The Mosque As a Bridge Into Society?

Graduate School of Social Sciences MSc Sociology: Migration and Ethnic Studies

The mosque as a bridge into society?

A qualitative case study on the immigrants’ perspective on the role of the mosque in integration

Carmen Roebersen, 11779543 Supervisor: Dr. Adeola Enigbokan Second reader: Dr. Pamela Prickett Date: June 25, 2018 Words: 23.998

Abstract Previous studies on immigrant integration were predominantly based on statistical integration. The present research aims to a further understanding of immigrant integration through the immigrants’ perspective. By using qualitative research methods, observations and interviews, these perspectives have been examined. This empirical study of first and second generation migrants in the Ulu mosque in Lombok shows how placemaking activities help by creating a sense of community, a sense of belonging and access to markers and means. It details three salient components, namely, place existence and aesthetics, interior place design, and place activities, and also how these helped to form and sustain the Muslim community. This study argues that the Ulu mosque is beneficial and indispensable in the integration process and bridges the gap between native Dutch and Muslims. The results are presented as means for future research and policy implications.

Table of contents Abstract ...... 2 1 A case study about a unique mosque ...... 5 1.0 The Ulu mosque: a unique mosque in the Netherlands? ...... 5 1.1 The Ulu mosque and the contradicting discourse within Dutch society ...... 6 1.2 Context ...... 9 1.2.0 Religiosity: barrier or bridge? ...... 9 1.2.1 The multicultural nightmare in Lombok ...... 10 1.2.2 The multicultural dream in Lombok ...... 11 1.3 Theoretical Framework ...... 12 1.3.0 Integration: what is it? ...... 12 1.3.1 Existence & Aesthetics: Development of mosques in the Netherlands ...... 13 1.3.2 Placemaking at the mosque ...... 15 1.3.4 Belonging and community building ...... 17 1.4 Methodology ...... 19 1.4.0 Research methods ...... 19 1.4.1 Selection of respondents ...... 22 1.4.2 Who are the respondents? ...... 22 1.5 Overview ...... 23 2 The existence of the mosque: A metaphor for Muslims and their position in Dutch society .... 25 2.0 Introduction ...... 25 2.1 A ‘visible’ mosque? ...... 25 2.1.0 What is the problem of (non-)visibility? ...... 25 2.1.1 The visibility and aesthetics of the Ulu mosque: an exception or an example? .... 26 2.2 The existence of the mosque: who belongs? ...... 30 2.2.0 Introduction ...... 30 2.2.1 The role of the Ulu mosque in community building and integration into society . 31 2.2.2 Who belongs to these markets? ...... 33 2.2.3 The market as a centre for community building ...... 35 2.2.4 The market as a two-way process of integration ...... 36 2.3 The meaning of the mosque: how to belong? ...... 38 2.3.0 Introduction ...... 38 2.3.1 Is the mosque still a spiritual place? ...... 39 2.3.2 New functions of the mosque? ...... 40 2.4 Conclusion ...... 46

3 Place design of the mosque: Networking in the mosque? ...... 48 3.0 Introduction ...... 48 3.1 The ‘kebab factory’, more than just a restaurant ...... 48 3.2 The Muslim community and economic opportunities ...... 50 3.3 Placemaking at the youth centre ...... 52 3.4 Going beyond religious convictions ...... 54 3.4.0 Silent room ...... 54 3.4.1 ‘Friendship’ between the church and the mosque ...... 56 3.5 Men and women area: a place for discussion? ...... 57 3.5.0 Introduction ...... 57 3.5.1 Men area: A school for norms and values? ...... 58 3.5.2 Women area: A school for norms and values?...... 58 3.5.3 The creation of trust within these areas ...... 59 3.5.4 The community and economic placemaking activities...... 60 3.5.5 Mosque or childcare? ...... 61 3.6 Meet & Greet: the importance of a community? ...... 61 3.7 The paradox of a community ...... 63 3.8 The community: desirable or not? ...... 64 3.9 Conclusion ...... 65 4 Conclusion and Discussion ...... 67 5 Bibliography ...... 72 6 Appendix ...... 80 6.0 Appendix A. Topiclist ...... 80 6.1 Appendix B. Codebook ...... 81

1 A case study about a unique mosque 1.0 The Ulu mosque: a unique mosque in the Netherlands?

“It is a place of unity, we are all different, but in the mosque we are one [..]in the mosque people don’t judge you based on nationality, because religion stands above nationality. Religion doesn’t know colour or race” (Mounir, Dutch-Turk, 26).

With this statement Mounir addresses the desire of the Ulu mosque to function as an overarching religious and socio-cultural place in Utrecht. After the opening of the new mosque in 2015 newspaper articles arose with titles such as, “a mosque for the whole neighbourhood” and “Ulu mosque bucked with prayer area ‘for everyone’” (Huisman, 2013: Hoekstra, 2015). The openness and welcoming attitude of the board of the Ulu mosque creates among its visitors a representation of the diversity that graces multicultural Lombok, where over 40 different nationalities live (Brandpunt, 2017). The prospective imam of the Ulu mosque explained that the goal and duty of the originally Turkish mosque is to deal with the diversity in the neighbourhood, and that their divers visitors, from Moroccans to Syrians, are all welcome (O., personal communication, February 26, 2018). By providing a multi-functional building which has religious and sociocultural functions this building obtained additional meaning that goes beyond religious meaning. Placemaking activities transit this building into a meaningful place (Mackenzie, n.d.). This is done by for example practising prayers in Arabic and in Dutch. Furthermore, it is manifested in providing teaching rooms for learning new languages such as Dutch and Arabic and in providing conference rooms1. In addition, the board of the Ulu mosque organizes markets and dinners for the whole neighbourhood to involve neighbours. On the ground floor of the mosque a restaurant, called “the ‘kebab factory’” is situated. According to the prospective imam this restaurant is meant to function as a meeting place for the neighbourhood. There are different reasons behind these inclusive activities of the mosque. As mentioned before diversity of the neighbourhood is a reason. Other reasons are the aim to pursue the will of the Prophet, and to counter the negative stereotypes on Muslims by providing native Dutch insight into Islam. Where sociologists Edwards, Christerson and Emerson (2013) argued that religion is capable of producing social inequality, this mosque seems to aim for equality and contradicts the idea of religion producing inequality.

1 The conference rooms are mainly used by the municipality of Utrecht, UNESCO or the green left-wing party. 5

Another remarkable aspect of the mosque is its existence in general. When visiting Lombok, the Ulu mosque, literally translated as “big mosque”, does not remain unnoticed. Next to its size, the location nearby central station contribute to its visibility. Despite the postmodern architecture which is reflected in the use of brick and glass, the mosque remains recognizable as a mosque with its enormous minarets and with its dome. The five storeys high mosque stands out against the three storeys high living houses surrounding the mosque. Overall, the visibility, location, multi-functionality, and transparency of the Ulu mosque and the inclusive approach of the board of the Ulu mosque, makes the Ulu mosque unique in the Netherlands according to philosopher and religious scholars Landman and Wessels (2005).

1.1 The Ulu mosque and the contradicting discourse within Dutch society

“Many mosque associations have been the victim of threats, violence and hatred. Despite these awful incidents the Islamic Association in the Netherlands maintains and claims her proactive role in society; she has continued unabated to be a valuable contribution to Dutch society for the purpose of cohesion and peace.” (ISN, 2017)2

The ‘bridge’ mentioned in the title on the front page of this report assumes that there is a ‘gap’. This gap is manifested in the idea that Islam differs from the ‘Dutch’ culture. Native Dutch perceive Islam as less civilized and as a threat to ‘their’ Dutch way of life (Smeekes, Verkuyten & Poppe, 2011). These perceptions of native Dutch have far-reaching consequences for Muslims and Islam such as the statement of ISN (2017) shows. Muslims and mosques are usually not desired in neighbourhoods. For Muslims this means that instead of being tolerated, they have to conquer their place in society (Sunier, 2009). Muslims feel often misunderstood and not accepted in Dutch society, which results in Muslims who feel they do not belong in the Netherlands (Ahmad & Szpara, 2003; Slootman & Duyvendak, 2015). These perspectives on the position of Muslims in Dutch society illustrate the gap between native Dutch and Muslims. The position of Muslims is also reflected in the less visible and marginal spaces in which mosques are located, which contribute to maintaining the feeling of not being recognized by the native Dutch population (Tamimi Arab, 2013). Marginalization of Islam is

2 This quote comes from the annual report of 2017 of the overarching Islamic association in the Netherlands, Diyanet where the Ulu mosque is part of. It is stated in the context of the occupation of the ISN Tehvit Mosque in Venlo. Retrieved from http://isndiyanet.nl/isn-jaarverslag/isn-verslag-activiteiten-2017/ 6 usually a result of the dominant anti-Islamic sentiments in the political and public discourses in the Netherlands, which comes close to Islamophobia. Despite the marginal position in which most mosques find themselves, it is asserted that the aesthetics of mosques are important in understanding the political, social and cultural position of Islam in society. These aesthetics can be beneficial in the process of integration and creating a sense of belonging (Tamimi Arab, 2013: Landman & Wessels, 2006). The scientific discourse in Europe also focuses on the negative aspects of Islam, by perceiving Islam as barrier to immigrant integration (Van Tubergen, 2007; Korteweg & Yurdakul, 2009; Ager & Strang, 2010; Vliegenthart, 2007). Contradicting the European discourse, spiritual spaces are in scientific literature in the United States described as social service hubs (Ley, 2008). These social service hubs contribute to integration by providing information and, social and economic assistance, according to sociologist Hirschman (2004). Furthermore, spiritual places are known for fostering a sense of community and a sense of belonging. Thus despite the continuous pressure of host societies in Europe, on integration of immigrants into mainstream society (Arango, 1998), the focus in scientific literature remains on structural integration. The meaning which immigrants themselves allocate to religion should not be overlooked. Religion remains a big part of the identity of migrants after arriving in their country of destination and religion remains an important social force in society (Strang & Ager, 2010: Edwards, Christerson & Emerson, 2013). This, in combination with the growing number of Islamic immigrants and the growing number of mosque visits, demonstrates that religion and Islam remains important in the Netherlands (NOS, 2017). In the case of the Ulu mosque, the board of the mosque aims for closing the gap, by providing meeting places, opening up for all ethnicities and including the neighbourhood in their activities. In combination with the aesthetics and visibility, the Ulu mosque suggests to contradict the discourse on Islam as barrier to integration. By clarifying the perspective of the immigrants’ on religion and on their integration this research aims to contribute to new insights into religion and integration. Therefore the research question will be:

How does the Ulu mosque contribute to the integration process of first and second generation migrants in terms of belonging, community building and access to markers and means?

