!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! ! Rachael!McKeown! 11257601! Master’s!Thesis!Project! Human!Geography!(Urban!Geography)! Supervisor:!Dr.!Cody!Hochstenbach! Second!Reader:!Dr.!Fenne!Pinkster! rachael_mckeown@hotmail.co.uk! 26th!June!2017! ! ! ! ! ! !‘Scouse’!Identity:!
Middle8class!perceptions!of!place!identity!in!Liverpool!
! Source:!Beverley!Goodwin!(Flickr)!class!residents!of!Liverpool,!UK.!A!qualitative!methodological!approach!:!involving!27!in:depth! interviews!:!explored!individual!perspectives!on!‘Scouse’!identity.!Results!suggest!that!middle: class!residents!perform!their!identities!in!unique!ways,!not!necessarily!aligned!to!traditional! ‘Scouse’!conceptions.!Findings!are!discussed!in!line!with!anti:essentialist!theory;!identity!is!a! varied,!fluid!and!mutable!concept,!which!cannot!be!easily!defined!or!bound!to!one!specific! group!within!place.!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Source:!A!Northern!Light!(2017)!
Foremost,!I!would!like!to!thank!all!my!respondents!for!sharing!their!time!and!personal!stories! important!to!their!identity.!Each!interview!afforded!a!distinctive!learning!experience;!and! certain!stories!providing!inspiration!for!the!efficacy!of!collectivism!and!community!spirit.!I! extend!considerable!gratitude!to!my!supervisor,!Cody!Hochstenbach,!for!his!guidance!and! continued!suggestions!for!improvement!in!my!work.!I!also!include!a!special!mention!to!my! supportive!parents!for!their!advice!and!encouragement!along!the!way.!Finally,!I!am!eternally! grateful!for!my!upbringing!within!Liverpool,!a!place!where!my!own!identity!flourished!and! was!fully!supported.!Liverpool,!and!its!residents,![!will!always!hold!a!special!significance!in! teaching! me! working[class! values! of! cooperation! and! social! equity,! which! I! endeavour! to! implement!throughout!my!daily!actions!as!best!I!can.!I!hope!that!this!research!does!justice!to! the!people!who!have!enabled!me!to!make!it!happen.!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
There’s! nothing! quite! like! the! feeling! of! coming! home.! There’s! comfort! in! the! air! –! place! appears!to!have!stopped!still,!everything!quietly!waiting!for!my!return.!!
!
Being! away! has! increased! my! appreciation.! Through! dividing! the! last! five! years! between! London!and!Amsterdam,!the!inevitable!return!to!Liverpool!has!been!a!constant!in!my!mind.! While! these! great! cities! have! afforded! experiences! and! employment! opportunities! unavailable!and!unattainable!back!home,!they!remain!only!temporary!fixations!within!my! imagination.!If!home!is!where!the!heart!is,!my!heart!belongs!to!Liverpool.! ! There’s!something!about!the!feel!of!the!place!that!I’m!unsure!if!I!can!explain.!Whatever!this! unidentifiable!‘something’!is,!it!stirs!loyalty!and!pride!–!we!are!‘Scousers’.!While!I’m!away,!I! perform!as!I’ve!been!taught:!I!don!my!red!footy!shirt,!share!recipes!of!my!Grandmother’s! stew,! discuss! the! intricacies! between! different! Beatles! albums,! even! repeating! the! word! ‘chicken’!when!my!accent!is!demanded!as!a!comedic!interlude!in!conversation.!!
!
Back! home! though,! there’s! no! need! to! pretend.! I’m! with! people! who! understand! this! indescribable!feeling.!There’s!a!unity!and!solidarity!here.!It’s!a!rare!occasion!if!you!leave!the! house!and!don’t!have!multiple!conversations!with!strangers.!We’re!all!sharing!this!home!of! ours:!Liverpool.!! ! But!perhaps!I’m!kidding!myself.!I!know!that!Everton!is!the!original!football!club!of!the!city;!it! is!the!team!the!locals!support,!not!the!out[of[towners!(sinking!feeling!that!I’m!now!‘one!of! them’!)!seeking!glory.!My!family!is!vegetarian!and!the!tradition!of!‘Scouse’!as!a!household! dish!ended!with!my!Grandparents.!Despite!living!a!stone’s!throw!away!from!Paul!McCartney’s! childhood!home,!I’ve!never!been.!Hell,!I!don’t!even!listen!to!The!Beatles.!Perhaps!worst!of!all,! I!routinely!introduce!myself!as!‘posh’!when!outsiders!question!where!I’m!from.!! ! Pausing!for!a!second,!I!wonder,!am!I!even!‘Scouse’!at!all?! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Rachael!Mckeown!(23/03/2017)!
2.! Theoretical!framework! 4! !!!2.1.! Identity! 4! !!!2.2.!! Performative!identity! 5! !!!2.3.! Class!identity! 5! !!!2.4.! Place!identity! 6! !!!2.5.! Sense!of!place! 7! !!!2.6.! Belonging! 8! !!!2.7.! Summary! 11! 3.! Research!design!and!methodology! 13! !!!3.1.! Research!question!and!conceptual!framework! 13! !!!3.2.! Operationalisation! 15! !!!3.3.! Case!selection! 18! !!!3.4.! Research!population! 20! !!!3.5.! Data!collection!and!analysis! 22! !!!3.6.! Positionality! 26! !!!3.7.! Limitations! 27! 4.! Can!a!place!have!an!identity?! 28! !!!4.1.! Characteristics!of!Liverpool!place!identity! 28! !!!!!!4.1.1.! !!!!Belonging!and!sense!of!place! 29! !!!4.2.! Class!identity! 32! !!!!!!4.2.1.! !!!!Individual!affiliation!to!class!identity! 32! !!!!!!4.2.2.! !!!!Working[class!heritage!of!Liverpool! 35! !!!4.3.! Middle[class!performativity:!An!alternate!Liverpool!place!identity! 42! !!!!!!4.3.1.! !!!!Accent:!Speaking!a!different!language! 42! !!!!!!4.3.2.! !!!!Football:!Playing!a!different!game! 43! !!!!!!4.3.3.! !!!!Religion:!Preaching!a!different!message! 47! !!!!!!4.3.4.! !!!!Music:!Singing!a!different!tune! 48! !!!!!!4.3.5.! !!!!Fashion:!Promoting!a!different!image! 50! !!!4.4.! Classed!Geography! 51! !!!!!!4.4.1.! !!!!Geographic!segregation! 51! !!!!!!4.4.2.! !!!!Regeneration!of!Liverpool! 58! !!!!4.5.! Summary! 63! 5.! Discussion! 64! 6.! Conclusion! 70! !!!6.1.! Personal!reflection! 72! 7.! Bibliography! 74! 8.! Appendices! 83!
Figure!One! Conceptual!framework! 15! Figure!Two! Map!of!Liverpool!within!the!borough!of!Merseyside,!UK! 18! Figure!Three! Liverpool!Exceptionalism! 19! Figure!Four! Steve!Rotherham!Metro!Mayoral!election!flyer!and!Liverpool! City!Council!Metro!Mayoral!poster! 31! Figure!Five! Harry!Enfield’s!‘Scousers’! 37! Figure!Six! ‘Scouse!Birds’! 51! Figure!Seven! Respondents’!current!addresses!within!Liverpool! 52! Figure!Eight! Respondents’!representations!of!the!boundaries!of!Liverpool! 54! Figure!Nine! Respondents’!representations!of!the!inhabitancies!of!‘Scousers’! 54! Figure!Ten! Areas!respondents!spend!their!free!time! 55! Figure!Eleven! Lark!Lane!and!Sefton!Park! 57! Figure!Twelve! Transformation!of!the!Albert!Dock! 60! Figure!Thirteen! Cultural!marketing!of!Liverpool! 60! Figure!Fourteen! Middle[class!identity!in!relation!to!traditional!Liverpool!identity! 66! Figure!Fifteen! Revised!conceptual!framework! 71!
