{"title":"‘Community is the one true capital’: Ideologies of urban self-build groups in Anke Stelling’s Berlin novels","authors":"Hanna Henryson","doi":"10.1093/fmls/cqad006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Privately organized collective housing is currently included in agendas for sustainable urban development in a range of European cities as a resource-efficient form of housing that prevents isolation and contributes to social cohesion within urban communities. However, research has shown that the recent surge of different forms of private-collective housing in Berlin could be a driver of gentrification and segregation. This article aims to uncover potential causes of the discrepancies between the ideological, and at times utopian, motivations underpinning self-build housing projects in the former East Berlin district Prenzlauer Berg, and their actual outcomes. I do so by analysing the literary (counter) discourse on self-build groups developed in Anke Stelling’s novels Bodentiefe Fenster [Floor-Length Windows] (2015) and Schäfchen im Trockenen (2018, published in English translation as Higher Ground in 2021). I show that the realization of socially progressive, or even utopian, plans for urban private-collective housing prove difficult, and sometimes impossible, for the characters in the novels, due to the influence of other societal structures such as gender and class inequalities, urban segregation and gentrification, discrimination and the neoliberal logic of individual competition and consumption.","PeriodicalId":42991,"journal":{"name":"FORUM FOR MODERN LANGUAGE STUDIES","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"FORUM FOR MODERN LANGUAGE STUDIES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/fmls/cqad006","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Privately organized collective housing is currently included in agendas for sustainable urban development in a range of European cities as a resource-efficient form of housing that prevents isolation and contributes to social cohesion within urban communities. However, research has shown that the recent surge of different forms of private-collective housing in Berlin could be a driver of gentrification and segregation. This article aims to uncover potential causes of the discrepancies between the ideological, and at times utopian, motivations underpinning self-build housing projects in the former East Berlin district Prenzlauer Berg, and their actual outcomes. I do so by analysing the literary (counter) discourse on self-build groups developed in Anke Stelling’s novels Bodentiefe Fenster [Floor-Length Windows] (2015) and Schäfchen im Trockenen (2018, published in English translation as Higher Ground in 2021). I show that the realization of socially progressive, or even utopian, plans for urban private-collective housing prove difficult, and sometimes impossible, for the characters in the novels, due to the influence of other societal structures such as gender and class inequalities, urban segregation and gentrification, discrimination and the neoliberal logic of individual competition and consumption.
私人组织的集体住房目前被列入一系列欧洲城市的可持续城市发展议程,作为一种节约资源的住房形式,可以防止孤立,促进城市社区内的社会凝聚力。然而,研究表明,最近柏林不同形式的私人集体住房的激增可能会推动士绅化和种族隔离。本文旨在揭示前东柏林普伦茨劳贝格区自建住房项目的意识形态(有时是乌托邦式的)动机与实际结果之间差异的潜在原因。我通过分析安克·斯特林的小说《落地窗》(2015)和《Schäfchen im Trockenen》(2018)中关于自建群体的文学(反)话语来实现这一目标。我表明,由于其他社会结构的影响,如性别和阶级不平等、城市隔离和士绅化、歧视以及个人竞争和消费的新自由主义逻辑,对小说中的人物来说,实现社会进步甚至乌托邦式的城市私人集体住房计划是困难的,有时是不可能的。
期刊介绍:
Since its foundation in 1965, Forum for Modern Language Studies has published articles on all aspects of literary and linguistic studies, from the Middle Ages to the present day. The journal sets out to reflect the essential pluralism of modern language and literature studies and to provide a forum for worldwide scholarly discussion. Each annual volume normally includes two thematic issues.