was skewedi) was Het Badhuis (2012). She found out that buyers think it is a central meeting place for different types of people living in the neighbourhood like the original Amsterdam, Turkish men, Dutch young families and students, it is remarkable that it is the only café, within the Indische Buurt, where the guests of all three categories IJpma focussed on where represented. Furthermore, Het Badhuis has been on Javaplein since 2007, while in the research of Ernst (2011) one of the cafés he focussed on already changed into a tapas bar. Of the fourteen cafés Brocken (2015) used in his research about commercial gentrification in the Indische Buurt four cafés already have been closed. Two of them got a new owner in the meanwhile and were closed eventually.

How can Het Badhuis keep its head high in a neighbourhood where a lot of establishments do not survive the commercial gentrification? What is the reason Het Badhuis is used by all these different groups as only establishment within this gentrifying neighbourhood? What aspects does Het Badhuis have that other establishments do not have? The goal of my research is finding out what the sociability of Het Badhuis is, in the context of gentrification.

(10)

10

First, the theoretical framework will be built to come to an understanding of the phenomenon and create a research question. Consequently the context will be briefly described following the methodological framework will be presented. After which the results will be shown. Eventually the conclusion will be formed, combining the theoretical and empirical findings, which is followed by some implications and thoughts for further research.

(11)

11

Theoretical framework

Invasion of middle class people

Gentrification is a process that was first coined by Ruth Glass over 50 years ago for the invasion of middle class people in previously disinvested inner city, working class neighbourhoods in London, which renovated old properties and displaced working-class communities (Lees, 2017). Gentrification is the physical and demographic change in the urban environment and landscape which is the result of the rebuilding and renewal of older blighted areas that accompanies the influx of middle class and upper class. Beginning with the arrival of wealthier new residents in limited space, the cost of housing increases in the form of increased rents and property taxes, resulting in the displacement of the original or indigenous, often lower class, residents (Lees, 2017).

The gentrifying new arrivals have the availability to home improvement loans and new mortgages who are not offered to the indigenous residents. The difference in socioeconomic class and investment capital is contributing to and accelerating the displacement of indigenous residents. Neil Smith (2008) showed that gentrification can be seen as processes by which capital is the main force of relocation or investments in low-income neighbourhoods instead of people. Revitalising the neighbourhood is of focus in neighbourhoods that have historically been disinvested by both the public and the private sector. With the demolition of public housing the newer rapid gentrification was born. It causes an instantaneous displacement and disbursing of former public housing residents to the private housing sector. Showed in the following quote is that gentrification is the localized result of racial and class disparities that is reflected in the physical landscape and demographic makeup of the city.

Loretta Lees, Tom Slayter, Elvin Wyly (2013) describe gentrification in this quote: "Gentrification is nothing more and nothing less than the neighbourhood expression of class inequality."

Improving social order in deprived neighbourhoods

Contrary to the market driven form of gentrification there is another form of gentrification, policy driven gentrification. The reason of gentrification can be found in

(12)

12

deliberately coined policy by the government or housing cooperative. The policy focus is social order in deprived neighbourhoods (Smith, 2008). Restructuration projects create more and better supply for the middle class. The neighbourhood should become more inviting for this group. The goal is to create economic attractiveness and increase the liveability of a neighbourhood. Liveability means few criminality and a considerable part of middle class families (Uitermark et al. 2007).

Initially, policy driven gentrification was of main importance in the Netherlands, currently more market forces are seen in the policy driven gentrification. Housing cooperative and the government are making use of the market forces to succeed this form of gentrification. The need for higher income groups is still the main goal, but the market forces are used to make it an attempting investment for this group. The living preferences of the middle-class change, which leads to changes at the demand side of the market driven gentrification. The new middle class prefers different living environments than before (Hamnet, 2003; Freeman and Braconi, 2004). Previously, middle class families preferred quiet suburbs, now some prefer the business and liveliness of the city. Their demand to appropriate housing in the city is managed by different players, that want to take advantage because this group is able to spend more than people with a lower income. Due to the arrival of the new middle class and immigrants in the city neighbourhood, feelings of displacement are triggered at the indigenous habitants.

The search for authenticity

Within a gentrified neighbourhood the gentrification of business premises often takes place. The search for authenticity often becomes entangled with commercial gentrification; either spaces where people are free to consume and live as they wish, or it can be used to claim new space by clearing away the old tastes and values of its previous users. Zukin’s (2009) critique is that this search for fabricated authenticity displaces working class and ethnic groups. Commercial gentrification leads to consumption spaces for the middle-classes, this group often does not represent the entire neighbourhood though (Bridge and Dowling 2001; Lees, 2008).

The consumption practices and identities of gentrifiers are reflected within the retail spaces of gentrified neighbourhoods, however the nature of these spaces in different gentrifying neighbourhoods varies quite significantly (Bridge and Dowling, 2001). Sharon Zukin (2009) has studied commercial gentrified spaces in New York, she argues that the process benefits some while it acts as a mechanism for further socio-economic polarisation. The search for authenticity manifests itself in pubs and bars too, however in a slightly different way. In

(13)

13

pioneering waves of gentrification in the late 1970s, many liberal, left leaning gentrifiers sought contact with ‘ordinary’ inhabitants of the neighbourhood and local cafes proved to be a common location for these encounters. While, for the original inhabitants of the neighbourhood, the local pub was a place which belonged to them and was a focal point of their community, for the new gentrifiers, it could function as a source of authentic, almost exotic adventure.