!
List!of!tables!
!
Table!One! Operationalisation!of!key!concepts! 17! Table!Two! Classes!and!their!income! 22! Table!Three! Respondent!demographics! 2485! Table!Four! Demographic!statistics!in!Liverpool! 38! Table!Five! Liverpool!General!Election!results!2017! 41!!
!
!
1.!Introduction!
! “I’m!back!in!Liverpool! And!everything!seems!the!same”! (The!Wombats1:!Let’s!Dance!to!Joy!Division)! !Recent! claims! suggest! that! increased! communication! and! mobility! associated! with! globalisation!causes!‘de[territorialisation’!of!local!places!(King,!1991).!Arguably,!however,!we! are!witnessing!a!resurgence!of!local!identities.!The!UK’s!Brexit!vote!to!leave!the!European! Union!and!the!United!States!Presidential!election!of!Donald!Trump!highlight!how!a!populist! rhetoric! of! closing! national! borders! has! held! sway! with! individuals.! Place! identities! are! increasingly!utilised!to!project!imageries!of!unique!attributes!of!place,!particularly!through! the!branding!and!marketing!strategies!of!cities!competing!for!international!investment!and! tourism.!!
!
As!such,!identity!has!become!politicised.!Strides!to!define!and!accentuate!certain!elements!of! place! identity! entail! definitions! of! who! does! and! who! does! not! belong! to! specific! places.! Exclusionary!social!practices!can!result!from!discursive!representations!and!performances!of! identity.!Therefore,!identity!is!necessarily!contested,!pointing!to!the!impossibility!of!reaching! a!universal!definition!of!identity!and/or!processes!of!identity!formation.!Identity!is!theorised! as!complex,!multiple!and!varied!across!time!and!space!(Massey,!1991).!The!multiplicity!of! identity!necessitates!a!need!for!further!study!into!local[level!identity!formation.!! !
Liverpool! represents! something! of! an! ‘Edge! City’! (Davies,! 2009;! Frost! &! North,! 2013)! –! situated!on!the!edge!of!the!UK!geographical!map,!on!the!edge!of!economic!stability,!and!host! to!an!‘edgy’!population.!Liverpool!is!discursively!presented!as!having!a!unique!place!identity,! individuals!are!expected!to!be!humorous,!friendly!and!proud!of!their!city;!residents!possessing! a!communal!sense!of!affinity!around!their!‘Scouse’!identity.!The!appellation!‘Scouse’!derives! from! ‘lobscouse’,! a! stew! brought! to! Liverpool! by! Norwegian! seafarers! and! still! consumed! within! the! city! today! (Boland,! 2010).! ‘Scouse’! more! frequently! refers! to! the! local! spoken! accent!and!dialect,!a!notably!strong!regional!signifier!within!the!UK!and!an!emotive!expression! of!the!‘Scouse’!identity.! ! Liverpool!is!commonly!depicted!within!academia!and!popular!culture!as!a!working[class!city.! In!this!context!class!is!entangled!with!the!place!identity!of!Liverpool!as!a!port!city,!including! its!heritage!of!maritime!and!dock!labour.!‘Scousers’!are!assumed!to!personify!and!perform!a! working[class!identity.!This!research!explores!how!middle[class!residents!of!the!city!resonate! with,! reject! or! are! ambivalent! to! the! archetypal! and! stereotypical! representations! of! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1!The!Wombats!are!a!rock!band,!who!formed!in!Liverpool!in!2003.!Two!of!the!members!are!native!to! Liverpool.!The!band!was!the!opening!act!of!the!2008!European!Capital!of!Culture!ceremony!in! Liverpool!Echo!Arena.!!
Liverpool’s!working[class!identity.!Like!many!cities,!Liverpool’s!middle[class!population!has! grown!over!recent!years,!through!professionalisation!of!the!workforce!and!increased!living! standards.!Some!residents,!though!not!all,!possess!generational!and!familial!ties!to!working[ class!culture!and!thus!relate!to!class!identity!in!varied!ways.!This!research!investigates!the! extent!to!which!these!residents!are!positioned!in!relation!to!archetypal!notions!of!‘Scouse’! identity!as!a!because!of!their!divergent!class!position;!indeed,!the!extent!to!which!they!are! entitled!to!claim!to!be!‘Scousers’.!!! ! This!research!explores!intersections!between!place,!class!and!identity!within!the!context!of! Liverpool.! The! research! question! was;! ‘How! and! why! do! middle:class! residents’! identities! resonate! with! place! identity! in! Liverpool?’! Notions! of! ‘belonging’! and! ‘sense! of! place’! are! drawn!upon!to!examine!the!relationship!between!place!and!class!identity!in!contributing!to! identity! construction.! Prior! research! in! the! context! of! Liverpool! has! mainly! explored! the! relation! between! identity! and! socio[cultural! factors! (Boland,! 2008a;! Platt! et! al.,! 2014),! arguably!overlooking!ways!in!which!class!and!place!supplement!the!co[constructive!process! of!identity!formation.!Qualitative!methods!were!utilised!to!explore!and!draw!out!individual! experience!of!identity,!27!in[depth!interviews!were!conducted.!Respondents!were!keen!to! retain!a!connection!to!a!collective!Liverpool!place!identity!and!so!might!situationally!label! themselves!working[class,!despite!their!objectively!definable!middle[class!status.!Thematic! analysis!revealed!accent,!football,!religion,!music,!fashion!and!geography!as!mechanisms!for! residents!to!perform!middle[class!identities,!not!necessarily!aligned!to!stereotypical!‘Scouse’! depictions! (which! were! believed! to! be! more! closely! aligned! to! working[class! residents! of! Liverpool).!Participatory!mapping!exercises!revealed!a!distinctive!middle[class!sense!of!place,! geographically!skewed!to!areas!in!the!centre!and!the!South!of!the!city,!more!attuned!to!their! lifestyle!preferences!in!accessing!sites!to!perform!their!identities.!!
!
The! thesis! begins! with! a! summation! and! comparison! of! relevant! literature! pertaining! to! identity,!belonging!and!sense!of!place.!Following!this,!the!specific!research!methodology!and! case! study! selection! are! discussed.! Empirical! findings! are! then! presented! in! subsections;! considering!the!characteristics!of!Liverpool!place!identity!and!its!relation!to!class!identity,! followed!by!exploration!of!how!middle[class!residents!perform!their!identity!in!varied!ways.! The!findings!then!turn!to!broader!processes!of!change!in!Liverpool,!which!have!enabled!the! development! of! middle[class! spaces,! providing! places! for! residents! to! perform! their! identities.!Though!contextually!specific!to!Liverpool,!research!findings!support!theory!building! with! salience! for! other! local! contexts.! Findings! revealed! tension! between! imagined! place! identities! and! individual,! personally! experienced! identity.! Discussion! turns! back! to! the! literature!to!compare!with!elsewhere!examples!of!middle[class!identification!and!segregation! within! urban! contexts.! Analysis! expands! upon! anti[essentialist! literature,! crucially! emphasising!the!multi[faceted!and!complex!nature!of!identity.!Finally,!the!conclusion!argues! that!identities!are!multiple,!varied!and!changing;!there!can!be!no!singular!place!identity.!The! Liverpool! case! offers! insights! into! enduring! aspects! of! place! identity! which! on! occasion!
transcend!objective!class!positioning!and!instrumental!performance!of!middle!class!identity.! Articulations!of!identity!should!therefore!be!viewed!as!reflexive!and!inclusive!of!multiplicity,! potentiating! possibilities! for! community! empowerment,! whereby! groups! democratically! work!together!(regardless!of!class!affiliation)!to!affect!societal!change.! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
2.!Theoretical!framework!
