Marginality and banality in the segregated city: Reflections on the ‘riots’ in Oslo

Abstract

The Israeli invasion of Gaza in late December 2008 triggered demonstrations-or, as several commentators termed them, riots-in Oslo's city centre, as it did in other European cities. Many young people from the Oslo's 'immigrant-dense' suburbs participated in these protests. The demonstrations in December 2008 were followed by unusually violent protests on 8 and 10 January 2009. Oslo's city centre was turned into a battlefield, with vandalised shops and 'warlike' clashes between demonstrators and police. Media coverage emphasised that most of the 'rioters' were young males from immigrant backgrounds. Commentators speculated that the demonstrations offered these males an opportunity to vent their frustrations towards both Israel and mainstream Norwegian society. Explanations of the urban unrest were similar to those put forth in the aftermath of unrest in other European cities. It was suggested that Norwegian youth were taking the opportunity to release their pent-up rage as marginalised residents of stigmatised neighbourhoods. This paper does not attempt to identify any universal, deeper-lying causes of urban unrest. However, based on prolonged fieldwork in Oslo prior to, during and following the demonstrations, it is argued that contextual knowledge of ordinary life can be helpful when trying to understand such extraordinary events.

The directors of urban transformation: The case of Oslo

“…Gentrification processes can also improve tourism (thus bringing more jobs), and ‘in the case of the gentrification of an inner city neighbourhood, the residents can reap some benefits, for instance, by an increase in real estate value’ (Dente, 2014: 679). In a study of urban unrest, it was asserted that ‘it is expedient to refrain from reducing the phenomenon to one final explanation’ (Andersen, 2019: 1133). Extending this logic, we are hesitant to reduce our attempts at understanding the conditions and effects of what we have observed to that of ‘gentrification’ – also given the ‘collective uncertainty about how to define and operationalize gentrification’ (Brown-Saracino, 2017: 527).…”

Nordic responses to urban challenges of the 21st century

“…As increasingly acknowledged, social inequalities, exclusion and segregation are significant problems in several Nordic cities (Kauppinen, et al 2021;Ljunggren & Andersen, 2015;Nielsen & Andersen, 2019;Wessel et al, 2016;Oddson, 2016). In fact, violence in urban areas as well as urban unrest are also phenomena that are being analyzed in these societies (Andersen, 2019;Gerell, 2017;Malmberg et al, Östh, 2013;Sturup et al, 2019).…”

A very Nordic set of concerns?

“…Against this backdrop of urban fragmentation, recent work also interrogates the possibilities for urban conviviality. Gressgård and Jensen (2016) examine Nordic urban planning to support ethnic pluralism, while various scholars explore particular settings that either facilitate cross-ethnic cohesion or highlight inter-ethnic friction, from parks and other public spaces (Jacob & Hellström, 2010;Kuurne & Gómez, 2019;Lapiņa, 2016;Mouratidis & Poortinga, 2020;Pries & Jönsson, 2019;Simonsen et al, 2017;Stanfield & van Riemsdijk, 2019;Thörn, 2012;Trandberg Jensen & Jensen, forthcoming), to schools (Sernhede, 2018), to friendship networks and moments of urban mobilization (Andersen, 2019;Hansen, 2020;Keskinen et al, 2019;Merrill & Pries, 2019). One particular district of Copenhagen has received extensive scholarly attention: the "freetown" of Christiania was established in the 1970s by activists seeking a space "autonomous" from overweening state regulation, but has been subjected over the last 20 years to various attempts at "normalization", which have been studied for their impacts on equity, surveillance, and integration (Amouroux, 2009;Coppola & Vanolo, 2015;Jarvis, 2013;Ntounis & Kanellopoulou, 2017;Rannila & Repo, 2018;Winter, 2016).…”