The political and public discourses which lead to the idea of Islam being a barrier to immigrant integration are reflected in the aesthetics of the mosque. Anti-Islamic sentiments in the politic discourse and struggles over power lead to marginalized spaces and sometimes even to the prohibition of mosques, according to professor in religious studies Tamimi Arab (2013). However, the existence of a spiritual place is important in creating a sense of community. Furthermore the aesthetics and visibility of a mosque can provide a sense of belonging. This research will contribute to extending literature on placemaking, aesthetics and immigrant religion by focusing on the role of the Ulu mosque in creating a meaningful place by examining the next sub-question: • How does the Ulu mosque creates a meaningful place and thereby contribute to the integration process of first and second generation migrants in terms of belonging, community building and access to markers and means? The Ulu mosque offers more than spaces for religious practices, they offer meeting rooms, teaching rooms, a cafeteria and so on. Thus, next to serving as a religious places, it also functions as community centre. As discussed before religious places are known for their function as social service hub. Communities are created at places where social capital, advices and practical services are shared to assist each other during periods of settlement (Ley, 2008). These community building processes reinforce belonging and reinforce distribution of information between people about housing, economic, and educational opportunities and hereby fostering the integration process instead of hampering it. To assemble a complete picture of placemaking activities the interior place design will be examined: • How does the place design of the Ulu mosque contribute to the integration process of first and second generation migrants in terms of belonging, community building and access to markers and means? The aim of examining this research is to contribute to the debate about immigrant integration and religion. It contributes to existing literature by applying qualitative research methods instead of quantitative research methods. Most research on integration in the European context is done on structural integration3, by utilizing quantitative research methods. This study goes beyond this, by using qualitative research methods and a different perspective on integration. Integration will not be measured as structural integration, but as integration in

3 Structural integration is more ‘functional’ focusing on how immigrants are incorporated into societal structures (Erdap & Oeppen, 2013). The focus in structural integration is on: How well is ‘their’ educational attainment? ‘Their’ language acquisition? And do ‘they’ lag behind on the labour market? Within this literature, they focus on how many times people visit the mosque and if this correlates with their outcomes on the labour market and educational attainment. 8 terms of belonging, community building and access to markers and means. Integration will be perceived from the immigrants perspective and as a two-way process. This study will demonstrate the value of talking with people, instead of talking about people. By applying qualitative research methods, this study extends existing literature by perceiving integration through the perspective of the subject of investigation and by focusing on placemaking, belonging and community building.

1.2 Context This section illustrates why different outcomes of religion on integration can be found and in which context this is occurring. Further, the background of Lombok is described, to understand the context in which the Ulu mosque is located (Dey, 2001). First, the history of Lombok is discussed. Described will be how Lombok became multicultural and if it always has been the multicultural dream4 citizens call it now. Secondly, it delineates the current situation and explores who exactly lives in this multicultural neighbourhood. It describes exceptional neighbourhood in which the mosque is located.

1.2.0 Religiosity: barrier or bridge? Immigrant religiosity in studies in the United States is often experienced as beneficial for integration into society instead of a barrier, according to sociologists Foner and Alba (2008). Mosques in the United States function as “mobilization vehicles and schools of civic participation” (Jamal, 2005). Hirschman (2004) states that the three R’s of immigrants religious communities, namely resources, refuge and respect, can be beneficial for integration. Religious participation offers a refuge in creating belonging and participation in times of loss. Mosques provide a place where migrants experience respectability, in contrast to what migrants experience in society. Furthermore, spiritual places offer services, such as providing information about jobs, education, housing and health (Hirschman, 2004). Studies executed in Europe find the opposite. Here, religion is suggested to be problematic, dividing society and to be a barrier to integration (Foner & Alba, 2008). The focus in the public discourse is mostly on strong boundaries, between ‘us’ versus ‘them’, between the ‘native Dutch’ and the ‘Muslims’ or ‘Western values’ versus ‘Islamic values’ (Korteweg & Yurdakul, 2009). The secularized state contributes to that, by making the

4 The multicultural dream entails the idea of "(celebrate) hybridity, impurity, intermingling, the transformation that comes from new and unexpected combinations of human beings, cultures, ideas, politics, movies, songs" (Joppke, 1996. p.488) 9 contrast between religious and non-religious even sharper (Van Tubergen, 2007). Anthropologist Cesari (2004, P.176) states: “The higher degree of secularization in Europe means that forms of social and cultural activity based on religious principles are frequently seen as illegitimate”. This is especially applicable to Islam, which norms and values are perceived as contradictory to those of a secularized state. The negative connotation Islam has is reflected in the desired integration of Muslims; their norms and values have to change to be perceived as integrated. These different discourses can be understood by knowing the context they occur in. Firstly, the composition of migrants. In Europe Muslims are a relatively large disadvantaged minority group, because of its labour migration background. In the United States the Muslim population is a relative small immigrant group and positively selected, thus mainly high skilled professionals. Secondly, the Netherlands in one of the most secularized countries of the world. Or as sociologist Casanova (2003, P.19) stated: “Americans think that they are supposed to be religious, while Europeans think that they are supposed to be irreligious.”. This results in perceiving norms and values of Islam as clashing with those of the secularized state. Thirdly, important in understanding the differences is the historical legacy of church- state relations. The early separation of state and church in the United States produced a wide diversity of religions, or a ‘religious marketplace’, while in Europe the state churches remained (Brooks Holifield, 2014).

1.2.1 The multicultural nightmare in Lombok Lombok (see Figure 1) has not always been the multicultural dream it is nowadays. The lack of integration discussed in different debates was also applicable to the situation in Lombok in the 1980’s. Immigrants were not integrated and major conflicts arose between the different ethnic groups living in the neighbourhood. Especially the opening of Figure 1. Buurt (neighbourhood) 75 indicates the Ulu mosque located in a living house the location of Lombok in Utrecht. Source: Alleato (2011). in 1979 caused a lot of conflict and

10 inconvenience (Meder & Dibbits 1999). The municipality tried to improve integration with a top-down approach, but this failed. The native Dutch in Lombok felt that they were neglected and that immigrants could do anything without complying to the rules. This was based on the argument that the municipality was afraid to get accused of discrimination, which eventually this led to more conflict (Wouters, 1985). It was not that migrants did not want to integrate, some of them wanted to learn the Dutch language. However, learning Dutch was not in line with the rules for labour migrants and the consequence was that they got fired (Zuithof, 2003). During the 1960’s labour migrants settled in Lombok because it was closely located to industry areas. Therefore the first labour migrants who came from Morocco and Turkey settled in Lombok (Dibbits & Meder, 1999). Assuming that this was only temporary, they were placed in guest houses. However, it turned out that these labour migrants stayed longer and family reunification came up. Because of the long waiting lists for rental properties, owner-occupied properties in Lombok were popular among labour migrants. Unfortunately due to the recession in 1970’s many labour migrants became unemployed, which caused Lombok to be a dilapidated neighbourhood and perceived by people living in Utrecht as the Kasbah (Meder & Dibbits, 1999)5.

1.2.2 The multicultural dream in Lombok Nowadays Utrecht is a city with a relative positive attitudes towards minorities (Connor, 2009). Lombok is still a multicultural neighbourhood with in 2018 only 57.5% of the population being native Dutch and 12.9% of other western nationalities (Gemeente Utrecht, 2018). The three biggest immigrant groups represented in Lombok consist of 10.9% of Moroccan descent, 8.9% of Turkish descent, 2.9% of Surinamese descent and 6.8% consist of citizens with another non-Western immigrant background. This neighbourhood with over 40 different nationalities is, by its own citizens, called the multicultural dream. For many people it is a well-considered choice to live in Lombok, people want to be part of a ‘multicultural dream’ such as Lombok. Because of this well-considered choice to live here, these people dare to take the lead in the neighbourhood, which results in active newcomers. These newcomers come up with many new initiatives, which are financed by the

5 Kasbah is a term of abuse, a negative association with foreigners and decay of the neighbourhood used by people living in Utrecht, which entails a picture about how people perceived Lombok and migrants living in Lombok in these days. budget they receive from the municipality (Zuithof, 2003; De Groot & Van Laar, 2012). This active civic participation is unique for a multicultural neighbourhood such as Lombok. These ideas vary from elderly who want to play bingo to Turkish-Dutch girls who want homework support (Zuithof, 2003). Sociologist Beate Volker (in Zuithof, 2003), confirms that binding among residents of Lombok is an important factor in these outcomes (Zuithof, 2003). The responsibility and self-reliance can be explained by their own well- considered choice to live in Lombok. Binding within communities is known for more willingness to participate in events and activities and lessens the criminality rates, and if there is criminality citizens are willing to intervene (Zuithof, 2003). For example in 1993 the Turkish-Dutch youth caused a lot of nuisance in Lombok (De Groot & Van Laar, 2012). The board of the Ulu mosque was aware of this, they took responsibility and came up with the idea to create a Ulu youth centre, which was funded by the municipality. This placemaking activity solved the problem of nuisance and provided a place for the youth where they can get homework support and attend multiple workshops such as job application training.

1.3 Theoretical Framework 1.3.0 Integration: what is it? Integration is a widely discussed topic, however, the meaning of the concept and what it includes changes throughout the years and remains vague (Schinkel, 2008). Most research focuses on structural integration of immigrants, where religion usually is seen as barrier to integration. However, argued is that integration should not be seen as solely the responsibility of immigrants. Integration can also be perceived as a two-way process where both immigrants and native Dutch should contribute to integration outcomes (Fleischmann, 2016). Remarkable is, is that when focusing on ‘their’ [immigrants] integration outcomes, the migrants’ perspective is not included. Therefore, this research will focus on the by immigrants experienced integration. It will explore the meaning of the mosque and its community for the people in the context of rising resistance towards Islam and towards the construction of mosques. The focus will be on how integration is perceived in terms of a sense of belonging and a sense of community (Duyvendak, 2011). Furthermore it will focus on integration in terms of access to markers and means. With this is meant that the mosque functions as social service hub and provides access to housing, health, education, employment or to social connections

12 and facilitators such as language, cultural knowledge and safety and stability, according to psychologists Ager and Strang (2008). Thus, integration will be perceived through the immigrants’ perspective and includes in the present study: 1) belonging, 2) community building, and 3) access to markers and means.

1.3.1 Existence & Aesthetics: Development of mosques in the Netherlands To understand the position of mosques in society nowadays, the development of mosques will be highlighted in this paragraph. The small number of mosques6 kept on being stable throughout the years, however the number of ‘Schuilmoskeeën’ decreased7. The small and stable number of mosques is remarkable when being aware of the increasing number of weekly mosque visits (see Figure 2 and 3). Figure 2. Turkish 1st and 2nd generation migrants who visit the mosque weekly The development of visible mosques started during the 1970’s when the Dutch government allotted a minor contribution to organize prayer areas for Muslims (Landman & Wessels, 2005). With the little money they had, they were able to rent a small store, garage, or old school building. Over the years the number of Muslims increased and Muslim communities organized themselves better, which resulted in one national organization.

6 Compared to the number of Catholic churches (1.500) and Protestant churches (2.000) there is relatively a small amount of mosques (500) in the Netherlands. 7 Translated as ‘Shelther Mosques’. Which is the name for mosques who were hidden in old school building or vacant stores and located in deprived neighbourhoods (Roose, 2009).