! “There!are!places!I’ll!remember! All!my!life,!though!some!have!changed! Some!forever,!not!for!better! Some!have!gone!and!some!remain.! All!those!places!have!their!moments”! (The!Beatles:!In!My!Life)! ! The!relationship!between!humans!and!their!lived!environment!is!complex.!This!chapter!will! review! current! theories! pertaining! to! identity! formation,! with! relation! to! place! and! class.!! Academic! insights! concerning! the! definition! of! identity! are! complex! and! contested;! conceptually,! identity! is! multi[faceted,! multi[scalar! and! evolving! over! time! and! space.! ‘Territorial’! perspectives! posit! a! direct! and! causal! link! between! place! and! identity! (Smith,! 2007),! whilst,! social! constructionism! stresses! the! importance! of! social! relationships! and! networks! creating! identity! (Hall,! 1996).! Essentialist! theories! suggest! that! identities! are! collective,!shared!and!bound!to!places!(Anderson,!2006),!though!anti[essentialist!standpoints! favour!the!existence!of!multiple,!varied!identities!across!many!places!(Massey,!1991).!Building! upon! these! debates,! performative! elements! of! identity! will! be! explored,! considering! such! expressions!of!identity!through!the!lenses!of!both!place!and!class.!The!relationship!between! place,!class!and!identity!will!be!drawn!out!through!examination!of!the!concepts!‘sense!of! place’!and!‘belonging’.!Sense!of!place!related!to!individuals’!emotional!attachment!to!place! and!belonging!is!defined!as!connection!to!a!group!identity!–!both!are!vital!in!understanding! whether! a! collective! identity,! based! around! shared! connection! to! place,! is! possible.! Such! theories! do! not! exist! independently,! but! interweave! to! co[construct! identity! formation.! Summation!of!the!literature!reveals!identity!as!individual,!plural!and!multiple!across!time!and! place! –! simplistic! definitions! of! identity! are! cautioned! against,! given! the! many! factors! contributing!to!identity!formation.!!
2.1.!Identity! !
A! unanimous! definition! of! identity! is! yet! to! be! provided,! dividing! academic! debate! with! contested!conceptual!definitions!of!defining!attributes!and!parameters!of!identity!formation.! Despite!this,!Hall!(1996)!argues!that!defining!identity!is!of!upmost!political!significance!as! one’s!identity!can!have!impactful!social!and!psychosocial!effects.!Breakwell!(1992)!claims!four! central!attributes!associated!with!identity:!distinction!from!others,!continuity,!self[esteem! and!self[efficacy.!Côté!(1996)!similarly!discusses!‘identity!capital’!as!individual!investment!in! one’s!self,!based!upon!cultural!consumption!aligned!to!perceived!approval!from!others!in! society.! Alternatively,! ‘exchanging’! experiences! via! relationships! and! interactions! enables! existing!cultural!identities!to!be!‘interrupted’!(Robins,!1996),!stressing!that!identities!are!not! static.!!
Notions!of!identity!are!continuously!challenged!and!(re)made!within!the!present!moment! (Habermas,!1992).!Furthermore,!Bauman!(1996,!24)!argues,!‘the!snag!is!no!longer!how!to! discover,! invent,! construct,! assemble! (even! buy)! an! identity,! but! how! to! prevent! it! from! sticking’.!As!such,!identities!constantly!change!and!transform,!strategically!utilising!elements! of! culture,! heritage! and! language! to! aid! construction! –! whereby! identity! is! discursively! produced!through!difference,!what!the!identity!does!not!represent!(Hall,!1996).!Grossberg! (1996)!concurs,!‘otherness’!produces!identity!and!demarcates!difference.!
!
Literature! commonly! depicts! identities! as! multiple,! varied! and! changing! across! time! and! place.! Arguably,! however,! definitions! ‘do! not! fully! capture! how! meaning! is! attributed! to! places’!(Gustafson,!2001,!8).!Hall!(1996)!suggests!preference!for!‘identification’!over!identity,! defined! as! a! process! of! producing! symbolic! boundaries! through! discourse! –! although! acknowledges! that! defining! identification! can! succumb! to! similar! problems! to! defining! identity.!! ! 2.2.!Performative!identity! ! Arguably,!identities!are!created!through!performance;!entailing!processes!of!remembering,! forgetting!and!repetition!of!rituals!(Fortier,!1997).!Massey!(1995,!188)!argues!that!traditions! enable!‘the!invention!of!the!coherence!of!a!place!…!defining!and!naming!it!as!a!‘place’!at!all’;! here!place!becomes!symbolic,!as!it!is!constructed!within!individuals’!imaginaries.!Goffman! (1959)!argues!that!individuals!develop!personas,!which!they!socially!perform!through!their! interactions;!through!which!there!is!a!constant!relationship!between!the!performer!and!an! audience.!Commentators!have!discussed!a!variety!of!means!by!which!individuals!are!able!to! perform! their! identities;! though! music! (Dimitriadis,! 2009;! Duffy,! 2010)! and! language! (Cameron,!1998;!Dovchin,!2011)!were!commonly!presented!as!mechanisms!for!individuals!to! enact!both!singular!and!group!identities.! ! Post[modern!authors!praised!the!‘performative!self’!(Hall,!1996).!Performative!perspectives! of!place!recognise!imbalances!in!power,!arguing!that!knowledge!about!place!is!contextually! created!based!upon!positionality;!through!which!interaction!of!all!spaces!and!times!configure! place!in!a!continual!process!of!becoming!(Thrift,!1999).!Though,!feminist!critique!has!argued! that!performative!theory!discursively!produces!identities!framed!through!exclusion!(Butler,! 1993).!As!such,!Fortier!(1997)!argues!that!social!categories,!such!as!gender!and!ethnicity,!are! performed! and! naturalised! in! the! production! of! cultural! norms.! These! processes! create! ‘typical’! (normative)! expressions! of! identity! (Gilroy,! 1987),! which! are! expected! to! be! conformed!to!in!the!performance!of!everyday!life.!!
!
2.3.!Class!identity! !
Class!is!portrayed!as!a!distinctive!element!of!identity,!a!political!signifier!of!an!individual’s! societal! status.! Savage! and! colleagues! (2001,! 888)! argue! that! ‘class! does! not! determine!
identity,! but! it! is! not! irrelevant! either.! It! is! a! resource,! a! device,! with! which! to! construct! identity’.!Much!like!other!matters!of!identity,!class!identification!is!complex!and!diverse!–! blurring!the!separation!between!class!groups.!Clearly!though,!within!an!era!of!globalisation! and! neoliberal! capitalism! inequality! between! the! wealthiest! and! poorest! individuals! has! sharpened!(Wilkinson!&!Pickett,!2009).!
!
Classic! Marxian! conceptions! of! class! distinguish! between! ‘ruling’! and! ‘proletariat’! groups! (Marx,!1967).!More!modern!depictions!of!class!stratification!have!posited!‘upper’,!‘middle’! and!‘lower’!classes;!largely!demarcated!by!wealth!and!occupation!status.!Growth!within!the! ‘middle[class’! has! led! academics! to! reason! that! traditional! class! identities! are! insufficient! (Lash! &! Urry,! 1994).! Beck! (1992)! claims! modern! society! is! witnessing! a! period! of! ‘classlessness’.!Such!theorisations!have,!however,!been!critiqued!and!are!largely!considered! to!be!out[dated!within!current!periods!of!economic!inequality.!!
!
It! has! been! argued! that! individuals! are! ambivalent! about! their! class! identities,! instead! preferring!to!be!recognised!as!‘ordinary’!citizens!(Savage!et!al.,!2001).!Thus,!the!performance! of!class!identity!is!threatening!for!individuals!perceiving!class!as!‘out!there’!–!a!grandiose! articulation! with! little! grounding! in! lived! reality! [! as! definitions! of! class! are! rarely! clearly! articulated!and!understood!on!a!lay!level!(Ibid.;!Van!Eijk,!2013)!
!