However, Zukin (2009) noted, these newcomers often did not feel welcome in such establishments and quickly left in search of different environments. Another major theme surrounding commercial gentrification is the search of the exotic and ethnic. This is particularly true with food and drink establishments which are typified by spaces of individual character, rather than mass consumption (Bridge and Dowling 2001; Zukin, 2008). When the process of gentrification is further developed many of the low-income residents, and the associated businesses catering to their needs are displaced. The retail and amenities landscape can further stimulate tensions and conflicts which may have originated from housing and displacement issues. One of the sentiments which comes up frequently is that of alienation -the new improvements are ‘not for us’- us is defined as the local, non-gentrifying residents (Doucet, 2009; Zukin, 2009). The new supply of amenities and services in commercial gentrification tend to represent the tastes values and, importantly, prices of gentrifying classes, which can be very different from other groups living in the neighbourhood. As a result, they can feel excluded because they do not cater to their needs and means (Doucet & Duignan 2012).

Depending on the degree of gentrification in a neighbourhood, cafés can either be hosts to something approaching a public realm where a range of people are accommodated and feel comfortable. Or cafes host diversity, instead of functioning as a place just for a certain group of people. Thus, the café is, besides playing an important role as a third place, important as a symbolic resource for a lifestyle accommodated by the fashionable and individualized cafés that occupy inner city neighbourhoods (Walters and Broom, 2013).

The purest form of social interaction

Classical sociologist Georg Simmel (1949) has a large contribution in our understanding of patterns of forms of social interaction. He studied contact mechanisms on a micro level and ascertained that environmental closeness both increases and decreases social distances. Simmel argues that the business and dynamics of the city leads to the attraction of people of the same social status. He argued diversity could lead to confusion, because of a mix

(14)

14

of people of different social status. In an essay about sociability, Simmel (1949) talks about the importance of, at first sight, meaningless conversations and informal meetings. According to Simmel (1949), the first and most important function of sociability is that it gives people a feeling of connectedness and with that being part of a (social) group. The second function of sociability is what is left after an interaction and what stimulates us to start future interactions, with these, significant, others.

Sociability results in social capital: issues to talk about, what we seem to have in common with the other. The second profit of sociability is emotional energy, the affective or emotional residue of the interaction, which is the base for a wish to continue the interaction on a later moment and to intensify this interaction, assuming that the experience was positive. In this way contact that has been experienced as positive is converted into sense of belonging, which forms the identity and makes it stronger, furthermore it creates a positive feeling about oneself and others.

In these accumulated meaningful interactions, we confirm in a playful and careless way our idea about reality. Sociability, an act of reciprocity or playful exchange, is the answer to the question why people associate themselves with others (Simmel, 1964). His answer is that in sociability there is no higher instrumental value than the joy, participating individuals experience in the conversation or meeting, or to the form of the interaction. The idea of the self originates from the game of the sociability together with the product of the interactions that happen between people.

Cafés can be seen as places that create sociability since joyfulness or pastime are the biggest mechanisms happening in this place. The natural and informal character of conversations are of big importance next to the generalizable reciprocity without expecting something back (Simmel, 1949). Do these conversations happen, and what are characteristics of a place that need to be present to facilitate these conversations that might lead to a resonating effect?

Behaviour in public place

Goffman (1966) was inspired by Simmel (1949) and started to focus on behaviour in public and semi-public spaces to be able to say more about ordinary human traffic and

(15)

15

patterning of ordinary social contacts, that were taken for granted instead of being studied. He distinguishes acquaintances and strangers in his analysis of public spaces. Acquaintanceship is when two people can personally identify each other by knowledge that distinguishes the other from everyone else and when each acknowledges that this state of mutual information exists to the other (Ibid, page 112). Once established, this gives rise to social bondedness. When they engage in the same social situation they are likely to possess either a duty or a right regarding face engagement.

Acquaintances require a reason not to enter into a face-to-face engagement with each other in a social situation while strangers need a reason to engage with each other (Ibid, page 124). Goffman describes three circumstances under which engagement among strangers is permissible and even obligatory sometimes. Firstly, mutual openness happens when there is mutual accessibility, this depends on to what extent there is informality and solidarity, which mostly happens between individuals that see each other as being part of the same group (Ibid, page 131). Secondly, mutual accessibility occurs when each of the two people involved experiences being in a position that functions as an opening, for example when two people unintentionally touch each other in passing on the street. Thirdly, the basis for mutual accessibility happens in open places, where ‘any’ two persons, strangers or not, have the right to start face-to-face engagement with each other.

Contrary, to not engage with each other is civil inattention, which means that people purposely do not look for any interaction, Goffman’s example is reading a newspaper or a magazine, this is an activity in which an individual becomes visibly enclosed. The newspaper or magazine can be seen as a carry around screen that can be raised at any time to give ourselves or others an excuse for not initiating contact. Nowadays the newspaper or magazine gets replaced by an actual portable screen like a mobile phone, laptop or tablet.

When combining Simmel’s sociology focussed on forms and Goffman’s micro sociological view, can be concluded that sociability will not happen in random places. The places that will serve sociability need to foresee in the ability to forget status and the burden of real life. Places that lead to this diminishing of hierarchies that happen in day to day life are mostly open places such as bars or cafés. How does this sociability happen and are there, contrary to Simmel’s ideas, possibilities for sociability happening in places between people with different social status?