During the 1990’s the Muslim Figure 3. Moroccan 1st and 2nd generation migrants who visit the mosque weekly communities advocated for bigger mosques, however municipalities and local committees opposed this request. This resulted for example in rejection of the construction plans of the Aya Sofya mosque in Amsterdam-West (Landman & Wessels, 2005). The mosque was only allowed if they built a smaller mosque which only functioned as mosque for Muslims within that area. This struggle concerning the construction of the mosque is not an exception. Many mosques have to adapt their plans to meet the plans of the municipalities, these plans are often based on anti-Islamic sentiments. The policy discourse, which sees the visibility of Islam in public spaces as a major problem, is acted upon (Landman & Wessels, 2005: Maussen, 2004). A mosque is seen as depreciation of the environment and not experienced as being aesthetic, therefore mosques are often placed in marginal spaces and not presented in public spaces (Kuppinger, 2008). If the mosque does not match with the desired spatial requirements of the authorities, which often base their opinion on anti-Islamic sentiments, the authorities use their position as tool to negatively impact mosque projects. These spaces are by authorities seen as not having a social meaning, but as spaces which can be used to expand their social position (Donley, 1987). Or as political scientist Maussen (2004, P.2.) stated in the case of Rotterdam: “Policy discourses on mosque establishment in Rotterdam in this period shows how socio-economic inequalities and cultural biases get produced, reproduced and contested as key actors ascribe various meanings to the presence of Muslim communities in the city.”. Due to the marginalized position of mosques, Muslims are kept away from the city’s dominant image and often situated in lower class neighbourhoods with less political influence (Kuppinger, 2008). However, representing Muslims in the city’s image is for them a step towards broader public recognition and equal participation. Especially when focusing on the process of integration, participation and acceptance the solution cannot be found in placing the mosque in invisible places such as hidden garages, old churches, school, offices or somewhere outside the city centre (Tamimi Arab, 2013). Schinkel (In Ertoçu & Bugdaci, 2009) argues that the marginalization of mosques is not only a result of the policy discourse, but also of the public discourse which sees mosques as “breeding places for terrorists”. This discourse leads to a lot of commotion in a neighbourhood when the plans of constructing a new more visible mosque are revealed (Cañas, 2008) Therefore, mosques are often placed in places where they are surrounded by prisons, mental institutions, hospitals, cemeteries, asylum centres, highways and empty spaces, far away from the civilized world (Tamimi Arab, 2013). Or as Foucault (in Tamimi Arab, 2013) would describe these spaces: “spaces outside society where otherness is central”. However, Read (2012) states that these spaces are not just spaces. From the outside buildings look like meaningless ‘dull’ buildings, but on the inside the place is by a lot of people experienced as a meaningful space. It facilitates values, it is a world “an sich”. When, in the 1990’s the Muslims tried to advocate for their rights, their main argument was that they needed a space as well, because they did not want to feel “as strangers” any longer (Landman & Wessels, 2005). Such a place is of major importance because first and second generation migrants need a place where they feel connected to, for emotional support and finding a sense of belonging which is necessary for integration into society (Brettell, 2003). These mosques and especially the aesthetics and visibility can function as a facilitator in the feeling of belonging and therefore in integration. Next to the visibility of the mosques, the role of the mosques in the Netherlands changed as well. The positive role of mosques in society is more and more recognized and seen in different cities throughout the Netherlands. A study done in a mosque in Rotterdam shows the importance of mosques for its users. Muslims looking for help are more likely to contact the mosque than contacting professional institutions. This is due to the fact that they feel more connected to the mosque and that the mosque is perceived as a lower threshold (Platform31, 2015). In Lombok the Ulu mosque is opening up for everyone and tries to include Muslims and native Dutch in pursuing the will of the prophet. In the northern part of Utrecht something else is occurring. There, a mosque is accused of being too fundamentalist and raising children with aversion of Dutch society (Algemeen Nederlands Persbureau, 2015). Thus, mosques can have a lot of impact upon the perspectives of users and of the neighbourhood. Therefore it is important to get a grip on the impact of a mosque and how this impact can be used in a responsible way. Still, the whole picture of the role of mosques and what this exactly means for people who rely on help of mosques is unknown.

1.3.2 Placemaking at the mosque Since the Ulu mosque is aiming for being a religious place and a socio-cultural place, many different placemaking activities take place. Theorists describe placemaking activities as a “space plus meaning” (Donofrio, 2010, p.152). The meaning of a place changes and evolves over time, since places are social constructions which can be interpreted and reinterpreted in different ways by different people. Placemaking activities are fostered by interactions

15 between people and places, but also by interactions between people (Saar & Palang, 2009). Sociologists Mazumdar and Mazumdar (2009) describe that the relationship between community and place is an important and powerful actor in placemaking activities which effectively shape the physical and social character of a certain place. Therefore this study will focus on the meaning of places, but also on the meaning of relations between people in these places. Placemaking regarding Lombok is high on the agenda of the municipality of Utrecht (Gemeente Utrecht, 2017). Creating places where people attach symbolic value to, where they want to identify themselves with, and like to spend their time is what placemaking means for the municipality of Utrecht (Gemeente Utrecht, 2017). The Ulu mosque is a place where the relationship between place and community strengthens the identity of people. The mosque demonstrates beliefs and values of Muslims through its aesthetics (Mazumdar & Mazumdar, 2009). According to urban planners Markusen and Gadwa (2010) placemaking entails more than only interactions, it provides a place where new jobs and incomes are created. It creates a place where knowledge and ideas are produced and reproduced. For example when a spiritual place functions as a service hub, placemaking occurs through providing information and assistance during the integration process (Dyck, 2005). This is partly related to serving the liveability of places by placemaking activities. Liveability outcomes include heightened public safety, community identity, increased access to housing, jobs, incomes and knowledge and collaboration between civic and non-profit organizations (Markusen & Gadwa, 2010). This study will examine the relationship between placemaking activities, through the aesthetics, visibility, community, use and existence of the mosque, and integration. The placemaking activities of the Ulu mosque are mainly based on their aim for inclusion and transparency. Their aim for including the whole neighbourhood and serving as a spiritual place ánd sociocultural place, has different outcomes for the experiences and meaning people attach to these placemaking activities. For example opening up for other religions creates placemaking by making space for a plurality of spiritual experiences. But the negotiations about the aesthetics of the mosque and the final result contribute to how the mosque is experienced and valued. The mosque provides spaces for meeting people and hereby providing an opportunity for community building, therefore this study will also focus on placemaking through interactions between people.

1.3.4 Belonging and community building Placemaking practices are also known for fostering a sense of belonging (Benson, Jackson, 2012). This study argues that the existence of the mosque appears to be important in creating a sense of belonging. Religious historian Mayer (2007, p.8) declared: “the weekly visit to the temple is like a mental return to the homeland” or “an expansion of the homeland to the hosting country”, which increases the feeling of belonging and feeling at home. Once migrants enter the country of destination they often tend to become more religious, due to when arriving in a new country, one gets more aware of its own identity and identity is closely related to religion (Mayer, 2007). Religious places tend to play an important role in this integration process in terms of belonging and feeling at home (Foner & Alba, 2008). These spiritual places offer people a feeling of home and provide comfort. It is a place where people can deal with death, suffering and loss of everything they left behind in the country of origin, such as families, friends and norms and values (Hirschman, 2004). The feeling of loss experienced by migrants after leaving their home country, can lead to the practise of religious rituals and prayers in the native tongue. The use of the native language can provide emotional connection, mainly when shared with others. Ethnic religious practices can be incorporated in ceremonies, immigrants can worship in their own language, with their own rituals and music and share stories from their homeland, so this all can be passed on to the next generation. Through participation in spiritual practices, or other placemaking activities, a sense of belonging is created (Foner & Alba, 2008). This is not depending on the reason of migration, for both economic migrants and refugees religion is an important actor (Hischman, 2004). Thus, this mosque in Lombok with its enormous minarets may seem foreign, but do they not represent the integration of immigrants in society? An important facilitator of belonging are communities which foster belonging by recognizing and acknowledging their interdependence (Block, 2009). Belonging to a community is being welcome, even if people are unfamiliar. Chavis and Wandersman (1990) embrace the idea of communities rising from social symbolic interactions which occur in a certain space, creating a meaningful place. These communities have to involve three components to be called community, namely: a networks of interpersonal ties outside the household which is capable of serving support and conviviality, using the same common locality, and sentiments of unity and activities. Block (2009) adds with his work on

17 communities that communities are based upon common needs and goals, shared lives, a certain culture and worldview, and collective actions, such as prayers. The composition or establishment of a community is a dynamic and ever changing process, whereby meaning and identity formation are underlying actors in this process of community building (Brace, Bailey & Harvey, 2006). Composition of a community includes institutions, such as the board of the mosque, and individuals, such as people who make use of the mosque to be involved in the social process of creating a community. The mosque as a sacred place, offers the community a place where they can share their identity, where they can meet and come together for social and cultural purposes, which is also reflected in the purposes of the Ulu mosque (Kong, 2001). Especially during moments of external antagonism, such as the rise of islamophobia, sacred places serve as a place where the sense of community is enhanced through antagonism (Kong, 2001). The focus of this research are communities that are established through making use of the same place, as happens through face-to-face interactions. These face-to-face interactions between community members are underlying in the creation of a community (Block, 2009). But also symbolic social interactions as for example making use of the same place can provoke moments of community. These community moments are places where integration occurs by combining or negotiating the connection between ‘here’ and ‘there’ (Lewis, 2010). Interactions between community members also create a sense of belonging by providing emotional, personal, instrumental and informational support (Chavis & Wandersman, 1990). In terms of integration this will mean that the community will contribute to belonging by providing emotional and personal support during times of loss for migrants, but also by providing emotional support in times of prejudice and negative stereotypes. Communities can support instrumental opportunities, they can provide access to markers and means, as the mosque for example does by providing language courses (Ley, 2008). The mosque makes the continuation of culture possible for immigrants. This provides security and a sense of belonging, and with the reproduction of cultural activities a moment of community is created (Lewis 2010). These feelings of security can even be created among migrants with different ethnic backgrounds. As long as they have a flexible approach on identity, and a shared identity, such as Islam, can be found (Block, 2009). The formation of a community can be stimulated in different ways. What is often known for immigrant communities, is that the similar way people dress, listening to the same music and speaking the same language are all factors that contribute to community building (Lewis, 2010).

The community sustains the existence of the mosque, because they want a place where they can practice their religion and where they can meet. However, the mosque also sustains the community, by providing a place where a sense of community is constructed (Kong, 2001). A tight community will be likely to make use of this mosque, and participate in divers and many activities provided by the mosque if this is in their collective interests to do so (Mitchell & Reid, 2001). A sense of belonging will increase the opportunity of talking about safety, such as the consequences of Islamophobia, but will also increase the support for other topics, such as hospitality and generosity (Block, 2009). The mosque as a community gives shape to hospitality by opening up for other religions and to generosity by expecting nothing in return. As mentioned before, as long as it is in their collective interest, such as countering negative stereotypes, Muslims are more likely to participate in activities. However, being part of a community is not only beneficial. Kong (2001) found during his research among an Asian community that the social control among the community was relatively high. This was by some members of the community experienced as a constraint instead of a benefit. Thus community can not only be seen as providing security and a tight community, but also as constraint. Nevertheless, the boundaries of what a Muslim community entails is not set but fluid (Block, 2009). Within a community different ideas can exist about what the community entails. These differences can be based on how someone practices Islam, but also on how the oppression of Muslims is experienced, since a stronger experience of oppression tends to results in stronger feelings of community.

1.4 Methodology 1.4.0 Research methods The study consulted different qualitative research methods, such as, participant observations and semi-structured interviews, to derive an answer to the following research questions:

How does the Ulu mosque in Lombok contribute to integration of first and second generation migrants in terms of belonging, community building and access to markers and means?

• How does the place design of the Ulu mosque contribute to the integration process of first and second generation migrants in terms of belonging, community building and access to markers and means?