It! is! no! longer! conceptually! adequate! to! simply! separate! individuals! along! economic! boundaries,!cultural!and!social!capital!must!also!be!considered!(Bourdieu,!1987).!Based!on! Bourdieu’s! theorisation,! Savage! (2015)! argues! that! seven! class! groups! exist:! precariat,! emerging!service!workers,!traditional!working!class,!new!affluent!workers,!technical!middle! class,! established! middle! class! and! elite.! Savage! (2015,! 172)! argues! that! these! seven! categories!are!constructed!within!a!multi[dimensional!approach,!whereby!clear!boundaries! between!the!class!groups!are!difficult!to!discern.!He!contends!for!greater!acknowledgement! of! the! influence! of! social! and! cultural! capital! in! determining! classifications;! though! demonstrating! the! complexities! wrapped! up! cultural! capital,! which! he! breaks! down! into! ‘highbrow’!and!‘emergent’!forms!(Savage,!2015).!!Interestingly,!individuals!with!higher!levels! of! cultural! capital! are! better! able! to! identify! and! articulate! their! identification! with! class! position!(Savage!et!al.,!2001);!highlighting!how!the!performance!of!class!identity!is!itself!a! classed!act.!! ! 2.4.!Place!identity! ! Place!represents!the!site!and!construction!of!social!action!(Agnew,!2011).!Places!are!mobile! (Cresswell,! 2004)! (either! literally! moving! [! e.g.! ships! [! or! the! parameters! of! place! are! continually!socially!redefined)!and!have!permeable!boundaries,!allowing!diversity!of!social! experience! (Agnew,! 2011).! Gustafson! (2001)! argues! that! places! develop! meaning! across! multiple!scales!(individual,!local,!national!or!global)!and!times!(past,!present!and!future).!Place!
identity!refers!to!the!distinctiveness!of!individual!places,!which!can,!in!turn,!contribute!to! individual!conceptualisations!of!identity.!
!
‘Territorial’!or!‘primordial’!conceptions!of!identity!suggest!that!place!has!a!direct,!causal!link! on! the! formation! of! individual! identity! (Smith,! 2007);! specifically,! the! lived! experience! of! places.! Similarly,! ‘Landscape! culturalism’! suggests! that! identities! are! inscribed! within! landscapes!(O’Keefe,!2007)!and!landmarks!precondition!the!ability!for!communities!to!thrive! (Lovell,!1998).!
!
Place!identity!is!capitalised!upon!through!marketing!of!places!as!‘unique’;!in!this!sense!place! is! a! commodity.! Branding! strategies! aim! to! attract! international! investment! and! tourism! within! competitive! place! markets! (Kavaratzis! &! Ashworth,! 2005).! Strategies! build! upon! existing!place!identity!and!discursively!reproduce!imaginaries!of!place,!through!selectively! remembering!and!appropriating!positive!aspects!of!place!and!heritage!(Moore,!2007).!Place! identity!is!enhanced!by!discourses!that!seek!to!preserve!the!perceived!value!of!a!place,!e.g.! literary!and!musical!awards!or!global!appellations!such!as!World!Heritage!Site.! ! Arguably,!though,!place!identity!is!threatened!by!globalisation.!Friedman!(2005)!claims!that! increased! communication! and! connection! fosters! expansion! of! space! (place! devoid! of! meaning);!diminishing!the!value!of!local!place[based!identity!(Giddens,!1991).!Zukin!(2010)! also! reports! loss! of! authenticity! and! unique! characteristics! within! urban! environments,! associated!with!pervasive!globalised,!generic!sites!and!tendencies!towards!homogenisation! of!culture.!Lewicka’s!(2011)!review!of!literature,!however,!finds!place!is!a!strong!object!of! attachment,!despite!increasing!mobility.!Globalisation!has!not!necessarily!led!to!development! of!meaningless!places,!the!importance!of!place!persists.!! ! 2.5.!Sense!of!place! ! Agnew!(1987)!highlights!three!attributes!of!place:!location,!locale!and!sense!of!place.!Sense! of! place! represents! the! subjectivity! and! variation! between! individual! levels! of! emotional! attachment![!highlighting!the!importance!of!empirically!understanding!the!effects!of!place! (Agnew,!2011).!Thus,!places!are!made!through!socio[spatial!imaginations!of!individuals!(Legg,! 2009).! Place! becomes! ‘all! spaces! that! people! have! made! meaningful.! They! are! all! spaces! people!are!attached!to!in!one!way!or!another’!(Cresswell,!2004,!14).!
!
Sense!of!place,!thus,!develops!out!of!human!engagement!and!interaction!in!space;!places! made!meaningful!though!framings!of!individuals!–!‘our!beings,!our!identities,!are!constituted! in!and!through!those!engagements,!those!practices!of!interaction’!(Massey,!2004,!5).!Massey! (1991)! argues! that! globalisation! has! increased! sense! of! place! through! fostering! mixing! of! influences! and! social! relations.! Similarly,! Gustafson! (2001)! argues! that! places! become! meaningful!through!relationships!between!‘self’,!‘others’!and!‘the!environment’.!
!
Massey!(1991,!28)!posits!the!development!of!a!‘global!sense!of!the!local,!a!global!sense!of! place’;!an!anti[essentialist!stance!to!place!and!identity!–!emphasising!multiple!identities!of! place,! continuously! (re)produced! and! unable! to! be! bounded.! She! defends! locality,! acknowledging!the!stability!place!can!provide!within!an!era!of!change!(Ibid.).!She!promotes!a! progressive!and!outwardly[focused!sense!of!place,!contrasted!against!‘defensive!localism’,! whereby! individuals! retreat! into! their! private! spheres! (Duyvendak,! 2011,! 12).! Local! place! identity! is! relational;! international! social! networks! produce! varied! identities! in! ‘meeting! points’!(Massey,!1991).!Similarly,!Amin!(2005)!argues!that!individuals!belong!to!a!‘situation’,! rather!than!territory,!culture!or!ethnicity.!Robertson!(1995,!26)!has!since!drawn!on!Massey’s! argument!to!develop!the!concept!of!‘Glocalisation’;!through!which!‘the!promotion!of!locality! is!done!from!above!or!outside’.!Sense!of!place!(and!thus!identities)!are!not!fixed,!but!processes! of!becoming!(Bunnell,!2008),!varied!across!space!and!time!(Woodward,!1997),!and!adaptable! to!change.!As!such,!‘all!spatialities!are!political’!(Kieth!&!Pile,!1993,!220).! ! ! Given!that!sense!of!place!and!identity!are!varied,!it!is!necessary!to!consider!that!sense!of!place! is!not!inherently!positive.!Places!can!also!generate!fear!and!anxieties!arising!in!their!social! relations! (Tuan,! 1974).! Power! imbalances! (‘geometries’)! implicit! within! globalisation! vary! experiences! across! place! –! while! some! are! increasingly! connected,! others! are! gradually! isolated,! restricting! a! ‘global! sense! of! place’! for! some! (Massey,! 1991).! Sense! of! place! is! experienced!differently!on!an!individual!level;!the!extent!to!which!individuals!share!common! identity!influences!one’s!level!of!belonging.!
!
