Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

'They Eat Potatoes, I Eat Rice': Symbolic Boundary Making and Space in Neighbour Relations

By Gwen van Eijk

Abstract

This article examines 'neighbouring' as the setting in which cross-category relations develop and symbolic boundaries are constructed. The study is based on thirty in-depth interviews with residents living in a multi-ethnic and a mono-ethnic neighbourhood in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. The findings challenge the hoped-for outcomes of social mixing in neighbourhoods, as well as the view that boundary making is something inherent to multi-ethnic neighbourhoods only. Neighbour relations are often setting-specific (relations are interchangeable, scripted and bounded, and passively maintained), which is relevant for understanding the spatiality of neighbouring and the limited exchange of personal information between neighbours. Because neighbouring involves the balancing of personal privacy and close spatial proximity, the exchange of personal information is limited, while spatial proximity ensures easy access to observable (through seeing, hearing and smelling) categorical markers that signify class, ethnicity, lifestyle, etc. In this way, neighbour interaction reconstructs symbolic boundaries rather than breaking them down.Boundary Making, Intergroup Contact, Multi-Ethnic Neighbourhoods, Neighbouring, Setting, Space, Symbolic Boundaries

OAI identifier:

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (2003a) 'Ethnic Complexity: Routes to Discriminatory Repertoires in an Inner-city Neighbourhood',
  2. (1955). [1922]) The Web of Group-affiliations
  3. (2008). A Hierarchy of Urban Communities: Observations on the Nested Character of Place',
  4. (1973). A World of Strangers: Order and Action in Urban Public Space.
  5. (2000). Changing Connectivity: A Future History of Y2.03K',
  6. (2010). Cognitive Processes.’ In
  7. (2007). Confined Contact: Residential Segregation and Ethnic Bridges in the Netherlands',
  8. (1996). Contesting Culture: Discourses of Identity in Multi-ethnic London. Cambridge:
  9. (1990). Different Strokes from Different Folks: Community Ties and Social Support',
  10. (1984). Distinction. A Social Critique on the Judgment of Taste. Cambridge:
  11. (1969). Ethnic Groups and Boundaries. The Social Organization of Culture Difference.
  12. (1998). Friendship, Sociology and Social Structure',
  13. (2003). Generalization of Positive Attitude as a Function of Subgroup and Superordinate Group Identifications in Intergroup Contact',
  14. (1998). Intergroup Contact Theory', Annual Review of Psychology,
  15. (2009). Investing in Poor Black Neighborhoods "As Is". In
  16. (1996). Lumping and Splitting: Notes on Social Classification',
  17. (1986). Neighbours. The Work of Philip Abrams. Cambridge; NY:
  18. (2002). Neither Busybodies nor Nobodies: Managing Proximity and Distance in Neighbourly Relations',
  19. (2010). Proximity by Design? Affective Citizenship and the Management of Unease’,
  20. (2006). Public Intimacy in Neighbour Relationships and Complaints',
  21. (2007). Sixteen Million Neighbors: A Multilevel Study of the Role of Neighbors in the Personal Networks of the Dutch', Urban Affairs Review,
  22. (1982). Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations', Annual Review of Psychology,
  23. (1954). The Concept of Neighborliness',
  24. (2008). The End to Urbanism: How the Changing Spatial Structure of Cities Affected its Social Capital Potentials.’
  25. (1996). The New Urban Frontier: Gentrification and the Revanchist City.
  26. (2003). The Right to the City. Social Justice and the Fight for Public Space.
  27. (1995). Things of Boundaries',
  28. (2010). Unequal networks. Spatial segregation, relationships and inequality in the city.

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.