(16)

16

Places of sociable association

Extending Simmel’s work on sociability, Ray Oldenburg analyses the places where sociable association tend to take place (1999). One prominent class of such settings he calls ‘third places’ and defines them as ‘a generic designation for a great variety of public places that host the regular, voluntary, informal and happily anticipated gatherings of individuals beyond the realms of home and work’ (Oldenburg 1999, p.16) Such informal public gathering places, like cafés, coffee shops, bookstores, bars, etc., are essential to the health of communities argues Oldenburg. He argues, in Post-World War II America, third places have largely disappeared, on the contrary all great civilizations and great cities have their characteristic public gathering spaces.

Oldenburg found an increasingly familiar pattern in sociability facilitated within third places, he posed eight characteristics of third places:

• Third places are situated on neutral ground • are functioning as leveller

• conversation is the main activity • are accessible and accommodating • have ‘regulars’

• have a low profile • the mood is playful

• as a home away from home

These are the essential characteristics of third places following Oldenburg because they engender the unique communication experiences and sociological benefits associated with these ‘great good places’. The interactions in third places are characterised as highly inclusionary, by democratic conversation and ‘pure sociability’ (Oldenburg and Brisset, 1982). Therefore it functions as ‘a common meeting ground for people with diverse backgrounds and experiences’ (Oldenburg and Brisset, 1982; p 275). Third places seem to fit perfectly within neighbourhoods that are undergoing the process of gentrification. Other scholars used the third place concept to conduct consumer research, coffee shop research and virtual social network research, which led to expansion of the characteristics(Soukup, 2006). As some of the

(17)

17

characteristics overlap and following other scholars, who extended the third place theory, I will use the following characteristics;

Physical purity

The third place tends to be plain and not elegant or chic (Oldenburg, 1999.) It does not have the tension to try to impress someone. It has a corner for everyone and mostly the atmosphere and feeling counts. Contemplating, Rosenbaum states that the best third places are often those that are so nondescript that many people never realize they exist (2006). Rosenbaum states that service firms must determine whether they want to serve as a host for their customers’ supportive relationships.

Regular guests as reason to visit

Key is that the regular guests visiting a third place are not attracted by the beverages, the seating capacity or the management but because of the fellow customers (Oldenburg, 1999). Gustafson found that places become meaningful because of relationships with people living there, such as friends, acquaintances and relatives (2001). Yi-Fu Tuan found out that a place is meaningful when people identify a place as something beyond itself (1971). People relate to a third place when there is a positive relationship between social supportive resources that a person receives from other people in the third place. This increases his or her loyalty to the place. Hall (2009) showed the reinforcement of belonging, by the owners/waiters of the café she studied in London, they developed family-like relationships with their regulars. Next to the regulars the owners and waiters are expected to be of importance too.

It is situated on neutral ground and therefore accessible and accommodating.

A place that facilitates sociability needs to be on neutral ground, individuals may come and go as they please, none of them is required to play host and all feel welcome, comfortable and at home. It gives the opportunity for neighbours to meet and leads to openings for informal and even intimate relations between people. The place should be accessible by anyone at any time of the day. A place needs to be priced for everyone. One can find acquaintances in the place at all hours to help tackle the demons of boredom and loneliness when necessary. Consequently, the place is alive which means that some people come and go, new acquaintances will appear and other will disappear. Consumers who seek support in third places and visit these on a near-daily base include

(18)

18

the older-aged, the elderly, the lonely, and those who belong to marginalized groups. Contrary, Rosenbaum showed any establishment that targets one of these groups will significantly change its social services cape by becoming a forum for a specific group of consumers which might avert other consumer groups (2005).

Not based on rank or social status

The place is inclusive and does not set formal membership or barriers to enter. The leveller leads to possibilities for friendships not based on rank nor social status. Individuals mostly select their associates, friends and intimates among the ones that are the closest to them in social rank. Third places expand possibilities, by being open to all, the emphasis is on personal qualities instead of one’s status in social life, personality is of main importance instead of the position in social rank. Following Oldenburg this leads to the pure form of sociability.

Practises and atmosphere

Within a place conversation is the main activity, the talk is lively, colourful and engaging (Oldenburg, 1999). At first, encounters in third places are marked by smiles and hand shaking. Conversations will take this over in a pleasurable and entertaining way. Whatever disturbs the conversation flow in a third place is dreadful, for example music that is too loud. The conversations within a third place are of a playful spirit, in line with the atmosphere. There should be an element of escape, escape from work, home, other duties or stressful events. It needs to function as a comforting place. Contrasting, Rosenbaum (2006) showed that customers attend third places to satisfy their consumption needs and need for companionship and emotional support.

A home away from home

The place can be seen as a home away from home, it needs congeniality to keep enduring. Visitors of third places should experience the feelings of warmth, possession, and belonging as they would have in their own homes. They feel as if a piece of themselves is rooted in the space and gain spiritual regeneration by spending time here.

(19)

19

Because of the intensification of gentrification, residents are changing, which could lead to more diversity in the public who visits certain places. Those new residents can be perceived as an outgroup and consequently treated with different behavior. However, with gentrification the outgroup is mostly the white middle class, which has more power because of economic resources. The neighbourhood changes to a certain extent to accommodate this group, however some places will stay the same.

