How do Polish people forge a sense of place-belonging in Aalsmeer? : experiences of Polish people with place-belonging in the Dutch town of Aalsmeer

(1)

University of Amsterdam

Faculty of Social and Behavioural sciences

How do Polish people forge a sense of place-belonging

in Aalsmeer?

Experiences of Polish people with place-belonging in the Dutch town

of Aalsmeer

Master thesis Sociology: Migration and Ethnic studies

Supervisor: Dr. P.J. Prickett Second reader: E.W. Stapper Date: 8th_{of July, 2019}

Student: Aldert van Dam Student ID: 10356177

(2)

(3)

2

Abstract

This thesis looked into the feeling of place-belonging of Polish people in the Dutch town of Aalsmeer with the use of semi-structured interviews. It uses place-belonging and migrant place-making as theoretical approaches. The latter presupposes that through similar experiences of discrimination a community and certain ‘migrant places’ could emerge. These places would then allow people to forge a sense of belonging to that place. This did not occur to such an extent. Place-belonging, and in particular language, relations, and political economy seemed to explain the experiences of Polish people more accurately. Proficiency in the Dutch language allows for association with new groups of people and may foster place-belonging. Housing was an obstacle due to the high prices and the ways in which some Polish people are employed in Aalsmeer. For some, no clear decision of where to belong is made and their stay in the Netherlands is perceived more temporarily. Lastly, through the politics of belonging, the bad reputation of some Polish people caused dissociation from other Polish people to occur. This bad reputation makes it harder to belong to a place, as people are associated with ‘bad Poles’ and face prejudice. This thesis considered the potential shortcomings of migrant place-making theories, and argued in favour of more grounded research into the ways migrants might experience and shape place.

Abstract

Deze scriptie onderzoekt de ervaringen van Poolse mensen in het dorp Aalsmeer, en hoe zij ‘thuis horen’ ervaren door middel van interviews. De theoretische benadering van ‘migrant place-making’ gaat ervan uit dat wanneer migranten gediscrimineerd worden in een plek uit deze gedeelde ervaringen een gemeenschap ontstaat. Hierdoor zullen Poolse plekken ontstaan, die vervolgens een thuisgevoel in deze plek helpen vormen. Dit bleek maar weinig op te gaan. In plaats daarvan wordt de theorie van ‘place-belonging’ gebruikt. Hierin werden taal, relaties en politieke economie als belangrijke factoren benoemd. Beheersing van de Nederlandse taal maakte het mogelijk om relaties met nieuwe groepen mensen aan te gaan, dit heeft een positief effect op thuisgevoel. Hoge prijzen, maar ook de manier waarop de contracten van sommige Poolse mensen werken maken het echter moeilijk om een huis te vinden in Aalsmeer. Voor sommige echter is een keuze over ‘thuishoren’ niet gemaakt en is verblijf in Aalsmeer meer tijdelijk. Ten slotte werden de ‘politics of belonging’

besproken. Hieruit bleek dat reputatie bij Nederlandse mensen belangrijk leek te zijn: wanneer iemand in ‘hetzelfde hokje’ als ‘slechte Polen’ wordt gestopt zorgde dat voor vooroordelen. Hierdoor namen Poolse mensen afstand van andere Poolse mensen, dit maakte het moeilijk om ‘te (be)horen tot een plek’. Deze scriptie heeft de mogelijke tekortkomingen van ‘migrant place-making’ theorieën overwogen, en pleit voor meer ‘gefundeerd theoretisch’ onderzoek naar hoe migranten een plek ervaren en vormen.

(4)

3

1. Introduction

“For my mother every time it was temporary, temporary, but I knew I just wanted to live here.“

(Wanda, 33, Daughter of Ludwika)

“And I go to Poland and a few months later I’m here. I want to look around and think (…). One year, gone, two years, three years, and later Wanda comes here, and that's why I don’t know what to do. Until I got this house I didn’t know what my place was in life. (…) But Wanda wants to live here because the Netherlands are good… I am here”

(Ludwika, 61, Mother of Wanda).

The migration of Polish people to the Netherlands has been frequently linked to temporal migration. Through EU accession and the Schengen agreement, migration between Poland and the Netherlands has become easier. Dutch media has addressed a need for migrants for the Netherlands: “Without labour migrants the economy will stall” a provincial representative states (Kusters & de Vries, 2019). Rob Jetten, chair of the Dutch party D66, stated that “We

actually need more Polish people in the Netherlands” (NOS, 2019a), but, he explains, “We do not want Polenhotels [temporary living spaces for labour migrants, Aldert] that cause nuisance”

(Ibid).

The presence of Polish migrants in the Netherlands goes beyond these Polenhotels, or their presence in the labour market. Polish supermarkets, Polish beauty salons, football teams and dentistry; Polish migrants change the places they live in (Vollebregt & Toemen 2018). But these ‘Polish places’ are not seen as positive by all: There is a fear of the possibility of a ‘parallel’ society (NOS 2019b). The idea is that because people can speak Polish everywhere, thanks to Polish supermarkets, medical facilities, and churches, the need to learn Dutch or engage in Dutch society is reduced: “For many Poles there is no need to integrate” (Ibid). Outside of the Dutch media, the Polish Ambassador to the Netherlands also takes issue with this ‘parallel society’. According to him however, this is created due to housing, regulation, and stigmatisation (Navis 2019).

Polish migration to the Netherlands, and Polish places in the Netherlands are not new phenomena. Already in 1928 a Polish school was opened in Limburg (Willems & Verbeek 2012: 33). For decades now, the city of The Hague has received Polish migrants. An example of this is migration from Poland during the Second World War, which has created a small “Diaspora” of Poles in The Hague (Idem: 276).

(7)

6 In Aalsmeer, the influence of decades of Polish migration has resulted in Polish church sermons and supermarkets in a similar way. Has this village of 30.000 inhabitants, the place in which I spent the majority of my childhood, become, in part, a Polish place? Do these three different Polish supermarkets help these migrants feel welcome, or does it reduce the need to integrate? With regards to Wanda and Ludwika cited above, what about settling in Aalsmeer in the first place? How come Wanda wanted to, and how come that this house affected Ludwika’s feeling of belonging as it did? There are multiple perspectives, in academia but in the public discourse as well, about what can happen, and also what should happen when migrants settle somewhere. I am here concerned with the experiences, perceptions and opinions of Polish migrants, such as those of Wanda and Ludwika, with regard to their feelings of belonging in Aalsmeer.

This will be addressed first through the lens of migrant place-making, a concept that tries to capture the way in which migrant groups ‘make places’. Through place-making migrants can express their identity and establish a (new) community and provide possibilities of a sense of belonging (Pemberton & Phillimore 2018: 734; Juan 2005: 38). This theory suggests that Polish supermarkets and church sermons do not hinder integration or create a parallel society, but rather that these Polish places allow for ways in which one can ‘be Polish in the Netherlands’, and belong in the Netherlands.

