CC BY
8
© Laboratorium: Russian Review of Social Research. 2023. 15(1):33-55 DOI: 10.25285/2078-1938-2023-15-1-33-55
I 33
H
Elizaveta Polukhina
Elizaveta Polukhina, Department of Sociology, International Laboratory for Social Integration Research, HSE University. Address for correspondence: HSE University, Miasnitskaia ulitsa, 11, room 331, Moscow, 101000, Russia. [email protected].
The article was prepared within the framework of the Basic Research Program at the HSE University.
The author would like to thank the talented young researchers Polina Chibiskova and Veronika Vorobieva, who collected the empirical data for this article. The author is deeply thankful to the participants of the seminar "Moral Emotions in the Social Sciences" held at the HSE University and especially to the author's supervisor Olga Simonova for multiple conversations about this study, as well as two reviewers for Laboratorium for their comments that significantly improved the article.
This article is based on the concept of material culture, which reveals the role of material objects in the social world. It shows how the urban environment changes the relationship between neighbors who share a common yard but live in housing of different types—in khrushchevki (the Soviet-era housing) or in new high-rise buildings. The article depicts a hierarchical material environment in the common space formed because of a municipal renovation program involving the gradual demolition of old housing and the redevelopment of the area with new dwellings. Material used in this article was collected in Moscow in 2019, through a case study of a yard shared by several building; the study involved interviews with 17 residents and concierges of the area and multiple observation sessions.
The article shows that the long-pending demolition of a khrushchevka and the destruction of the common yard space caused conflict and resulted in hierarchical courtyard materiality and housing inequalities. This created a perception of the khrushchevka residents as a "stigmatized" group and strained their relationships with neighbors in the new buildings. The hierarchical housing environment as a structural materiality forms and maintains multidimensional aspects of housing inequalities—spatial, social class-based, and symbolic dimensions.
As interpretative and analytical framework, the article uses Wendy Bottero's notion of the sense of inequality, which is understood as an emotion that develops from hierarchical relationships. On the basis of the empirical date, this article elaborates on Bottero's idea and explains why, in this situation, it is more appropriate to call this social emotion "a sense of injustice," referencing society's ideas about what is proper. Therefore, structural housing inequality is a condition for the emergence of an intersubjective sense of injustice as a social consequence of this situation.
OW RELATIONS BETWEEN NEIGHBORS ARE CHANGING IN AN ENVIRONMENT OF REDEVELOPMENT: HOUSING INEQUALITIES AND A SENSE OF INJUSTICE
Keywords: Neighboring; Housing Inequalities; Khrushchevka; Common Yard; Sense of Injustice; Housing Justice
The value of material objects and their significant role in shaping social relations has been established in contemporary academic debates on "the material turn" (Hicks 2010; Tilley 2012). The material dimension investigates how objects acquire different meanings when used as symbols and through different usage to give an understanding of the relationship between the material and social worlds. For instance, recent research focused on rethinking of Soviet material culture (Golubev 2020; Karpova 2020). What do material objects produce, and how do they shape urban neighbors' relationships? From the dimension of materiality, neighborhood studies focus on the use of common objects and space to construct relationships of solidarity or conflict between neighbors (Bogdanova, Brednikova, and Zaporozhets 2021:147). These sense-making objects could be items of collective use, such as building entrances, courtyard grounds, bulletin boards, doors, and the materiality of the common yard shared by different residential buildings.1 Housing is not just abstract buildings, but something that is always involved in a variety of specific social processes (Jacobs [1961] 1993). Therefore, from the point of view of materiality studies, housing communicates with individuals, producing social meanings and practices. In this context, the housing materiality coproduces the culture and relationships of neighborhoods.
This article shows how urban neighborly relations are formed in the space of a redeveloped and hierarchized urban common yard. The Moscow courtyard chosen for the study has experienced significant changes over the past 15 years, and as a result, neighbors live in different types of housing—a luxury apartment building,2 a "new building" (novostroika)3 and a khrushchevka. The five-story khrushchevka4 (see Bu-chli 1997; Varga-Harris 2015), built in 1962, is included in the current municipal renovation program,5 but its residents have not yet been resettled, which has led to conflicts with local authorities as well as neighbors. As Anna Zhelnina and Elena Tykanova note about the specifics of the capital city, "Moscow's urban political field is characterised by the prevalence of large federal urban redevelopment projects and
1 In this study, the common yard denotes a shared space between apartment buildings, which, in the Soviet era, was designated as a public place for local residents.
2 In Russian, this type of housing is usually call "business-class housing." Houses of this type are built of high-quality materials and have a variety of amenities, such as high ceilings, a concierge, video surveillance, a well-appointed entrance, an underground parking garage, etc.
3 This type of housing is characterized by a recent date of construction but may vary in quality of construction and amenities. In this case, the novostroika is inferior in quality to the luxury apartment building and, therefore, less expensive.
4 Khrushchevki were built during the mass-housing construction boom spearheaded by Niki-ta Khrushchev in the early 1960s. They were cheap, simple, and constructed quickly; they usually have low ceilings and lack elevators and garbage chutes.
5 The program of housing renovation (Renovatsiia) in Moscow is the city government's multi-year program aimed at demolishing the socialist-era prefabricated apartment buildings and replacing them with new high-rises. For details see Korableva et al. (2021) and Zhelnina (2019, 2021, 2022).
the notable involvement of city bureaucrats as the adversaries of protesters" who oppose some of such projects (2021:221).
Is the selected urban common yard typical for Moscow? On the one hand, it is atypical because usually developers try to organize them in a more integrated manner, designed with a homogeneous organic environment and similar types of housing. On the other hand, in recent years, single construction projects (odinochnaia zastroika) and the environment of redevelopment have become widespread, which makes the selected case relevant for analysis.
In the context of unstable social policies and a lack of regulated housing rights, a modern resident can be confronted with a forced relocation and temporary resettlement with an indefinite implementation period. The majority of these events redefine the order of neighboring relationships, including individuals' housing strategies (Zhelnina 2021). How are neighborhood relationships transformed in the context of the redevelopment of the common courtyard by new houses and neighbors? How do the residents of the courtyard perceive the process of change? What are the social consequences of these relations? This article seeks to address these issues.
NEIGHBORHOOD AS A SPACE OF INEQUALITIES
Urban residential communities and housing conditions have been a subject of sociological research since the Chicago school (Anderson 1923; Park [1929] 1967; Wirth 1928). Usually, works in the field of housing studies are based on Marxist and Webe-rian traditions (Clapham 2015:10) and pay attention to the structural mechanisms of the reproduction of inequalities in the distribution of housing and issues of housing ownership (Rex and Moore 1967). This article continues the tradition of these studies on the example of one Moscow common yard and shows the social mechanics of neighboring relations in the context of housing inequalities and the social consequences of these inequalities.