In neighbourhoods that are fully gentrified, anger among non-gentrifying groups is often directed towards the incoming gentrifiers (Atkinson, 2000; Butler, 2003; Freeman, 2006). One of the most prominent debates within gentrification is the manner in which social interactions and cohesion takes place among different population groups within a gentrifying neighbourhood. The role of semi-public spaces such as local pubs has been used in looking for the potential for different segments of the local population to meet and interact or serve to reinforce the divisions between ‘us and them’, and gentrifiers and non-gentrifiers (Ernst & Doucet, 2014).

Within Indische Buurt commercial gentrification can be seen. What started as policy driven gentrification has now led to commercial gentrification within Indische Buurt. Het Badhuis is one of the local public places that popped up with the start of the gentrification. As the self-imposing Living room of East, it should be a place for the population living in Indische Buurt, however is this really the case and how does it work?

This leads to the question; What is the sociability of Het Badhuis within a gentrified neighbourhood?

Following sub questions will help in answering the main question. - What are the physical characteristics of Het Badhuis?

- Who are making use of Het Badhuis, what is the accessibility? - What is the meaning of Het Badhuis for its visitors?

(20)

20

Context

Het Badhuis is situated in the centre of Indische Buurt. This neighbourhood is situated in the eastern part of Amsterdam, close to the old harbour of Amsterdam. The population in Indische Buurt consists of 22932 residents (OIS, 2017). 48,9 percent of the population consists of non-western immigrants, the demographic profile shows that around 33 percent of the residents can be considered as part of the lower-income population. Indische Buurt was built in the beginning of the 20th century.

The physical quality of the houses was not good. This contributed to the physical and social and economic decline of the neighbourhood which started in the 1960s. Some parts have been replaced with the city renewal around 1980 (Onderzoek, Informatie en Statistiek, 2017). Other parts have been replaced with the urban renewal around 2000. In cooperation with private parties and housing corporations the government introduced a new national and local government policy on social mix and differentiation in 2007.

The aim of this strategy was creating a more balanced housing stock by offering private and high rent housing, next to social rent, which always had been over-represented in the Indische Buurt. These policies were coined to create a more balanced population and break up concentrations of poverty in deprived neighbourhoods, by making them more attractive to middle-class households. Combined with the preservation and renovation instead of demolition of the older housing stock, set the ground work for the ensuing gentrification, given that the rest of the inner-city of Amsterdam already was gentrified.

Following transformations collected by Informatie, Onderzoek en Statistiek (2017) show the effects of gentrification: the number of new urbanites between the 18 and 55 years old from Dutch or western background, that came to live in the city after turning 18 consists of 30 percent in Indische Buurt. The appreciation of the neighbourhood is increasing from a 6,8 in 2011 to a 7,4 in 2015. There are no new houses built in Indische Buurt however the houses to buy are increasing from 20% in 2011 to 25% in 2016 while social housing decreases from 68% to 62%.

(21)

21

Methodology

Operationalisation of key concepts and terms

The main concept in this thesis is sociability. In the theoretical framework this concept was discussed. The concept of sociability of a place is understood as facilitating an open atmosphere supporting social interactions between people visiting that place. To conceptualize sociability the concept of third place by Oldenburg (1999) was used. The characteristics were brought back to six categories supplemented by ideas of Rosenbaum, Gustafson and Yi-Fu Tuan. The six researchable aspects of sociability of a place are: physical characteristics,

regular guests, situated on neutral ground therefore accessible and accommodating, not based on rank or social status, practices and atmosphere, home away from home.

These six characteristics were used as sensitising concepts in the topic list to come to an understanding of what the respondents thought about these aspects (Bowen, 2006). In practice, I did not explicitly ask respondents if Het Badhuis was an ‘home away from home’ to them. Instead I asked what Het Badhuis meant to them to gain more information and just use the categories as a guideline (Bowen, 2006). The words used for formulating these characteristics were not used by me in interviewing to not impose theoretical concepts on the respondents. After the first few interviews turned out respondents used words as homeliness

feelings and regular guests repeatedly, which lead to a clear connection to the theory.

The other concept that is important within the context of the research is gentrification.

Gentrification is the physical and demographic change in the urban environment and landscape

which is the result of the rebuilding and renewal of older blighted areas that accompanies the influx of middle class and upper class. Since this was the context no questions were explicitly asked, it turned out that respondents were pointing at this issue thorough the whole interview. Words that were used were: yuppen, hip, hipsters, double income couples. Because these gentrifiers were pointed at a definition should be given. There can be made a division between

gentrifiers and non-gentrifiers. Non-gentrifiers are the people that have lived in the

neighbourhood before the gentrification started, this both can be the working class as the immigrant population, 10 years or longer. Gentrifiers are the people that came to live in the neighbourhood after the policy driven gentrification and not in social housing, shorter than 10 years.

(22)

22

Qualitative research has been used to get insight in the perspectives and meanings visitors have about Het Badhuis (Bryman, 2012). Before the type of interview and the coding process is going to be introduced the focus of the interview has to be outlined. The group that has been interviewed are consequent visitors of Het Badhuis, the boundary of consequent was set at two times a month, for at least one year. This seemed like a sufficient amount of knowing and giving meaning to Het Badhuis. As explained in the following sections, this was enough to give meaning to the place.

