Based on ethnographic research conducted in wealthy and deprived areas of Mexico City, this article analyzes and discusses the contribution of place and class interaction in shaping urban segregation. Spatial isolation and social homogeneity are both the result of structural forces and cultural processes embodied in individual practices. Focusing on cultural processes, three main issues are explored: “the sense of place” in poor peripheries; the experience of “being-in-place,” or “being-out-of-place” among people coming from disadvantaged and privileged backgrounds; and the process of “othering” in urban encounters between social classes. We conclude that current processes give a new character to the experience of urban inequality, which deeply erodes social coexistence, recognition, and solidarity.
AguilarA.MateosP. (2011). Diferenciación sociodemográfica del espacio urbano de la Ciudad de México [Sociodemographic differentiation of the urban space in Mexico City]. EURE, 37(110), 5-30.
2.
BayónM. C. (2012). El lugar de los pobres: Espacio, representaciones sociales y estigmas en la Ciudad de México [The place of the poor: Space, social representations and stigma in Mexico City]. Revista Mexicana de Sociología, 74(1), 133-166.
3.
BayónM. C. (2015). La integración excluyente. Experiencias, discursos y representaciones de la pobreza urbana en México [The excluding integration. Experiences, discourses, and representations of urban poverty in Mexico]. Mexico City, Mexico: Bonilla Artigas.
4.
BayónM. C.SaravíG. (2013). The cultural dimensions of urban fragmentation: Segregation, sociability, and inequality in Mexico City. Latin American Perspectives, 40(2), 35-52.
5.
BilligM. (2005). Sense of place in the neighborhood, in locations of urban revitalization. GeoJournal, 64, 117-130.
6.
BourdieuP. (1999). Efectos de lugar. In BourdieuP. (Ed.), La miseria del mundo [Weight of the world: Social suffering in contemporary society] (pp. 119-124). Buenos Aires, Argentina: F.C.E.
7.
CassiersT.KestelootC. (2012). Socio-spatial inequalities and social cohesion in European cities. Urban Studies, 49, 1909-1924.
8.
CONEVAL (National Council for Evaluation of Social Development Policy) (2016). Informe de Pobreza en México 2014 [Mexico Poverty Report 2014]. Mexico City, Mexico: CONEVAL.
9.
CresswellT. (1996). In place/out of place. Geography, ideology, and transgression. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
10.
CresswellT. (2015). Place: An introduction. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
DuhauE. (2008). División social del espacio y exclusión social [Social division of space and social exclusion]. In CorderaR.Ramírez KuriP.ZiccardiA. (Eds.), Pobreza, desigualdad y exclusión en la Ciudad del SigloXXI (pp. 199-211). Mexico City, Mexico: Siglo XXI.
13.
DuhauE.GigliaA. (2008). Las reglas del desorden: Habitar la metrópoli [The rules of disorder: Inhabiting the city]. Mexico City, Mexico: Siglo XXI.
14.
GierynT. (2000). A space for place in sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 463-496.
15.
GilbertA. (2007). The return of the slum: Does language matter?International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 314, 697-713.
16.
GoffmanE. (1986). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
17.
HardingD. (2007). Cultural context, sexual behavior, and romantic relationships in disadvantaged neighborhoods. American Sociological Review, 72, 341-364.
18.
HarveyD. (1996). Justice, nature and the geography of difference. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
LamontM.MizrachiN. (2012). Ordinary people doing extraordinary things: Responses to stigmatization in comparative perspective. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 35, 365-381.
21.
LamontM.SmallM. (2008). How culture matters: Enriching our understanding of poverty. In LinA. C.HarrisD. R. (Eds.), The colors of poverty (pp. 76-102). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
22.
LinkB.PhelanJ. (2001). Conceptualizing stigma. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 363-385.
LowK. (2015). The sensuous city: Sensory methodologies in urban ethnographic research. Ethnography, 16, 295-312.
25.
MarcuseP. (2009). From critical urban theory to the right to the city. City, 13, 185-197.
26.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2011). Divided we stand: Why inequality keeps rising. Paris, France: Author. doi:10.1787/9789264119536-en
27.
PickeringM. (2001). Stereotyping: The politics of representation. New York, NY: Palgrave.
28.
ReayD. (2004). “Mostly roughs and toughs”: Social class, race, and representations in inner city schooling. Sociology, 38, 1005-1023.
29.
RelphE. (2008). Place and placelessness. London, England: Sage.
30.
RobertsB. (1995). The making of citizens. London, England: Routledge.
31.
RobertsB. (2002). Biographical research. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
32.
RodgersD. (2004). “Disembedding” the city: Crime, insecurity and spatial organization in Managua, Nicaragua. Environment and Urbanization, 16, 113-124.
33.
RubalcavaR. M.SchteingartM. (2012). Ciudades divididas: Desigualdad y segregación social en México [Divided cities: Inequality and social segregation in Mexico]. Mexico City, Mexico: COLMEX.
34.
SaravíG. (2009). Transiciones vulnerables: Juventud, desigualdad y exclusión en México [Vulnerable transitions: Youth, inequality and exclusion in Mexico]. Mexico City, Mexico: CIESAS.
35.
SayerA. (2005). The moral significance of class. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
36.
SeamonD.SowersJ. (2008). Place and placelessness (1976): Edward Relph. In HubbardP.KitchinR.ValentineG. (Eds.), Key texts in human geography (pp. 43-52). London, England: Sage.
37.
ShapiroI. (2002). Why the poor don’t soak the rich. Daedalus, 131(1), 118-128.
38.
TuanY. (1977). Space and place: The perspective of experience. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
39.
WattP. (2006). Respectability, roughness and “race”: Neighborhood place images and the making of working-class distinctions in London. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 30, 776-797.
40.
YoungA. (2010). New life for an old concept: Frame analysis and the reinvigoration of studies in culture and poverty. Annals, 629, 53-73.