There is an assumption that in stable societies groups with the same housing status form a social class characterized by the closeness of economic, cultural, and symbolic capitals (Savage et al. 2013). Thus, the relative consistency of housing and other statuses has been documented in some studies based on the Soviet-era data (Semenova 1996). Achieved class positions were stable in the first years after the collapse of the USSR (Krotov, Burawoy, and Lytkina 2003; Trushchenko 1994) because the housing system remained the same for few years and the new housing institutions of the market economy were not yet formed. Thus, in the Soviet period, "the communal way of life is embodied in the style of communication of people living next to each other . . . where its ideal image is a 'neighborhood brotherhood'" (Shmerlina 2006:33). The decline of communal traditions is usually caused by the rejection of the Soviet style of everyday life, where the public had priority over the individual for neighbors and colleagues living close to the large factories where they worked.
Elena Bogdanova, Olga Brednikova, and Oksana Zaporozhets (2021) have concluded that Soviet neighborhoods were mostly "forced." After the collapse of the Soviet Union, people could change their places of residence based on their tastes and
financial abilities and thus "choose" their neighbors. Therefore, the post-Soviet period can be called a time of "neighborly reassembling." In the early 2000s the general formula for neighborly relations in Russia was "politeness plus mutual help" (Sh-merlina 2006:37). Traditional rituals of politeness between neighbors usually implied some form of greeting and less often a brief exchange of news. Mutual aid included help in looking after children, watering flowers, walking pets, and other chores.
The concept of "neighborhood" prevailing in Western studies of neighbors' relations (which, on the surface, resemble a community similar to Ferdinand Tonnies's Gemeinschaft [(1887) 2017]) is difficult to apply to Soviet and post-Soviet realities because of the lack of social homogeneity in Soviet and post-Soviet neighborhoods. A more appropriate term is "neighboring," which instead of territorial closeness emphasizes practices of interpersonal communications and interactions among neighbors (Bogdanova et al. 2021:157). In this article, "neighborhood" (sosedstvo), or rather, the more appropriate for today's Russia, "neighboring" (sosedstvovanie), is understood as a multidimensional phenomenon: it is a socio-geographical category, tied to a particular place of residence and a mobile, dynamic, and informalized network of residents (Grannis 2009).
As new technologies emerged and the "hybridization" of neighboring relations occurred (Gromasheva 2021), we can observe "a controlled diversified neighborhood" that began to manifest itself in the 2010s (Bogdanova et al. 2021:140). Today, "scenarios can vary in relations with different neighbors, which is probably related not only to personal sympathies but also to social closeness, because it is easier to build relationships with people of 'one's circle'" (148). One of the characteristics of Russian neighboring is its high social diversity—neighborhoods may encompass housing of varied class and price, and communal apartments and high-priced luxury units may exist in the same apartment building (157).
In some cases, neighborly relations have a class character, and often conflicts or solidarization take place for reasons related to neighbors' class background, because routine neighborly negotiations are easier to conduct with people with similar social characteristics (Bogdanova et al. 2021:158). On the other hand, previous studies have also shown that in situations of class differences, it is difficult for urban residents to develop a common agenda and consensus (Ivanov 2016:11). Neighborly relations are also based on social identification as a process in which people come to feel that some other human beings are "the same as they are" (de Swaan 1995:25). As sociologist Wendy Bottero discovered, "the pattern of 'homophily' (the principle that we are more likely to associate with people who are socially similar to ourselves) has a major impact on social networks creating 'social interaction distance' between unequals. There is a social sorting process in the way we form social ties, so that the people we interact with tend to be similar to ourselves. . . . This has major consequences for our routes through life and worldviews, and for how inequality is reproduced" (2007:814). Earlier, she noted that "the reproduction of hierarchy is carried out every day, by us all, in the most banal and mundane of activities. The nature of hierarchy is such that simply by going about our daily lives social inequalities are mechanically reproduced" (2004:995). Moreover, Mike Savage has identified the par-
adox of class that "the structural importance of class to people's lives appears not to be recognized by the people themselves. Culturally, class does not appear to be a self-conscious principle of social identity. Structurally, however, it appears to be highly pertinent" (2000:12). Therefore, a hierarchized housing environment can act as a structure that creates multiple inequalities, and multiple scholars have shown the importance of neighborhood for the formation of one's class position. First, according to Beverly Skeggs, "intimate positioning of myself with 'others' enables me to see differences and feel inequality" (1997:132-133). Second, as Bottero noted, "ironically, because of the deep-seated way in which hierarchy is embedded in personal relationships such differences are likely to be perceived in public rather than personal contexts. 'Class' exists 'out there' in the public domain . . . in various public contexts, or through stereotyped representations of 'them'" (2004:999). Meanwhile, social identification remains multidimensional and unstable (de Swaan 1995:34). Therefore, "in the understanding and study of the neighborhood the hermeneutic approach, dealing with complex, multiple, changing, constantly reassembling relationships, begins to dominate" (Bogdanova et al. 2021:166).
NEIGHBORHOOD'S MATERIAL ENVIRONMENT
As a result of the material turn (Hicks 2010), social scientists are embracing material culture as an interdisciplinary approach. Material culture reveals the interactions between material world/things and social worlds/individuals (Appadurai 1986; Miller 1998; Tilley 2012). Cross-cultural artifacts are displayed, and objects are invested with meanings through associations and usage, which give an understanding of how the relationship between material and social realities changes over time, connecting the lives of things and individuals (Woodward 2019).
Housing, as the material object communicating with individuals, produces such elements of culture as social meanings, symbols, practices, and habits. For instance, the structuralist perspective of the home is exemplified in Pierre Bourdieu's (1977) analysis of the Kabyle house, where culture occurs as a normative structure, reproducing itself through a social order that is present more in the externalized order of the house through the cognitive maps of its inhabitants (Miller 2001:5). Daniel Miller attached the extended meanings of home to the "active agency of the occupants of the home and the home as a site of consumption and the 'do-it-yourself' process" and "emphasize[d] the home as both the source and the setting of mobility and change" (2). Through the lens of the relational approach, Lindsey McCarthy (2020) views home from a broader perspective—as material and symbolic, as well as structural and agentic, where material objects give shape to the social world as well as being shaped by it. This relational perspective sees the identity and material culture as intertwined (McCarthy 2020; Polukhina 2022b).
Analysis of the situation when the space of the common yard and houses around it changes and its material environment becomes highly hierarchical is of interest. Usually, residential neighborhoods are designed with the same type of housing for people socially close to each other to live nearby, but social mixing of residents is also an
urban trend (Lelévrier 2013). Gentrified areas become the most vulnerable, where "old" groups are replaced by "new" ones and "authentic" residents and spaces are displaced (Vanke and Polukhina 2018; Zukin 2019). Inequalities of post-Soviet realities are exacerbated in heterogeneous environments (Strelnikova 2018). The remaining residents need to agree on the new rules for living together, and there is a gradual rethinking of their position in relation to others. In this article, the focus of attention is on the territory of the common yard and apartment buildings around it where the situation of a heterogeneous living environment spontaneously arose and became long-term.
