Laco Toušek

Cílem textu je naznačit šíři záběru, kterou lze za pomoci konceptu sociální exkluze zaujmout ve vztahu k problému transformujících se sociálních nerovností v soudobých společnostech. V textu krátce představujeme genealogii konceptu a následně se věnujeme konkrétním formám, kterých sociální exkluze může nabývat v městském prostoru.

This book presents the results of our long-term research of Karlov, a workers´ colony in Pilsen demolished at the end of socialism. The aim of this book is to reconsider the value and significance of narratives representing the idealized past of respondents to the study of the perception and conceptualization of spatial and social transformation in the present.  We assume that although Karlov does not anymore exist materially, its collective representation offers the actors a specific frame of reference that can be used to understand and critically reflect the present (dis)organization of the built and social environment that could otherwise be incomprehensible for our respondents.
In the first chapter we deal with the above mentioned ideas and present our methods, ethical standing and our sources of inspiration ranging from Halbwachs to the socialist school of workers´ ethnographies.
In the second chapter Laco Toušek presents the processes of urbanization and industrialization in Pilsen, business success of the Škoda Works factory and specific strategies of the elites toward the ever present lack of housing for the growing number of workers. He then describes workers´ colonies in Pilsen and specifies material, demographic and social characteristics of Karlov.
The third chapter deals with narrative reconstruction of the Second World War. Although the consequences of bombardments proved fatal for the future of the colony, respondents do not ritualize war rememberingas traumatic, rather they use narratives on war to further reproduce and solidify their collective identity.
The next chapter written by Ilona Dvořáková analyses the conflicting representations of housing in Karlov by authorities and respondents in late socialism. These narratives are later contrasted with the present narratives of the former inhabitants. The question of living conditions in Karlov is dealt in the following chapter by Michal Růžička as well. He focuses on the structuring forces of everyday life experience, especially work in the factory and division of labour based on gender.
The final chapter by Petra L. Burzová seeks to theorize the foundations of narratives on collective identity among the respondents. The author concentrates on narrative strategy of Karlov former inhabitants – „the will to collective memory“.

Předkládaná zpráva je výstupem z projektu Analýza strachu z kriminality ve Velkých Hamrech, který pro Úřad vlády České republiky realizovalo Centrum aplikované antropologie a terénního výzkumu (CAAT) při Katedře antropologie Fakulty filozofické Západočeské univerzity v Plzni. Zpráva obsahuje závěry kvantitativního a kvalitativního terénního výzkumu provedeného v srpnu a září roku 2014.

The article focuses on the former working-class neighbourhood Karlov, built at the beginning of the 20th century by Skoda Works in Pilsen. We study the nowadays non-existing place in the context of the transforming urban space of an industrial metropolis, and its relation to its collective (witness) representations. Based on data from interviews with living contemporaries, participant observation during commemorative meetings and archival research, we study the negotiated changes in the representational strategies of “Karlovers”. In the article we study two forms of Karlov: commemorative Karlov, as it is remembered and produced by the former inhabitants of Karlov during their regular meetings, when they retroactively construct Karlov as a meaningful place and an ideal for life in urban environment. Then we attempt to explain why is this commemorative Karlov resisting to being identified with the remaining Karlov, that is, with physical and architectonical remains of the commemorated place.

In the chapter we intend to argue that our analysis of the limits and workings of tolerance and respect has to be spatially situated. A distinct place always constitutes the determinant delimiting the boundaries of transgression, i.e. what is considered ‘out of place’. In Western societies the issue of tolerance is inevitably related to the modes of production and control of the public urban space. Coming out of critical accounts of the public sphere/space, we argue that the idea of public space is far from cultural and social neutrality. Using the example of the marginalized groups of Roma and homeless people in the Czech Republic, we demonstrate the hegemonic and exclusionary modes of construction of the public space and the ways it serves as the basic instrument of identity politics, either integration or marginalization.

