바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
사전등록 바로가기
 

logo

  • P-ISSN1225-6706
  • E-ISSN2733-4295
  • KCI

ISSN : 1225-6706

논문 상세

이전 다음
논문 투고

Vol.31 No.2

Citation Share

도시의 문화 다양성으로 인한 복잡한 사회적 경계의 형성, 그리고 도시 주체들의 이용·착취에 대한 연구: 런던(London)의 서덕(Southwark) 사례를 중심으로

Production of Complicated Social Boundaries Formed by Cultural Diversity, and Use/exploitation of Urban Subjects in the City: A Study of Southwark, London

공간과 사회 / Space and Environment, (P)1225-6706; (E)2733-4295
2021, v.31 no.2, pp.213-253
https://doi.org/10.19097/kaser.2021.31.2.213
한준섭 (Swansea University)
한준섭. (2021). 도시의 문화 다양성으로 인한 복잡한 사회적 경계의 형성, 그리고 도시 주체들의 이용·착취에 대한 연구: 런던(London)의 서덕(Southwark) 사례를 중심으로. 공간과 사회, 31(2), 213-253, https://doi.org/10.19097/kaser.2021.31.2.213

초록

이 논문은 영국 런던(London)의 서덕(Southwark) 지역 사례를 통해 도시 공간의 문화다양성으로 인한 복잡한 사회적 경계가 도시 주체들에 의해 이용·착취되는 현상을 논하고자 한다. 런던은 단순히 인구가 많은 대도시가 아닌 절반 이상의 시민들이 민족 소수자(ethnic minority)로 구성되어 있어 도시에 형성된 문화적 성향이 매우 다양하다. 런던은 문화적 차이로 인한 갈등을 피하기 위해 서로의 문화에 대한 적당한 무관심이 사회적 매너가된다. 하지만 무관심과 관계의 파편화는 경제적·정치적 권위를 가진 주체들이 자신의 이익을 위해 도시를 이용·착취하는 데 더 유리한 환경을 제공한다. 사회적 경계가 복잡할수록 더 많은 이용 가능한 수단들이 생산된다. 반면, 일반 시민들은 복잡한 도시 관계로 인해형성되는 모든 정보와 지식을 습득하고 이해할 수 없는 한계가 있다. 시민들은 함께 근본적인 사회적 모순에 적극적으로 대응하지 않고 단지 각자의 위치에서 자신에게 이익이 되는 제한된 관계 안에서 도시의 기능과 자원을 이용한다. 결국 관계의 파편화는 권위·권력에 의한 도구적 이용·착취에 대해 시민들이 함께 대응하는 것을 방해한다. 최근 한국의 이주민 증가를 고려하면 런던의 사례는 한국에도 좋은 시사점을 제공한다는 판단으로 이 논문을 진행했다. 연구 자료는 현지답사를 통한 민족지학적 (참여)관찰, 인터뷰, 2차자료 수집 등의 방법을 통해 생산되었다.

keywords
London, Southwark, cultural diversity, social boundary, urban contradiction, 런던(London), 서덕(Southwark), 문화다양성, 사회적경계, 도시의 모순

Abstract

This paper explores the use and exploitation of complicated social boundaries formed by urban subjects in urban space, in the case of Southwark, London. London not just is a hugely populated city but also consists of ethnic minorities exceeding half of London’s overall population with cultural diversity. To avoid conflicts generated by the cultural diversity, mild indifference becomes a social manner that people should have in London. However, indifference and fragmented relations become a means to an end for usage and exploitation of the subjects having economic/ political power. And, the complex social boundaries become the cause of more production of complicated resources to use. Besides, normal citizens have limits in obtaining and understanding all information and knowledge caused by complicated urban relations. Also, citizens do not actively counteract against social contradictions in cooperation with others, but they just use the resources bringing benefit to them in the limited urban relations. Considering the rapid increase of the population of ethnic minorities, London’s case also has great implications for South Korea. Methods for this research are ethnographic (participatory)observation, interview, and secondary data.

keywords
London, Southwark, cultural diversity, social boundary, urban contradiction, 런던(London), 서덕(Southwark), 문화다양성, 사회적경계, 도시의 모순

참고문헌

1.