At an earlier stage of the research the pursue was to use small talks for answering the research question. These small talks had to be about one of the topics that were in the topic list for the interviews or linked to the research topic and should not be introduced by the researcher. However, in the period of research, due to lack of personnel and busy days these small talks did rarely happen. The small talks that were useful for the research were used. The start of taking quick notes began from the moment that was decided to write a thesis about Het Badhuis. Some small talks and unstructured observations were collected since October.

Data collection

The process of data collection had two main purposes. First to build a complete knowledge of how the place looked and was used by different visitors and to what extent interactions happened. Second to obtain visitors’ narratives about the place and deeper meanings connected to it. Qualitative research has been used to create a full understanding of the narratives of the guests of Het Badhuis. Before collecting data, I was working at Het Badhuis since October which lead to an exploration from a different perspective. Therefore, I decided to start my research with observations from the researcher perspective. I tried to take nothing for granted while observing. The focus was first creating an overall view of the space, music, vibe and guests. Afterwards the focus was more on how guests were behaving individually and second on interactions, what kind of interactions and between who. Due to the beautiful weather most of the movement happened outside, which lead to deciding to use the observations just for the goal of getting first insights about the field. I did four observations each consisting of seven hours and smaller observations when I had to wait for respondents to arrive, they mostly consisted of less than one hour.

(23)

23

First a list of possible participants was created. Based on observations while working and at the start of the research period, first a list of possible participants was sketched. This list did not contain names but descriptions of persons, like ‘man that always drinks gin in the morning’. Since this could lead to biased information, first my colleagues and manager at random were asked if they had suggestions for consequent visitors. Second, when started interviewing, respondents were asked if they had any suggestions, which is called snowball-sampling (Bryman, 2012). Age and gender differences were of priority in the recruitment process, diversity of the population was of main focus. Being at Het Badhuis at different times and days together with selecting different people led to making the sample variate within the particular case. The variety was chosen to create a complete understanding from different perspectives.

Since the selection of participants was conducted with stratified purposive sampling, the deciding factor in choosing to approach participants was that they had to visit Het Badhuis during the research period (Ritchie et al, 2013). Excluding the waiters and manager, these were selected based on period working at Het Badhuis. All participants were Dutch speaking, following all contact and interviews was carried out in Dutch. In this way visitors could express themselves in their native language. Amsterdam dialect was spoken sometimes, clarification was asked when necessary.

Interviews

The interviews were in-depth and face-to-face, this interviewing method best fitted the aim of getting deep insights in meanings and feelings concerned to Het Badhuis. In total, 19 consequently visitors of Het Badhuis were interviewed next to 3 colleagues and the manager. All interviews were conducted in Het Badhuis, there was the opportunity to use the private space upstairs, however the decision was made by the respondent, ensuring a quiet and comfortable environment to speak freely. In total, ten of the interviews were done upstairs, five on the terrace on a quiet spot and one in the restaurant part when it was quiet. Two times because of meetings upstairs another spot had to be chosen in negotiation with the respondent. Two interviews were conducted with two respondents at the same time, because these respondents were a couple and the other two respondents always visit together. Two interviews were conducted in groups, because they always visit Het Badhuis together, one group consisted

(24)

24

of three respondents, the other group of four respondents. I tried to let all visitors answer the questions as much as possible and include every visitor, in these cases.

When decided to focus on consequently visitors only, the aim was to create a heterogeneous group of respondents in terms of times visiting, period visiting, age and gender. Times visiting varied between two times a month to two times a day. Period visiting varied from two and a half years to twenty-five years, which resulted in big age differences as well as a wide variety of narratives from long ago and the near past. Age was selected on guessing and varied from 21 years old to 70 years old. Gender turned out to be hard as selection criteria, since more men visit Het Badhuis on a consequent base than women. Five female visitors were interviewed next to fourteen male visitors, consequently two male colleagues were interviewed next to one female colleague and the female manager. Interviewing colleagues and the manager were to get insight from the perspective of Het Badhuis, these narratives were contributing to the narratives of the visitors and led to other insights.

All interviews, the individual, double and group interviews were semi-structured and flexible, allowing new topic to emerge (Bryman, 2012). A topic list, showed in Appendix 1, was used during the interviews consisting of themes that emerged in the theoretical framework. The theoretical exploration led to the derivation of these themes and are thus deductive. The topic list was discussed with someone not familiar with the topic to find out if the topics were clear. Suggestions were addressed. The topic list was flexible enough to allow new themes to emerge from visitors’ experiences leading to obtain inductive data as well. The central themes in the topic list were Het Badhuis in general, the physical aspects, meaning, accessibility and contacts. When starting the interview was decided to ask to the first memory of Het Badhuis, which proved to be a good question and lead to a good first understanding of the deeper meaning. The aim was to ask visitors how they perceived the sociability of Het Badhuis and the themes named above helped identifying what sociability consists of. Additionally, this provided, feelings concerned with the place and deeper emotions about Het Badhuis. Further the interviews proved to be flexible enough, as new themes emerged. Visitors came up with other insights in how the sociability of Het Badhuis can be perceived to them.

The interviews were conducted in the period of one month and five days, the first interview starting at the 9th of April and the last interview was the 16th of May. The duration of the interviews ranged from 30 minutes to one hour and thirty minutes. Interviews averagely

(25)

25

lasted fifty minutes. This includes the two double interviews and two group interviews that were conducted. The interviews were recorded using my phone One recording went wrong which was found out at an early stage and led to taking notes immediately after the interview, quoting directly was possible, however deep meanings were not able to be used because of risk of interpretation.