However, the extent to which one can speak about Polish migrants as a group, both from a conceptual as well as from an empirical standpoint will be problematised, mostly because of its assumption that a community needs to be present for migrant place-making to come to fruition. In order to interpret findings that suggest a sense of belonging to a place might be a more individual affair, a different theoretical lens will be used in the second part of this thesis: place-belonging and the politics of place-belonging.

Mainly drawing from in-depth semi-structured interviews, I will try to come to an understanding of how Polish people forge a sense of place-belonging in Aalsmeer? As such the first sub-question will attempt to explore whether migrant place-making does indeed foster a sense for belonging, and whether it occurs in Aalsmeer. This question is phrased as how does migrant

place-making factor in to place belonging? It appears that to my research participants no ‘Polish

community’ that could forge this sense of belonging is present. The following sub-questions take a closer look at the relationships that are there and explores whether these factor into the

creation of a sense of place-belonging. While they turn out to play an important role, the language

you are proficient in can allow you to forge new relationships that affect place-belonging. The role of language will be discussed in the third sub-question which posits how cultural factors

affect place-belonging. A complex and multifaceted discussion of the experienced ways in which

(8)

7 on I will discuss the ways in which the political economy of the situation many research participants are in affect their looking for a literal place: a house. The fourth sub-question is thus: How do political economic factors affect place-belonging? Through this focus a discussion of the role of temporal job agencies will also be offered.

Throughout my conversations, research participants distanced themselves from other Polish migrants, by exploring the fifth and final sub-question: How politics of belonging factor

into place-belonging, the issue of reputation, and the perceived loss of it will be discussed. All

together these suggest that large parts of the lives of Polish migrants are not experienced among ‘ethnic lines’. However, ethnicity should not be ignored, as it can be an important factor in parts of the lives of Polish migrants, such as through their political economy and language proficiency. I will first look into ways in which belonging has been understood in academic literature. I will therefore provide an overview of relevant literature for such a study, and will specifically address the ethnic lens in migrant place-making, and how the theory of belonging may provide a better theoretical underpinning for the study I will conduct here. After a discussion of the methods used I will answer the five stated sub-questions. Finally a conclusion will follow that reflects on these findings and will conclude this thesis.

(9)

8

2. Migrant place-making or place

belonging?

Migrant (?) place-making and Belonging

Here I will only briefly discuss forms of migration, and in particular migration in the EU. Afterwards I will discuss some of the concrete effects migration may have at the local level, and discuss why this local level in particular is relevant. A particular strand of literature I will discuss is migrant place-making, which relates to belonging. However, after discussing some perhaps problematic assumptions in this literature, I will discuss the notion of place-belonging and the way politics play a role within it.

2.1 Migration

Migration from Poland to the Netherlands over the last decade is often be understood in the context of EU labour migration. After the 1st of May 2004 10 new countries joined the European Union (EU), among them Poland. Many of the already existing member states restricted migration, such as the Netherlands (Castels et. al 2014: 177). After 2007 these restrictions were removed and free, unrestricted migration between Poland and the Netherlands was made possible (SCP 2011: 11). However, a pure focus on labour migration would not be able to explain the variety of reasons for migration from Poland to the Netherlands. Research into the Polish people that are registered in the Netherlands, recognises other main reasons for migration from Poland to the Netherlands, particularly family reunion (volgmigratie) and schooling (study) (SCP 2018: 32). However, for a large group the reasons for migration are unknown or fall under other categories (in 2015 those categorised as ‘Other’ was the same number as categorised as labour migration). Earlier research recognises the marital migration of Polish women with Dutch men as an important category as well (SCP 2011: 13). From a more historical perspective one can identify political reasons as well (See for example the chapter on labour union Solidarinosc in Willems & Verbeek 2012: 162).

Within the labour market these people of Polish descent work within industry, the commercial sector, agriculture and commercial horticultural (SCP 2018: 99).

Understanding this diversity of possible reasons for migration among the Polish in the Netherlands requires a theories that allow for this diversity. Already in 2008, the idea that the EU might cause or have caused forms of migration that are as of yet ill understood was mentioned by Favell. His call for action states that “(…) our tried-and-tested narratives and

(10)

9

and citizenship, based on post-colonial, guestworker and asylum models, and historical distinctions between pre- and post-1973 trends - are finished.” Rather, he argues that “(…) the new East West migration finally provides scholars with a European context comparable to the Mexican-US scenario that has inspired the largest and most sophisticated body of migration theory and research available in the social sciences.” (Favell 2008: 702). The answer scholars provided to

this question can be found in the idea of ‘liquid migration’ or liquid mobility (De Haas, 2014: 32). Others however, criticise the idea that this migration is indeed new, and, more importantly for this thesis: scholars wondered whether this idea of liquid migration could account for the settlement of migrants and the coexistence of both ‘new’ as well as ‘old’ forms of migration (Engbergen, 2018: 67).

As discussed, attention to different migration trajectories is important since these exist among Polish migrants in the Netherlands, but perceiving this migration as ‘liquid migration’ or ‘liquid mobility’ will not do justice to this diversity. What is known is that Polish migrants do settle in the Netherlands. When they settle they shape the places they settle in, which brings me to the topic of place-making.

2.2. What is a place, and what is a sociology of place?

In this thesis a place is more than the geographical location of the case at hand. As Gieryn argues, a place is more than a description or a backdrop to a social setting. It is an ‘agentic player in the

game’ (Gieryn 2000: 466). What defines a place then is: location, material form and

meaningfulness (Ibid). Places do not only influence what people can and cannot do, but people also change places. We do so not only in a material way, though the construction or destruction of buildings, roads and forests, but also through the attachment of meaning (Idem: 465). Industrial development can create a place just as much as its architects can , but the role of daily interactions by ‘ordinary people’ may not be disregarded. As Gieryn notes: “The very idea of

‘neighbourhood’ is not inherent in any arrangement of streets and houses, but is rather an ongoing practical and discursive production/imagining of a people” (Idem: 472). In this thesis I will mainly

focus on the latter, since, as discussed in the introduction, the existence of ‘Polish places’ might relate to other discussions, such as those of integration, but also direct effects on the places they are constructed in, alluded to above.

Migrant place-making is place-making with a focus on the role of groups of migrants. With and within these places migrants may attach meaning to a place, and alter it, both through interpretation as through material manifestations of their presence such as specific ethnic shops or restaurants or road signs. Place-making is then linked to the forging of a sense of ‘belonging’

to a place, and possible practices within this place may help express this belonging (Peperkamp

(11)

10 This meaning of a place then goes beyond material manifestations of migration, where migrant place-making is not only an increase of a certain type of business or the emergence of an ‘ethnic enclave’ (which it can be), but more importantly it is the attachment of meaning. A place has the potential to become “[a site] for the creation of social networks, aggregating devices,

anchors for identity and representations of culture” (Juan, 2005: 37). In her study of Vietnamese

place-making in two American cities, Juan shows how places allow the Vietnamese American communities she studies to “stay Vietnamese” (Ibid), in this context, staying Vietnamese however

“is about generating new ways of being Vietnamese in America” (Idem: 61).