"In Pilsen’s Karlov"  is an exhibition catalogue presenting a 70-year history of the now defunct neighbourhood Karlov in Pilsen, Czech Republic. Karlov was built by Škoda Works in 1910 – 1913 to accommodate more than 3.000 of its workers. Placed between "Říšské [Jižní] předměstí" and the Bory airport, Karlov consisted of 10 streets spatially separated from the rest of the city’s build-up area. Being subordinated to the rhythm of the neighbouring Škoda Works, the inhabitants of Karlov witnessed all important milestones of the 20th century: formation of the Czechoslovak Republic in 1918, both world wars, as well as the firm establishment of the Communist regime afterwards. The final abolishment of Karlov, marked by the demolition of the last houses standing, merely illustrates Pilsen’s post-war urban development.

""The goal of the dissertation based on several years of field research in Pilsen conducted by a wide range of research methods is to analyze the production of space in relation to the examined homeless population. The production includes dominant representations of space and formal social control strategies, which make this population deviant, as well as spatial practices exercised by this population, which are labeled as deviant. In short, the dissertation deals with geography of the homeless and their control. The text is based on theories and findings of constructivist criminology, also on neomarxist and poststructural approaches in cultural geography and urban anthropology, which do not interpret space as an invariable and inert arena for reification of social processes, but as a dynamic cultural construct in symbolic, social and material unity.
As a result of urbanization and industrial revolution production of space in Western society from Early Modern Period takes place in two different, but not dichotomic spheres – public and private. Public and private spaces can be considered to be the key cultural categories, which constitute the character of space as well as social structure and everyday actions and behavior of people in modern society. Social status of the homeless automatically defines them as a population without any private space in the form of accommodation where they could exercise activities and satisfy needs that are culturally connected with such space (sleep, food, relax, social reproduction, hygiene, etc.). Nevertheless, it does not mean the homeless do not construct their own places that fulfill some functions of private space. However, they create such places in public space and also in space that can be labeled as residual. The character of residual space is usually so ambiguous, that it cannot be, apart from strict definition of legal ownership, in relation to its sense considered private or public. These places are empty and deserted spaces in urban environment, which at this moment are not being produced by dominant social forces and from the point of view of the majority they have no function. They are characterized by indifference, suppression of norms and their control.
In contrast, public space is defined by ambivalence. On one hand, it is open space for all citizens, on the other hand, it is characterized by tension resulting from confrontation of strangers. It is a sphere of constant conflict between current social order and practices of individuals whose actions can attack the order. Therefore public space is a primary sphere of power and social control, which is primarily focused on marginal social groups. On the basis of exercised strategies of public space social control and their interpretation we can state that the homeless perform transgression not because of the quality of their behavior, but because of its spatial context.
Constitutive element of deviation is the fact that the actions are meant to happen at a different place. According to Mary Douglas the homeless are out of place, because in public space they perform activities that do not belong there, but to private sphere. Said differently, the homeless violate dominant social and spatial order of society as they exist, or their behavior exists, in a wrong place. Geography of the homeless gives a fundamental and general finding that social relations and actions are always physically, symbolically and socially embedded in space. Homelesness, transgression, deviation or any other phenomenon cannot be examined without its relation to spatial structure as culture is always spatial.

"""

Za minulý rok byl pojem sociální vyloučení uveden v médiích skoro 770krát. 1 Oblíbený internetový vyhledávač Google indexuje jen v českém jazyce přibližně 15 tisíc dokumentů obsahujících toto sousloví. Avšak kdybychom stejným způsobem „pátrali “před deseti lety, stěží bychom narazili na jednu jedinou zmínku.

Abstract The article attempts to examine broadly the origin and the application of the focused interview method which was developed by Robert K. Merton in the 1940 s during his cooperation with Paul Lazarsfeld in the field of communication research. Although this method is frequently confused with so-called focus groups, author argues that the focus groups are rather legacy of the two different methodological sources than continuation of Merton's method.