EMOTIONAL EXPERIENCE OF NEIGHBORING AND A SENSE OF INJUSTICE
It has been confirmed that "neighborhood disadvantage resulted in greater negative emotion [and] less positive emotion" (Hackman et al. 2019). Social emotion is the link between the social structure and the social actor (Ray 2014). Social emotion can maintain social ties and destroy them. Crucial in this context is the concept of emotional energy, developed by Randall Collins (1993). According to Collins, emotional energy is born in interactive rituals and fuels sustained emotions. Therefore, successful rituals lead to solidarity and overall emotional uplift, while unsuccessful ones lead to alienation, depression, and passivity. Urban stratification is based on emotional energy: emotional experiences are localized in certain urban spaces and allow the stratification of the users of these spaces. Stratification can be linked to feelings of shame (Scheff 2011), fear, anxiety (Barbalet 1998), and resentment (Hegtvedt and Parris 2014). The emotional manifestation of resentment—class hatred and anger—can be observed at all levels of social hierarchy. Resentment is the emotional response that arises when basic rights are encroached upon and is a socially sanctioned expressions of moral anger. Resentment is often linked to the mechanism of attribution. It is a way of defending oneself and identifying the cause of failure or success. Negative emotions individuals tend to attribute externally (i.e., to blame others), while positive emotions they tend to attribute internally (i.e., to credit themselves). Thus, what happens in the hierarchical and crowded courtyard and surrounding apartment buildings under study is well illustrated by the concept of collective emotions. Generally, collective emotions may drive conflict and unite people together at the same time. Bottero's A Sense of Inequality (2019) provides a detailed theoretical rationale for the notion of the sense of inequality. I will return to this concept and its usefulness later in the article.
This article shows how structural housing inequalities as materiality are a condition for the emergence of social consequences—an intersubjective "sense of injustice" (see figure 1). Thus, the long-pending khrushchevka demolition and the destruction of the common yard spaces were the causes for the conflict and the resulting hierarchical6 courtyard materiality and housing inequalities in terms of a spatial, social class-based, and symbolic dimensions. This situation created a per-
6 Social hierarchy is a type of social structure in which actors are ranked according to the levels of capitals, power, and prestige they possess. Usually, hierarchies depend upon the social structure, rules, and control to guide practices and activities.
ception of the residents of khrushchevka as a "stigmatized" group and strained relationships with their neighbors from new apartment buildings. The inhabitants of the khrushchevka have fewer resources, and the situation of "housing justice"7 does not arise for them. Therefore, the hierarchized housing materiality acts as a structure that forms and maintains multidimensional aspects of inequalities.
Figure 1. Main concepts used for the analysis of redevelopment of housing environment.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY: A CASE STUDY OF AN URBAN COMMON YARD
The case study method is appropriate for investigating everyday neighborhood life in an urban common yard. It is a strategy aimed at a sequential and intensive study of one or more sites, taking into account different data collection methods available (Bura-woy 1998; Polukhina 2022a; Stake 1995, 2006; Yin 1994, 2003). Our urban places have become a platform for studying the daily life of residents in the case study research design (Pilkington 2017). Thus, the space of a neighborhood—and even a small space such as a common yard—is a platform for the study of everyday life and related social phenomena. This approach makes it possible to "localize" participants in the space of social differences and analyze their attitudes toward representatives of other social groups, which are actualized in their social practices and communications. The Chicago school sociologists used a similar approach, treating urban environment as a laboratory for understanding what is happening through the eyes of residents of different parts of the city and urban fringes (Park [1929] 1967; Wirth 1928).
7 For more on the concept of housing justice, see Roy and Malson (2019) and Maharawal and McElroy (2018).
The empirical case is the space of a common yard, where residents of different types of houses (i.e., a khrushchevka as well as the new high-rise buildings) share a common area. The data were collected by research assistants, Veronika Vorobieva and Polina Chibiskova, under the guidance of the author, from July to October 2019 as part of an HSE University project. Entry into the field was facilitated by a local who was a friend of the researchers and provided the first interview and further contacts. This individual's contacts were given an invitation with information about the study, and many willingly agreed to take part. Seventeen interviews were conducted with the residents and concierges of the apartment buildings—ten with residents of the khrushchevka and seven with residents of the new high-rise buildings. Most interviews took place in the yard. The project team (i.e., the author and two research assistants) regularly discussed the results of the observations and interviews.
Some of the interviews included a projective technique called "mental maps" (Lynch 1960), which involved the participants creating images of how they envisioned the area. Mental maps make visible people's ideas about social reality and visualize the perception of urban space, which is structured by divisions (Bourdieu 2005:50; Wacquant 2022). In this sense, mental map is a way to represent space (Glazkov 2013:40) but also depict perception and reproduction of sociocultural inequalities (Strelnikova and Vanke 2017:62).
Researchers conducted multiple observation sessions, making photographic records of the daily life in the common yard. The common yard was chosen based on the hierarchical environment presented here in a saturated form, which is of theoretical interest in the study of the nature of neighboring relations. The thematic analysis was used to analyze collected data (Bryman 2016:587-589), and the main themes that emerged from this analysis were "transformation of the courtyard space," "relationships with neighbors," "emotions," and "identity."
THE TRANSFORMATION OF THE COMMON YARD SPACE: THE BUILT-UP COURTYARD, INEQUALITIES, AND TENSE NEIGHBORING
For a long time, the common yard area that we studied was part of a common "dormitory" district in the northwest of Moscow, which was built up with residential buildings in the 1960s. Some of that residential housing was given to the military, another part to the employees of scientific institutes and enterprises. Many streets in this neighborhood still bear names of generals, marshals, and spies. The district is located near the Moscow River, with a lot of green and park areas, is considered environmentally friendly, has good transport accessibility, and is quite prestigious. In recent years it has experienced active development, and in 2019 there were more than 10 large-scale, new residential buildings erected. Therefore, there is now a combination of different types of housing—from the Stalin-era housing and five-story khrushchevki, which traditionally made up the housing stock of the district, to the newest residential complexes.
Figure 2. The view of the studied courtyard; from left to right: the new building/novostroika, the luxury apartment building, and the five-story khrushchevka, Moscow, 2019.
The courtyard space that we studied is surrounded by different types of housing, not only in terms of history and architecture, but also in terms of comfort and prestige. Among the residential houses in the yard is a five-story khrushchevka built in 1962 (on the right in figure 2), which, as part of the city's renovation program, is on the list of houses slated for demolition as of August 1, 2017. In this building and another khrushchevka next to in, an absolute majority of residents (over 90 percent) voted for the inclusion of their building in the renovation program, which would involve demolishing the buildings and relocating their residents, but these houses have not yet been demolished. It is important to mentioned that while khrushchevki denote certain (lower) social class of their residents, current residents of khrushchevki do not necessarily belong to the same social group or class because they are usually children or even grandchildren of original residents, who themselves were often from different professional groups and, therefore, social classes.
Figure 3. A mental map of the courtyard by a resident of the luxury apartment building,
Moscow, 2019.