Place-making, and migrant place-making in particular can thus allow for ways in which ethnicity can be enacted and perceived in a specific local context. It is important to note here that many mention this specific form of migrant place-making as something that occurs when faced with discrimination. A thorough account of how this can occur is provided by Veronis (2007). She studies Latin American senses of belonging in Toronto, Canada. In this study she shows how the (re)construction of collective identities takes place, in her case a ‘Latin American’ identity (Veronis 2007: 467-269).

This process of forging a common identity in a place does not need to be successful. Gill (2010) attempts to develop a theory of both ideal typical making as pathological place-making. He presents 4 stages. The first is to “agree upon the conditions of membership” (Gill 2010: 1159) and as such the identity is ‘projected’ in the public sphere through “signs, shops and

restaurants” (Castles and Davidson 2000: 131 as cited by Gill 2010: 1160). Other ‘sites’ for

creation of anchors for identity and representation of culture described by literature on Poles are religion, family and friends, leisure activities, food consumption and preparation and the sites of more ‘mundane’ activities such as shopping for groceries (Ryan 2010: 364; Peperkamp 2018).

A pathology of place-making in this stage may be a failure to agree or project a migrant identity. This may depend on differences among the migrating groups. The second stage of place-making is the idea that these places are ‘representative’ of ‘the migrant cohort’. Gill argues, with reference to Veronis (2007) above that differences between migrants of course are a part of this, rather he refers to this representation as a ‘compromise’, as “the strategic costs of accepting

a common identity (that is to some extent essentializing) are worth the gains available to migrants and do not cause migrants to have to abandon important aspects of their own identity” (Gill 2010:

1160). A failure of this stage is then related to the possible unrepresentativeness of a place and related the impossibility of expressing ones diversity within the common identity. The third stage is the acceptance of the made place by the ‘host community’. A failure of this stage is related to interpretations of the places by the host society, The previously mentioned news articles which refer to a parallel society could be understood as such. Finally the fourth stage is

(12)

11 when new migrants feel ‘affinity with existing migrant places’, as such it can become a place in which one interacts with people they would not in their countries of origin. Pathologies of this stage are related to being unable to make the choice to engage in a place and thus not being able to ‘compromise’ but being forced to associate ‘particular place based initiatives’. (Idem: 1160-1161). Gill demonstrates this model through migrant place-making in the UK by Polish migrants. In the cases he studies a Polish community does not emerge, and the places that are made, such as a church service in Polish might be exclusionary for individuals that (Gill 2010).

These two examples give an idea of the potential of migrant place-making, as well as the way in which it is a process that can fail or succeed. Moreover it does not need to be defined ‘ethnically’ as in the example of Veronis, where a new collectivity was formed out of the same experiences. Gill on the other hand shows how there can be issues within a group of migrants from one nationality partly because of internal differences and the failure to account for this diversity in a place. Moreover migrant place-making is explicitly mentioned in reference to the building of a community. As such it is about a collective forging of belonging. But what about this collective?

Alternatively, Pemberton and Phillimore suggest that this theoretical model is not linear in the sense that stage one does not need to always precede stage three or four (2018: 745). This model, and the mentioned pathologies may be problematic in other senses as well.

2.3. Migrant? Place-making

The previously mentioned articles, aside from showing two different sides and therefore presenting a less straightforward interpretation of migrant place-making, are interesting in a theoretical sense as well. Both show how migrant place-making is not a predestined a priori given of ‘co-ethnics’ constructing and interacting in ‘ethnic’ places. Since the possible constructions of places are thus in theory a multitude, the formation of a ‘Polish place’ is not a given.

This is interesting in light of criticism on migrant place-making literature as it has been argued that it assumes “single, relatively large, bounded (and concentrated) ethnic groups,

building distinctive migrant places or neighbourhoods, reflecting this single ethno-national identity” (Pemberton & Phillimore 2018: 734). This single, and in particular ‘bounded’ ethnic

group may not always be present, as has been discussed in the previous section. In the case of Gill the group was not as ‘bounded’ as one might assume, and in the case of Veronis, the group was not a ‘single’ nationality.

To understand how migrants as individuals shape places then, might require that, as Glick Schiller and Schmidt remark, research on “place-making [needs to go] beyond the

(13)

12

assumptions that migrants’ social lives are confined within ethnically defined neighbourhoods ”

(Glick Schiller & Schmidt 2016 : 5). Other ‘sociabilities’ play an important role in people’s lives and researcher thus need to be attentive to “That which is not ethnic” (Brubaker et.al. 2006: 168).

This is related to a larger problem in (social) sciences addressed by, among others, Roger Brubaker. In Ethnicity without groups he addresses the problematic assumption in social science that “discrete, sharply differentiated, internally homogeneous and externally bounded groups [are]

basic constituents of social life (...) and fundamental units of social analysis” (Brubaker 2002: 163).

In rethinking the way we discuss ethnicity in science, we ought to understand ethnicity not as a concrete group, but rather as “political, social cultural and psychological processes” (Idem: 167). Groupness, and the relevance of ethnicity seen through this lens, is something that can happen, but just as well could not happen. Using this approach, the attention shifts to how people “do

things” with categories: do they identify with, internalise, or, include a category in an

administrative practice (Idem: 169-170)?

In discussions on -and the performance of- ethnicity, policies, politicians and community leaders play an important role but ethnicity is also ‘experienced and enacted in everyday life’ (Brubaker et. al 2006: 167). For an understanding of the expression and doing of ethnicity top down as well as more bottom up tendencies are both relevant. When thinking of ways in which ethnicity is enacted in everyday live, a focus place and place-making may provide insights in how places are shaped by migration. But to accurately capture the possibilities of place-making by migrants other approaches might be helpful, as was previously argued by Wessendorf, and Pemberton & Phillimore that “The literature on (migrant) place-making assumes “migrants

cohere in distinct ethnic communities within which a process of place-making occurs” (Pemberton

& Phillimore, 2018: 736). Migrant place-making and studies of migrant place-making should not

“Interpre[t] place making through an ethnic lens, assuming that individuals forge identities along ethnic lines” (Wessendorf 2019: 134). Rather, places and place-making might be a “site where ethnicity might - but need not - be at work” (Brubaker et al. 2006: 168). In order to capture the

complexity of people's everyday lives and the role of ethnicity in it, Brubaker et al. discuss the preoccupations people have, showing that the concerns people have are only “occasionally

interpreted in ethnic terms” (Idem: 191).