Sociální a kulturní antropologie, dále jen antropologie, stojí jako každá empirická věda na provázaném vztahu mezi teorií a metodologií. Díky metodologickému arzenálu antropologové vytváří data , která v rámci analýzy interpretují skrze již existující koncepty a teorie, respektive na jejichž základě formulují koncepty a teorie nové. Takto naznačený lineární vztah je však spíše hypotetický, jakkoli to často metodologické učebnice zamlčují, neboť v rámci výzkumu reálně dochází k neustálému křížení mezi dedukcí a indukcí, teorií a daty, jejich vytvářením a teoretickou interpretací. Thomas H. Eriksen (2008:44–45) s odkazem na Godfreyho Lienhardta (1985) přirovnává vztah mezi teorií a empirií k dušené směsi králíka a slona, kdy k uvaření této směsi je zapotřebí jeden slon etnografie a jeden králík teorie, přičemž vtip je v tom, aby výsledný pokrm chutnal po králíkovi.
Specifický metodologický přístup v podobě dlouhodobého terénního výzkumu za využití primární metody zúčastněného pozorování (souhrnně v anglosaské tradici etnografie) je tradičně chápán jako to, co odlišuje antropologii od ostatních sociálně-vědních disciplín. V duchu této tradice můžeme s notnou dávkou jízlivé nadsázky říct, že zatímco sociolog měří od svého pracovního stolu abstraktní souvislosti mezi kvantitativními daty (trochu nepatřičně též nazývanými „tvrdá data“), jejichž „sběr“ sám neprováděl, a vytváří závěry o lidech či sociálních jevech, které nikdy neviděl či nezažil, antropolog resp. etnograf provádí převážně interpretace kvalitativních dat (velmi nepatřičně též nazývaných „měkká data“) o lidech, se kterými byl dlouhodobě v přímé a blízké interakci, a jevech, které sám zažil či se stal jejich svědkem...

In this paper, we compare the situation of the Roma in Hungary and the Czech Republic, their segregation and state policies before 1989, and the developments after 1989, particularly in the area of housing and housing policies. This paper attempts to show that both under the communist regime before 1989 and in the post-1989 system, forms of discrimination toward the Roma existed, resulting either in a certain level of deliberate segregation of the Roma (especially in Hungary) or their coercive assimilation, which often failed and resulted in problems of cohabitation in mixed neighbourhoods and consequently to the ultimate growth of segregate localities despite the original intentions of the government (as in the case of communist Czechoslovakia). We also intend to show that while both Hungary and the Czech Republic went through a successful process of democratic transition, the establishment of a democratic regime in itself has not proved to be a sufficient tool in combating the discrimination and segregation of the Roma. Nevertheless, our mission is not to conclude this paper with a fatalistic claim that, no matter the regime, the issue of Roma segregation is an inextricable one. Rather, we would like to analyze the main failures in the newly established democratic policies of Roma integration that have been undermining the generally acknowledged aim of intercultural reconciliation. Our aim is to formulate specific policy recommendations and find out what the two countries can mutually learn from their possibly similar experiences, where they differ, and what the causes of difference are

This paper focuses on spatial segregation of Roma in the urban environment of the Czech Republic after 1989. We stress the fact that the level of spatial segregation of Roma has increased dynamically in the past twenty years and, in addition, the increase does not correspond to the general level of spatial differentiation. We then discuss the main theoretical approaches within social science to the interpretation of residential segregation of ethnic groups and attempt to critically use these approaches in the analysis of the segregated population of Roma. We arrive at the findings that these theories, emphasizing either the voluntary aspect of minority residential strategies or conversely the constraints by which these strategies are determined, do not grasp the process of spatial exclusion of Roma population and that it is inevitable to turn our attention to the “anthropology of space”. We should concentrate on the ways in which the cultural nature of modern society manifests itself in the production of urban space. Our conclusion is that Roma segregation may be understood as a spatial purification from those who are – within the context of complex societies – constructed as the deviant other on the basis of the essentialization their (cultural) difference.