35% Campaign. 2019. The Heygate Diaspora. http://35percent.org/2013-06-08-the-heygatediaspora/(검색일: 2021.7.21).

2.

Ahonen, P., Tienari, J., Meriläinen, S., & Pullen, A. 2014. “Hidden contexts and invisible power relations: A Foucauldian reading of diversity research”. Human Relations, 67(3), pp.263~286.

3.

Alleyne, B. 2002. “An idea of community and its discontents: towards a more reflexive sense of belonging in multicultural Britain”. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 25(4), pp.607~627.

4.

Bauman, Z. 1999. Culture as praxis. London: Sage.

5.

BBC. 2011. “State multiculturalism has failed, says David Cameron”. BBC news. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12371994(검색일: 2021.7.21).

6.

Benjamin, W., & Jennings, M. W. 2003. Walter Benjamin: Selected Writings. elknap Press of Harvard University Press.

7.

Bhabha, H. K. 1994. The Location of Culture. Abingdon: Routledge.

8.

Bourdieu, P. 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste(R. Nice, Trans.). Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

9.

Bourdieu, P. 1989. “Social Space and Symbolic Power”. Sociological Theory, 7(1), pp.14~25.

10.

Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. J. D. 1992. An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

11.

Butler, J. 2010. Antigone’s Claim: Kinship Between Life and Death. New York City:Columbia University Press.

12.

Calhoun, C. 1993. “Nationalism and ethnicity”. Annual review of sociology, 19(1), pp.211~239.

13.

Carter, H. 2008. “Building the Divided City: Race, Class and Social Housing in Southwark, 1945–1995”. The London Journal, 33(2), pp.155~185.

14.

Castells, M. 2010. The Rise of the Network Society: The Information Age: Economy, Society, and Culture. Hoboken: Wiley.

15.

Cresswell, T. J. 1996. In Place/out of Place: Geography, Ideology, and Transgression(Vol. 1). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

16.

Cicourel, A. V. 1993. “Aspects of Structural and Processual Theories of Knowledge”. In P. Bourdieu, C. Calhoun, E. LiPuma, & M. Postone (Eds.), Bourdieu: Critical Perspectives(pp.89~115). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

17.

Edensor, T., & Jayne, M. 2012. “Introduction: Urban Theory Beyond the WeSt”. In T. Edensor & M. Jayne (Eds.), Urban Theory Beyond the West: A World of Cities(pp.1~27). Oxon: Taylor & Francis.

18.

Featherstone, M. 2007. Consumer Culture and Postmodernism. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

19.

Glucksberg, L. 2016. “A view from the top”. City, 20(2), pp.238~255.

20.

Godefroit-Winkel, D., Schill, M., Longo, C., & Chour, M. 2021. “Building City Identities: A Consumer Perspective”. Markets, Globalization & Development Review, 5(2).

21.

Hall, S. 1996. “Introduction, Who Needs ‘Identity’?” In S. Hall & P. du Gay (Eds.), Questions of Cultural Identity (pp.1~17). California: SAGE Publications.

22.

Hall, S. 2000. “The multicultural question”. In H. B.(Ed.), Unsettled Multiculturalism (pp.209~242). London: Zed Books.

23.

Hamnett, C. 2004. Unequal City: London in the Global Arena. London: Taylor & Francis.

24.

Hero, R. E., & Tolbert, C. J. 1996. “A racial/ethnic diversity interpretation of politics and policy in the states of the US”. American Journal of Political Science, 40(3)(Aug., 1996), pp.851~871.

25.

Hoggard, L. 2015. Living in Peckham Rye: The lowdown on hipster central. Evening Standard. https://www.homesandproperty.co.uk/property-news/living-in-peckhamryethe-lowdown-on-hipster-central-a93401.html(검색일: 2021.7.21).

26.

Holland, C., Clark, A., Katz, J., & Peace, S. 2007. Social interactions in urban public places. Bristol: Policy Press.

27.

Ingerson, S., & Kim, A. K. 2016. “Exploring the value of an ethnic restaurant experience: a consumer perspective towards Korean restaurants”. Tourism Recreation Research, 41(2), pp.199~212.

