2013
DOI: 10.1177/1367549413510419
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Conviviality in everyday multiculturalism: Some brief comparisons between Singapore and Sydney

Abstract: This article considers the question of conviviality in everyday multiculturalism. It elaborates the concept of ‘convivial multiculture’ through case studies from Sydney and Singapore. In comparing these two contexts, the article considers what underpins conviviality across three themes: spatial ordering, where consideration is given to the role of built environment and material furnishings of place in shaping encounters with difference; connecting and bridging work, where we discuss the concept of ‘transversal… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
96
0
3

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 158 publications
(102 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
3
96
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…A sense of cultural belonging was clearly fostered by spaces for interaction and shared experiences, which confirms previous research on spaces and enablers of conviviality (Wise 2005;Wise and Velayutham 2014) . This relates to both spaces that meet the social, cultural and religious needs of newly arrived communities, such as Muslim prayer rooms, and spaces that allow for interaction and engagement between new arrivals and other residents such as workplaces, schools, sporting facilities, shops or a welcoming church.…”
Section: Conclusion: Conditional Belongings and Contradictory Governmsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…A sense of cultural belonging was clearly fostered by spaces for interaction and shared experiences, which confirms previous research on spaces and enablers of conviviality (Wise 2005;Wise and Velayutham 2014) . This relates to both spaces that meet the social, cultural and religious needs of newly arrived communities, such as Muslim prayer rooms, and spaces that allow for interaction and engagement between new arrivals and other residents such as workplaces, schools, sporting facilities, shops or a welcoming church.…”
Section: Conclusion: Conditional Belongings and Contradictory Governmsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…They describe gestures as how we build, maintain and repair the architectures of our everyday intersubjectivity with others (known and unknown). Specific practices of recognition, enquiry, negotiation, incorporation, care and accommodation are not simple attributes of already-formed civic-minded people, but forms of labour which create relationship and meaning (Noble 2013;Wise and Velayutham 2014).…”
Section: The Conceptual and Methodological Challenges Of Convivialitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Things such as signs in different languages or use of on non-textual signification are shaped by laws and policies directing how we should treat others: urban planning, anti-racism programmes in schools, cultural sensitivity training in workplaces, laws against racial vilification, and good neighbour programmes in local government areas. These policies and programmes entail often ambiguous circuits of recognition: while some of these practices produce resentment, they also help manage protocols of contact and relationship, so the empirical task is to establish when and how they work, and the accommodations and resistances they produce, and the affects of multicultural hope and resentment that they foster (Wise and Velayutham 2014).…”
Section: The Conceptual and Methodological Challenges Of Convivialitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Their examples also confirm Valentine's claim that 'in particular spaces there are dominant spatial orderings that produce moments of exclusion for particular social groups' (Valentine, 2007:19). These moments of exclusion were also produced because of a lack of interulturual skills among the long-term residents in these areas resulting from a lack of the daily habits of 'intercultural civility' described by Noble (2013) and others (Sandercock 2003, Wessendorf, 2014Wise & Velayutham, 2014).…”
Section: Settling In An Ethnically Dominated Area Versus a Mixed Areamentioning
confidence: 99%