These notions of less ‘essentializing’ ways of thinking about ethnicity do have shortcomings according to Veronis, who I discussed above. She discusses concepts and theories that approach ethnicity and the role it plays in life as less fixed and bounded, such as diaspora, hybridity, and transnationalism (Veronis 2007: 457). These notions thus go beyond treating ethnicity in a ‘groupist’ way. But migrant place-making need not to be understood as the creation of places that people affiliate with due to their ethnicity and possible shared origins.

(14)

13 Rather, she refers to Hall and Gilroy’s work on hybridity and diaspora in which “the formation of

cultural identities (…) are based on shared experiences of marginalization rather than common origins” (Idem: 458). In her study then, migrants from diverse countries in Latin America “relate based on their common experiences in the host society” (Ibid). This formation or production of

‘cultural identities’ in a diaspora are according to Hall “defined, not by essence or purity, but by

the recognition of a necessary heterogeneity and diversity (…) with and through, not despite, difference” (Hall 1990: 234 as cited by Veronis 2007: 458). Ethnic places, or places that are

defined ethnically do not need to be ‘bounded’, when the diversity within the group is present. Moreover, marginalization and not origin is what may cause migrants to choose to engage in migrant place-making. This choice is the final, but crucial, nuance Veronis pays attention to. She refers to bell hooks who, Veronis argues, “provides a basis for an alternative understanding of

ethnic places as chosen spaces where ethnic/racial and immigrant groups can construct a shared identity based on their common experiences of ‘Othering’” (Veronis 2007: 457 own emphasis).

This, Veronis continues, makes these groups visible and allows for claims to citizenship (Idem: 457-458).

While others (Gill 2010, Juan 2005) have argued along a similar line when marginalized migrant place-making allows for a safe place. As my emphasis in the quote may indicate, the focus on the choice to engage in these places is crucial.

Veronis adds on this idea by referring to Nagel (2001) who argues that “Ethnic identities

still tend to be treated as “cultures”- as unified, discrete, pre existing social entities” (Nagel 2001:

252, in Veronis 2007: 459). Therefore Veronis argues in favour of more research in the tradition of grounded theory: “[an approach] that is more sensitive to empirical variation and geographic

difference.” (Idem: 459).

This theoretical framework works well in the case of Veronis as in Toronto “Despite the

essentializing nature of categories produced in and through place, Latin Americans’ identity is certainly not static or complete” (Idem 469). These places stem from the experiences of

marginalization, but are also sites for engagement with differences within those that are ‘Othered’. As such the places “are strategically fixed and essentialized while simultaneously being

fluid and flexible” (Ibid).

Through the above discussion an idea of how a sense of belonging can be forged for migrants: through migrant place-making. This theoretical approach has been scrutinised however due to failing to go beyond the ethnic lens, and assuming people live lives in ethnically defined places and neighbourhoods. This critique I argue, is not fully justified, as migrant place-making is “based on shared experiences of marginalization rather than common origins” (Veronis, 458). Due to experienced the marginalisation and discrimination, or ‘Othering’, people create ‘migrant places’ where a way to express ones ethnicity in a localised way is possible. Through

(15)

14 this, if migrant place-making is successful in the first place, a sense of belonging can be forged. Whether or not this occurs and the empirical question I will ponder in the following sub-question, which states how does migrant place-making factor in to place belonging?

2.4. Who belongs where?

Through the attachment of meaning place-making can “forge and assert a collective identity” and

“establish the validity and aspirations of a new community” (Pemberton & Phillimore 2018: 734)

and thus “make claims to and express (…) belonging in certain neighbourhoods in the city” (Gill 2010: 1159).

This can be done through ‘strategic essentialism’ which refers to the choice of associating oneself with people who have faced marginalisation. While this does enable a study of migrant place-making that is not per se ‘groupist’, and, as I argued in line with Veronis, does not “[Interpret] place making through an ethnic lens, assuming that individuals forge identities

along ethnic lines” (Wessendorf 2019: 134). Migrant place-making does pay attention

marginalisation based on ethnicity in particular, and as such it provides little insight in other ways in which migrants ‘make a place’ for themselves, as individuals. Moreover, if migrant place-making is not successful, deeming it a ‘pathology’ may fail to address parts of migrants;' lives that are not experienced ethnically. While the critiques of place-making of assuming groupism may not be fully applicable to all possible ways of doing research into migrant place-making, Veronis’ embrace of difference within a chosen places still provides little understanding of that ‘which is not ethnic’ but may very well be important to everyday lives of migrants, and, their claims of belonging to a place.

How can belonging then be understood outside of these chosen places? In Wessendorf's research on ‘super-diverse’ neighbourhoods, the people presented not only had relationships with people of the other ethnicities, but also “distanced themselves from co-ethnics and showed

little interest in co-ethnic relations” (Ibid). As such, other sociabilities that are not ethnic did play

a role. Instead of a migrant place-making approach, Wessendorf then posits an approach based on ‘belonging’. Belonging, in contrast to migrant place-making, may provide insight in the lives of migrants outside of the places that are, albeit strategically, made.

Conceptualising belonging however, is not easy. Here I will discuss two ways in which belonging has been understood in literature which appear to be relevant for this research.

The first involves belonging to a place, as is the main concern of Antonsich, who wants to understand what it means to say “I belong here” (Antonsich 2010: 4). Often however, belonging has been “uncritical[ly] conflat[ed] with the notion of identity and citizenship” (Ibid). This among other reasons explains why the term is as ill-defined as it is. Place-belonging is understood as

(16)

15 ‘narrated by the self’, and consequently the emotional feeling attached to a place by an individual is an individual ordeal. Antonsich is interested in the attachment to a place by individuals. The ‘scale’ of said place can vary from a neighbourhood to an island to a country (Idem: 6). Place-belonging is shown to relate to multiple factors, being ‘auto-biographical, relational, cultural, economic and legal (Idem: 8).

Out of these 5 factors, as I will show below, my data refers to four of these factors: relational, cultural, economic and legal, in case of the last two the interaction between them is relevant. Relational factors relate to the personal and social ties people may have “in a given place” (Ibid). These ties may variate from more intense relationships with friends and family members to more ‘occasional’ weak ties such as familiar strangers: people who are “not

“personally known” but, because of a shared daily path or round (...) recognizable” (Lofland 1998:

60: as cited in Blokland 2009: 188). But research suggests that the former, more emotionally and time intensive, relationships are more important for generating a sense of connectedness, which is in turn linked to belonging (Antonsich 2010: 9). Moreover, these interactions are required to ‘take place’ physically (Ibid).

Among cultural factors that help forge a sense of belonging, language is considered the most important among them. Language can generate a feeling of being ‘at home’ since it allows not only for an understanding of ‘what you say’ but also ‘what you mean’ (Ibid). However, language can also be used to differentiate among people, as for example accents can be used to recognise, or believe to have recognised differences in background (Garapich 2007: 13). In particular in migration, learning a language can open up possibilities for relationships with people who speak the native language, or enable one to apply to different jobs (Ryan 2010: 373).