The applied methods are suitable when aiming at understanding the experiences, perceptions, meanings and values of the key-actors (Hennink, Hutter & Bailey, 2011). These methods are all derived from the sociological discipline, and are useful for obtaining a nuanced insight in the world of the interviewees (Giddens & Sutton, 2010). These insights will be derived to unravel the placemaking activities and integration experienced by first and second generation immigrants. It is also used to discover (silent) norms and values and understand the context in which this research takes place. The statement of anthropologist Spradley (1979, in Mazumdar & Mazumdar, 2009) was an challenging and interesting starting point in understanding the immigrants’ perspective:

“I want to understand the world from your point of view. I want to know what you know in the way you know it. I want to understand the meaning of your experience, to walk in your shoes, to feel things as you feel them, to explain things as you explain them. Will you become my teacher and help me understand?” (p. 34) This paragraph will describe the used methods and how those methods relate to this study. The interviews and observations took place simultaneously, thus the order applied in this paragraph is random. Participant observations are by anthropologist Schensul (1999, in Hennink, Hutter & Bailey, 2011) described as “the process of learning through exposure to or involvement in the day-to-day or routine activities of participants in the research setting”. Observations in this study are done in and around different areas of the mosque. The observed places, are the ‘kebab factory’, the women area, the markets, and the Commemoration Day on the 4th of May. In these areas of the mosque I observed how the use of places created meaning for people and contributed to belonging and community. From the end of March until the end of April, I visited the mosque and its markets on a regular basis. Four times a week I spent my days at the ‘kebab factory’, here I drunk tea, ate baklava with the elderly, joined the cheap breakfasts in the weekends, or prepared or worked out interviews. During this time, I visited every market organized by the Ulu mosque. I went to these places on different times and days. On weekdays, in the weekends, on Fridays and on special holidays such as Kingsday. I

20 enjoyed walking around through the divers public of the markets and the Kanaalstraat8 and approaching people to have a conversation about the mosque. These conversations were mainly with Muslims and native Dutch people who were visiting the market or the ‘kebab factory’. More exceptional were conversations with the vendors at the market stands or of the shops in the Kanaalstraat. Of these conversations, six led to an interview planned on another day, in these cases I told the respondents about my research. During most observations I was part of the activities occurring. However, I did not wear a headscarf during my observations and interviews. In most observed situations the public was mixed, such as on most markets, in the ‘kebab factory’ and in the women area. There I was part of the activity, and the community was then perceived from the insiders perspective, an emic perspective. However, this was not always the case. During one of the markets I felt I stood out, because I was not wearing a headscarf. Questionable is thus, till what extent this situation can be seen as participant observation. To understand and explore the experiences and perceptions on the role of the Ulu mosque in integration, interviews were conducted. In total, sixteen semi-structured interviews9 were conducted with people who make use of the mosque. The interviews were analysed and coded, partly based upon literature and partly on new insights derived from the interviews. This has resulted in a Codebook which can be found in Appendix B. During the interviews I was multiple times confronted with the fact that I was perceived as an outsider. By stating “our community is tighter than yours”, respondents reflected on my position in the ‘other’ community, the native Dutch who see Muslims as terrorists. Thus, despite my attempt to ask transparent questions and not touch upon topics such as Islamophobia, terrorism or the term integration, my appearance had consequences for the answers. The context or situation where the interviews took place, was not perceived as transparent by the interviewees. These reactions clearly showed the perceived gap they tried to bridge through those interviews.

8 Street across the mosque 9 See Appendix A for Topiclist 21

1.4.1 Selection of respondents The present study will include both first and second generation immigrants. The selection of respondents followed from the outcomes of social and cultural psychologists Phalet and Ter Wal (2014). This study found that the negative image of Muslims held by native Dutch, is by first generation migrants experienced as barrier to belonging to Dutch society. First generation migrants of various ethnic backgrounds feel excluded and discriminated against. This is to a lesser extent applicable to the second generation migrants. Since first and second generation migrants experience the negative image of religion as barrier, both generations are included. The respondents were approached in various ways. First, a friend of mine suggested two respondents who make use of the Ulu mosque. Via a roommate of mine and two Muslims colleagues, whom I also interviewed, I approached three other respondents. The prospective imam of the mosque also addressed two respondents. Thus, this research relied partly on the snowball effect, which includes the use of social networks within a community for approaching new respondents (Hennink, Hutter & Bailey, 2011). This method of sampling is suitable when aiming to reach a more hidden population group or a harder reachable population such as Muslims. However, this method also brings consequences along. It limits the research by only gathering respondents from the same social network. Therefore my visits to the ‘kebab factory’ and the market were used to recruit new respondents. Here I met six other respondents. Despite the consequences of the snowball effect, it also has its benefits. I knew some respondents, or the respondents knew someone who knew me. This resulted in increased trust and respondents who felt more at ease, which made it easier to talk about sensitive topics, as for example ‘being homosexual in the Muslim community’. The location of the interviews were depending on how I knew the respondents. Some interviews were held at my place or at a friend’s place, at the silent room at work or at the place of colleagues of mine. Respondents I knew through the ‘kebab factory’, were interviewed in the ‘kebab factory’.

1.4.2 Who are the respondents? In total sixteen interviews were conducted. These people varied in gender, age, ethnic background and religious participation. The ages of the respondents vary between 19 till 52 years old. Seven women and nine men. Different nationalities have been included which

22 represent the diversity of the mosque users, to understand how people make different use of this place. Out of sixteen, fourteen interviews were conducted with first or second generation migrants who make use of the mosque for practicing religion and for sociocultural reasons. The other two interviewees are Dutch in a sense that they do not have a migration background. These two interviewees consist of a woman who was converted to Islam when she was in her mid-twenties and the chairman of the church. Despite that this study was aiming for including only first and second generation migrants, the woman was capable of clearly describing the differences of Dutch communities and the Muslim community due to perceiving herself as having been part of both communities. Because she contributed by comparing these communities from her own experiences, the choice was made to include this interview. The chairman of the Antonius church in Lombok who I approached by email, contributed to the study by providing insight in the placemaking practices of the board of the Ulu mosque in terms of collaboration and creating partnership with important actors in the neighbourhood. The other fourteen respondents all had a migration background. This means that themselves or (one of) their parents came from another country than the Netherlands. The exact situation of the respondents will be specified throughout the text. Overall the respondents had roots in Turkey (7), Morocco (3), Egypt (1), Syria (1), Bosnia (1) and Pakistan (1). The title of this research “the mosque as a bridge into society”, refers to the existing and experienced gap between first and second generation migrants and native Dutch. With using the term native Dutch in this study, referred is to people without a migration background, thus without parents or grandparent who were born abroad. In this study the term native Dutch will be used as the equivalent for non-Muslim, unless stated otherwise.

1.5 Overview The next chapters will supply profound knowledge on why the existence of the mosque important is for Muslims, an overview of the meaning of the mosque can be found in Figure 4. In Chapter 2 it distinguishes different forms of belonging and describes how the existence, visibility and aesthetics of the mosque relate to these different forms of belonging. It illustrates the impact of the mosque physically being visible, being a community and being a community in interaction with society. Next to this, it shows that feeling at home and belonging are specific and depending on the context. Furthermore it provides insight in how

23 placemaking activities such as the market create a sense of community and foster a two-way process of integration. Overall, it illustrates how the existence of the mosque creates a sense of community, a sense of belonging and fosters integration by providing a place here, which reminds migrants of being ‘there’. Chapter 3 will describe the use of different places in the mosque. It illustrates how these places create meaning and contribute to community building. Multiple spaces within the mosque function as meeting places, were trust is created, and processes of community building and belonging occur. It describes how the community and network provide access to jobs, incomes, housing and health. But also how providing contact opportunities between non-Muslims and Muslims can foster understanding and belonging. It also demonstrates the paradox of the community and insight in the desirability of the community effects.

Figure 4. Placemaking components in the integration process in the Ulu mosque

2 The existence of the mosque: A metaphor for Muslims and their position in Dutch society 2.0 Introduction During the interviews and observations I was confronted with the importance of the existence, the aesthetics, and visibility of the Ulu mosque. For many respondents this was contributing to a sense of community and a sense of belonging. At the same time the mosque illustrates how the notion of belonging seems to be a place specific and a dynamic process. The existence of the mosque also seems to be important in aiming for transparency and inclusion and its consequences.

Therefore, this chapter will firstly describe the importance of the existence of the Ulu mosque. Secondly, it will demonstrate how placemaking activities of the mosque contribute to a two-way process of integration by including native Dutch. And thirdly, the meaning of the existence of the mosque for Muslims will be examined.

2.1 A ‘visible’ mosque? 2.1.0 What is the problem of (non-)visibility? For years mosques in the Netherlands were invisible. Mosques were settled in less visible places such as deprived neighbourhoods or hidden in vacant stores, garages or as the Ulu mosque, first in an empty living house and after that in an old bathing house (Crijnen, 2004). In the Netherlands, the public discourse is dominated by a resistant attitude towards mosques, native Dutch seem to be prejudiced against Muslims and strong anti-Islam feelings dominate (Landman & Wessels, 2005: Velasco González, Verkuyten, Weesie & Poppe, 2008). An underlying reason for those negative stereotypes can often be found in perceived symbolic threat, such as “mosques which take over the country” according to sociologist and anthropologist Kuppinger (2014). This results in mosques which are usually not welcome in neighbourhoods. Native Dutch who want to “put a halt on the construction of new mosques” is an often heard statement in the negative discourse on Islam. Mosques and Muslims are perceived as bad neighbours and the idea of Muslims who want to dominate Western civilization is not rare (Smeekes, Verkuyten, & Poppe, 2011). Since the recent Syrian refugee crisis, the resistant attitude towards Muslims even became stronger (Versteegh, 2015). At the

25 same time, the visibility of mosques increased and led to more conflict about Islam and especially about the visibility of places of worship (Green, 2010).

An example of the resistant attitude towards Muslims and its consequences is shown on a YouTube video about the Westermosque in Amsterdam (Al Jazeera, 2015). During the construction of the mosque the board of the mosque received threats of non-Muslims who stated that: “after finishing the mosque we will set it on fire”. A board member of the Westermosque mentioned that this kind of criticism is the worst to hear, and that they do not take it lightly. According to him, this conflict leads to a situation where Muslims do not perceive themselves as Dutch, and Dutch do not perceive Muslims as being Dutch, which eventually will cause problems. For Muslims, this continuous struggle over being part of the dominant city image leads to feelings of not being recognized and not belonging in the Netherlands. However, a sense of belonging is indispensable in the process of integration (Landman & Wessels, 2005).

2.1.1 The visibility and aesthetics of the Ulu mosque: an exception or an example?

Figure 5. Previous location Ulu mosque. Source: Figure 6. New location Ulu mosque Alleato (2011). Over the years mosques in the Netherlands became more and more visible, some even became enormous in size. Their huge minarets and domes symbolise Islamic culture, but these examples are still an exception. In Utrecht four out of ten mosques are nowadays visibly recognizable as a mosque (Alleato, 2011). Still, the Ulu mosque remains an exception, by contradicting the discourse on marginalization by its visibility and the absence of protest during its construction. Therefore, it is interesting and

26 suggests to be a positive development that the opposite happened in the visible Ulu mosque, which is built without almost any commotion.

The visibility of the Ulu mosque changed throughout the years as can be seen in Figure 5 and Figure 6, which respectively show the “hidden” mosque and the “visible” mosque. Despite the recent minor shift towards visibility of mosques, the existence and especially the aesthetics and visibility can function as a Figure 7. Location Ulu mosque nearby central station facilitator in the feeling of belonging and therefore in integration according to anthropologist Brettell 2003). This visibility does not only manifest itself in its aesthetics but also in its location (see Figure 7). But, visibility and location do not go hand in hand as can be seen in Figure 2. Despite the central location (see Figure 4), it was still not recognizable as a mosque. Nowadays the Ulu mosque is, because of its location next to the central station of Utrecht, the most centrally located mosque compared to other mosques in the Netherlands. This in combination with its visibility and recognizable aesthetics make the Ulu mosque an exceptional and unique mosque. The central location of the mosque contributes for Muslims to the feeling of belonging in the Netherlands, by delineating the idea of being part of the dominant city’s image (Maussen, 2004).

This visibility of the mosque is one of the strong elements of the mosque. It is not only visible in the Lombok neighbourhood, it is visible throughout the whole city. Even from my own apartment building at a height at about 30m, four kilometres to the north-east of the Ulu mosque, at night the blue-lighted minarets (see Figure 8) are clearly visible and striking against the skyline of Utrecht. The 44 meter high minarets, which are lighted at night, are important for the visibility of the mosque. These minarets also contribute, next to the dome, to the recognizability of the mosque.