The second residential building (built in 2003, shown in the center of figure 2) may be considered a "luxury" dwelling—a new 25-story brick building with 3-meter-high ceilings, a concierge, video surveillance, a well-appointed entrance, and an underground parking garage. This building is part of a complex of luxury buildings constructed on this street and, in contrast to the other two buildings, has an inner courtyard that is fenced off and which significantly distinguishes this building from the other, older, two in the common courtyard. The entrance to the fenced-in yard is officially allowed only to the inhabitants of this building, and therefore this courtyard area can be characterized as closed to outsiders. There are no residents who "received"8 apartments in this house; everybody who lives here bought their apartments and at a high price.
Even though the buildings form a single common yard space, the residents of the luxury apartment building think of the fenced area in their building as their yard and do not consider residents of the two buildings next to and opposite theirs as neighbors with whom they share a common yard. A mental map drawn by one of the residents of this building (figure 3), indicates that the boundaries of the yard, in her perception, do not include the neighboring areas. This yard can be, partly, an example of a "gated community" (Blakely and Snyder 1997; Low 2003). Due to market mechanisms (i.e., the price of housing, residents' choice of location, the type of housing), the building attracts quite homogeneous neighbors in terms of income and lifestyle, and this process is a part of class formation.
Figure 4. View of the five-story khrushchevka from the luxury apartment building, Moscow, 2019.
The third building is a new building (novostroika; on the left in figure 2), built in 2002 in place of a nine-story building. It is a little distant from the common yard and is only partially involved in the dynamics under study. Even though this new, 18-story brick building is also formally considered luxury housing, the average market price of apartments in it is somewhat lower than the one next door because it has lower ceil-
8 In Soviet times, because there was no real estate market, residents were allocated housing by their employers or municipal authorities.
ings, cheaper construction materials, and no fenced area or additional services. Some of its residents used to live in the nine-story building that it replaced, others were allocated apartments through various municipal programs, and the rest purchased their apartments. Therefore, a mix of social classes is present in this novostroika.
The old nine-story building, which had adjacent landscaped areas on the street side and inside the courtyard, was not subject to the renovation program. The official reason for its demolition was that the building was unfit for habitation due to its condition. However, such a reason is questioned by the residents of the khrushchevka who suggest that the reason for the demolition was that "someone wanted to build another luxury apartment building, so it was even built in violation of building regulations—too close to the khrushchevka" (51-year-old man, khrushchevka resident) (see figure 5).
Figure 5. Partial view of the courtyard on Google Maps that illustrates the proximity of the luxury apartment building (marked "16 корпус 1") to the khrushchevka ("16 корпус 2"), whose adjoining territory was taken up by the nearby road.
The close proximity of the new apartment building and the road, as well as the demolition of the green area and the courtyard benches, displeased the khrushchevka residents. They were upset that the new building was constructed too close and without any consultation with them: "Now we have practically no courtyard; the neighboring house stands practically here [where the old courtyard used to be]. In place of this building, there used to be a courtyard: trees, benches, flowerbeds. . . . Now there is no yard. . . . It used to be so quiet, cozy, and green. And now it's just a parking lot. We used to have our courtyard, and now it's gone. It was just erased" (51-year-old man, khrushchevka resident).
According to some informants, this discontent was quelled by the district leadership's promises of rapid demolition of the khrushchevka and relocation of its residents, similar to the nine-story building. However, the promises have still not been
fulfilled, and the residents remain without any information. "They said they would demolish everything here now; then they said, next year. If not this year, then next year. And then, after that, they stopped working here," the 51-year-old khrushchevka resident added.
The proximity of the luxury apartment building and the absence of the old green area have caused discomfort for the khrushchevka residents, such as diminished natural light in their apartments or the loss of views because their windows abut the new building. According to the informants, during the construction of the novostroika, the khrushchevka sank by 1.5 meters. The mental maps drawn by the khrushchevka residents (figure 6) show how they continue to perceive the space in terms of its previous boundaries, before the new buildings were built. They perceive the courtyard and the new buildings as a shared space, unlike the residents of the luxury apartment building, who think of their building and its yard separately from the common yard (see figure 3).
Figure 6. Two mental maps of the courtyard drawn by the khrushchevka residents. In both of them their building is depicted on the top, with the neighboring buildings on the bottom and on the left of the drawings. The smaller rectangles/squares represent cars. The map on the left also shows the fence that separates the luxury apartment building and its playground from the
rest of the courtyard.
As Elena Tykanova and Anisya Khokhlova (2019) discovered, main factors for successful self-organization in a situation of urban conflict are the small size of the local community, the presence of a "voice" from the authorities, participation of members of other initiative groups, the presence of a local leader, and the previous experience of self-organization. In our case, we find some characteristics for successful mobilization, but delays with the demolition of the building, lack of self-organization experience, and restricted communication with city authorities limit the possibilities for the residents of the khrushchevka. Researchers call actors in this scenario of urban conflict "desperate urbanites"—inexperienced city dwellers who try to protest using known methods and expecting a quick response, and when this does not happen, experiencing frustration and not understanding how to proceed, which may put an end to their resistance (Zhelnina and Tykanova 2021:214). Thus, the inhabitants of the khrushchevka have few resources, and the situation of housing justice does not arise for them.
Generally, social mix of residents is a key component of urban planning in many Western countries. For example, "the arrival of the population attracted by new housing developments is seen as a vector for social diversity" (Lelevrier 2013:409). Therefore, municipal authorities frequently declare that such mixing would promote livability of neighborhoods and social interaction between different groups. Researchers have shown that "two factors mediate the effects of social mix on social interaction. The first factor is the residential trajectories of the residents, which are conducive to more or less familiarity with the neighbourhood. The second comprises the mixing methods that are implemented with respect to spatial layout and physical arrangements" (414). In our case, the trajectories of the residents of the khrush-chevka and the organization of space only contribute to the growth of the conflict between residents of different apartment buildings that share the common yard.
SOCIAL EMOTIONS IN THE SITUATION OF CLOSE NEIGHBORING AND HOUSING INEQUALITIES
The residents of the five-story khrushchevka feel despair and do not believe in the possibility of resettlement, as they have been waiting several years. According to the informants, resettlement is impossible because of legal peculiarities concerning the house: "Because of legal conflicts [regarding land ownership], this house is still here. And the residents would love to get out of here" (50-year-old woman, a representative of the housing co-op and luxury apartment building resident). Thus, the residents of the khrushchevka have been in a state of protracted limbo for many years.
Based on conversations with the residents of the khrushchevka, we can conclude that the tension that is present among the residents of the buildings surrounding the courtyard is based on negative feelings that khrushchevka residents have toward the former residents of the demolished nine-story building who were given more comfortable housing—the "new building" ("they just got lucky"). Furthermore, the khrushchevka residents have negative feelings toward the new neighbors from the luxury apartment building, with whom they were forced to become "close" neighbors (see figures 4, 5, 6, 7).