Related to the latter are economic factors. Understood as the need for ‘a stable material condition’ for individuals and their family, being ‘integrated into a given economy’ appears to be a necessary aspect of place-belonging as well (Antonsich 2010: 10). Lastly; legal factors relate mainly to citizenship rights, and the uncertainty experienced with regards to an individual’s legal status (Idem: 10-11). In the Dutch context as will be discussed below, both of these later factors intersect in important ways that are also directly linked to the availability of residential options for individuals.

Antonsich also refers to length of stay as a factor that might influence a sense of place-belonging (Idem: 11). However as will become apparent from the pages that will follow, this can intersect with other important factors of belonging, and can play very distinct roles.

Whereas migrant place-making allowed for the forging of a sense of belonging through

collective identity formation, the conceptualisation of place-belonging I have presented here

allows for more of a discussion of individual constructions of place-belonging. I have demarcated three analytically distinct but intersecting factors that may play a role in the constructions of

(17)

16 place-belonging: Relational, cultural and political economical. These three will be discussed in sub-questions 2, 3 and 4, respectively: How do relationships factor into place-belonging; How do cultural factors affect belonging; How do political economical factors affect place-belonging? Through the discussion of these sub-questions, I will assess the notions stated previously in the literature review, as well as those that came up in the conversations with my research participants.

2.5. Who decides who belongs?

Whereas the above discussed factors that ‘factor’ into an individual’s sense of place-belonging, place-belonging does not occur in a vacuum. In the work of Yuval-Davis, on who Antonsich based much of his conceptualisation, attention is given to the ‘politics of belonging’ (Yuval-Davis 2006: 205). To Yuval-Davis belonging is instead related to social location, which is understood as, but not limited to, sexuality, race, nationality, class or stage in the life cycle (Idem: 200). These are, needless to say, different but related things to belong to. In order to avoid confusion I follow Antonsich in referring to 'belonging to a place' as place-belonging. To Yuval-Davis (2006) belonging can be understood through three different analytical levels. She suggests untangling the difference in social locations, individual identifications and emotional attachments and lastly ethical and political value systems. These political value systems are the site of the politics of belonging.

The politics of belonging are partly practices ‘by others’. Here again, the previously addressed issue of conflation of the term belonging with identity comes up. The politics of belonging are not only part of politics in a narrow sense of the word, they are not, indeed, specifically located in the municipal courts, the administrative practices or the regulations that govern citizenship, they are also, everyday and ‘mundane’. ‘Us’ and ‘them’ is not only expressed in Polish vs. Dutch, but also within these groups. As such, the politics of belonging is not only about the maintenance of boundaries, but also of the contestation of what is involved in belonging (Yuval-Davis 2006: 205). Here “belonging to a place becomes one and the same as

belonging to a group of people, i.e., belonging becomes synonymous with identity, both social and individual” (Antonsich 2010: 13). As such: “Membership (to a group) and ownership (of a place) are the key factors in any politics of belonging” (Ibid). In the context of migration this could refer

to belonging to the political economy of a place, but also to having social and human rights. Moreover, belonging is seen as being able to express ones identity and “be recognised as an

integral part of the community where they live, as well as being valued and listened to” (Antonsich

2010: 14). A problem in this perception of the politics of belonging is that a ‘Dominant ethnic group’ could “fill the notion of belonging with a rhetoric of sameness, which clearly prevents any

(18)

17

recognition of difference.” (Idem: 15). An empirical critique on this idea comes from studies on

belonging and migrant place-making in super-diverse neighbourhoods (Pemberton & Phillimore 2018; Wessendorf 2019). In these studies it is shown that a certain ‘cosmopolitan’ way of being becomes the norm, and a failure to do so would result in not belonging. From a theoretical point of view these presented notions do discuss a ‘host society’ which may have a community that uses ‘a rhetoric of sameness’, and in doing so (an albeit formulated as a process) groupness is assumed. The politics of belonging then are between the ‘host society’ that presents what it means to ‘belong’, and in which belonging is, again, an ‘ethnic’ situation instead of one that can

occur ethnically. As mentioned above place-belonging can occur on different scales, such as

cities, neighbourhoods or islands. The ethnic lens then fails to account for the politics of belonging that might occur. Moreover, one might also view “Class, gender, and subnational

regional and cultural differences” as important for the daily lives of individuals (Çaglar & Glick

Schiller 2018: 4) as well as the politics of belonging. Why then, are the politics of belonging phrased as ‘ethnic’?

In line with this I follow Youkhana (2015) in the assessment that these ideas fail to go beyond groupism. Belonging is often still used in an essentializing way, in which someone’s nationality is assumed to be most important factor in someone’s life (Youkhana 2015: 11). In order to avoid this, studies of belonging should encapsulate how everyday practices could

“Transgress dominant ideologies, political practices and the politics of social boundary making”

(Ibid). Questions about how and what conditions produce belonging come to the front, all the while not ignoring that which could but does not have to be experienced ethnically (Idem: 20).

To understand how and where politics of belonging then occurs, I perhaps ought to go beyond the nation. A possibility of going beyond ethnic or national ways of perceiving the politics of belonging can be found in the way in which Yuval-Davis presents the idea of autochtony which could be constantly be refined, and simply meaning ‘I was here before you’ at the basis. This latter idea liberates the concept from the notion of sameness and rather enables everybody who is ‘less new’ to make claims of belonging (Yuval-Davis 2011: 99-100). As such the role kinship and families could be used, but does not have to as “insiders and outsiders do not

exists as fixed boundaries”, rather “kinship can be used to enact such boundaries” (Savage et.al.

2005: 31).

Whereas both of this might be useful opening up of ways in which the politics of belonging can occur, other possibilities may also exist. In the fifth and final sub-question I will discuss the way in which my research participants participate in the politics of belonging. The fifth question is How do the politics of belonging factor into place-belonging?

From the previous sections it became apparent that place-making has the opportunity to anchor migrants' identity and help foster a sense of belonging. However, place-making is also

(19)

18 known to fail in producing these positive effects. Rather it can work exclusionary and fail in fostering a feeling of belonging, or it can create a tension in what it means to be Polish or a Polish migrant and instead cause people to dissociate with this community. I have suggested that Brubaker's notion of perceiving ethnicity as a process instead of a strictly demarcated group may help understand these phenomena. Place-making has also been discussed outside of this ‘mono-ethnic’ bounded approach. Here then place-making and migrant place-making is seen as a place in which not only identities are represented or imagined, but also contested.

This view has been criticised, but the key point however, is that this form of essentialism is discussed as being a reaction to ‘Othering’. By using the grounded approach you are sensitive to the differences in findings localised in place and time. So while indeed, the ideas of Juan or Gill may not apply in the town I am studying, this does not render it untrue for the cases in which these findings are grounded. It does, however, complicate the ways of thinking about place-making.