After conducting the interviews, I took notes about certain things that stood out to me and the recordings were transcribed with Express Scribe software in Dutch. Simultaneously was started with the process of coding by marking sentences that stood out while transcribing which is the first round of coding.

Data analysis

The data that was gathered in this study was inductive, since the topic guide matched existing theory on sociability. The inductive data was, after transcribing, analysed with the help of Atlas.ti software. After having marked important sentences while transcribing, analysing the interviews systematically by creating codes was possible by using this software. The data was coded in three rounds. Important sentences were marked while transcribing the interviews. Second, all interviews were read through again and a second round of open coding started by creating tentative labels for each chunk of data, sometimes already marked while transcribing. The aim of the first round of open coding was to let new concepts and themes naturally emerge from the data. The pre-existing themes came across emerging from the theoretical exploration such as ‘home’ and ‘regulars’, the process of open coding enabled the data to also deviate from these pre-existing themes. The second round can be described as axial coding, connecting codes and themes. In this second round labels were being compared and combined when necessary. Resulting in creating new topics along with getting rid of topics. A comprehensible list of topics was created, these can be compared and when necessary connected.

After coding all data for each major theme specific quotes were consulted, codes that often were mentioned were written down together with deviating codes. These themes were combined to form a specific framework leading to answers on each sub question. By consulting all quotes comprehensible summaries were created showing the richness of the experiences and opinions of the respondent together with creating a clear overview. This study, as any study, has some shortcomings that will be shown in the discussion.

(26)

26

Ethical issues

In doing observations, the management and team working were aware of me observing, the guests were not aware, however when taking notes, no names were used to take care of the privacy. In interviewing the respondents were made aware of the recording of the conversation and were given the opportunity of reading the transcript. The purpose of the research was explained, their answers are used for my master thesis and not particularly shared with the owner of Het Badhuis.

Role as a waitress

Starting the field work made me aware of the difficulties of doing research at the place you work. While doing observations and interviews interruptions happened for work related subjects. The lack of waiters and the summer weather led to being put to work instead of being able to conduct observations. In doing interviews there was awareness of my role as a waitress, one way of putting weight at my role as researcher instead was by not making drinks myself but asking my colleagues. Participants sometimes were not willing to talk about certain things because they saw me as part of the waiters instead of being a researcher, after explaining the purpose of my research not being in behalf of the owner they were more willing to talk.

(27)

27

Results

A magnificent building full of history and memories

While everything around Het Badhuis is moving, the building is quite static. It looks different in changing weather conditions, however this brick building still has the same look as 76 years ago. The building has been there since 1942, however people do not just take it for granted. In the passing years the building had different purposes which led to both minor as major changes. The area surrounding has been updated by the government, which was part of the gentrification policy to create a safer neighbourhood (Ernst and Doucet, 2014). When asking for people’s opinion people about the building there was no need to encourage people to tell me more. A substantive majority mentioned something about the magnificence of the building. Remarkable was that everyone appreciated the authenticity of the building. Moreover, the history that belongs to the building is of high value for the guests, for most of the guests it is not just a building. A handful of people grew up in the neighbourhood, they mentioned knowing the building from when it was an actual bath house. Two women went for a bath, one women a couple of times and the other just once.

‘[thinking out loud] Is it okay to tell this, well the phone boxes here on Javaplein are my first memory of Het Badhuis, oh [ashamed] I was waiting with a friend until someone left a wallet in the phone boxes [laughs out loud]…Yes by then you had to use coins for making phone calls, but yes we checked if someone left their wallet behind…By then it was an actual bath house, however we already had a shower at home.’

(Woman, 53 years old, unemployed, housewife, visiting two times a day for 15 years)

The quote is illustrating because it has a few elements key of the neighbourhood. It shows the criminal character the neighbourhood had when it still was considered as a deprived area (Smith, 2008). The woman shows that this was a practise that was accepted by then. Furthermore, can be concluded this woman can be counted to the non-gentrifiers (Ernst and Doucet, 2014). It was showed that she did not make use of the actual bath house because of the reason of having a shower at home. However, feelings of authenticity are connected to this place (Zukin, 2009).

(28)

28

‘I think it looks amazing, I take snapchats2_{of Het Badhuis all the time, even}

more when they just put the red lights above the letters, that’s so dope.’

(Man, 22 years old, taxi driver, visiting two to three times a week for 2,5 years)

‘It is a monumental building of course, I think it is one of the most beautiful

buildings in east. The centre of east, literally situated in the middle of the Indische Buurt if you would check Google street view3, it is just east.’

(Male waiter, 23 years old, working at Het Badhuis for 1,5 years)

Both the quotes show that the building is appreciated because of specific elements, one argues the red lights above the letter, which is not plain, rather chic and outstanding (Oldenburg, 1999). The other argues that it is one of the most beautiful buildings in east, which shows that the building is not nondescript (Rosenbaum, 2006). The second quote puts weight at the authenticity by claiming it is a monumental building being of importance for the neighbourhood (Zukin, 2009). In his perspective it is the centre of east and ‘just east’ illustrating thoughts of a major part of the visitors. It shows the importance of the place in their lives. Het Badhuis is seen to represent Indische Buurt.