In!certain!circumstances,!sense!of!place!can!become!exclusive!to!specific!social!groups,!linked! to! class! identity.! Particular! groups! utilise! their! power! to! adapt! spaces! to! suit! their! social! preferences!(Harvey,!1990).!Increasingly,!middle[class!status!affords!an!economic!and!cultural! power!to!interact!within!enclaves!of!leisure!and!employment!performing!everyday!routines! (Graham!&!Marvin,!2001;!Butler!&!Robinson,!2003).!Savage!et!al.!(2005,!29)!demonstrate!the! ability!of!middle[class!residents!to!‘electively!belong’!to!spatial!locations!which!are!aligned!to! their! cultural! tastes! and! where! likeminded! individuals! also! live.! These! processes! of! disaffiliation!demonstrate!how!social!aspects!can!be!performed!spatially.!! ! 2.6.!Belonging! ! Much!like!identity!formation,!theorisations!of!belonging!have!also!been!contested.!Yual[Davis! (2016)!argues!that!belonging!has!become!naturalised!through!everyday!routines;!commonly! inferred!as!citizenship!(Antonsich,!2010)!and!group!solidarity!or!cohesion.!Typically,!belonging! is!presented!as!inherently!spatial;!the!landscape!(re)produces!cultural!order!(Trudeau,!2006).! It! is! possible,! however,! to! belong! to! both! a! group! and! a! place! (Pollini,! 2005).! More! sophisticated!definitions!recognise!the!multiplicity!of!belonging!(Antonsich,!2010;!Yual[Davis,! 2016);!as!a!dynamic!process!of!becoming!(Mee!&!Wright,!2009)!through!varied!‘modes!of!
belonging’! (Sicakkan! &! Lithmn,! 2005,! 27).! Belonging! can! be! both! personal! and! formal! (Fenster,!2005).!Belonging!is!variously!performed!(Rowe,!2005)!and!mobilised!through!myths! and!rituals!to!meet!specific!social!needs!of!that!moment!(Lovell,!1998).!
!
Antonsich!(2010)!distinguishes!between!the!concepts!of!identity!and!belonging.!Belonging! constitutes! two! categories:! ‘place[belongingness’! and! ‘politics! of! belonging’! (Ibid.).! Place[ belongingness! arouses! emotional! attachment! and! feelings! of! safety! and! familiarity! (Ibid.).! Emotion! is! suggested! as! paramount! to! belonging! (Yual[Davis,! 2007),! thus! representing! a! personal!connection!to!place.!Lovell!(1998)!claims!that!loyalty!to!place!through!belonging!is! both!real!and!fictional,!as!memories!of!place!produce!a!material!landscape.!Duyvendak!(2011)! explores! belonging! through! relation! to! ‘home’,! recognising! that! definitions! of! ‘home’! are! contextually!specific,!expressed!with!varied!meanings!across!geographic!scales.!Morley!(2001,! 433)!notes!the!interrelation!of!multi[scalar!belonging:!‘if!the!home,!the!neighbourhood!and! the! nation! are! all! potential! spaces! of! belonging,! this! is! no! simple! matter! of! disconnected,! parallel!processes.!Each!of!these!spaces!conditions!the!others’.!Antonsich!(2010)!develops!five! attributes! of! ‘feeling! at! home’,! which! he! sees! as! a! symbolic! concept:! auto[biographical,! relational,! cultural,! economic,! and! legal.! For! Hannerz! (2002),! home! is! postulated! against! feelings!of!being!‘away!from!home’.!
!
Duyvendak!(2011)!argues!that!Western!Europe!promotes!‘nation[as[home’!discourses!that! long!for!‘authentic’,!homogenous!national!identities!of!place,!perceived!to!be!lost!through! increased!mobility!and!migration.!‘Revanchist!nostalgia’!claims!an!exclusive!‘right’!for!natives! to! feel! at! home,! which! is! ultimately! ‘rooted! in! an! imaginary! past’,! with! exclusionary! consequences!(Ibid.,!107).!Contrastingly,!US!notions!of!‘home’!centre!around!nostalgia!for! traditional,! nuclear! families.! Though! the! ‘home’! is! lost! through! gender! emancipation,! encouraging!women!into!employment,!it!is!reformulated!to!the!wider!benefit!of!society!as! individuals! feel! at! home! within! workplaces! –! ‘visions! of! the! future! can! grow! out! of! appreciation!for!the!past’!(Ibid.,!114)2.!Boym!(2001)!similarly!discusses!nostalgia:!‘restorative’! forms!long!for!the!past,!while!‘reflective’!forms!foster!valuable!aspects!of!the!past!to!bolster! the!present.!Furthermore,!Yual[Davis!(2016)!suggests!that!the!more!belonging!is!threatened! by! perceived! external! influence,! the! more! central! these! defensive! emotional! elements! become!in!shaping!an!individual’s!identity.!
!
It!must!be!acknowledged!that!if!places!are!possible!sites!of!belonging,!then!in!turn!they!also! potentiate! exclusion.! For! Antonsich! (2010)! this! is! reflected! within! ‘politics! of! belonging’,! representing! discursive! power! to! separate! between! ‘us’! and! ‘them’.! Dominant! groups! articulate!notions!of!belonging!through!rhetoric!of!sameness,!disempowering!difference!of! ‘others’!(Ibid.).!Belonging!requires!assimilation!to!the!hegemony!(Yual[Davis,!2006);!though! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 2!Though!the!recent!US!Presidential!election!of!Donald!Trump!was!arguably!won!based!on!racial!and! ethnic!‘revanchist!nostalgia’,!particularly!through!rhetoric!of!increasing!border!control!from! perceived!migratory!threats.!
‘others’!are!never!able!to!fully!assimilate!into!the!dominant!community!(Antonsich,!2010).! For! Favell! (1999),! the! politics! of! belonging! represents! “the! dirty! work! of! boundary! maintenance”,!as!places!become!synonymously!portrayed!as!belonging!to!a!singular!identity.! Carrillo!Rowe!(2005,!21)!argues,!‘belongings!are!conditioned!by!our!bodies!and!where!they! are!placed!on!the!globe!…!people!are!not!free!to!choose!their!belongings!outside!the!bounds! of!power’.!Furthermore,!Paasi!(2003)!argues!that!different!social!actors!are!within!positions! of!power!and!can!manipulate!social!and!spatial!distinctions!between!‘us’!and!‘them’.!Lovell! (1998)! has! argued! that! local[level! belonging! can! offer! a! site! of! conflict! or! resistance! to! national,!more!hegemonic,!belongings.!She,!however,!asserts!danger!in!utilising!terms!such! as!‘local’!and!‘location’,!given!their!reliance!upon!the!existence!of!an!‘other’.!!
!
Essentialist!theorisations!claim!that!identity!formation!is!collective!within!place;!naturalising! belonging! between! a! group! of! individuals! sharing! heritage! and! culture.! ! Discussing! the! formation! of! nationalism,! Anderson! (2006,! 6)! argues! that! communities! are! culturally! ‘Imagined’;!group!members!foster!‘deep!attachment’!to!others!despite!limited!interaction! and!knowledge!of!members.!Communities!are!‘limited’,!defining!inclusion!and!exclusion!of! belonging.!Nations!and!‘all!communities’!are!‘imagined’!through!the!horizontal!development! of!‘stretchable!nets!of!kinship’!(Ibid.).!Not!all!communities,!however,!are!territorial.!Travelling! communities! transcend! place! and! share! belonging! through! movement! (Lovell,! 1998).! Belonging! to! a! shared! community! is! enabled! through! the! spread! of! ideology! through! ‘languages!of!power’!and!accessibility!of!information!concerning!‘others’,!allowing!a!point!of! difference!for!the!community!(Anderson,!2006,!36).!
!