As such, migrant place-making literature when grounded in everyday lives may find that ‘ethnicity rarely occurs’, but when it does occur it can work decisively. Theories that take a more individual approach such as those of place-belonging may account for other ways in which people create a place in which they belong. Relational, cultural and political economical factors were named as relevant for this thesis in particular. These factors do not take place in a vacuum, and the politics of belonging may very much play a role. While attempts were made to view these politics of belonging outside of an ethnic lens, the question in particular is how these politics of belonging are engaged with by the research participants. This thesis hopes to further ‘ground’ research on belonging for migrants and critically assess the ways these processes are studied as well.

These questions will hopefully enable me to answer the following research question: “How do Polish people forge a sense of place-belonging in Aalsmeer?“ Before I attempt to answer this question as well as the affiliated sub-questions in the analysis I will first explain the methods used in the methodology section.

(20)

19

3. Methods & Research design

I have conducted a qualitative case study of place-making among Polish migrants in the village of Aalsmeer. Within qualitative studies, and within qualitative studies with a more interpretivist stance in particular, the focus is on attempting to understand how individuals themselves give meaning to, and understand the social world around them. I take this approach because the topic at hand requires an understanding of how migrants construct senses of belonging in their daily lives. I will attempt to understand the place and practices within the place of Aalsmeer. My interest is thus in understanding how these people interpret their life world.

This study takes an grounded approach. This approach seeks to “seek a situational fit

between observed facts and rules” (Timmermans & Tavory 2012: 171). A researcher generates

new and expands on theory based on ‘surprising research evidence’, one moves “back and forth” between data and theory (Charmaz 2006: 24). Moreover, the data ought to be leading in coming to the analysis instead of beginning with a priori codes before engaging with the data (Idem: 5-6, 9-10).

Grounded approaches allow for a better understanding of the lives and struggles of those ‘at the margins’, in particular with respect to the anti-essentializing notions used here. A problem when using these kind of conceptualisations is that the lived experiences and exclusionary mechanisms that may be at work are downplayed through anti-essentializing notions (Veronis 2007: 459). Grounded theory is as such more concerned with what the data allows us to discuss than with formulating and refining theories, but is also more “sensitive to empirical variation and geographic difference” (Ibid). The relevance of the sensitivity to geographic difference aligns closely with the concerns in place-making literature. Moreover, staying close to the data helps avoid problems related to what has been referred to as conformability, the qualitative equivalent of objectivity of more quantitative, positivistic studies. Conformability in qualitative research means that findings “are the result of experiences and

ideas of the informants and the participants, rather than the characteristics and preferences of the researchers” (Shenton 2004: 72).

Going “back and forth” between data and theory, and pondering the question of “what is

this data a study of” (Charmaz 2006: 47), help in avoiding that the conclusions are mere

‘artefacts of the researcher’ but instead real, grounded experiences. I entered the field wanting to study place-making, but throughout my interviews belonging seemed more important and appropriate, as no community seems to have emerged. The question to ask oneself when considering data ‘what is this data a study of’ (Charmaz 2006: 47). This data is about belonging.

(21)

20 The goal of this study is not only to increase the knowledge on the (potential) ways in which migrants may shape their environments, but also to critically assess the manner in which this knowledge is produced.

In attempting to uncover this I conducted semi-structured interviews with 15 Polish people1_{living in or close to Aalsmeer. These migrants have different ages, occupations and differ}

in their duration of residency in the Aalsmeer region. The interviews will be conducted in Dutch. Some of these conversations were held with the help of a informant who translated back and forth as well. Next to this I have had conversations with those who are very invested in the ‘sites’. The organiser of dance events for Polish people in the larger region, as well as a Polish person who helps Polish people in Aalsmeer by providing translations of official documents are the prime examples of this. These are not my primary source of data, but may help hopefully me to provide context when needed. Below first I will discuss the way in which the interviews were held and how I came into contact with my informants.

Throughout this section I will reflect on my own positionality, and the influence I may have had on the research.

3.1. Interviews:

The interviews were conducted in the homes of the respondents. We sat in the living room, and occasionally at the dinner table. Six of the interviews were one on one, four interviews were held with multiple members of the same household at the same time, one with two people who were colleagues, and one with two colleagues and the partner of these colleague. Finally one was with the entire household: the husband, wife, and two children.

The interviews were, to a varying degree, informal and rather unstructured, however all topics noted in the topic list in appendix 1 were discussed, although not in that order. The interviews lasted between 45 minutes to three hours, although more often than not the conversation diverged to different topics.

All interviews were conducted in Dutch, my native language and many of the respondents' second or third language. This caused some translation issues occasionally, where the informant and I did not know a certain word, or arguably more relevant for the quality of this research, in which a respondent had a different connotation for a certain word. On two occasions, the word at hand was ‘place’, or ‘plek’ in Dutch, in these cases I would suggest areas which were of interest when discussing place-making (café’s, going out, ‘groceries’.).

A priority in my interviews was to make those who I was talking with feel as comfortable as possible, therefore at times I had little control over the interview setting. Sometimes the radio

1_{I use the term ‘Polish people’ as a translation of "Poolse mensen" - the term by my informants. Also to} differentiate from ‘Poles’ or ‘Polen’.

(22)

21 or television was on in the background, or we discussed topics not related to the study at hand for a long time. This might have inflated the amount of interview time significantly. Sometimes however the conversation went on to topics of interest that were not yet included in my topic list, or discussed by my literature review. The grounded approach and semi-structured interviews allowed me to still discuss them when necessary.

I recorded the conversations and all respondents signed the confidentiality form in appendix 4. Afterwards I transcribed the interviews verbatim. I did not do so for sections that were not relevant for the topic at hand. I then coded and found themes in the transcribed interviews. I will discuss this process in more detail later, after I discussed the method of sampling used below.

3.2. Sampling:

While the interviews with those ‘invested in the sites’ will be based on the relevance of said sites, the interviews with Polish migrants required snowball sampling. Snowball sampling involves asking respondents “who meet some criteria of interest” to suggest other individuals who would be of interest to me (Halperin & Heath, 2017: 277). The ‘criteria of interest’ here is being a Polish migrant living in or near the neighbourhood of the village of Aalsmeer, and being able to have a conversation in Dutch. Through the social network of the initial three respondents I acquired due to my grandmother who teaches one-on-one Dutch classes to Polish migrants, I had hoped to acquire a total of 20 respondents, but eventually reached 16 people of which 15 were Polish migrants, living here ranging from a few years to multiple decades. More descriptive information on my respondents can be found in the appendix (appendix 2). All names in the table as well as in the text are fake.

While representativeness and generalisability are not the goal of this method of sampling, some issues that stem from this sampling method will be highlighted here. First my grandmother came up in quite some interviews, not only as a topic of conversation, but also in the context of the Dutch language, my conversational partners would mention how this interview was good for their language proficiency, as well as their excuses for when they were struggling with the language itself: “Don’t let your grandmother know Aldert!”

