‘Super simple stuff?’: crafting quiet in trains between Newcastle and Sydney

Abstract

The demands passengers place on contemporary public transport systems are increasingly focused on providing a safe, comfortable and reliable transport experience. One expression of these demands is the recent introduction of designated quiet carriages to trains. The experience of travelling in these spaces has been given little academic scrutiny. Using a case study of the commuting experience between Newcastle and Sydney, New South Wales (NSW), Australia, this paper investigates the practices, relations and affective atmospheres of quiet carriages. The paper argues that passengers on trains come together to craft quiet through interactions between human and material actors. This crafting of quiet results in noticeably different quiet atmospheres at different times of day and in different parts of the journey. Drawing on participant observation including an auto-ethnographic account of travelling in a quiet carriage, the paper distinguishes between four types of quiet crafted by the passenger collective -sleepy and comfortable quiet, busy quiet, tense quiet and spooky quiet. These four types of quiet play upon the body with different intensities and some have stronger affects that linger after the completion of the journey.

Mobile devices and their effect on the sociality on Dutch Intercity trains

“…Below, we argue that (the experience of) sociality is the outcome of socio-material relations; an 'interplay' (Bissell 2010) or 'crafting' (Watts 2008;Hughes, Mee, and Tyndall 2017) of multiple aspects, such as 'the arrangement of train seats, timetables, windows, tickets, newspapers, rain clouds, mobile phones, rucksacks, railway cuttings, and all the social and technological flotsam of train travel' (Watts 2008, 712). Although these different aspects are all entangled, we draw them apart here for analytical purposes.…”

“…no talking), in order to reduce 'sensory infections' (Watts 2008), such as ringing mobile phone and loud conversations. They first emerged in the early 2000s in several global cities such as London, Boston, and New York, and have since been implemented more widely in the Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland and Japan (Hughes et al 2017). Butcher (2011) describes how such codes of conduct are not just disciplining but also comforting, as they provide clarity on how to behave.…”

“…Other factors that might influence the train's sociality are its design, personal belongings such as bags, and the time and duration of the travel. Numerous studies have shown how people use their bodies and belongings to claim their territory in public space and create shields of privacy (Lofland 1973;Watts 2008;Kim 2012;Hughes, Mee, and Tyndall 2017). Based on their research on metro use in New York City, Tonnelat and Kornblum (2017) conclude that people look for the most defendable territory, one that minimises contact.…”

“…This section outlines three phases of data-generation, of which particularly phase two (diary-keeping) has methodological novelty as participant, auto-ethnographic observations (e.g. Hughes, Mee, and Tyndall 2017;Watts 2008;Wilson 2011) and surveys (e.g. Lyons et al 2013;Clayton, Jain, and Parkhurst 2016) are more common when studying public transport behaviour (with some notable exceptions like Ocejo and Tonnelat's (2014) use of subway diaries).…”

“…Surrounded by familiar and unfamiliar strangers, travelling by public transport is an activity rarely performed alone (Thomas 2009;Bissell 2010Bissell , 2016Wilson 2011;Hughes, Mee, and Tyndall 2017). As such, trains, trams, metros and buses can be seen as places of potential encounter, although they are highly controlled spaces in terms of access and regulation.…”