It is quite unique that a such visible mosque as the Ulu mosque was allowed and accepted in a negative national atmosphere, where mosques are generally not wanted. Maussen (2004) describes that the urban renewal framework in Dutch cities has allowed for the improvement of mosques, but neglected the aspects of visibility. Despite this negative discourse the Ulu mosque was allowed to construct a new building, albeit under certain conditions. Figure 8. The at night blue lighted minarets of the Ulu mosque It all started with the renewal plans of the municipality. Lombok a neighbourhood which is seen as open and multicultural needed a mosque which suited these characteristics. Regardless of the need, there were core conditions this mosque had to meet. The architecture of the mosque had to be transparent and had to display openness, the mosque itself should serve as a functional place. This mosque needed to serve as a bridge between Dutch society and the Muslim community by including non-religious people and providing events for everyone, which supports the insight into Islam and counters the negative stereotypes about Muslims. Thus, the function of the mosque is not only a space for sacred placemaking, involving religious practices and meaning, but also for community formation (Mazumdar & Mazumdar, 2009).

The aesthetics of the mosque are focused on including the conditions of the municipality by using transparent materials and appearing as an open mosque with aiming at countering the negative stigma about Muslims (see Figure 9). During my conversations at the market non-religious and native Dutch described the mosque being: “modern” and “overwhelming”, and Figure 9. Transparent materials used in the Ulu mosque “beautiful” as well. These statements demonstrate that we are not talking about a traditional colossal mosque with a lot of decoration, since they refer to the word “modern”. With the word modern they refer to the construction: “which is made out of brick’” and the: “functionality of the mosque that goes beyond religion”. The appearance of mosques which looks “Dutch” are often related to the notion of “modern” architecture (Roose, 2009). To construct a mosque with a “Dutch” appearance the use of bricks is in architecture an often used strategy, since it is a common architecture style in the Netherlands (Tamimi Arab, 2015). It is even argued that if a mosque appears to be “Dutch” it contributes to community building (Van Dijk 1999). The mosque fits into its place by using the same red bricks as the surrounding houses, instead of the traditional white walls. The aesthetics of the Ulu mosque are a well thought out idea. Throughout the architecture of the mosque they tried to combine the traditional Islamic style of mosques with the Dutch culture and adapt it to what is accepted. Their aim was to create a place where the Turkish and Dutch culture comes together: A place which has meaning for Muslims and non-Muslims and contributes by connecting people. The dome and minarets are the only aspects which make the mosque recognizable as a mosque. These minarets are transparent and made out of glass as a strategy to open up. A compromise is made on how often these minarets are used for the call for prayers, the mosque is allowed to do this two times a day instead of five times a day, so that people in Figure 10. Decorations on the carpet in the prayer area the neighbourhood do not experience “nuisance” as one of the interviewees explained. This reflects the negative discourse on Muslims. Native Dutch notice the presence of Islam/Muslims or the mosque, because the mosque stand out during their calls for prayers, these calls for prayers differ from the ‘norm’ in the Netherlands. Therefore the calls for prayer are considered as “a call for terrorists” (Velasco González et al. 2008). An emerging idea is that the lights in the minarets should be used for the call for prayers, instead of sound (Tamimi Arab, 2013). However, the Muslim community in the Ulu mosque resisted this idea (Tamimi Arab, 2013). Nevertheless, the minarets do have other

29 practical functions, they are used as elevator for elderly people, which is a characteristic of a Poldermosque10 (Landman & Wessels, 2005). Another strategy used for opening up, is one which is more often used by mosques, namely the use of matted glass for the second and third floor of the mosque. By doing this, the idea is given that no ‘mysterious, scary or terrorist’ activities happen on the other side of the wall. The use of matted glass is often applied as compromise by negotiations about aesthetics (Tamimi Arab, 2013). On the inside of the mosque the connection between the Turkish and Dutch culture is a central aspect in the architecture. The decorations on the carpet in the prayer area are in the same style as other Turkish carpets, but this one consists of Tulips, which combines the Dutch and Turkish culture (see Figure 10).

2.2 The existence of the mosque: who belongs? 2.2.0 Introduction Migration flows created throughout the years a diversity in population composition. This dynamic composition led to cities in which the dominant ethnic or racial group is missing, the so called majority-minority cities (Cameron, Epstein, O’Halloron, 1996). This raised the question if this majority-minority cities eventually would lead to normalization of differences and inclusion. Lombok might not be the perfect example of a majority-minority geography, since more than 50% of the population is perceived as native Dutch, however it is an example of a highly diverse neighbourhood. Furthermore, Lombok or specifically the Ulu mosque is capable of illustrating different forms of belonging. Sociologist Duyvendak (2011) addresses that creating a sense of belonging or a sense of feeling at home no longer can be seen as a struggle which only concerns migrants, but also native Dutch. In the context of changing neighbourhoods, and experiencing the threat of “mosques which take over the country”, it is also the native Dutch who experience a loss of feeling at home (Kuppinger, 2014). This paragraph explores the role of the mosque within this debate. It will provide insight into the experiences of Muslims and native Dutch in spaces of the mosque. This paragraph will draw upon how the existence of the mosque can create community building

10 An often made division is between Poldermosques and Heimweemoskeeën (Homesick mosques). A Poldermosque is a mosque which is adapted to Dutch society, they are sober, functional and not always immediately recognizable as a mosque. “Homesick mosques” are traditional mosques, with high minarets, enormous domes and sumptuous decorations, which would remind people of “home” and therefore in the public discourse often linked to Islamization (Roose, 2009).

30 within the Muslim community, and between the Muslim community and the native Dutch. Furthermore, it illustrates different forms of belonging perceived by migrants.

2.2.1 The role of the Ulu mosque in community building and integration into society The board of the Ulu mosque takes a leading position in lessening the gap between native Dutch and Muslims. The aim of the board is to open up for other religions and non-religious people. This is defined by providing guided tours through the mosque, whereby everyone is welcome. Alper (Dutch-Turk, 52), who was born in the Netherlands as a son of a Turkish labour migrant, explained that: “some Dutch people are afraid and have criticism on the mosque, because they do not fully understand what is going on in the mosque.”. Therefore, guided tours are implemented as strategy to provide information about Islam. The mosque is used as a place where negative feelings towards Muslims can be countered and processes of community building can be stimulated (Mazumdar & Mazumdar, 2009). Integration of the neighbourhood is done by organising dinners for the whole neighbourhood and multiple markets each year. The ground floor of the Ulu mosque functions as a cafeteria, which is used as meeting place and reminds people of home because of the shops on the ground floor of their building. Offering a place for various religions makes space for a plurality of religious experiences. Arranging the building in this way, turns this space into a translocal place, where it is on the one hand part of Lombok and Utrecht, and due to its size and height part of the high and modern buildings of the business area (Hall & Datta, 2010). On the other hand it fits perfectly into the street scene by being connected to a broader spatial geography. The mosque is situated at the end of a long shopping street with many Turkish and Moroccan low-budget fruit and vegetable shops, tea houses and traditional clothing stores. These markets organized by the board of the Ulu mosque are organized for everyone. By doing this, they try to send a message of openness. Invitations are distributed through various channels. The monthly ‘neighbourhood message’ from the municipality mentions the upcoming events at the Ulu mosque such as the market. The Ulu mosque also mentions it on their own Facebook page and Twitter account and the invitations are distributed by mail in the neighbourhood. The latter is in Turkish and Dutch and clearly states that everyone is welcome. At the market itself, the Dutch signs with “Iedereen is Welkom” (everyone is welcome) are everywhere.

2.2.2 Who belongs to these markets? Despite the willingness of the board of the Ulu mosque to be open, the Easter market (see Figure 11) was a spatial geography which was dominated by a specific group. Everywhere around me were people who looked Turkish or Moroccan. There were women who were wearing headscarves, long traditional dresses and sometimes a burka and there were men with beards who Figure 11. Easter market at the Ulu mosque were wearing caftans and djellaba’s.

The age of the visitors was diverse, there were older men and women, but also families with little children. A diversity of products were sold on the market, such as toys, books and clothes. Despite that, the Turkish products dominated the market. The food which was sold was Turkish and the clothing was mainly traditional, the signs within the market tent, which presented what was sold at which stand, were in Arabic. The market was organized in a tent, this tent was set up in such a way that offered plenty of sitting opportunities. Everyone was talking to each other and greeted each other, people seem to know each other. For Muslims, this is a place where they feel at home, where they belong.

Despite that they feel at home, and the willingness of the board of the Ulu mosque to be open and inclusive, I did not feel like I belonged there. Where this market from the immigrants’ perspective might have been experienced as an open and inclusive market, I did not feel comfortable. From the moment I entered the terrain of the mosque, people stared at me and seemed curious about my appearance. I did not feel comfortable because I felt I stood out compared to other people making use of this place. I did not wear a headscarf as the other women, which might have led to perceiving me as one of the native Dutch who is prejudiced. I did not spoke the language most people in the tent spoke and had no clue what the signs inside the tent stated. Furthermore, I did not know anyone who was inside the tent, despite that everyone else in the tent seemed to know each other. The way people stared at me made me feel like an intruder. At this market I was looking for recognition in terms of similar clothing or language. Or as geographer Kong (2001) described it, I was looking for a ‘shared identity’, to feel a sense of belonging. I was looking for every small detail in which I could

33 identify myself with the users of the market. But I did not find this so I experienced the market as if I was the outsider.

Thinking back about this situation made me realize I do not know how it is to be part of a minority group. This in combination with this market being one of the first Ulu markets I visited made me feel uncomfortable. I experienced difficulties with answering the question where do I belong and where do I feel at home. Since, I am most of the time in a majority position I usually do not reflect on my position. However, when I asked the respondents this question they all immediately had an example of where they do not feel at home. Kubra (Dutch-Turk, 21), who is born in the Netherlands, but daughter of a Turkish labour migrant, explained to me that:

“I do not feel at home at places where there are not many people who are coloured like me. Because of my headscarf you see immediately which kind of religion I practice, if I am the only person with a headscarf I do not feel safe. I like to have people around me who look like me, to feel comfortable.”

This supports the idea that people search for places where they can meet similar others and where they can identify themselves with (Duyvendak, 2011). Asking a Dutch woman who I met at one of the other markets, why this market was the first she went to, she confirmed Duyvendak’s (2011) perception with stating: “you don’t know what to expect and they are, sorry to say it, different than I am”. Muslims are often framed as the “other”. Framing it in this way immediately reflects on the social power imbalance this term covers (Morey & Yaqin, 2010). As Kubra (Dutch- Turk, 21) said she does not experience a sense of belonging without similar others around her, she is an outsider of a specific group (Özbilgin & Woodward, 2004). Thus the market can function as a place where Muslims are not perceived as the “other”, it is a place where they belong. At the same time and at the same place I felt like the “other”. What can be concluded from these paragraphs is that feeling at home and belonging is specific, and depending on place, situation and composition. At the same time it creates a distinction between those that feel they belong and those who do not feel they belong.