Terrace

There is a remarkable difference when the summer months have started, and the terrace appears. The terrace permit allows owners to start using their terrace from the 30th of March, this was just before the start of the research period. When asking questions about the physical characteristics people mentioned the terrace as one of the first things, mostly because the weather was nice, and they had been using this more than the seats situated inside. A major overall opinion was that the terrace is big (it contains around 60 places to seat). Furthermore, the sun is shining during the whole day at different parts of the terrace. Concluding the view when seated on the terrace is appreciated, one can see the whole neighbourhood passing by, in this way social control is practiced. In the first interview was mentioned that the terrace had been different during the period another owner was taking care of Het Badhuis, this came back in other interviews as well, mostly as being a negative memory (Hamnet, 2003; Freeman and

2_{Snapchat is a multimedia messaging app used globally. One of the principal concepts of Snapchat is that}

pictures and messages are only available for a short time before they become inaccessible.

3_{Google Street View is a technology featured in Google Maps and Google Earth that provides panoramic views}

(29)

29

Braconi, 2004). The terrace used to be higher than the rest of the Javaplein at the same level of the entrance. It was a bit smaller than the current terrace, however it was heightened with sand and surrounded by a wall. Which meant you were looking down on the surroundings. Showed in the following quoted:

‘They had to level it at one point, this is better. (Man, 66, retired, visiting five times a week for 20 years)

‘Why do you think this is better?

(Interviewer)

Regarding, yes I think for the owner that they have more space, more seats. And maybe you are sitting more equal so in that regard, yes it was kind of strange, but more on street level, I will look if I can find you a photo’

(Man, 66, retired, visiting five times a week for 20 years)

Since the terrace is levelled with Javaplein people see it as inviting, people pass by and decide to have a drink. Furthermore, there is always something happening in the surroundings of the Javaplein, which leads people to sit at the terrace for hours and just look at what is happening. It is the bustle of the area combined with having a quiet and relaxed spot at the terrace. What this quote represents is the positive view towards the changes within the neighbourhood. The neighbourhood becomes more sociable and safer (Uitermark et al, 2007).

‘Look, everyone passes by, the terrace is of course very inviting so people pass by and think let us have a cup of coffee, this could be anyone. Also, I think that, if, during summer the terrace is crowded it looks very nice, a little bit like a business card of the square.’

(Woman, 45 years old, administrative assistant, visiting two times a month for 10 years)

In this quote it is taken for granted that the terrace is inviting which is an aspect of the accessibility (Oldenburg, 1999). Furthermore, she talks about everyone and anyone which acclaims the difference of the public, which can be seen as the levelling function of Het Badhuis (Oldenburg, 1999)

(30)

30

In summer you first have to cross the terrace, in winter you just have to choose if you take the stairs or the slope leading to the main entrance via the patio. The patio is partly covered by the roof and partly by a parasol. In the uncovered area a couch is situated, covered with pillows, facing a table, next to three other tables with chairs. Under the roof a longer table is situated facing a less comfortable couch, next to it another less comfortable couch facing two tables and chairs on the other sides. The furniture situated on the patio is changing from time to time same goes for the pillows and fake sheepskin blankets that are spread over the couches and chairs. First, because some things disappear and second because of the second-hand furniture, which after a third life needs to be replaced at one point.

‘Last Sunday we were sitting in the patio in the sun and you were not able to put a glass on the table, because of the risk of falling over. If you are seated on certain spots on the couch we were sitting, you are situated in a hole, I would say at one point you need to replace that.’

(Woman, 39 years old, social worker, visiting once a week for 9 years)

She points out the quality of the interior not being that good, the purpose for the furniture is not being met since it is old, as she claims. However, with talking about a couch she shows the purpose of the interior being elegant or chic instead of plain (Oldenburg, 1999).

Heating is installed in the patio which leads to a nice and comfortable place outside even during the colder months of the year. In summer the main entrance doors, which are situated in the middle of the big building, are opened which connects the patio more with the indoor area of Het Badhuis. It can be seen as an extended inside and quite a lot of regulars have their vast spot in this area.

Indoor

After having passed the patio you walk in via the main entrance. When entering you can either go left or right. Earlier this was because there was a division between the men’s and the ladies’ part of the actual bath house. Since it is currently used as café-restaurant, there is no such division anymore, however it still visible and used in dividing the ‘café part’ from the ‘restaurant part’. The first thing catching the eye is the fireplace surrounded by two comfortable chairs. While there is an actual chimney, exteriorly visible, this gas heater is installed for the

(31)

31

atmosphere rather than actual heating up the entire area. Above the fireplace a stuffed deer is hanging.

When deciding to go left three staircases have to be climbed consequently the restaurant will be entered. The area consists of a small bar, facing the partly open kitchen, a bread corner, where the cutlery is situated, next to napkins. The ‘restaurant part’ covers fifteen tables, which are not always positioned in the same way. Some of the tables have regular chairs, others have comforting chairs and, following on the bar, a long couch takes care of seating places, covered with different pillows. On each table a dinner candle in a chandler, a vase with fresh flowers and coasters are found. Depending on the time of the day and the weather the tables are set with cutlery and napkins. The light in the restaurant is coming from the row of windows at the front during the day. In the evening it is coming from the lights on the walls covered with flower wallpaper. Furthermore, the chandeliers hanging from the ceiling provide light, in the evenings the lights are dimmed, and the music is nearly not hearable. In the middle of the restaurant part food lift is connected to the space upstairs, it is not in use anymore. The surrounding pillar is painted green, same as the window frames and the wall behind the bar.