Keywords: essentialism, Gypsies, marginalisation, production of space, social control

The paper considers problems with data collection methods for social network analysis specifically so called name generators that are widely used in surveys and interviews. The issue is exampled by a research of homeless people in Pilsen, Czech Republic. Beginning with the general discussion of relational data and basic network terms, the article then covers methods of data collection with focus on name generators. A description of non-representative research design on social support networks of homeless people follows. The selected results show that personal networks are small, with high density and rather based on kin or friendship ties. Further, major parts of the ties are outside the homelessness. However, the ecological validity of the results is questioned. On the basis of the triangulation with a data from the qualitative interviews the paper concludes that the personal networks are rather “cognitive networks” than the actual social relations.
Keywords: social network analysis, personal networks, name generator, social support, validity, homelessness.

V následujícím přehledu se zaměříme na vybrané výsledky sčítání bezdomovců v Plzni, které v roce 2009 pro Magistrát města Plzně realizovalo Centrum aplikované antropologie FF ZČU. Sčítání, vycházející z Evropské typologie bezdomovství a vyloučení z bydlení (ETHOS) organizace FEANTSA, bylo zaměřeno na dvě, resp. tři kategorie bezdomovců. Na osoby, které jsou 1)bez přístřeší a nocují na ulici (parky, kanály, nelegálně obsazené budovy a pozemky apod.) či v noclehárnách pro bezdomovce a dále na osoby 2) bez domova, které jsou buď v 2a) azylových domech pro muže a ženy nebo v 2b) azylových domech pro rodiče s dětmi . Vzhledem k tomu, že se jedná o skupiny, jejichž sociodemografické charakteristiky jsou odlišné, prezentujeme tam, kde je to relevantní, zjištění jak úhrnem, tak za jednotlivé kategorie zvlášť.