Figure 7. A cab is waiting for a passenger coming out of the luxury apartment building. The entrance of this building faces the road, which is also in front of the entrance to the khrushchevka, Moscow, 2019.
The territorial proximity and the residents' perceived social distance provoke the emergence of resistance practices, as well as create conflict situations and tense neighboring relationships. For example, the residents of the khrushchevka put up fences that prevent residents of the luxury apartment building from being able to park their cars. "The residents themselves brought this crap here [items that make it difficult for cars from the luxury apartment building to park near the khrushchevka]. . . . But we quickly warned them off—we let down their tires and that's it. . . . We wrote a note, wrote two notes, but on the third, I got fed up. I went out at night, let down all four tires and wrote: 'Next time they'll be cut'" (60-year-old woman, khrushchevka resident).
Figure 8. Exit from the underground parking garage of the luxury apartment building near the
khrushchevka, Moscow, 2019.
Because of the proximity, there was an opportunity to compare the living conditions, lifestyles, and practices of the new neighbors. The new neighbors own premium and large cars (see figure 8), have personal drivers (figure 9), or call cabs that come to pick them up not at their own building but, because of the cramped conditions, at the khrushchevka (figure 5). There are rumors among the khrushchevka residents that the luxury apartment building residents have close ties to the municipal authorities: "Not good people at all these new neighbors of ours. . . . For a while I worked in a polyclinic serving municipal authorities. I know these people because of that" (60-year-old woman, khrushchevka resident).
At the same time, some residents of the new houses speak negatively about the residents of the khrushchevka, stigmatizing them as "drunks" and "not like us." "I hear and see these boozers and revelers all the time. And this neighborhood is extremely uncomfortable, extremely! . . . Our kids don't socialize with those kinds of kids. They just don't know their language; they don't know their habits. Their habits
are sometimes animal-like" (50-year-old woman, a representative of the housing coop and luxury apartment building resident).
It is clear that the khrushchevka residents have negative feelings about the residents of the new apartment buildings. They are aware that the redevelopment that happened in their courtyard involved government actors and developers, whom they partially blame for their situation, as we described in our field notes in 2019: "Along the way, some radical statements about the company that built the luxury apartment building were made. According to the informant, the initiative group of the khrushchevka had filed a lawsuit. Passing by the court located next to the house, the informant did not miss the opportunity to rant unflatteringly about an employee of the court who was standing near the entrance with a cigarette, alluding to corruption of the court's employees while talking about disputes over the construction of the new apartment buildings." As discovered by Tykanova and Khokhlova, it is a popular situation when "in urban conflicts, citizens often construct an image of their opponents as being in a coalition with municipal authorities and business elites. However, cases in which citizens' demands are met indirectly suggest that such coalitions do not always exist (probably, they are formed less often if the financial stakes are smaller)" (2014:120).
Figure 9. A driver picks up residents of the luxury apartment building, Moscow, 2019.
The courtyard that we studied represents a neighborhood of housing inequalities that are expressed along several dimensions. On the one hand, the residents of the neighboring houses belong to different groups—the residents of the luxury apartment building are more homogeneous, numerous, and well-off, as the apartments were bought at fairly high market prices, and there is an ongoing process of class formation, which manifests in the desire to fence off and create a gated environment. Therefore, the mental maps of the luxury apartment building residents show their territory as autonomous, separated from the common courtyard (fig-
ure 3). On the other hand, the inequalities of residents' housing rights are also expressed in the difference in spatial rights: the khrushchevka residents were forced out of their courtyard by the construction of new housing and the road. The khrushchevka residents, according to the informants, find themselves ignored by the authorities and have been waiting for the promised resettlement for about fifteen years. In this sense, the inequalities of the residents of the houses are expressed in three ways: spatially (i.e., the deprivation of the courtyard grounds, discomfort due to the proximity of the new development, "fencing off"), on the basis of social class (i.e., different status and income expressed through different lifestyles), and symbolically (i.e., different houses as symbols of different housing groups). Thus, a situation of multidimensional housing inequalities due to redevelopment of some of the housing stock, the uncertainty of the situation with the demolition of the other part of it, and the conditions of neighboring proximity, all provoke negative feelings and tension among neighbors. How does this situation affect residents' identities?
KHRUSHCHEVKA RESIDENTS AND THE CHANGE IN THEIR IDENTITY
Until the mid-2000s, the khrushchevka residents were surrounded by similar five-story houses, and they felt quite comfortable in this courtyard space—"ordinary" in their homogenous environment. Their apartment building did not neighbor buildings of a different class, and they did not experience inequalities or perceive social distances or differences with their neighbors. "Everything was normal, we lived and saw people like us, and we did not know any grief, as they say, well, when you do not see how other people live, you do not compare yourself with anyone, bad thoughts do not enter your head. But now . . . you don't even have to try to feel worse" (50-year-old woman, khrushchevka resident).
After the construction of the luxury apartment buildings across from their homes, some residents had the "feeling" that they occupied a "disadvantaged" and low social position. In this situation of social contrast, some of the khrushchevka residents describe their feelings as negative and themselves as a group of stigmatized residents. "For some reason, I started to feel at some point that they [the residents of the luxury apartment building] think that we are something different, that we don't look good in their eyes. And I began to feel that way about myself " (22-year-old woman, khrushchevka resident).
For some residents of the khrushchevka, the expected move to a new house is an impetus to change their lives. They pin their hopes on moving to a new building, believing that the move will give them the opportunity to feel better about themselves at a new level of comfort. The current situation with years of delay contributes to depression and stigmatization. "It's probably ridiculous to talk about it anymore. In fact, we're just waiting for things to change for the better, for us to finally have comfortable conditions. And that a new, different life will begin" (50-year-old woman, khrushchevka resident).
The established hierarchical materiality of the common yard, the spatial displacement of the khrushchevka residents from their territory, the protractedness of their expected relocation make this group feel like "victims" and "hostages" of the situation, limiting the possibilities of agency and resistance. "We're just tired of this situation; it's kind of pointless to fight; in fact, there's nothing to fight for, so everyone is waiting, I think, for us to be moved somewhere else" (51-year-old man, khrushchevka resident). In contrast to the residents of the neighboring new building, there is a process of relatively consistent class formation followed by a desire for autonomy. The hierarchized housing materiality acts as a structure that "forms" multidimensional aspects of housing inequalities—a spatial, social class-based, and symbolic dimensions.
A SENSE OF INEQUALITY OR INJUSTICE?
The situation in the hierarchical and crowded common yard that we studied is well illustrated by what Bottero conceptualizes as the sense of inequality. This term is understood as a specific sense individuals feel arising through relationships, hierarchies, perceptions, values, beliefs, manifestations of injustice and humiliation, struggles through protest, resistance, and the more effective ways in which people "know" and "sense" the world (Bottero 2019:1-2). Bottero points out that individuals tend to be more aware of and concerned about "local" inequalities in their own lives and their milieu (53).