On working days, during the day, most of the tables are taken by people working, mostly using their laptops and sometimes having phone calls. Most of these visitors wear headphones (Goffman, 1966). Furthermore, meetings are held at the round table situated here and some students use this quiet corner, compared to the sometimes-busy area of the café, to study. Everyone is allowed to sit in this part, however during dinner time people that are still working or studying are nicely asked to leave this part and look for a place at the reading table in the ‘café part’.

‘On Friday mornings it is quiet and it is a big building so if I am able to have phone

calls over there (points at the restaurant) I am interrupting no one in this way. If I would go to sit at the coffee house, the Coffee Company, then you are sitting very close by other people and here we know a lot of people so the sphere is nice and quiet so and yeah good waiters.’

(Man, 44 years old, project leader, visiting two times a week for 9 years)

In this quote is showed that the physical space available is rather big which leads to a corner for everyone (Oldenburg, 1999). He argues the possibilities of making use of the place without

(32)

32

being disturbed by others (Goffman, 1966). On the contrary he argues the importance of knowing other visitors (Oldenburg, 1999). Furthermore, he points at the waiters and says they are good, it shows the importance of waiters within the place (Hall, 2009).

In the evenings people are having dinner or just drinks with some snacks. However, no one really mentioned particular things about this experiences in the ‘restaurant part’ because most of the visitors interviewed are making use of the ‘café part’, the patio or terrace.

When going in the right direction, when entering Het Badhuis, you enter the ‘café part’. Containing a big bar, the stairs to downstairs, where the toilets and the office are situated, and the stairs to the first level, where an extra space for meetings or parties is created. Furthermore, there is a reading table at the window front side. The various newspapers of the day are spread over the table next to some magazines, furthermore a big plant or vase with flowers are creating a homeliness sphere (Oldenburg, 1999). In between the reading table and the stairwell against a fence, surrounding the stairwell, a little cabin soring the fire hose is situated. On this black cabin other magazines and some newspapers forgotten to throw away are waiting to be read. In the corner is a children’s playing corner, including wooden blocks, a plastic car, Duplo, reading books and a small table with two chairs. On the other side of the stairwell are three higher tables with crutches, along the bar are crutches as well.

The bar is almost as wide as the area, on the right side under a big set of windows a couch is created covered with different pillows and facing five tables with comfortable chairs on the other side. Between these tables and the reading table are two tables, one with a couch and chairs and the other with chairs only. Compared to the restaurant part these tables and chairs are rather low. Each table is covered with a candle in a glass, coasters and a beer menu next to sometimes a plastic advertisement for a new sort of beer. Depending on how busy it is empty glasses and plates of the previous guests are spread over the tables.

On the bar which is made from bluestone and wood, the pastry is displayed, next to the different bottles of beer. The colours of the walls in the café are green as in the restaurant. However, some of the walls are decorated with painted propaganda images coming from the time of the bathhouse, showing the previous function the building had (Zukin, 2009). Next to these images, the wall behind the bar is the only place where you can see immediately that it has not always been a café-restaurant. The bottles of spirits are hanging on a wall of original

(33)

33

tiles, the concrete divisions that once were the divisions between the women’s showers are still visible, showing the authenticity (Zukin, 2009). Left from the bar is the entrance to the kitchen, the fridges and the supply room. On the left side is a black cabin where a lot of stuff is stored and the cash machine is situated.

Above the wall of tiles are the windows which now offer place for big candles and above that the name Het Badhuis is visible written in a plain font fitting to the bath house style. In the ‘café part’ it is averagely lighter since there are more windows, however in the evening the lights are dimmed, when a party is thrown the disco lights are turned on, which point at the disco ball that hangs from the ceiling. The music is mostly quite loud. Depending on who is working vinyl records are played or Spotify playlists, varying from top 40 to 80s, from reggae to rock. The kind of music leads to a different vibe.

When talking about the interior of Het Badhuis people mostly started laughing a bit or were hesitating to what extent they were allowed to tell what they really thought about it. The answers mostly were describing the interior as old, not styled or thought about and ‘not hip’. Descriptions that were used were very diverse, everything thrown together, homely, vintage, old skool and even like my mom’s home. ‘Leave it to beaver household’ 4_{is a term that was} coined a couple of times. When asking if they would like to change anything the answers were very clear. The majority would throw away furniture that is broken, same counts for blankets or pillows that are old and a bit dirty and maybe painting the walls in another fresh colour and cleaning out everything entirely. However, everyone thought that the interior had to stay the same because they just loved it.

‘I think it is a Leave it to Beaver household5, it is a hacked-together, sloppy pile of everything, the interior is not styled but I like that, that is how it is at my own house.

(Male 64 years old, retired, visiting 2 times a week for 20 to 25 years)

Well, I started telling that it is a nice and old thing and that a blind horse cannot do any damage. And it has something on the other side. Sometimes I think, what a hell of a mess is it here, buy a couple of new chairs or something, you know, however that happens from time to time.

4_{Dutch translation is Huishouden van Jan Steen} 5_{See footnote 6}

You wanna be where you can see, troubles are all the same : a case study to the sociability within a gentrifying neighbourhood