Anthropologist Philippe Bourgois, currently employed by the University of Pennsylvania, became widely known in social sciences as an author of the book In Search of Respect: Selling Crack in El Barrio (1995), ethnography of inner-city street culture in East Harlem. The study meant a breakthrough as the author was the first person to win trust of drug dealer gang members. Subsequently he conducted a several year long intensive field research. The monograph, in a masterly way combining classical ethnographical style and a modern concept of social structuration, won him legitimately positive reviews and many awards, including Margaret Mead Award and C. Wright Mills Award. After almost fifteen years a new book Righteous Dopefiend was published, co-authored with a photographer and post-graduate medical anthropology student Jeff Schonberg.
Whereas in the previous publication Bourgois described a sub-culture of drug dealers, interpreting it as a manifestation of resistance, a counter-culture offering alternative means of status saturation in conditions of social inequality and exclusion, in the recent title he and Schonberg introduce the reader among drug addicts living in the streets of San Francisco, where the authors found desperation and suffering instead of resistance. They spent incredible twelve years by participant observation of twenty middle-aged intravenous heroin addicts, whose everyday concerns were to satisfy their basic living needs (especially those which result from their addiction) and fight to retain their dignity and respect in gears of marginalization and stigmatization.
The Introduction is devoted to a brief overview of methodology and a more detailed description of theoretical foundations and concepts used to examine the surveyed issue. Nine following topical chapters deal with different aspects of the informants’ life: ethnic differentiation, partner relationships, physical and social impacts of addiction, childhood, subsistence, parenthood, homosocial relations, everyday aspects of addiction and addiction therapy. Partial findings lead to theoretical, but more importantly, practical conclusions in the closing part of the book. Although the topics, thoughts and findings appear across the chapters and are occasionally repeated and the text structure is not a very systemic one, the book works as a compact and organic complex. With regards to the length of the survey the authors were also able to tie the text together using a linear plot taking place in the background following the trajectories of the key informants with occasional retarding and retrospective diversions over the course of more than a decade. As anticipated, many of them finish in a tragic way.
This novel-like plot increases the dramatic character and authenticity of the criticism of neoliberalism. The criticism is nowadays modern even among Czech left wing intellectuals. I can see a problem in the fact that similarly to a lot of other critics Bourgois and Schonberg define neoliberalism only very vaguely as a „political-economic model of capitalism“, adopting several general phrases from David Harvey (A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 2005), transforming the term in a bit unclear chimera. The term is then hanging over the text as deus ex machina and here and there, whenever necessary, is pointed out as the reason of marginalization, even in the context where conservatism used to be pointed out just several years ago. Evidence of the change of the concept can be found for example in the criticism of War on Drugs, one of the main tools of criminalization and marginalization in the USA. The repressive strategy, declared by Nixon at the beginning of the 1970’s, used to be labelled as an idea of authoritarian conservative thinking, but now it is taken as an example of a neoliberal policy. Current intellectual “epidemic” of the vague term of neoliberalism can also be identified in the fact that Bourgois did not mention it once in his previous book. On the contrary, he managed with only a brief criticism of conservatism, although the book was written in mid 90’s, the times when, according to the above mentioned David Harvey, neoliberalism had been a dominant doctrine for more than a decade.
Theoretical fundaments of neoliberal American society criticism are based on concepts taken from works of Bourdie, Foucault and Marx. Through the concepts of symbolic violence and habitus the authors deconstruct inequality, poverty and drug addiction as ontological categories and point out their rootedness in the social structure (and the agent’s habitus) and their unconscious reproduction by means of everyday actions, in the framework that leads to the categories being perceived as natural consequences of individual’s behaviour. The book includes very impressive demonstrations of specific displays of symbolic violence in the form of agents’ internalized racism, homophobia or a body technique. The concept of symbolic violence is connected with Foucault’s interpretation of biopower, exerted against the surveyed homeless, predominantly through their drug addiction, on the level of anatomo-politics (e.g. the way of abscess therapy or using informants’ bodies for medical students’ practice), as well as on the level of biopolitics (e.g. substitution therapy or on the contrary criminalization of addiction). Means of exerting biopower could be positive or negative, however, in both cases they can be displayed in the form of symbolic violence. It is probably not surprising that according to the authors the dominant forms of biopower in the current American society are definitely the negative ones. They have destructive impact on marginalized groups of population and they even constitute these groups. With a reference to Marx the theoretical fundaments are in the context of empiric data framed by a complex concept of lumpen-abuse. The concept refers to the process of creating and maintaining a non-productive part of population through social, psychological, physical and economic means of abuse produced by neoliberal society. However, lumpenization does not constitute a social category that would exist as a social class on its own, but is comprehended in the context of Bourdie’s system of classes and habitus as a form of subjectivity shared by agents and reproduced by their everyday practice.
Bourgois preserves his clear and readable ethnographic writing style and as in his previous monograph his fieldnotes, or in fact fieldnotes of both researchers, receive a lot of space. In this respect a methodology question might arise regarding the extent of interventions and alterations to the fieldnotes. The notes are in several places so detailed and include direct and extensive quotations of the informants’ utterances in situations where an exact recording would be very difficult that it makes one believe they were written in a significant retrospective. The strategy of transforming refined notefields into an independent literary work is definitely effective, as the authors themselves point out, in helping “to understand the pragmatic rationality for what at first sight may appear to be entirely self-destructive or immoral” (page 9). Moreover, the impact is enhanced by another effective documentary technique – photography. The text of the book is accompanied by several tens of photographs made by Jeff Schonberg. Captivating, raw and a bit underexposed black and white photographs do not function only as a staffage in the form of randomly chosen snapshots from field work as it is usual, but they are put on the same level as the text itself and they add a substantial emotional charge to the publication. The way they are presented and their quality turn the book into a full photo-ethnographical study. Nevertheless, I feel confident in saying that sometimes the photographs only work on the surface and are without more significant analytical importance although the authors point out that „embedding the photograph in text allows an appreciation of the effects of social structural forces on individuals“(page 9).
With regards to publishing the photographs featuring exposed faces of the informants who are often labelled as criminals in the text, a question of the research ethics arises as damage might have been done to the informants or their relatives, friends or contacts. The authors did not answer the question quite satisfactorily as they only changed the informants’ names. They cynically add that they had obtained informed consent for publishing the photographs. However, such consent protects the interests of the research institution against possible legal actions rather than the interests of the surveyed people who had voluntarily taken part in the research. They subsequently point out the key reason for publishing non-anonymous photographs, which was the wish of parties, the researchers as well as the surveyed population, to show real stories with real people striving to retain their dignity and respect of the others.
I see the most important strength of the book in its extension to applied anthropology, or more precisely to critically applied public anthropology. The authors unequivocally see anthropology as an engaged subject of science, which “in the early twenty-first century cannot physically, ethically, or emotionally escape the hardship of the lives of its traditional research subjects” (page 320). In accordance with this Bourgois and Schonberg do not formulate their conclusions only in theory, but stating they would otherwise became only “intellectual voyeurs“ (page 297), they step outside the comfort of intellectual academic discussions and formulate specific recommendations they think might lead to a remedy or at least improvement of the situation the observed population lives in. One of the recommendations, most of which we have to say is not original, is a socially controversial although pragmatic – and, as shown by criminology as well as medical studies also effective – provision of heroine on medical prescription.
Righteous Dopefiend is definitely a book aspiring to become “classics” and obligatory reading for students of social anthropology and associated disciplines. It has all necessary qualities. In the context of the surveyed issue it is extremely difficult to find a similarly intense and long term study getting to the very core of the ethnography approach and consistently making use of all its advantages. On the theoretical level the authors build on structural theories of power, social agency and inequality elegantly solving the agent-social structure problem and they overcome traditional dichotomy between individual and structural causes of marginalization. On the application level they provide recommendations for changing policies and they engage in the interest of their informants. And last but not least they are very successful in showing the reader a suggestive view of the surveyed environment. As sociologist Loic Wacquant rightfully stated, if Pierre Bourdieu, George Orwell and American photographer of the Great Recession Walker Evans had joined, they would have been unable to produce more revealing insight. Righteous Dopefiend is a breathtaking celebration of anthropology showing its role and contribution for understanding social structure of the modern society at the beginning of the third millennium.