Communal! belonging! is! portrayed! as! developing! through! processes! of! remembering! and! imagining.!Remembering,!crucial!in!fostering!belonging,!represents!an!‘obligat[ion]!to!forget’! –! purposeful! amnesia,! whereby! national! narratives! are! selectively! articulated! (Anderson,! 2006,! 201).! Collective! memories! formulate! when! individuals! interact! (Blokland,! 2009).! O’Keeffe! (2007)! warns! against! essentialist! depictions! of! ‘collective’! memory,! which! infers! responsibility! of! group! members;! favouring! instead! ‘collected’! memory,! through! which! identities! remain! open! to! re[imagination.! Within! any! group,! memories! can! be! read! alternatively!(Busteed,!2007).! ! Valentine!(2008)!discusses!the!consequences!of!socio[economic!divisions!between!diverse! groups!occupying!shared!place,!promoting!the!necessity!of!everyday!encounters!with!‘others’! in!forging!civic!culture.!Similarly,!Duyvendak!(2011,!121)!urges!respect!between!groups!in! theorising!a!community[centric!vision!of!‘home’;!a!‘harmonious!society’,!where!the!belonging! of!all!is!accepted!and!respected.!‘Home’,!thus,!represents!a!site!of!shared!belonging,!hybrid! and!adaptable!to!change.!Valentine!(2008)!urges!we!must!go!beyond!discourse!of!‘tolerance’,! which!conceals!implicit!notions!of!privilege,!instead!‘meaningful!contact’!and!recognition!of! intersectionality!is!encouraged.!Furthermore,!Yual[Davis!(2016)!offers!a!feminist!perspective! whereby! belonging! is! articulated! through! mutual! trust,! able! to! resist! dominant! societal!
groups!through!internalising!and!neutralising!systems!of!power.!Ash!Amin!(2002)!argues!that! proximity! is! not! enough! to! achieve! social! transformation;! therefore,! place! alone! cannot! influence!belonging,!cultural!(re)invention!must!also!be!sought.! ! For!Antonsich!(2010),!the!plural!nature!of!belonging!entails!that!it!cannot!be!divided!neatly! into!‘territorial’!and!‘constructionist’!categories,!but!can!simultaneously!represent!both.!Thus,! belonging!can!influence!both!place!identity!and!individual!identity!construction.! ! 2.7.!Summary! !
The! ubiquity! of! identity! conceals! difficulties! in! defining! the! complexities! of! this! central! concept!and!associated!processes!of!formation.!The!literature!demonstrates!an!intrinsic!link! between! identity! and! place,! either! negatively! (exclusionary! discourses)! or! positively! (promotion!of!relational!connection!and!contact)!performed.!!
!
Place!identity,!defined!as!unique!characteristics!of!a!place,!when!routinely!performed!can! shape!an!individual’s!identity.!Thus,!‘sense!of!place’,!personal!meaning!attributed!to!place,! can! either! resonate,! reject! or! reflect! ambivalence! toward! the! promoted! place! identity.! Furthermore,!an!individual’s!identity!is!mediated!through!level!of!belonging!to!the!collective! dominant!group;!specifically,!where!place!identities!are!projected!as!‘shared’,!influencing!how! individuals!feel!included!in!society.!Belonging!is!not!necessarily!bound!to!territory,!but!may! also!be!socially!and/or!culturally!reflexive.!Class!identity!highlights!how!individuals!‘belong’! within!social!groups,!either!reinforcing!or!undermining!an!individual’s!identity.!Some!place! identities! may! promote! a! dominant! class! group! as! central! to! the! identity,! furthermore! compounding!the!complex!process!of!personal!identity!formation.!Theorisations!presented! here!are!highly!important!for!this!research,!which!seeks!to!understand!the!process!of!group! identity!formation.!Literature!reveals!that!sense!of!place!is!not!unanimous,!but!varied,!and!so! conceptualisations!of!a!singular!place!identity!are!best!avoided.!Furthermore,!belonging!is! presented!as!an!inherently!political!concept,!through!which!power!social!actors!influence!who! is!entitled!to!belong!–!highly!necessary!in!this!research!exploring!the!influence!of!middle[class! residents!belonging!to!Liverpool!place!identity.! !
Literature! provided! here! represents! academic! conceptualisations,! useful! for! this! research! which!scrutinises!how!such!theorisations!are!realistically!experienced!and!felt!by!individuals,! examining!the!relationships!at!play!in!identity!formation.!Primary!focus!has!been!devoted!to! the! national! scale! of! analysis,! though! Massey! (1991)! recognises! the! improbability! of! delineating!differential!scales!of!identity!formation.!As!such,!this!research!aims!to!explore! middle[class!identity!formation!patterns!within!the!local,!urban!setting!of!Liverpool.!While!my! findings! will! arguably! contribute! to! non[essentialist! and! constructionist! understandings,! I! seek!to!argue!that!place!and!identity!co[construct!identities.!As!discussed!in!the!following! chapter,!Liverpool!represents!a!unique!entanglement!of!place!and!class!identity!–!the!place!
identity!of!the!city!is!imagined!as!‘working[class’,!necessitating!study!into!how!middle[class! groups!personally!identify!with!and!perform!this!identity.!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
3.!Research!design!and!methodology!
!
This! methodological! chapter! builds! upon! the! provided! theoretical! background! of! this! research.!The!research!explores!the!relationship!between!the!concepts:!place!identity,!class! identity,!belonging!and!sense!of!place![!aiming!to!explore!identities!of!middle[class!residents! in!Liverpool.!The!research!questions!are!guided!by!these!concepts,!derived!from!theory,!which! have!been!defined!and!operationalised!with!regard!to!their!relevance!to!this!research.! !
Justification! is! provided! for! methodological! choices,! case! study! and! research! population! selection.!In!answering!the!research!questions!this!research!employed!an!in[depth!case!study! approach! in! Liverpool,! collecting! primary! data! from! purposively! selected! participants.! Qualitative! methodologies! were! favoured! to! elicit! individual! accounts! of! middle[class! identity.!Participatory!mapping!and!photography!exercises!supplemented!27!semi[structured! interviews,! exploring! how! place! identities! correspond! to! individual’s! sense! of! place! and! belonging,!thematically!analysed!through!a!process!of!open!coding.!Individual!respondents! represent!the!unit!of!analysis,!as!the!study!seeks!to!explore!personal!experiences.!Thus,!the! research!falls!between!an!explorative!and!descriptive!study!–!the!boundary!of!the!research! population!has!been!defined,!yet!existing!understandings!about!the!phenomena!are!limited! defined!(Blaikie,!2004).!Personal!positionality,!reflexivity!and!limitations!of!the!research!are! also!considered.! ! Whilst!this!study!cannot!claim!to!be!an!ethnography,!it!does!have!an!ethnographic!flavour!to! the!choice!of!study!design!and!interpretive!methods.!This!locates!the!notions!of!identity,!its! boundaries!and!how!it!may!be!performed!and!made!visible,!or!expressed!within!an!interview! or!participatory!visual!exercise,!within!a!broader!concern!of!culture,!life!worlds!and!place.!As! such,! ethnographically! informed! inquiry! has! become! increasingly! popular! within! social! sciences! and! human! geography! (see! Latham! 2003,! Rose! 2016)! and! appears! suited! to! the! subject!matter!of!this!study.! ! All!qualitative!research!produces!findings!bound!to!contextual!and!temporal!circumstances.! Nevertheless,!it!is!hoped!that!certain!findings!will!have!transferability!to!other!contexts!of! understanding!place,!class!and!identity.!
!
3.1.!Research!question!and!conceptual!framework! !Literature! has! highlighted! the! complexity! of! identity! formation.! Thus,! the! constructed! Liverpool!middle[class!identity!is!not!considered!static,!but!evolving!by!mutually!reinforcing! class!and!place!identities.!
!
Previous!discussions!of!identity!formation!in!Liverpool!have!largely!overlooked!elements!of! place!and!class!identity,!instead!addressing!social!and!cultural!influences!on!‘Scouse’!identity.!
Acknowledging! that! sense! of! place! and! belonging! are! often! socially[produced,! social! and! cultural!elements!of!identity!formation!were!secondarily!examined.!Due!to!the!scope!of!the! project,!these!factors!were!explored!over!other!factors!which!also!influence!identity!(e.g.! ethnicity,! gender! or! age);! though! acknowledging! that! these! can! emerge! naturally! within! interviews.!!
!