28.

Jensen, O. 2014. St.George’s festival and community development in Bermondsey, London Borough of Southwark(United Kingdom). Oxford: COMPAS

29.

JSNA. 2015. Overview of Southwark’s Population. Southwark: Lambeth & Southwark’s Public Health Intelligence Team

30.

Kelly, P., & Lusis, T. 2006. “Migration and the Transnational Habitus: Evidence from Canada and the Philippines”. Environment and Planning A, 38(5), pp.831~847.

31.

Kymlicka, W. 2010. “The rise and fall of multiculturalism? New debates on inclusion and accommodation in diverse societies”. International Social Science Journal, 61(199), pp.97~112.

32.

Kpessa, M., Béland, D., & Lecours, A. 2011. “Nationalism, development, and social policy:The politics of nation-building in sub-Saharan Africa”. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 34(12), pp.2115~2133.

33.

Landlease, 2015. Portfolio Report December 2015. Sydney: Lendlease Corporation Limited.

34.

Landlease, 2016. 2016 Half Year Results Lendlease Group. Sydney: Lendlease Corporation Limited.

35.

Lees, L. 2014. “The urban injustices of new Labour’s ‘New Urban Renewal’: The case of the Aylesbury Estate in London”. Antipode, 46(4), pp.921~947.

36.

Lees, L. and Ferreri, M. 2016. “Resisting gentrification on its final frontiers: Learning from the Heygate Estate in London(1974–2013)”. Cities, 57, pp.14~24.

37.

Ley, D. 2004. “Transnational Spaces and Everyday Lives”. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 29(2), pp.151~164.

38.

Lock, D., & Baxter, M. 2014. Walworth History Tour. Stroud: Amberley Publishing.

39.

Markkanen, S., & Harrison, M. 2013. “‘Race’, Deprivation and the Research Agenda:Revisiting Housing”. Ethnicity and Neighbourhoods. Housing Studies, 28(3), pp.409~428.

40.

Marshall, J. and Foster, N. 2002. “‘Between Belonging’: Habitus and the migration experience”. Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe canadien, 46(1), pp.63~83.

41.

Massey, D. 2007. World city. Cambridge: Polity.

42.

Merleau-Ponty, M., Smith, C. 1962. Phenomenology of Perception. London: Routledge

43.

Nava, M. 2007. Visceral cosmopolitanism : gender, culture and the normalisation of difference. Oxford: Berg.

44.

Office for National Statistics. 2012. 2011 Census: KS201EW Ethnic group, local authorities in England and Wales. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/datasets/2011censuskeystatisticsforlocalauthoritiesinenglandandwales(검색일: 2021.7.21).

45.

Parekh, B. C. 2000. Rethinking Multiculturalism: Cultural Diversity and Political Theory. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

46.

Parekh, B. C. 2008. A New Politics of Identity: Political Principles for an Interdependent World. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan

47.

Pemberton, S., & Phillimore, J. 2018. “Migrant place-making in super-diverse neighbourhoods:Moving beyond ethno-national approaches”. Urban Studies, 55(4), pp.733~750.

48.

Phillips, D., & Unsworth, R. 2002. Widening Locational Choices for Minority Ethnic groups in the Social Rented Sector. In P. Somerville & A. Steele (Eds.), ‘Race’, Housing and Social Exclusion (pp.77~93). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

49.

Rogers, A. 2013. Being Built Together, A Story of New Black Majority Churches in the London Borough of Southwark. London: University of Roehampton, Southwark for Jesus and Churches Together in South London.

50.

Rofe, M. W. 2003. “‘I want to be global’: Theorising the gentrifying class as an emergent élite global community”. Urban Studies, 40(12), pp.2511~2526.

51.

Said, E. W. 1979. Orientalism. New York: Pantheon Books.

52.

Schippers, N., & Wildemeersch, D. 2007. “Dealing with difference on the shop floor:Learning between ‘Reflective Practice’and ‘Mild Indifference’”. In R. Veen, D. Wildemeersch, J. Youngblood, & V. Marsick(Eds). Democratic practices as learning opportunities (pp.165~177), Pennsylvania: Brill Sense.

