Is Doel, still Doel?

After seeing the documentary ‘an Angel in Doel’ by Tom Fassaert, we started wondering what factors shape the identity or existence of a town. Is it the people, or is it the place? Considering Doel’s history, the town was just an ordinary old village in Belgium that had developed slowly like many others. In the West, we are used to new expansion and industrialisation rapidly replacing the old. It may come to no surprise to us, then, that a village such as Doel is replaced by newer, larger structures for the harbour of Antwerp. However, it seems that Doel has managed to follow its own timeline and break with this tradition, now that it has been ‘saved’ and will most likely continue to exist for time to come. Activist initiatives are striving to create a new identity and emphasise societal value, for example by aiming to make Doel an ‘artistsvillage’ (Doel2020, n.d.). We wonder, what has been ‘saved’ exactly?

The change in the village of Doel can be viewed linearly by looking at how the situation was back in the days and comparing this to the situation of today. However, when analysing change it is also important to consider the concept ‘place’ as place also plays an important role in understanding the dimension of politics and power. The village of Doel is not the only space that was of influence on the change, the surrounding areas and the city of Antwerp also plays a role. We look at change linearly, but it also happens simultaneously (Massey, 2013). Doel challenges the idea of development we have, not following the ‘usual’ timeline of development we follow for expansion and industrialisation. It is surprisingly different as it has turned into a ‘ghost town’.

As mentioned in the intro, activist initiative Doel2020 is trying to put Doel on the map as a place that holds value. They do this by resisting the urban and industrial development that was planned for Doel, by striving to turn it onto a place for living, thriving, and creating. Raising awareness about the quality of the place of Doel, interestingly relates to the perspective of subpolitics of performing place, showing how performing a place can be done through various channels in order to demonstrate its value (Buizer, Turnhout, 2011). We think that the initiative Doel2020 is using this opportunity to create a new identity for Doel, not necessarily preserving the ‘old’ one.

In Doel the transformation brought by development has multiple implications. It not only affects the physical structure of the place, but also impacts the people living there and how they associate themselves with Doel. Previously, the citizens considered Doel as a place where they belonged from generations and would expect this to continue. However, this situation has changed. Now the people and their identity to Doel is associated with making themselves more valuable and recognize themselves as “a full-fledged community worthy of existing” (Doel2020, n.d.). The ‘saved’ Doel has little to do with the people, because either they all left or died. Overall, the place has been replaced entirely. So maybe Doel, is not Doel anymore. What do you think about this? What ‘makes’ a town?

Marinka Heupers, Sakhie Plant, Robin Schouten 

References:

Buizer, M., & Turnhout, E. (2011). Text, talk, things, and the subpolitics of performing place. Geoforum, 42(5), 530-538. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2011.05.004

Massey, D. (2013) Massey on Space. Social Science Bites. Sage. https://youtube.com/watch?v=Quj4tjbTPxw. 

10 redenen - 10 vragen. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.doel2020.org/page.php?ID=138