Liverpool’s! place! identity! is! commonly! presented! as! ‘unique’! and! ‘exceptional’,! within! scholarly! outputs! (Belchem,! 2006)! and! popular! culture.! Such! discourses! aid! in! the! performance!of!identity,!yet!how!individuals!relate!to!this!has!been!understudied.!Liverpool’s! identity!is!often!depicted!as!a!working[class!identity!(Frost,!2000);!therefore,!place!and!class! have!become!entangled!within!discussions!of!identity.!Given!the!city!and!identity!archetypes! are!often!represented!as!‘working[class’!a!tension!emerges!for!how!other!social!groups!relate! to!or!resent!this!aspect!of!the!place!identity.!Scant!research!exists!within!the!Liverpool!context! exploring! whether! residents! personally! identify! as! working[class! –! though! some! residents! possess!familial!heritage!to!working[class!culture,!they!may!or!may!not!personally!identify! with!this!grouping!or!objectively!‘count’!as!working[class.!Therefore,!this!research!aimed!to! explore!the!tension!between!how!place!identity!is!imagined!and!how!individual!identities! within!the!city!reject,!resonate!with,!or!are!ambivalent!to!this!imaginary.!This!highlights!a! relevant! intersection! between! place,! class! and! identity,! which! was! explored! through! the! following!research!question:! ! ‘How!and!why!do!middle:class!residents’!identities!resonate!with!place!identity!in!Liverpool?’! ! The!following!sub[questions!deepened!this!exploration:! 1.! What!are!the!characteristics!of!‘Scouse’!(Liverpool)!identity!for!middle[class! residents?! 2.! How!and!why!do!middle[class!residents!belong!to!and!perform!traditional!class! distinctions?!! 3.! How!and!why!do!middle[class!residents!experience!‘sense!of!place’!associated!with! the!place!identity!of!Liverpool?! ! Such!open!research!questions!(‘how’!and!‘why)!are!useful!in!allowing!for!descriptive!accounts! of! the! phenomena! under! scrutiny! along! with! explanatory! factors;! how! participants! make! sense!of!matters!(Denscombe,!2010).!Utilising!a!combination!of!both!in!this!approach!aimed! to!uncover!what,!if!anything,!‘Scouse’!identity!entails!for!middle[class!residents,!and!in!what! ways!this!is!constructed!in!association!with!place!and!class.!Furthermore,!the!research!sought! to!aid!contributions!in!understanding!why!individual!and!collective!identities!do!or!do!not! relate!to!place.!Question!one!aimed!to!draw!out!the!characteristics!of!each!respondent’s! personal! identity;! recognising! that! individual! identities! are! unique.! Subsequent! questions! explored!how!the!individual’s!identity!is!influenced!by!class!(two)!and!place!(three)!identity!–! extracting!why!these!elements!may!be!of!importance!for!a!person’s!identity.!Within!the!latter! questions,! the! concepts! of! ‘belonging’! and! ‘sense! of! place’! were! explored;! particularly!
examining!how!respondents!relate!to!and!visualise!these!terms!in!places!in!the!city!(through! visual!and!mapping!exercises).!
!
Figure! One! draws! out! a! predicted! relationship! between! place! and! class! (independent! variables)!implicating!middle[class!identity!in!Liverpool!(dependent!variable),!displaying!the! utility!of!each!sub[question.!This!speculative!conceptual!model!guided!the!research!project,! signifying!key!areas!for!exploration.!It!supposed!that!both!place!and!class!identities!influence! each! other,! combining! to! co[construct! identity! formation.! It! expected! that! middle[class! identification!(or!working[class!identification)!shape!perceptions!and!performance!of!identity! in!varied!ways.!Strong!causal!associations!were!not!postulated!at!the!outset,!acknowledging! the! strength! of! qualitative! research! as! explorative! and! descriptive,! rather! than! being! concerned!with!‘testing’!and!‘quantifying’!relationships,!recognising!that!identity!formation! may!not!neatly!follow!the!linear!patterns!suggested!in!this!model.!! ! Figure!One:!Conceptual!framework! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!=!Causal!relationship! ! 3.!2.!Operationalisation! !
Defining! the! concepts! emergent! from! the! literature! allowed! for! abstract! terms! to! be! operationalised!into!key,!observable!variables!for!consideration!during!the!research!process! (Babbie,!2006);!developing!an!understanding!of!how!‘identity’!is!expressed!and!performed!in! relation! to! the! subjective! realities! of! participants.! This! process! of! deconstruction! and! understanding!assisted!in!the!construction!of!the!topic!guide!for!interviews!(see!Appendix! One),! highlighting! areas! to! focus! upon! during! discussions.! Table! One! presents! operationalisation!of!the!research!process.!
!
Based!upon!analysis!of!the!literature!I!define!place!as!Geographic!space,!which!is!meaningful! to! an! individual.! Identity! is! defined! as! an! individually! reflective! process! of! recognising!
characteristics!and!attributes!that!resonate!with!one’s!sense!of!self;!these!qualities!may!be! verified! or! rejected! in! comparison! to! other! individuals.! It! is! acknowledged! that! identity! is! conceptually!complex;!multiple!constituting!factors!co[constructing!identity!formation.!This! research!chose!to!focus!upon!two!supposed!contributory!factors!of!identity!construction:! place!identity!and!class!identity.!!
!
Place! identity! is! defined! as! the! unique! characteristics! of! place,! impacting! how! place! is! internally!and!externally!(discursively)!discussed!and!performed.!Place!identity!may!result!in! negative! or! positive! stereotypical! representations! of! place! and! people! residing! in! that! location.!Class!identity!relates!to!an!individual’s!position!within!society,!compared!to!others,! based!upon!their!economic!(i.e.!wealth/occupation!status),!social!(i.e.!number!and!spread!of! networks!and!relationships)!and!cultural!(i.e.!frequency!and!style!of!leisure!pursuits)!capital! accumulations.! It! is! recognised! that! place! and! class! identities! are! distinct,! but! mutually! reinforcing!elements!of!an!individual’s!identity.! ! The!aim!of!this!research!was!to!uncover!the!extent!to!which!residents!resonate!(or!not)!with! archetypal!imaginations!of!place!and!class!identity.!The!relationship!between!these!factors! will!be!guided!by!the!concepts!‘sense!of!place’!and!‘belonging’.!Sense!of!place!is!defined!as! the!emotional!meaning!and!attachment!individuals!associate!with!place.!Whilst!place!identity! represents! the! attributes! associated! with! the! location,! sense! of! place! is! subjective! to! individual!experience.!Discourses!of!place!identity!influence!how!individuals!make!sense!of! their!self,!yet!also!individual!performances!and!projections!of!identity!will!ultimately!feed!into! any!collective!place!identity.!!
!
Belonging!is!defined!as!personal!connection!to!a!collective!identity,!how!individuals!relate!to! the! common! group.! Belonging! is! differentiated! from! ‘sense! of! place’,! in! that! it! can! be! detached!from!territory;!it!is!possible!for!individuals!to!experience!a!belonging!to!a!group!of! people,! a! class! group,! or! other! elements! of! identity! unrelated! to! place.! Though! it! is! also! possible!to!belong!to!place,!it!is!not!a!necessary!requirement.!!
!
Broad!points!of!focus!were!incorporated!within!the!inquiry!to!explore!the!key!factors,!such! as:! physical! place(s),! social! relationships,! cultural! influence,! institutional! factors,! symbolic! places,! material! goods,! sonic! and! musical! elements,! religion,! sport,! fashion,! heritage! and! history!of!place.!It!was!expected!from!the!outset!that!strong!expressions!of!‘sense!of!place’! and!‘belonging’!co[construct!middle[class!identities!in!Liverpool.! ! The!definitions!outlined!here!were!not!fixed!throughout!the!research!process,!but!open!to! redefinition!based!upon!emerging!research!findings.!A!partial!operationalisation!approach! allowed!categories!and!indicators!anticipated!to!arise!from!data!collection;!commensurate! with!approaches!to!theory!building!associated!with!explorative!research.!Arguably,!within! qualitative!research!‘measurement’!is!not!appropriate!or!justified,!given!interviews!are!not!
designed!to!test!identities,!but!to!explore!nuanced!experiences!(which!may!not!have!yet!been! discovered!within!the!literature).!Blaikie!(2004)!confirms!that!outlining!rigid!variables!is!not! relevant!within!all!strands!of!social!research.!‘Identity’,!‘place’!and!‘class’!are!conceptually! fluid!and!varied,!theorised!differently!between!individuals.!The!broad!characteristics!of!‘sense! of!place’!and!‘belonging’!outlined!allowed!unique!experiences!to!be!elicited,!refraining!from! predefined,! rigid! definitions.! A! social! constructivist! stance! (Taylor! et! al.,! 2015)! afforded! respondents! the! opportunity! to! guide! discussions! in! uncovering! their! personal! determinations!of!middle[class!identity!in!Liverpool.!