53.

Sennett, R. 2012. Together: The rituals, pleasures and politics of cooperation. New Haven:Yale University Press.

54.

Simmel, G. 1969. “The metropolis and mental life”. In R. Sennett(Ed.), Classic essays on the culture of cities (pp.47~60). New Jersey: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

55.

Sims, A. 2017. Peckham has been named the best place to live in London. TimeOut London. https://www.timeout.com/london/blog/peckham-hasbeen-named-thebest-place-to-live-in-london-032017(검색일: 2021.7.21).

56.

Slater, T. 2006. “The Eviction of Critical Perspectives from Gentrification Research”. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 30(4), pp.737~757.

57.

Slater, T. 2018. “The invention of the ‘sink estate’: Consequential categorisation and the UK housing crisis”. The Sociological Review, 66(4), pp.877~897.

58.

Smith, S. J. 1993. “Residential Segregation and the Politics of Racialization”. In N. C. a. N. Keith (Ed.), Racism, the City and the State(pp.128~143). London and New york:Routledge.

59.

Southwark Council, 2018. Overview of Southwark‘s population. London, UK: Southwark’s JSNA.

60.

Stahl, G. 2015. “Egalitarian Habitus: Narratives of Reconstruction in Discourses of Aspiration and Change”. In C. Costa & M. Murphy (Eds.), Bourdieu, Habitus and Social Research: The Art of Application(pp.21~38). Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan UK.

61.

Steadman, I. 2013. Look to the Heygate Estate for what’s wrong with London’s housing. Newstatesman. https://www.newstatesman.com/contact-new-statesman(검색일:2021.7.21).

62.

Surrenti, S. 2009. “The Consumption of Experience and the Ethnic Market: Cosmopolitan Identity Beyond Multiculturalism”. In G. B. Prato (Ed.), Beyond Multiculturalism:Views from Anthropology (pp.201~211). Surrey: Ashgate Publishing Limited.

63.

Tomlins, R. 1997. “Officer discretion and minority ethnic housing provision”. Netherlands journal of housing and the built environment, 12(2), pp.179~197.

64.

Tonkiss, F. 2003. “The ethics of indifference: Community and solitude in the city”. Inter national journal of cultural studies, 6(3), pp.297~311.

65.

Triggs, T., McAndrew, C., Akama, Y. and Choukeir, J. 2011. “‘Telling your Story’: People and the Aylesbury Estate”. Include 2011: Online Proceedings, pp.1~10.

66.

United Nations. 2017. International Migration Report: Highlights(ST/ESA/SER.A/404). Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division

67.

Virdee, S., & McGeever, B. 2018. “Racism, crisis, brexit”. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 41(10), pp.1802~1819.

68.

Vertovec, S. 2010. “Towards post‐multiculturalism? Changing communities, conditions and contexts of diversity”. International Social Science Journal, 61(199), pp.83~95.

69.

Wacquant, L. 2009. “The Body, the Ghetto and the Penal State”. Qualitative Sociology, 32(1), pp.101~129.

70.

Wacquant, L. 2014. “Putting Habitus in its Place: Rejoinder to the Symposium”. Body &Society, 20(2), pp.118~139.

71.

Watt, P., & Minton, A. 2016. “London’s housing crisis and its activisms”. City, 20(2), pp.204~221.

72.

Wessendorf, S. 2014. “‘Being open, but sometimes closed’. Conviviality in a super-diverse London neighbourhood”. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 17(4), pp.392~405.

73.

Wise, A. 2009. “Everyday Multiculturalism: Transversal Crossings and Working Class Cosmopolitans”. In A. Wise & S. Velayutham (Eds.), Everyday Multiculturalism (pp.21~45). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.

74.

Zizek, S. 2008. Violence: six sideways reflections. New York: Picador.

75.

Zukin, S. 2009. Naked City: The Death and Life of Authentic Urban Places. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

76.

‘흑인 역사의 달(Black History Month)’ 웹페이지. https://www.blackhistorymonth.org.uk/article/section/bhm-intros/6962/(검색일: 2021.7.21).

공간과 사회

논문 투고 OA 정책