However, regardless of whether Bottero understands "a sense of inequality" and "a sense of injustice" as being synonymous or separate, "I feel that we have been treated unfairly" is a common discursive practice and emotional experience of the khrushchevka residents in our case study of the common yard. Thus, the concepts of spatial justice (Harvey 1973; Soja 2009) and the right to the city (Lefebvre 1968, 1974) have become central issues for urban theorists. The concept of spatial justice is rooted in social justice and power relations regarding distribution of resources (Watson 2021). Thus, a social "sense of injustice" is the reason for resistance and collective action. "Sense of injustice" seems to be a more appropriate concept to describe dominant collective feelings about various forms of inequalities as structural phenomena. The term "inequality" is broad, abstract, and ubiquitous, since space is always hierarchical. The concept of "injustice" points to social notions of justice, norm, and order, and refers to a specific situation, invoking subjects of actions and emotions. From this perspective, structural inequality is a social condition for the emergence of a subjective "sense of injustice" (Polukhina 2020:88). Thus, inequality is a structural characteristic, and injustice is a collective, intersubjective emotion. This case study of a hierarchical material environment reveals that structural housing inequalities as materiality have social consequences—an intersubjective "sense of injustice" on the part of a "stigmatized" group.
CONCLUSION
The case study of a Moscow common yard shows that housing inequality as materiality and structure, in the context of the courtyard's redevelopment, was expressed multidimensionality: through a spatial dimension (i.e., the destruction of the previous courtyard space and "squeezing" the khrushchevka residents were reasons for the conflict), social class-based dimension (i.e., differences in lifestyles and incomes of residents), and symbolical dimension (i.e., houses are symbolic representations of the groups). Multidimensional housing inequalities, occurred due to the development of the hierarchical housing stock and the redevelopment of the courtyard space based on the decisions of the authorities and the developers, provoke a polyphony of negative feelings and tensions in neighboring relations. Thus, the resulting hierarchical materiality and the housing inequalities of the common yard space created among the khrushchevka residents a perception of them as a "stigmatized" group and strained their relationships with neighbors in the new buildings. This was also aided by mass media, many of which "published mainly images of crumbling houses and apartments in a deplorable condition, uninhabitable" (Zhelnina 2019:30).
While the main interpretative framework for this study draws on Bottero's work (2019), the study led me to refine her concept of the sense of inequality as a "sense of injustice" for a better description of the residents' dominant collective feelings. This way of thinking about it is close to the discursive practices and emotional experiences of the residents, reflecting ideas about social norms and what is proper. In other words, structural housing inequalities provide the conditions for the emergence of an intersubjective "sense of injustice" among the khrushchevka residents.
What does this case bring to the debate about class inequalities? This case demonstrates that in the context of a diverse housing stock as materiality, a homogeneous class is emerging in newly built housing, and it is characterized by the desire of its members to be separated and "gated" from other residents. In times of changes or urban conflict, individual residents join together with their neighbors (i.e., mobilize) to resolve problems they all face, and therefore ties among neighbors grow closer. As a result, the "we group" becomes more localized and well-defined. Social classes on the opposing sides of the conflict use different practices of marking "privileged" and "stigmatized" groups (e.g., asserting dominance over the territory, their symbolic superiority, and the like).
When designing social policy programs, decision-makers should take into account the role of negative consequences and social emotions (Simonova 2014). Social scientists have demonstrated ways to mitigate negative feelings by creating "collective imaginaries" or initiating favorable practices for constructing group identities (Bouchard 2009; Peacock, Bissell, and Owen 2014). A positive image helps people defend their "place in space" against the symbolic violence that is triggered by social inequalities (see Reynolds and Brady 2012; Walkerdine and Jimenez 2010).
REFERENCES
Anderson, Nels. 1923. The Hobo: The Sociology of the Homeless Man. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Appadurai, Arjun. 1986. The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Barbalet, Jack M. 1998. Emotion, Social Theory, and Social Structure: A Macrosotiological Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Blakely, Edward J., and Mary Gail Snyder. 1997. Fortress America: Gated Communities in the United States. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Bogdanova, Elena, Olga Brednikova, and Oksana Zaporozhets. 2021. "How Can Neighborhood Be Understood and Studied?" Laboratorium: Russian Review of Social Research 13(2):139-171. https://doi.org/10.25285/2078-1938-2021-13-2-139-171.
Bottero, Wendy. 2004. "Class Identities and the Identity of Class." Sociology 38(5):985-1003.
Bottero, Wendy. 2007. "Social Interaction and Inequality." Sociology Compass 1(2):814-831.
Bottero, Wendy. 2019. A Sense of Inequality. London: Rowman & Littlefield.
Bouchard, Gerard. 2009. "Collective Imaginaries and Population Health: How Health zData Can Highlight Cultural History." Pp. 169-200 in Successful Societies: How Institutions and Culture Affect Health, edited by Peter A. Hall and Michèle Lamont. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1977. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 2005. Sotsiologiia sotsial'nogo prostranstva. Moscow: Institut eksperimental'noi sotsiologii.
Bryman, Alan. 2016. Social Research Methods. 5th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Buchli, Victor. 1997. "Khrushchev, Modernism, and the Fight against Petit-Bourgeois Consciousness in the Soviet Home." Journal of Design History 10(2):161-176. https://doi.org/10.1093/jdh /10.2.161.
Burawoy, Michael. 1998. "The Extended Case Method." Sociological Theory 16(1):4-33.
Clapham, David. 2015. The Meaning of Housing: A Pathways Approach. Bristol, UK: Policy Press.
Collins, Randall. 1993. "Emotional Energy as Common Denominator of Rational Choice." Rationality and Society 5(2):203-230.
De Swaan, Abram. 1995. "Widening Circles of Identification: Emotional Concerns in Sociogenetic Perspective." Theory, Culture & Society 12(2):25-39. https://doi.org/10.1177/026327695012002002.
Glazkov, Konstantin. 2013. "Mental'nye karty: Sposoby analiza, pogreshnost' i prostranstvennaia metrika." Sotsiologiia vlasti 3:39-56.
Golubev, Alexey. 2020. The Things of Life: Materiality in Late Soviet Russia. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Grannis, Rick. 2009. From the Ground Up: Translating Geography into Community through Neighbor Networks. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Gromasheva, Olga. 2021. "Hybrid Neighborness in Action: The Case of Kudrovo, Russia." Laboratorium: Russian Review of Social Research 13(2):13-38. https://doi.org/10.25285/2078-1938 -2021-13-2-13-38.
Hackman, Daniel A., Stephanie A. Robert, Jascha Grübel, Raphael P. Weibel, Eirini Anagnostou, Christoph Hölscher, and Victor R. Schinazi. 2019. "Neighborhood Environments Influence Emotion and Physiological Reactivity." Science Report 9:9498. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019 -45876-8.
Harvey, David. 1973. Social Justice and the City. Revised ed. Athens: University of Georgia Press.