!
Table!One:!Operationalisation!of!key!concepts!
‘How!and!why!do!middle:class!residents’!identities!resonate!with!place!identity!in!Liverpool?’!
Concept( Definition( Indication( Method( Sub4
question(
Place!
identity! The!unique!characteristics! and!attributes! of!place!
Strong!or!weak!association!with!
representations!/!stereotypes! Semi[structured! interviews!with! residents! 1!&!3! Class! identity! (status)! Economic,! social!and! cultural! capital! Own!articulations!of!what!‘class’! represents! Income!/!employment!/!housing!status.! Strong!or!weak!bridging!and!bonding! between!networks! Type!and!time!spent!pursuing!leisure! time!activities! Strong!or!weak!sense!of!affiliation!with! a!specific!class!group!or!identification! with!multiple!class!groups!(e.g.!via! personal!progression!of!class!position! or!familial!generational!difference! between!class!groups)! Background! information! form!&! Semi[ structured! interviews!with! residents! 2! Belonging! Personal! connection!to! the!collective,! group!identity! Strong!or!weak!sense!of!belonging!–!
social,!cultural!and!physical!factors! Semi[structured! interviews!with! residents!
2!
Sense!of!
place! Emotional!meaning!and! attachment!to! place! Strong!or!weak!sense!of!place!–! experiences!within!place!(social!and! cultural)! Semi[ structured! interviews!with! residents!&! Participatory! mapping!and! photography! exercise! 3! ! ! ! ! ! !
3.3.!Case!selection! ! “During!the!1970s!and!1980s,!Merseysiders!became!increasingly!alienated!from!the!rest!of! the!country.!The!‘us’!and!‘them’!syndrome!developed,!and!it’s!still!going!strong!here.”! (Jamie!Carragher![!Retired!Liverpool!Football!Club!player![!2008,!189)! ! Case!studies!are!praised!as!‘serious!investigations!of!some!mystery!about!the!social!world’,! for!providing!in[depth,!multi[faceted!research!results!(Faegin!et!al.,!1991,!2).!Explanatory!case! study!design!is!valuable!for!complex!research,!where!the!boundaries!of!the!phenomena!and! context!are!not!easily!separated!(Yin,!2013).!This!approach!underpins!the!study!design!utilised! in!the!context!of!this!research.!Debatably,!Liverpool!represents!an!‘extreme’!(Gerring,!2004)! case! of! analysis! given! ‘Scouse’! identity! is! deemed! atypical! within! the! UK;! affording! the! possibility!of!redrawing!the!boundary!of!analysis!between!identity!and!sense!of!place.! ! Figure!Two:!Map!of!Liverpool!within!the!borough!of!Merseyside,!UK!(Source:!Ordnance!Survey,!2012;!own! adaptation)! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Liverpool!is!located!in!the!North!West!of!England,!along!the!banks!of!the!River!Mersey!(Figure! Two).! Colloquially,! people! from! Liverpool! are! referred! to! as! ‘Scousers’,! and! the! ‘Scouse’! identity! has! been! variously! stereotypically! depicted! with! a! mixture! of! celebratory! and! pejorative! connotations! (Boland,! 2010).! ‘Scousers’! themselves! often! buy! into! the! more! positive!archetypes,!considering!themselves!possessed!of!exceptional!warmth,!humour!and! creativity!within!a!supportive!culture.!The!city!itself!has!a!colourful!history!of!migration,!waves! of!economic!expansion!and!decline,!with!latter!emphasis!upon!regeneration!and!tourism,!all! of!which!have!fed!off!and!into!considerations!of!local!culture!and!identity!(Belchem,!2006).!
!
The! archetypal! ‘Scouse’! identity! encapsulates! notions! of! ‘Exceptionalism’;! residents! often! considering! themselves! as! unique! in! comparison! to! their! national! or! even! close! regional! compatriots!(Belchem,!2006)!(Figure!Three).!Despite!this,!there!are!competing!interpretations! of! what! a! ‘Scouser’! is! and! where! they! come! from! (Boland,! 2010).! The! identity! has! been! simultaneously!framed!around!accomplishments!in!music,!sport,!culture!and!heritage,!while! negatively! stereotyped! for! criminality,! poverty! and! industrial! militancy.! Negative! events! within!the!city’s!history!have!led!to!a!tightening!of!the!local!community,!keen!to!assert!notions! of!pride!in!the!face!of!adversity!(Belchem,!2006).!National!coverage!of!the!murders!of!James! Bulger,!Anthony!Walker!and!Rhys!Jones!(all!children)!have!tarnished!the!city’s!reputation!and! furthered!representations!of!criminality!and!brutality.!Boland!(2008a)!argues!that!such!events! are!beyond!the!control!of!individuals!attempting!to!promote!the!city!and!have!reinforced! negative! external! images! of! the! city.! The! existence! of! such! negative! representations! of! Liverpool! identity! creates! potential! for! contradictory! subject! positions! or! ambivalence! towards!stereotypical!depictions.! ! Figure!Three:!Liverpool!Exceptionalism!(Source:!Joanthon!Liew,!2016)! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! In!2008,!Liverpool!was!awarded!the!European!Capital!of!Culture!and!the!city!aimed!to!rebrand! its!identity,!projecting!a!more!outward[looking!image,!celebrating!perceived!uniqueness!and! capitalising! upon! iconographic! places,! focused! on! attracting! international! tourism! and! investment.! Typically,! during! periods! of! economic! change! and! global! shifts,! traditional! identities! attached! to! place! have! diminished,! however,! in! Liverpool! identity! has! arguably!
become! more! important.! Boland! (2010)! has! argued! that! the! ‘Scouse’! accent! has! become! stronger!within!parts!of!the!city,!despite!social!mobility,!as!a!means!of!asserting!difference! from! other! places! within! England.! Thus,! the! importance! of! the! local! identity! has! become! politicised,!a!tool!for!branding!Liverpool!as!a!place!of!difference!alongside!other!competing! cities!(Little,!2008),!but!also!a!means!of!personal!identification!and!meaning!to!individual! residents.! Local! identities! are! increasingly! important! within! an! ever[globalising! world! (Massey,!1991),!yet!also!indicative!of!the!changing!nature!of!identity.!
!
To!date,!studies!of!Liverpool!have!focused!around!social!and!cultural!aspects!contributing!to! ‘Scouse’!identity!formation.!This!thesis!expands!upon!this!but!also!explores!how!this!identity! is!connected!to!place!and!class!identity.!Like!many!post[industrial!cities,!Liverpool’s!residential! geography! is! somewhat! demarcated! along! class[lines! but! social! mobility! trajectories! can! mean! that! individuals’! attachment! to! class[framed! identities! are! complex.! Moreover,! the! undoubted! potential! for! expressions! of! solidarity! associated! with! certain! accounts! of! ‘Scouse’[ness!may!also!have!exclusionary!effects!for!outsiders.!Hence,!the!research!analyses! diverse! and! subjective! accounts! from! middle[class! residents,! focusing! upon! how! these! individuals!make!sense!of!their!identity!in!relation!to!their!class!and!through!Liverpool!as!a! place,!or!through!specific!places!within!the!city.! ! 3.4.!Research!population! ! “People!up!there![Liverpool]!earn!less,!die!more!quickly,!have!fewer!jobs!and!live!in!houses! worth!the!square!root!of!sod!all”! (Jeremy!Clarkson