Figure 12. Market at Ulu mosque 2.2.3 The market as a centre for community building During my fieldwork, a couple of weeks later, I visited another market (see Figure 12). There was a lot of diversity among the visitors, including native Dutch, other non- Muslims and Muslims. Everyone was laughing and talking to each other, I experienced this market as a relaxed atmosphere. The market was situated at the ‘Mosque square’ and existed of many different stands. The stands were diverse in what they sold and in who was standing behind the stands. There were women with headscarves selling baklava again, and men who were speaking a non-Dutch language selling lahmacun or standing behind the clothing stands, where mostly jogging suits were sold. But there were also Dutch men selling cheese and French fries. These markets can be used as an instrument which counters the negative stigma on Muslims. The diverse products that were sold at the market provide an opportunity to learn something about each other’s cultures. These open spaces, such as markets are places where people gather and among these people relationships and interactions take place, which produces a community feeling (Kuo, Sullivan, Coley & Brunson, 1998). The board of the Ulu

35 mosque creates by organizing these markets a place where neighbourhood ties can occur and a sense of community can be created. These gatherings contribute to community building which is beneficial for belonging. This became clear when I spoke to Ali (Dutch-Turk, 47), who was born in the Netherlands, but whose parents came to the Netherlands as labour migrants. He told me that the aim of these markets was partly economic, but also to “connect” people. Processes of “connecting” take place at the prayers among Muslims, but also at the markets, which tend to “connect” everyone who makes use of this place, which addresses community building. According to Ali, during these “connecting” events everyone is one, from his standpoint there are no feelings of “otherness”. This implies that these markets organized by the mosque do play a role in creating a sense of community and therefore contribute to the process of integration in terms of feeling at home.

These markets are not only about connecting but also about providing opportunities to experience intergroup contact between Muslims and native Dutch. One of the reasons that intergroup contact is scarce is caused by the lack of opportunity to have intergroup contact stated social-psychologist Martinovic (2013). However, intergroup contact is important in reducing negative stereotypes about Muslims, which is one of the underlying reasons of the resistant attitude towards Muslims in society. Or as Idir (Dutch-Bosnian, 22), whose parents fled the war in Bosnia, stated: “they [native Dutch] sometimes forget that we are normal people too”. This statement is remarkable when knowing that Idir is born in the Netherlands and is a Dutch citizen too. At one of these markets a Dutch non-Muslim visitor addressed this occurrence: “normally I do not really talk to them [Muslims], but at these markets I do, it is interesting to learn about their culture and see what they sell here”.

2.2.4 The market as a two-way process of integration The interviews suggest to unravel another way of contributing to the process of integration, not perceived through the perspective of the Muslim immigrants, but through the non- religious people who are interested in these kind of places. One of the main purposes of the mosque is to distribute information about Islam to counter the negative stigma on Islam and Muslims. An applied strategy of doing this is by organizing markets and dinners for the neighbourhood. The aesthetics of the mosque seem not only to be important for Muslims, but also for non-religious people who find this mosque an intriguing place. By including non-

Muslim people at these markets and dinners, a two-way process of integration is encouraged, by improving the image of Muslims, and community building for both Muslims and non- Muslims. These markets serve as a place where symbolic social interactions take place. Which can create support among people at the market, sentiments of solidarity and eventually lead to a sense of community, according to community scientist Chavis and psychologist Wandersman (1990). The aesthetics of the mosque do play an important role in how the non-religious value the mosque. The mosque is seen as “overwhelming”, “big”, “modern”, and “beautiful”, but all positively meant and led for some to the desire to visit the mosque. Daphne (Dutch, 23) is living in the neighbourhood of Lombok. After the completion of the constructions of the mosque, Daphne was curious about how the mosque looked like on the inside and she: “needed to go there and see it!”. The easiness of these guided tours improved the mosque’s image, people in the neighbourhood “appreciated” that they did this, and thought that they were: “really friendly people”. By doing these guided tours and going to the same markets people make use of the same place and contribute to community building by strengthening, stimulating and encouraging underlying connections between those people who often do not know each other (Nuyts, 2017). These places create an overall connectedness with the neighbourhood, especially with this mosque, where markets take place completely without obligations. The markets are experienced by non-Muslims as “cozy” and people visit them because they are “curious” about their “culture” and “how their markets look like”. These placemaking events contribute to a sense of community by providing a place for interactions among neighbours. These informal interactions and settings where it takes place create social support among neighbours (Chavis & Wandersman, 1990). These markets which create community moments are according to psychiatrists Bhugra and Becker (2005) known for making the majority culture, and the minority culture less threatening, when individuals get to know each other’s culture, Bhugra and Becker call it, becoming “linguistically and socially fluent” in each other’s culture. This can function as a platform where employment opportunities are established and health care opportunities are discussed as will be mentioned in Chapter 3. The interactions between the majority and minority culture are taking place in a dynamic process in which these cultures change and where improved understanding of different cultures is created. Bhugra and Becker (2005) even argue that by creating understanding about each other’s cultures, insight in each other’s situation is conceived, and the need for a mosque can be better understood by the native Dutch population.

The diversity of these markets brings us back to an interesting statement of a Dutch woman who was about 60 years old, whom I met at one of these markets. She mentioned that: “they [Muslims in Lombok] deserve it [to have a big mosque], because they try to integrate and do their best”. Thus, she argued that migrants first have to make an attempt to integrate into the neighbourhood, before she would perceive Muslims as deserving to have a visible place where they can practice their religion. This relates to the debate about who is deserving and undeserving (Razack, 2008). Muslims are in the hierarchy of belonging, which is often based on boundaries between ethnicities, usually ranked on the bottom (Phoenix, 2011). The position in the hierarchy can have consequences for how deserving or undeserving Muslims can be seen. This results in how native Dutch perceive the claims made by migrants or Muslims. This woman perceives Muslims who do not integrate as less deserving to express their religion. This shows that Muslims have to conquer their place in society (Sunier, 2009). Which relates to the title of this chapter “The mosque as a metaphor for their position in Dutch society”. The markets discussed in this paragraph and the previous paragraph provide insight in the consequences of a sense of belonging and no sense of belonging. When people, as for example the Dutch non-Muslim visitor, goes beyond the distinction based on “otherness”, this way of placemaking contributes to community building. Because the social processes and interactions occurring at these markets do not solely develop a place in material form, but also create a meaningful place, to which people can relate and feel connected to (Ehrkamp, 2010). What the above text demonstrates is that these markets organized by the Ulu mosque can play an important role in creating a sense of belonging and creating a sense of community. At these markets the Muslim population which is normally placed in the position of the “other” is now in the dominant position, whereby others are put in the place of the “other”. But at the same time it functions as a place which goes beyond the terms of “otherness” and “similarities”, and creates an overarching experience. By being part of the same place social processes and interactions are formed and community building between native Dutch and Muslims takes place.

2.3 The meaning of the mosque: how to belong? 2.3.0 Introduction In previous paragraphs is discussed how the aesthetics of the mosque relate to recognition and acceptance of Islam and how the aesthetics create a sense of belonging. It discussed how

38 placemaking activities, such as the markets, can be experienced differently. Furthermore it illustrated that these markets are capable of creating a sense of community, but also creating a sense of non-belonging. However, the main purpose of the mosque, namely its function as spiritual place is so far not explored. The next paragraph will touch upon the spiritual function of the mosque. It unravels the importance of the existence of the mosque in creating a sense of belonging and a sense of community building in the background of remaining negative stigmatization and prejudice of Muslims (Bonino, 2015).

2.3.1 Is the mosque still a spiritual place? In most religions times of worship are depending on time cycles and sacred holidays (Yang & Ebaugh, 2001). For Muslims this means that they are expected to pray five times a day in the mosque. The exact times they have to pray are depending on the position of the sun. As Idir (Dutch-Bosnian, 22) mentions: “people [Muslims] in the Netherlands do not pray that often, most of them go to the Friday prayers or with special occasions”. This is most of the time confirmed in interviews with Nissrine and Ramla. They mention that they sporadic visit the mosque for religious purposes. However, they do visit the mosque and attend services during special occasions on religious celebrations such as Eid Al Adha (sacrificial feast) or Eid ul- Fitr (sugar festival). Nissrine (Dutch-Moroccan, 21) herself was born in the Netherlands. She described her Moroccan father as: “a man who was looking for a better future” when he came to the Netherlands. Eventually her mother followed her father to the Netherlands. Nissrine tries to explain this occurrence by focusing on the different structures of the Moroccan and the Dutch society: “also in Morocco, it is not required to pray five times a day, but their daily life and societal structure is constructed in a way that makes this possible”. For her and other Muslims, praying at the mosque itself seems not to be that important anymore. More often the focus is on the connection between God and the person who prays. Ramla (Dutch-Egyptian, 32) who is also born in the Netherlands, described her father remarkable enough also as: “someone who was looking for better opportunities”. She stated that: “praying is something between me and God, I don’t need a mosque for that”. In the United States Muslims adapted their religious practices to the traditional Christian holidays. This means, that Sunday prayers are now the most important prayers of the week instead of Fridays prayers (Yang & Ebaugh, 2001). In the Ulu mosque, the Friday

39 prayers are still the most important prayers of the week. This might be due to the Netherlands being one of the most secularized country’s in the world (Van Tubergen, 2007). Which means that Sunday is by many native Dutch no longer perceived as a traditional Christian holiday. Thus, society is not structured in a way which makes it easier to pray on Sunday instead of Friday. Overall, the religious importance of the Ulu mosque is decreasing for the Muslim respondents. However, they still visit the mosque for various reasons. The next paragraph illustrates one of these reasons; it delineates the importance of the existence of the mosque for Muslims in creating a sense of belonging.

2.3.2 New functions of the mosque? 2.3.2.1 The declined religious importance of the mosque The declined importance of the mosque concerning religious goals is an interesting finding. Especially by being aware of the fact that people still go to the mosque and value the existence of the mosque as important for their well-being. This section will focus on reasons why Muslims keep visiting the mosque, despite the decreased spiritual function of the mosque. Fatma (Dutch-Moroccan, 24), sister of Nissrine and also born in the Netherlands, is one of the Muslims who feels she does not have to pray at the mosque. Fatma states that she can pray at home, but at the mosque: “I can meet other people who are also Muslim”. According to the in the Netherlands born Mounir (Dutch-Turk, 26), son of two labour migrants from Turkey, the existence of mosques in the Netherlands is needed: “to let people as me, feel at home”. This paragraph delineates multiple forms of belonging created by the existence of the mosque. The various ways in how belonging contributes to the integration process will also be discussed. It illustrates why the existence of mosques in the Netherlands is important.

2.3.2.2 Belonging and the country of origin The aim of the architecture of the mosque was, as discussed, to link it partly back to Turkey. The link to Turkey was made with creating shops at the ground floor of the mosque, which is similar in Turkey. During the interviews I found out that this meant a lot to Aliyah (Pakistani, 23) who fled the war in Pakistan. She explained: “it reminds me of home”. For her, it was not only about the appearance of the mosque, but about the smell and the atmosphere, she stated: “I like the way people dress, the language they speak, and the calls for prayers”. The calls for

40 prayers, clothing and language are all common symbols which contribute to the feeling of community and to the feeling of membership (Chavis & Wandersman, 1990). According to sociologist Lewis (2010) people recognize themselves in these similarities such as clothing, music and language, which creates a sense of unity or community, and a sense of belonging. Aliyah described how the existence of the mosque helped her to find her way in Dutch society. During the day she did her own thing, went to school or did other things teenagers her age did. But at the same time she was always looking forward to Friday, when she went to the Friday prayers with her brother. During these moments in the mosque: “for one moment I can forget everything, totally be myself, and overthink life, it gives me courage to start the next week”. The atmosphere in the mosque also reminds people who were born in the Netherlands of the country of their parents. In the ‘kebab factory’ I met two Dutch-Turkish brothers, Roshan (19) and Zehab (21), who were both born in the Netherlands. They explained to me that they still feel connected to the culture of their Turkish parents. For them it is important that their culture and the culture of their parents is “visible” and “accessible” here. They explain that it also reminds them of their parents’ home country, because it reminds them of the experiences of their vacations in Turkey. Roshan states that during vacations he: “experience things that reminds them of Turkey”. Despite that they were born in the Netherlands, they still see the Turkish culture as part of who they are.