Hegtvedt, Karen A., and Christie L. Parris. 2014. "Emotions in Justice Processes." Pp. 103-126 in Handbook of Sociology of Emotions, edited by Jan E. Stets and Jonathan H. Turner, vol. 2. New York: Springer.
Hicks, Dan. 2010. "The Material-Cultural Turn: Event and Effect." Pp. 25-98 in The Oxford Handbook of Material Culture Studies, edited by Dan Hicks and Mary C. Beaudry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ivanov, Petr. 2016. "Gorodskie zhiteli i proizvodstvo prostranstva (na primere rossiiskikh goro-dov)." Interaktsiia. Interv'iu. Interpretatsiia 11:5-15. https://www.inter-fnisc.ru/index.php /inter/article/view/4448.
Jacobs, Jane. [1961] 1993. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Random House.
Karpova, Yulia. 2020. Comradely Objects: Design and Material Culture in Soviet Russia 1960s-80s. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.
Korableva, Ekaterina, Irina Shirobokova, Oleg Pachenkov, and Matthias Bernt. 2021. "Dwelling in Failure: Power and Uncertainty in a Socialist Large Housing Estate Regeneration Program in Saint Petersburg, Russia." Journal of Housing and the Built Environment. https://doi.org/10 .1007/s10901-021-09892-3.
Krotov, Pavel, Michael Burawoy, and Tatiana Lytkina. 2003. Zhilishchnaiastratifikatsiiagoroda: Ryn-ochnaia evoliutsiia sovetskoi modeli. Syktyvkar, Russia: Komi Nauchnyi Tsentr UrO RAN.
Lefebvre, Henri. 1968. Le Droit à la ville. Paris: Éditions Anthropos.
Lefebvre, Henri. 1974. La production de l'espace. Paris: Éditions Anthropos.
Lelévrier, Christine. 2013. "Social Mix Neighbourhood Policies and Social Interaction: The Experience of Newcomers in Three New Renewal Developments in France." Cities 35:409-416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2013.03.003.
Low, Setha. 2003. Behind the Gates: Life, Security, and the Pursuit of Happiness in Fortress America. New York: Routledge.
Lynch, Kevin. 1960. The Image of the City. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Maharawal, Manissa M., and Erin McElroy. 2018. "The Anti-eviction Mapping Project: Counter Mapping and Oral History toward Bay Area Housing Justice." Annals of the American Association of Geographers 108(2):380-389. https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2017.1365583.
McCarthy, Lindsey. 2020. "Homeless Women, Material Objects and Home (Un)making." Housing Studies 35(7):1309-1331. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2019.1659235.
Miller, Daniel. 1998. Material Cultures: Why Some Things Matter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Miller, Daniel, ed. 2001. Home Possessions: Material Culture behind Closed Doors. Oxford: Berg.
Park, Robert E. [1929] 1967. "The City as a Social Laboratory." Pp. 3-18 in On Social Control and Collective Behavior: Selected Papers, edited and with introduction by Ralph H. Turner. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Peacock, Marian, Paul Bissell, and Jenny Owen. 2014. "Shaming Encounters: Reflections on Contemporary Understandings of Social Inequality and Health Sociology." Sociology 48(2):1-16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038513490353.
Pilkington, Hilary. 2017. "Can Qualitative Data Speak beyond the Individual Case? Employing Meta-Ethnography for the Synthesis of Findings in Transnational Research Projects." Pp. 101-121 in Understanding Youth Participation across Europe: From Survey to Ethnography, edited by Hilary Pilkington, Gary Pollock, and Renata Frank. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Polukhina, Elizaveta. 2020. "'Chuvstvo neravenstva': Chto takoe sub"ektivnoe neravenstvo i kak ego izuchat'." Interaktsiia. Interv'iu. Interpretatsiia 12(2):81-90. https://doi.org/10.19181 /inter.2020.12.2.5.
Polukhina, Elizaveta. 2022a. "Ethnographic Case-Study Design for Discovering Identities in Russian Post-industrial Neighbourhoods." The Qualitative Report 27(5):1221-1238. https://doi .org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5381.
Polukhina, Elizaveta. 2022b. "Material Culture, Housing and Identities in Russian Post-industrial Neighbourhoods." Housing Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2022.2091114.
Ray, Larry. 2014. "Shame and the City: 'Looting,' Emotions and Social Structure." Sociological Review 62(1):117-136. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-954X.12136.
Rex, John, and Robert Moore. 1967. Race, Community and Conflict: A Study of Sparkbrook. London: Oxford University Press.
Reynolds, Megan M., and David Brady. 2012. "Bringing You More than the Weekend: Union Membership and Self-Rated Health in the United States." Social Forces 90(3):1023-1049. https://doi .org/10.1093/sf/sor023.
Roy, Ananya, and Hilary Malson, eds. 2019. Housing Justice in Unequal Cities. Los Angeles: Institute on Inequality and Democracy at UCLA. https://www.goethe.de/resources/files/pdf194 /housing-justice-in-unequal-cities.pdf.
Savage, Mike. 2000. Class Analysis and Social Transformation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Savage, Mike, Fiona Devine, Naill Cunningham, Mark Taylor, Yaojun Li, Johs Hjellbrekke, Brigitte Le Roux, Sam Friedman, and Andrew Miles. 2013. "A New Model of Social Class? Findings from the BBC's Great British Class Survey Experiment." Sociology 47(2):219-250. https://doi.org/10 .1177/0038038513481128.
Scheff, Thomas J. 2011. "Alienation and Hidden Shame: Social-Emotional Causes of Conflict." New English Review, July. https://www.newenglishreview.org/articles/alienation-and-hidden -shame-social-emotional-causes-of-conflict/.
Semenova, Victoria. 1996. "Ravenstvo v nishchete: Simvolicheskoe znachenie 'kommunalok' v 30-50-e gody." Pp. 373-390 in Sud'by liudei: RossiiaXX vek. Biografii semei kak ob"ekt sotsiologichesk-ogo issledovaniia, edited by V. Semenova and E. Foteeva. Moscow: Institut sotsiologii RAN.
Shmerlina, Irina. A. 2006. "Sotsial'naia ekologiia sosedstva." Sotsial'naia real'nost' 9:32-46.
Simonova, Ol'ga. 2014. "Styd i bednost': Posledstviia dlia sotsial'noi politiki." Zhurnal issledovanii sotsial'noi politiki 12(4):539-554.
Skeggs, Beverley. 1997. "Classifying Practices: Representations, Capitals and Recognitions." Pp. 123-34 in Class Matters: "Working-Class" Women's Perspective on Social Class, edited by Pat Mahony and Christine Zmroczek. London: Taylor and Francis.
Soja, Edward W. 2009. "The City and Spatial Justice." Paper presented at the conference "Spatial Justice," Nanterre, Paris, March 12-14, 2008. https://www.jssj.org/wp-content/uploads /2012/12/JSSJ1-1en4.pdf.
Stake, Robert E. 1995. The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stake, Robert E. 2006. Multiple Case Study Analysis. New York: Guilford Press.