Úvod Analýza sociálních sítí (social network analysis, zkratkou SNA) je interdisciplinární přístup ke studiu sociální struktury, který leží na pomezí mezi metateorií a analy-tickým nástrojem interpretace a vizualizace dat. Od ostatních exaktních a systema-tických přístupů k vytváření a analýze dat, např. klasického kvantitativního šetření, se liší především tím, že neklade důraz na atribuční data, ale na data relační, tj. na vztahy mezi jednotlivými aktéry (či jinými jednotkami analýzy) v rámci sociální struktury. Jinými slovy řečeno, pokud chápeme sociální strukturu v intencích A. R. Radcliffe-Browna (1940, s. 2) jako síť vztahů, tak cílem SNA není měření individu-álních charakteristik (věk, příjem, politické preference apod.) a vzájemných kore-lací mezi nimi, ale samotná povaha vztahů, jež mezi sebou aktéři navazují a které tvoří sociální síť. Analýza sociálních sítí je v dnešní době koherentní subdisciplí-nou, k níž existuje nepřeberné množství literatury a celá řada softwarových aplikací pro organizaci, měření a vizualizaci relačních dat. V této kapitole krátce nastíním genealogii tohoto přístupu a následně představím základní postupy vytváření a analýzy relačních dat. Na omezeném prostoru, který je pro jednotlivé kapitoly v této učebnici vymezen, nemohu pochopitelně zdaleka obsáhnout vše, proto je na konci uveden přehled základní literatury.