The Ulu mosque is arranged in a way which turns the space into a translocal place (Hall & Data, 2010). On the one hand it is part of Lombok and Utrecht. Due to its size and height it is part of the modern buildings of the business area (see Figure 13). On the other hand it fits perfectly into the street scene by being connected to a broader spatial geography. The mosque is situated at the end of a long shopping street with many Turkish and Moroccan low-budget fruit and vegetable shops, tea houses and traditional clothing Figure 13. View of Ulu mosque on business area stores. This provides insight into how this mosque creates a sense of belonging by reminding them of ‘home’. Translocality: “describes socio‐spatial dynamics and processes of simultaneity and identity formation that transcend boundaries” (Greiner & Sakdapolrak 2013, p.373). For the mosque this means that at one hand it reminds Muslims of their country of origin, but it also offers them a place in the Netherlands where they can engage in familiar practices. It provides a place where two worlds can come together. This place, the mosque, provides the continuity of identity by enabling migrants to recognize and reproduce their past (Mazumdar & Mazumdar, 2009). The respondents clarify that the mosque is a highly valued place for them due to reminding them of home and helping them by accepting their situation. By leaving the country of origin, they also left behind family, familiar places, and communities, which can lead to the experience of loss, place loss or place nostalgia (Mazumdar 1992: Milligan, 2003). The mosque provides migrants the possibility to combine the Turkish part of their identity with the Dutch part of their identity. With providing this opportunity, the mosque contributes at the same time to the integration process by creating a sense of belonging. A place such as the mosque, which reminds them of a place of the past is important in creating new place ties. The mosque functions as a symbolic stable factor in maintaining the identity and community identity of Muslims (Mazumdar & Mazumdar, 2009). This desire for Aliyah and the two brothers to go back to the mosque and undergo experiences which remind them of ‘home’ is a positive nostalgic experience. For Aliyah and the two brothers this experience does not include the idea of wanting to go back to their (parents) country of origin. The feeling of “reminding them of home” is improving the feeling of being ‘there here’ (Lewis, 2010). Being ‘there here’ includes the idea or opportunity to participate in familiar practices of ‘there’, and at the same time, the attempt to be ‘here’. A mosque can thus be seen as offering a place where two worlds come together and can be combined. This combination is beneficial for the integration process instead of hampering the integration process (Lewis, 2010).

2.3.2.3 Belonging and connecting The mosque itself is a place which creates unity. It offers people a place where they can share their religion and come together. The mosque, or religion in general, is often seen as something which divides society and supports people to stay within their own community, which hampers integration (Edwards, Christerson & Emerson 2013). Idir (Dutch-Bosnian, 22) shared an interesting perspective on the idea of mosques dividing society. If there would not have been a mosque with the size as that of the Ulu mosque, then society would have been more segregated than it is now. Without any mosques where you can come together: “people will stick to their own community”. The existence of the enormous mosque, which aims for inclusion, makes it possible to mingle. Normally visitors of the mosque are delineated by ethnicity, but the Ulu mosque offers a place for all Muslims. The mosque goes beyond ethnicity, everyone can join the prayers. Perceiving it from Idir’s perspective, mosques are essential in creating unity among society, they all share the same religion. That the mosque goes beyond ethnicity is something which people, even Muslims themselves, sometimes forget. Alper (Dutch-Turk, 52) explained that the mosque is related to your religious conviction and not to ethnicity. However, he admits that it sometimes looks like this when a specific ethnicity can choose the board. The Ulu mosque which is used by Turks, Moroccans, Surinamese, Iraqi, Iranians, Syrians, Pakistani etc., contributes as Alper stated to the: “feeling of being connected”. Nissrine states that this connecting function is the reason for her to visit the mosque: “the mosque brings people together and you will never be alone, which is a nice feeling”. According to Nissrine it is important that the mosque functions as a connecting factor in the neighbourhood. It should be a place where everyone can come together, which connects Muslim but also non-Muslim people. The function of the mosque as a place where people can come together and connect is mentioned by many interviewees. They experience their visits to the mosque as: “networking

43 moments”. The mosque provides a place where people meet family and friends. Idir (Dutch- Bosnian, 22) his friends from high school also go to the same mosque as he goes. Therefore the mosque and being Muslim is according to Idir: “something you share, that’s what makes the connectedness so strong, togetherness, that’s what makes it unique”. For Sarah (Dutch, 38) the mosque also felt as a place where she felt “included” and “respected”. These feelings of inclusion and respect are by the Sarah seen as logical, because the Muslims community is by her perceived as more “tight”. These examples show that placemaking is not only about the relationship between a place and the people who make use of this place, but also about a place which enables people to have a relationship with other people (Mazumdar & Mazumdar, 2009). It even goes beyond the relationship between people, by offering a place where processes of community building and belonging are occurring. The connectedness and moments of not feeling alone, mentioned by the respondents, contribute to their shared identity, due to being Muslim: “is something you share”(Ramla, Dutch-Egyptian, 32). The purpose of this identity process and the search for a common identity, is a result of the quest of belonging (Kraus, 2006). From the immigrants perspective the existence of the mosque produces a feeling of home and offers a place for the process of integration.

2.3.2.4 Belonging and understanding How Muslims perceive and evaluate their own community is linked to how they experience the image of Dutch society about them (Prasad, 2012). During the interviews and observations it became clear that some Muslims have the idea that native Dutch do not understand what Islam entails. Every aspect of Islam which came up during the interviews was explained, or they asked me if I knew what: “the Koran was” or if I knew that they prayed five times a day. Even of these basic understandings of Islam was thought that I did not knew about this. Islamophobia is multiple times raised during the interviews. The idea of: “people out there” who see Islamic people as terrorists creates connection within the religious community. The more the focus is on differences between Islamic and non-Islamic communities, the more they feel connected with the Islamic community. The mosque as a place is indispensable in this. The experience of religion is something which is only shareable with other Muslims. Aziz (Syrian, 42), who fled the war in Syria, shared his feeling about this and stated: “a lot of people who do not understand Islam”. This makes according to Aziz the connection between

Muslims stronger, because Muslims: “understand and know what Islam entails”. For him this connection of being Muslim, what native Dutch do not understand creates “real binding”. The resistant attitude towards Muslims is not only about creating connectedness within the community, but something that goes beyond that. It creates awareness about the freedom of religion they have here, which Mounir stated he took for granted. For Mounir (Dutch-Turk, 26) the presence of the Ulu mosque gives certainty about the existence of the minority groups in times when Islamophobia is on the rise. During these times: “the mosque means a lot me” is what Mounir stated. He experiences the mosque as a: “meeting place”, to meet friends. Respondents referred multiple times to the fact that they are not all “terrorists”. It seemed like they had to prove themselves. The mosque is a place where they can escape from this, a place which creates “unity”, or as Mounir states it: “everyone is different, but in the mosque we are all the same”. The discourse on Islamophobia creates a distinction between the natives and the Muslims, who are seen as potential terrorists (Phoenix, 2011). This ‘us’ / ‘them’ division creates unequal access to the right of national belonging. Muslims are in the hierarchy of belonging, which is often based on boundaries between ethnicities, ranked on the bottom. As discussed before they appear to construct identities based on being Muslim to create a sense of belonging. For Muslims the mosque is the best suited place to create an identity in the discourse of Islamophobia. In the mosque people understand each other and accept each other regardless of ethnic background. The mosque is a place where knowledge about Islam is produced and reproduced, this shared understanding about Islam is indispensable in the process of belonging, since this understanding is missing during interactions with native Dutch. The discourse on Islamophobia provokes social exclusion, but at the same time it fosters social inclusion and community building by creating boundaries based on religious affiliation. During the interviews, respondents kept emphasizing and repeating that not all Muslims are terrorists. These statements reflect on my position during this research. During this research, I did not wear a headscarf, what might have affected the way they saw me. They might have seen me as native Dutch who is prejudiced and negative about Muslims. Approaching me and stating that they are not terrorists, is their strategy to close the gap between themselves and the native Dutch population. This gap is relatively big when Muslims are experienced by native Dutch as terrorists. The interviews are used to convince me, or through this study convincing others, that Muslims are not terrorist. The interviews are even used for emphasizing the helpfulness and tight community they are part of as will be argued

45 in Chapter 3. The questions asked during the interview were by myself perceived as questions without a link to the topic of terrorism, however it might be that interviewees have experienced this different and perceived a link between the questions and the negative stereotypes of Muslims.

2.3.2.5 Belonging and a second home The last important way in which the mosque creates belonging is by providing people the feeling of a second home. They experience the mosque as an “easeful place”, the home of God which is everywhere. For Aziz (Syria, 42) the mosque was important when he came to the Netherlands, he described the mosque as “a home which is everywhere, you only need a mosque”. The mosque is multiple times seen as a place where people “feel at home” and a place which people experience as “a second home”. Thus the existence and the visibility is important for the Muslim visitors of the mosque by providing feelings of acceptance and recognition. It is important because it reminds them of their country of origin, it offers them a second home, and a place where people understand each other and where people can connect. These forms of belonging all contribute to Muslims feeling at home and belonging and therefore improves their integration process. The mosque as a place, is important for their integration process, it is a meaningful place which people highly value.

2.4 Conclusion The Ulu mosque is an existing and visible mosque, just as the Muslims in the Netherlands are existing and visible. But the mosque had to adapt to Dutch society in many ways, they adapted by decreasing their calls for prayers to comply to the norms of Dutch society, they adapted by being transparent and open, they adapted by gathering money to construct a functional mosque which is not only used by them, they adapted by incorporating the neighbourhood through markets and dinners, and lastly they adapt by building a modern non- traditional mosque. It is accepted that the mosque is here, as long as they adapt to Dutch society and do not stand out compared to native Dutch. This is the same for Muslims in Dutch society, freedom of religion is highly valued and accepted, as long as you adapt to Dutch society, dress like Dutch people do, think like Dutch people do and have the same norms and values as Dutch people do. Therefore this mosque clearly reflects the social position of Muslims in Dutch society.

Despite that mosques reflect and reproduce their disadvantaged position in Dutch society, this chapter provides insight in the meaning of the Ulu mosque. Where native Dutch want to put a halt on the construction of new mosques, this chapter provides insight through the perspective of Muslims immigrants themselves. It examines the importance of the existence of this mosque for integration in terms of community building, belonging and placemaking. The Ulu mosque appears to be a meaningful place which offers people a place where they belong through the processes of reminding them of their country of origin, creating understanding, creating a second home, and connecting people. It serves as a place where non-Muslims are included, where native Dutch can learn about and enjoy the Islamic culture together with Muslims. These events create shared community moments and will bridge the gap between native Dutch and Muslims. This in combination with community- building which occurs at the markets and at neighbourhood dinners, makes the mosque for many people an indispensable and meaningful place which contributes to the integration process.

3 Place design of the mosque: Networking in the mosque? 3.0 Introduction During the fieldwork I have been confronted with the importance of the mosque and its community for Muslims who use the mosque. As discussed before, the Ulu mosque has next to a religious function also a multifunctional socio-cultural function. This chapter describes how Muslims use and experience the different spaces in the mosque. It turned out that the Muslim community of the Ulu mosque plays an important role in how places are valued. This is related to creating a sense of belonging, a sense of community building and access to markers and means. The latter, the access to for example education and employment, is usually a result of the former two. To keep this section structured the meaning of the different places within the mosque will mainly be discussed in the same order as the guided tour took place.