Strelnikova, Anna. 2018. "Old and New Residents of Former Industrial Neighborhood: Differences and Identities." Higher School of Economics Basic Research Program Working Papers, Series Sociology, WP BRP 84/SOC/2018. https://wp.hse.ru/data/2018/12/14/1144758663/84SOC2018.pdf.
Strelnikova, Anna, and Alexandrina Vanke. 2017. "Polevoe issledovanie industrial'nogo raiona: Strate-gii sbora i analiza vizual'nykh dannykh." Interaktsiia. Interv'iu. Interpretatsiia. 9(13):51-72.
Tilley, Christopher. 2012. Handbook of Material Culture. London: SAGE.
Tonnies, Ferdinand. [1887] 2017. Community and Society. London: Routledge.
Trushchenko, Ol'ga. 1994. "Prestizhnyi adres: Sotsial'no-prostranstvennaia segregatsiia v Moskve." Sotsiologicheskiizhurnal 0(4):120-126.
Tykanova, Elena V., and Anisya M. Khokhlova. 2014. "Traektorii samoorganizatsii lokal'nykh soob-shchestv v situatsiiakh osparivaniia gorodskogo prostranstva." Sotsiologiia vlasti 2:104-122.
Vanke, Alexandrina, and Polukhina, Elizaveta. 2018. "Territorial'naia identichnost' v industrial'nykh raionakh: Kul'turnye praktiki zavodskikh rabochikh i deiatelei sovremennogo iskusstva." Laboratorium: Russian Review of Social Research 10(3):4-34. https://doi.org/10.25285/2078 -1938-2018-10-3-4-34.
Varga-Harris, Christine. 2015. Stories of House and Home: Soviet Apartment Life during the Khrushchev Years. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Wacquant, Loi'c. 2022. "Rethinking the City with Bourdieu's Trialectic." City 26(5-6):820-830.
Walkerdine, Valerie, and Luis A. Jimenez. 2010. "Psychosocial Approach to Shame, Embarrassment and Melancholia amongst Unemployed Young Men and Their Fathers." Gender and Education 23(2):185-199. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2010.490202.
Watson, Sophie. 2021. Spatial Justice in the City: Space, Materiality and the Normative. London: Routledge.
Wirth, Louis. 1928. The Ghetto. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Woodward, Sophie. 2019. Material Methods: Researching and Thinking with Things. London: SAGE.
Yin, Robert. 1994. Case Study Research Design and Methods. London: SAGE.
Yin, Robert. 2003. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Zhelnina, Anna. 2019. "'Getto v khoroshem smysle' protiv 'betonnogo getto': Raionnye diskursy i renovatsiia v Moskve." Gorodskie issledovaniia i praktiki 4(2):21-36. https://doi.org/10 .17323/usp42201921-36.
Zhelnina, Anna. 2021. "Bring Your Own Politics: Life Strategies and Mobilization in Response to Urban Redevelopment." Sociology 56(4):783-799. https://doi.org/10.1177/00380385211059438.
Zhelnina, Anna. 2022. "Making Urban Futures at Your Kitchen Table: Temporalities of an Urban Renewal Controversy inMoscow."City&Community.https://doi.org/10.1177/15356841221135171.
Zhelnina, Anna, and Elena Tykanova. 2021. "'Igroki' na 'arenakh': Analiz vzaimodeistvii v gorodskikh lokal'nykh konfliktakh (sluchai Sankt-Peterburga i Moskvy)." Zhurnal issledonanii sotsial'noi politiki 19(2):205-222. https://doi.org/10.17323/727-0634-2021-19-2-205-222.
Zukin, Sharon. 2019. Obnazhennyigorod: Smert' izhizn'autentichnykh gorodskikh prostranstv. Moscow: Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy.
LIST OF QUOTED INTERVIEWS
• Woman, 50 years old, a representative of the housing co-op and resident of the luxury apartment building, with higher education
• Man, 51 years old, resident of a two-room apartment in the khrushchevka, musical instrument tuner, divorced, with higher education
• Woman, 22 years old, resident of the khrushchevka, university student
• Woman, 50 years old, resident of the khrushchevka, no information about occupation
• Woman, 60 years old, resident of the khrushchevka, no information about occupation
Как меняются отношения между
соседями в условиях дворовой застройки: жилищное неравенство и чувство несправедливости
Елизавета Полухина
Елизавета Полухина, НИУ ВШЭ, департамент социологии, Международная лаборатория исследований социальной интеграции. Адрес для переписки: НИУ ВШЭ, Мясницкая ул., 11, каб. 331, Москва, 101000, Россия. [email protected].
Статья подготовлена в рамках Программы фундаментальных исследований НИУ ВШЭ.
Автор выражает благодарность талантливым молодым исследователям Полине Чибисковой и Веронике Воробьевой за сбор эмпирических материалов. Автор также выражает признательность участникам научно-методического семинара НИУ ВШЭ «Моральные эмоции в социальных науках», особенная благодарность - научному руководителю автора Ольге Симоновой за внимание и обсуждение результатов данного исследования. Автор признательна двум анонимным рецензентам, комментарии которых помогли улучшить качество статьи.
Статья основана на концепции материальной культуры, раскрывающей роль материальной среды для социального мира. На эмпирическом материале показывается, как в условиях застройки меняются отношения между соседями, живущими в одном дворе, но в домах разного типа - доме хрущевской постройки (хрущевке) и новых многоэтажных домах. Показана иерархизированная материальная среда дворового пространства, сформированная в результате городской программы, предполагающей снос «ветхого» жилья, перепланировку и новую застройку территории. Эмпирическую базу работы составили 17 интервью с жителями и консьержами и многочисленные сеансы наблюдений, собранные в 2019 году в одном московском дворе.
В статье показано, что долгое ожидание сноса «ветхой» хрущевки, разрушение дворового пространства стали условиями для возникшей иерархизированной жилой среды, жилищного неравенства и конфликта. Одним из последствий застройки стали «стигматизация» и «вытеснение» жителей хрущевки, напряженные отношения с соседями из новостроек. В этом кейсе иерархизированная жилая среда выступает структурой, которая формирует и закрепляет жилищное неравенство в его многоаспектных измерениях - пространственном, социально-классовом и символическом.
Для интерпретации этого случая выбрана концепция Венди Боттеро, изложенная в ее работе «A Sense of Inequality» («Чувство неравенства») 2019 года. «Чувство неравенства» понимается здесь как специфическое чувство индивидов, возникающее в иерархических отношениях. В статье на основе анализа эмпирических данных предложено развитие идеи Боттеро и показано, что в данном контексте уместнее называть эту социальную эмоцию «чувством несправедливости», используя отсылку к социальным представлениям о нормах и должном. В этом смысле структурное жилищное неравенство является условием для возникновения интерсубъективного «чувства несправедливости» как социального последствия в этой ситуации.
Ключевые слова: соседство; жилищное неравенство; хрущевка; городской двор; чувство несправедливости; жилищная справедливость