Another effect, which multiple of my interviewees pointed out to me as well, is related to age, stage of life, and migratory aspiration. The informants I gathered through this network were older, living in the Netherlands for a longer time (3 to 20 years) and most were planning on staying at least until retirement. A large section of this group of Polish people has held the same job for a longer time and are not or are no longer reliant on temporary job agencies for their occupation. As I will discuss the final sub-question, many of these individuals also point to those

(23)

22 who (still) depend on job agencies and are more oriented on a short-term return to Poland as being a distinct group from themselves.

3.3. Coding:

The coding was conducted first by doing line-by-line coding, in which I tried to stay truthful to the original text and code in ‘action’ (Charmaz 2006: 49). In this coding I compare data to codes, but also data to data. By comparing different interviews by different research participants to one another I was able to go back into texts already coded to recode things that appeared relevant when compared to other texts. In this initial phase of coding and when I coded ‘in action’, I asked myself questions about processes, the development of these processes and how the research participant is involved in this process. Moreover questions about the research participants feelings and experiences during this process, as well as changes and consequences of the process are noted (Idem: 51).This also allows to ask the aforementioned question ‘what is this data a study of’ (Idem: 47), already alluded to above.

All interviews were held, transcribed and coded by me. All translations are also done by me. In these translations I tried to stay as true as possible to the original meaning in Dutch (the language of the interviews). An example here is Polish people (Poolse mensen) and ‘Poles’ (Polen). More problematic might be ‘Huis’ vs. ‘Thuis’, referring to a house versus a home, in a similar vein to space vs. place. One translation issue comes up when words that have multiple meanings in one of the languages at work here, be it Polish, Dutch or English. For all but one of my respondents, Polish was their first language, Dutch their second or third. A issue here is for example the word “Colleague”, used in Dutch and English to refer to someone you work with directly. In Polish ‘Kolega’ has multiple meanings such as: colleague; fellow; friend; buddy;

compeer; comrade; mate; compadre. This makes it more difficult to translate what is meant when

someone tells me a ‘Colleague’ helped them find a new job: I am left to wonder if it were a former colleague or a friend indeed, and have to consider context specifically. In these cases I tried to stay as close as possible to the intended meaning, instead what was said literally. When deemed relevant I will provide the original phrasing in Dutch as well as the English translation.

3.4. Case:

The village of Aalsmeer (for a map see appendix 2) has a long history in horticulture. Flowers and trees were grown on the land that was left from the centuries of Turf cutting, a practice which allows historians to date Aalsmeer back to the 15th century (Noord-Holland Archive n.d.). The trees and flowers were sold on the market in, among other places, Amsterdam. In 1912 an auction house was build. This auction house was eventually moved to the East of Aalsmeer in 1972 (Ibid), where it grew to the biggest auction house of flowers and plants in the world (Royal

(24)

23 Flora Holland) all at a ten minute car ride from Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport. The village has more than 31000 inhabitants of which by far the largest nationality is Dutch (29.433) followed by Polish (818), Syrian (135), and finally the UK and Germany (134 and 120 inhabitants respectively) (Aalsmeer Inhabitants 2019). Two of these 29.433 people are my grandparents who owned and ran a flower farm. The busses from Amsterdam to Aalsmeer drive through the area used for the auction house, and now trucks deliver the flowers, instead of boats. The ride to the house of my grandparents, where the flower farm was located, is no longer a long road of flower farms and the occasional yacht harbour, but more and more one of villa’s and expensive cars. Between these harbours, villa’s and tree and flower farms stands a white house with two cars in front of it with Polish number plates, owned by AB flexkracht, one of the temporary employment agencies.

The auction house and related companies such as distributors and sellers (temporarily) employ migrants. Due to contract laws many of these people are working from contract to contract for a maximum of 4 years. While many people are employed through these structures, some are not. While there are only little more than 800 Polish people registered in Aalsmeer, through these job agencies the actual number may be much higher. Aalsmeer then, potentially provides some insight in ways in which the lives of Polish people in the Netherlands in other more rural villages may occur. There are many other smaller villages in which a large section of the population is of Polish descent, mainly due to the presence of the industrial and agricultural sector in those villages (SCP 2018: 45; 144).

These people might be directly employed with their employer, or work in the black or grey market. And some of these people might travel past the villa’s, past the flower farms, and past AB flexkracht to visit my grandparents. This is not to be employed in their flower farm, because they have been pensioned for a couple decades now, but to learn Dutch at the kitchen table, with my grandmother. My conversations with Polish people in the village of Aalsmeer started here, through my grandmother I initially talked to 4 people, who in turn directed me to other Polish migrants. Eventually I talked to 15 Polish people who lived in Aalsmeer or the vicinity of the village and had conversations with several individuals who in one way or another had relations to Polish migrants but were not migrants themselves. Many of my research participants were initially contacted by other research participants. I am not sure what kind of descriptions of the conversations had were given, or in what way the research participants directly influenced each other, but I am aware of this. In some cases it has been shown how “interviewing within a community may increase awareness of the social divisions that exist

between researchers and participants” (Temple & Koterba 2009: 10). Moreover, perhaps due to

the fact that I am white, some respondents discussed their views on refugees, or other migrants and migrants of colour in particular with me that they might otherwise not have.

(25)

24

Analysis

In the subsequent sections I will use the insights from the literature review to answer the stated sub-questions. Through these questions I come to an assessment of the ways in which a sense of belonging is forged, for Polish people in Aalsmeer. First I will take a ‘migrant place-making’ approach. I will discuss the role of supermarkets and church in particular. For many of my research participants these places did not foster a sense of place-belonging in particular, even when faced with discrimination. Leisure is then shown as a potential site where migrant place-making as a reaction to ‘Othering’ has occurred. However, the suitability of the concept of migrant place-making is limited.

In order to still make sense of the data, and the ways in which place-belong can be forged, three factors in the process of construction of a sense of place-belonging will be discussed: relational; cultural and; political economical factors. These concepts help explain the experiences of the research participants in finding a place where they feel like they belong, as well as the lack thereof.

In both the discussion of migrant place-making as in the discussions of the three factors that shape a sense of place-belonging, it became apparent that research participations dissociated from other Polish people in Aalsmeer. This dissociation will be discussed in the final sub-question, which engages with the Politics of belonging.

4. How does migrant place-making factor

in to place belonging?

Migrant place-making is assumed to potentially help forge a sense of belonging to a place such as a neighbourhood, and could create the possibility for an expression of ‘being Polish in Aalsmeer’. This community of Polish in Aalsmeer is not formed due to the shared origin, but rather through a shared experience of ‘Othering’. Here I will discuss the emergence of Polish supermarkets and Church services and show how they were experienced by my research participants. While experiences of ‘Othering’ did occur, the Polish supermarkets and church services themselves did not fulfil the role of these places for some research participants. Leisure activities might align most with ideas of migrant place-making, but the lack of data makes it difficult to assess this fully.

(26)

25

4.1 Supermarkets, sausages and subverting your ethnicity

Aalsmeer has and has had multiple Polish supermarkets, three at the time of writing. Some of the first came around in the early 2010’s, developed at first by Brian van Heusden, together with his wife Natalja van Heusden. In the early 2010’s Brian was at the forefront of place-making in Aalsmeer, owning two supermarkets, one in the centre and one next to the auction house in the east of the village (Aalsmeer vandaag 2014). While the village only has around 800 registered residents from Polish descent, the owner has claimed to service up to 2500 to 3000 clients a week.

When Brian and Natalja van Heusden opened up, Gabriella, who has been in the area for decades remembers the early days of these Supermarkets:

“One time I was there in the supermarket, back then on the Hornweg and it was Friday afternoon, so a lot of Poles! The first time I experienced something like that, many working Poles that were doing their weekend groceries, man it was like a theatre, (…) it was really, I never experienced something like that in the Netherlands. It was great, almost a social network 'Oh you're still working there?' (…) real nice it was.”

The supermarket functioned as a ‘social network’, it allowed people to keep up and spread information. This network function of these kind of stores exists now as well, for example for Wanda who visits the Polo Smak weekly, often on the bike ride between her mother and work. She has friendly relations with several members of staff, which started around her largest hobby, reading:

Wanda: “There are two Polish girls, and a Ukrainian girl who also works there. Well and we talk a lot, it started with the books, because I was there every time, I just came for the books, and I bought 10 at once, so she laughed a bit. Interviewer: That you would buy 10?

Wanda: Yeah, every time, every week 10 books for example. 'Do you read this much!?' and I say 'Yeah!' (…) but yeah I was there for the books, and then we started talking about books and what not. (…) and then every time you're there, you talk a bit 'how’s it going'”.

The people at Polo Smak even managed to get a cheaper deal on the books because she was buying so much. For many of my respondents, the Polo Smak was the go-to supermarket, but not

(27)

26 for social calls, and not for everyday groceries either. The fact that it was the go-to appears to mainly depend on the quality of the produce and how close they were to the supermarket on their daily routines. “They all order from Poland” one of my research participants said, apparently there is no difference between them, only with regards to freshness. Implying that the differences between the supermarkets are small and people do not go out of their way to visit one.

The Polish supermarkets were mainly visited for specific Polish produce, and sausages in particular. But also for more labour intensive traditional dishes, such as pierogi, these supermarkets offer a ready-made alternative to the manual process of rolling up homemade dough around homemade vegetable, cheese or meat fillings. Apart from sausages though, many criticise the freshness or lack thereof of fruits and vegetables in Dutch supermarkets. Zygmunt for example feels avid about the quality of Polish bread as it is sturdier than its Dutch counterpart. The tomatoes bought in the Polish supermarket are ‘not plastic’, as Anna explains. Anna now visits a Turkish market in a nearby small city for her meats and fruits.

Through the occurrence of a Polish shop, Polish food is now available in Aalsmeer in multiple locations. Through food one can acquire tastes, smells and the sights that remind one of home (Rabikowska & Burrell 2008: 163). The making of this food can occur at home but of course outside of the domestic space as well. For example in restaurants, these sites then can also visualise the influence of a migrant group in an place, helping create a ‘Little Bosnia’ (Hume 2015: 8-9) or ‘Little Saigon’ (Juan 2005: 43) and work as a visual marker for the community. This then can create a way of being, in this instance, Polish people in Aalsmeer, as these kinds of visible representations can help construct but also validate a community (Pemberton & Phillimore 2018: 734). The purchasing of this food happens in other places as well, as some ‘Dutch’ stores have an aisle of specific ‘ethnic’ products, next to the Polish shops. In the case of a Polish shop in particular the “products, language, people and characteristically Polish design all

merge to create an experience which resonates very intimately” (Rabikowska & Burrell 2008:

165). In this sense, even when those shopping do not attempt to ‘make friends’, the ‘mundane practice’ of buying groceries connects one with one’s home country (Ibid).

When this food is made and consumed outside of the domestic household it allows for consumption by, and interaction with people who would otherwise not come into contact with these foodstuffs, which is something that can even be capitalised and commodified (Hume 2015: 10). The owners of these places may be referred to as 'ethnic entrepreneurs’, however it has been pointed out large parts of the rise and fall of the businesses of ‘ethnic entrepreneurs’ are dependent on factors that have nothing to do with their ethnicity (Raes 1998: 99-100). First and foremost, Raes argues, these people are entrepreneurs (Idem: 89). Many of the stores were at first run by a Dutch man and a Polish woman, Brian and Natalja van Heusden. The van Heusden’s

(28)

27 plans for a clothing store and their ambitious plans for Aalsmeer and the Polish in Aalsmeer are no more, as in 2016 the stores were declared bankrupt (Roy Hazenoot 2016). As of now, the Polish supermarkets remain, one in the building across from Van Heusdens fashion store/supermarket combo in the centre of the village, and one in the building he started in (Website Foodplus n.d.; Studio040 2016). Polo Smak and Foodplus are both owned by companies that own multiple stores, in the Netherlands but also the United Kingdom, Ireland and Germany. This change from more localised to now, franchised business can be linked to Raes’ critique of the extent to which these ethnic entrepreneurs are ‘ethnic’.

These places are still a visual manifestations of the presence of Polish people, and enable the research participants to engage in traditional cuisine. They can function as places in which social networks emerge. In this sense food, the making of it and its consumption allows migrants to connect with tastes and practices from home, but allows people who would not otherwise eat this to experience parts of the communities' practices as well.

However, even with more supermarkets to choose from, many of those I talked to did their regular groceries in bigger supermarkets, where prices play a role, but changes in preference may have occurred as well:

Maria: “When I came here, I only did groceries in the Polish shop, because I didn’t know the Dutch product (…) its hard! It’s hard for immigrants if they don’t know.”

Romek, who has been here close to 20 years hardly visits the store, but he used to: “Yeah at first it was like that, I went to Poland more often and I always

brought food if it didn’t spoil. But I quickly ended.”…. “I lived, I got used to… I live in a different country.”

A reason to change their store of preference, or the frequency of visiting the supermarkets could be taste and getting used to different tastes. But also being more proficient in the Dutch language, and therefore the ingredients of products. Moreover the networking function may have reduced according to some, the ‘theatre’ was then not now, as Gabrialla and Malina explain:

Gabriella: “(…) a few years ago, it was one store so one place, but that’s what I think”

How do Polish people forge a sense of place-belonging in Aalsmeer? : experiences of Polish people with place-belonging in the Dutch town of Aalsmeer

University of Amsterdam

Faculty of Social and Behavioural sciences