3.1 The ‘kebab factory’, more than just a restaurant “Now the ground floor is rented to the ‘kebab factory’, so that fits really good into the mosque, because they also sell halal meat and the food they serve is perfect for the people who visit the mosque. But it could have been a Hema as well, a Kruidvat, or a supermarket, or restaurant as long as the company which came here did not sell any alcohol.” (Ilyas, Dutch-Turk, 26)

Ilyas, born in the Netherlands, whose parents came to the Netherlands as labour migrants, explained the idea behind the restaurant the ‘kebab factory’ to me, which can be seen in Figure 14. He stated that the ‘kebab factory’ was a strategy to diversify the incomes of the mosque. Next to sustaining an income, it also contribute to new jobs and incomes which are generated by the existence of the ‘kebab factory’. The ‘kebab factory’ fosters access to economic opportunities by providing new Figure 14. Entrance Kebab Factory jobs and incomes (Markusen & Gadwa, 2010).

Observations and interviews revealed that the function of the ‘kebab factory’ goes beyond providing economic opportunities and its function as a restaurant. With the type of food they sell and the location, they to want to provide a place for a specific group. Alcohol is not allowed and halal kebab, chicken, Turkish tea and baklava are the products which are served. However, the composition of the visitors of the ‘kebab factory’ goes beyond ethnic divisions and demonstrates the divers ethnic character of the neighbourhood. People with different ethnic characteristics were making use of the place. The place is used by older Turkish men, who were eating baklava and drinking coffee and tea. In the middle of the restaurant Dutch and assumable Dutch-Turkish and/or Dutch-Moroccan families were having dinner. The bar offers youth a place where they can hang around without causing nuisance. In the ‘kebab factory’ (see Figure 15) there is room for everyone. The ‘kebab factory’ offers a place where ethnic boundaries are exceeded and it invites its visitors to enjoy the spaces of the mosque together. It provides a place where symbolic interactions among users of this physical environment take place and where a sense of community is created (Chavis & Wandersman, 1990). For these days it means that creating a sense of community in the ‘kebab factory’ goes beyond religion or ethnicity, due to its divers public. On most of the days I went to the ‘kebab factory’ the public was divers in terms of ethnicity. However, the atmosphere was different during the cheap all-you-can- eat breakfast in the weekends. Then, families came around to eat breakfast together and talk to each other. It was crowded with mainly people with, I assume, a migration background. People were talking in a non-

Dutch language, and many women wore Figure 15. Kebab Factory headscarves. This is the same on Fridays, when many families were going to the afternoon prayers. After the prayers people gather in the ‘kebab factory’. Here, they come together and talk about the prayers. They discuss what is said during the prayers and how they feel about that. A man of about 50, who visited the ‘kebab factory’ regularly with his family, explained: “These kind of moments, when you are sitting with the family together are valuable because important things are discussed. Normally everyone is doing their own thing and before you know it another week has past, but it is good to have a place where you can come together after the prayers.” Being part of social actions creates connection (McNeeley, 1999). Face-to-face interactions, such as the gatherings in the ‘kebab factory’ strengthen and stimulate community building (McNeeley, 1999). During the times I sat in the ‘kebab factory’ it became clear that the community played an important role in people life’s. The ‘kebab factory’ was used by people who came together to eat or to drink. People met each other in the ‘kebab factory’, sometimes because they had an appointment and sometimes because they accidentally met each other there. What I never saw was people who were sitting alone, there was always someone who eventually joined them. The way people greeted each other assumed that people knew each other. When I asked the man of around 50 in the ‘kebab factory’ how it came that it seemed like everyone knew each other he explained: “aha I don’t think everyone knows each other personally, but you recognize each other from the mosque, and that makes it easier to chitchat a bit”. Because of the atmosphere where it seemed normal to greet and talk to each other, it felt easier to approach people who were making use of this place. Therefore this place was suitable to acquire access to new respondents. It led to a conversation with Dutch-Turkish youth who were hanging around. For them the ‘kebab factory’ is an easy and accessible place where they have the opportunity to meet: “It is easy, because there is always place for use here, they [‘kebab factory’] are open till 2:00 a.m., the food is good and cheap ánd we are close to the mosque. We meet here often before or after the prayers, it kind of keeps us of the streets.” These symbolic interactions or real social networks within the ‘kebab factory’ produce spatial and temporal community moments (Lewis, 2010). Common spaces are known for their informal contact and contribution to community building and sense of belonging (Kuo et al., 1998). The ‘kebab factory’ is for many people a meaningful place, by offering a place where people can come together. It is a place which fosters symbolic interactions among its users, and where a sense of community is created (Chavis & Wandersman, 1990). Thus, with providing access to economic opportunities and offering opportunities for community building, the ‘kebab factory’ goes beyond its original commercial goal.

3.2 The Muslim community and economic opportunities

As mentioned before the ‘kebab factory’ functions as a place which fosters new jobs and incomes. This happens also at the markets, here people can rend a stand and sell their products. This economic placemaking activity is more often a concern for the Ulu board. With offering economic opportunities, they try to shape the social Figure 16. Shops in the Kanaalstraat character of the neighbourhood by ‘helping’ each other. The physical character of the neighbourhood is shaped by creating more economic opportunities. This results in revitalization of the neighbourhood (Markusen & Gadwa, 2010). On Fridays the mosque is usually visited by around 2.000 till 4.000 people. This is beneficial for the smaller entrepreneurs situated at the Kanaalstraat, which is the street across the mosque (see Figure 16). According to Alper (Dutch-Turk, 52): “These entrepreneurs tend to experience increased incomes because people visit them after the Friday prayers. The shops at the Kanaalstraat, it is for many people a family trip”. These economic opportunities and increased incomes are not only provided because of events organized by the mosque, but also throughout the network of people who meet in the mosque. This network functions as a catalysator in finding a new job, by receiving new information from the community. Ramla and Nissrine argue that due to their religion, they are raised with norms and values that differ from Dutch norms and values. Because of those norms and values, they see themselves as more helpful compared to native Dutch. Ramla (Dutch-Egyptian, 32) explained: “When someone is looking for a job, and people know about this they will inform other people about this or tell them who they should contact for more information about a job”. However, Mounir (Dutch-Turk, 26 ) stated that the role of the ‘religious’ community should not be overestimated: “It might be that not religion will help you in finding a job, but the network, and a network is something which can be found everywhere”. Thus, Mounir confirms the role of the community. Mounir continuous this statement with: “The beneficial effects of connections do not only count for religious communities, but for everyone. When you know someone within a specific organization, you will get a job earlier than if someone from outside that organisation applies.”. Thus, connections in general play an important and informative role in accessing the labour market.

Where religion is often seen as a barrier to labour market integration, Fatma and Idir support the idea of the religious community as a bridge in finding a job which support the findings of geographer Ley (2008). Fatma (Dutch-Moroccan, 24) argues that because of this network the accessibility of the labour market is improved: “I think it can help you to find a job, because of the community. Because they have certain expectations of you. One of these expectations is that everyone helps each other, thus if you are not able to find a job, than everyone will keep their eyes open so that they can help each other.” This statement confirms the benefits of the network for labour market opportunities, but especially praises the religious network. This network is seen as more “helping”, because of differing “norms and values” and “expectations”. Idir (Dutch-Bosnian, 22) stated that the mosque offers a place where new connections can occur and that these places are important in creating a network and a community. He mentioned: “In the mosque you get to know a lot of new people and you talk with each other. And especially informing each other. [...] People who often go to the mosque, discuss things and talk to each other. Just because you talk to a lot of people, you get to know each other and know more about things, which can be interesting for you. It is an informal way to gain information.” The mosque provides a place where people meet and network opportunities are created. This study confirms the importance of the mosque in serving the economic needs of Muslims and facilitating economic opportunities for Muslims, argued by Ley (2008) and Hirschman (2004).

3.3 Placemaking at the youth centre Entering the mosque, children were walking and running through the hallways. The soccer table, which was situated in the hall, was used by kids of about 12 years old. They were busy playing, until they got distracted by my appearance. When I told them about the guided tour, they were enthusiastic telling me about ‘their’ youth centre which is shown in Figure 18. The purpose of the youth centre was

Figure 17. Entrance Ulu Mosque 52 providing homework support and to keep the youth of the street, whom were causing nuisance in the neighbourhood. It provides a training ground and prepares the youth for the labour market, but also offers room for Arabic and Quran lessons (Markusen & Gadwa, 2010). Improving educational outcomes suggests to be structural integration. However, activities in this centre provide, according to the youth I met in the mosque, access to support they do not get at school. Looking at the educational system in the Netherlands this is promising. The social economic status of parents and educational attainment in primary school do not have to be determinative for educational outcomes (Jackson, Jonsson & Rudolphi, 2011). Good support and aspirations can play a decisive role in improving educational outcomes. Respondents gave various opinions on the accessibility of education caused by the community at the mosque. As Idir (Dutch-Bosnian, 22) stated: “no of course did the community not play a role in the choice of a school”. It became clear that the community itself is not always the most prominent factor in this. Figure 18. Location Youth centre Kubra (Dutch-Turk, 21) touched upon the role of religion herein: “I do think religion has an influence on school and education for example. Allah will always help us, thus if we believe in the right way, he will help us at school.”. But others such as Sarah (Dutch, 38) mentioned that, however she was grown up in an environment where it was normal to choose her own school, her husband: “preferred a school where other children from people he knew from the mosque went to”. Assumed can be that most of the time parents make their own decision about where their children go to school. Only one of the respondents, Isis (Dutch- Moroccan, 19) who is born in the Netherlands as daughter of a Moroccan labour migrant, explicitly mentioned that the religious community do play a role in the accessibility of education: “The community does play a role for some people in access to education, health services and housing, because people are really willing to help and support each other by facilitation of basic needs. So then, specific schools are recommended such as Islamic schools, however it is the question if this is the best choice. Other people will, of course, also recommend other schools, it is just what they need and want.”

Where the role of the community seems to be different for everyone, the mosque does take the lead in offering homework support and language courses. What should not be underestimated is the message the mosque wants to address with offering these services. This is also addressed by Nissrine (Dutch-Moroccan, 22): “Although, my parents think it is important that I learned the Dutch language, but is also something which the mosque addresses that it is important here in the Netherlands to build a future here. But they also think it is important to get a sufficient level in Arabic, because of their religious conviction.” Thus, the board of the Ulu mosque provides services which improve access to better education and improves integration. This study shows the importance of the mosque in accessing educational opportunities and its contribution to integration. Hereby it confirms the findings of sociologist Littlefield (2010), about spiritual places providing social services such as education.

3.4 Going beyond religious convictions 3.4.0 Silent room

On the first floor of the mosque the silent room, the men area, women area and meeting rooms are situated. The prospective imam first showed me the silent room which makes the Ulu mosque unique (see Figure 19). This silent room is used as prayer area for other religions than Islam and is set up because of two different reasons. Firstly, because they had to meet the condition of inclusion. And secondly, because of the will of the prophet, he aimed for acceptance of all religions. By providing this unique silent room, they shaped the physical and

Figure 19. Location Silent Room social character of the mosque.

3.4.1 ‘Friendship’ between the church and the mosque The silent room resulted in friendship between the mosque and the Antonius church, situated in Lombok (see Figure 20). This partnership tend to be beneficial for the succeeding of placemaking efforts (Markusen & Gadwa, 2010). The Ulu mosque approached the church to discuss how the silent room had to be decorated in a suitable way. The chairman of the church, named Jesse (Dutch, 54), described the Figure 20. Antonius Church in Lombok relationship between the church and the mosque a “friendship”. They are connected in terms of money, place, communication and events. During the constructions of the mosque, the mosque received an amount of money from the church. By doing this, the Antonius church wanted to welcome the mosque and convey a message of appreciation. Furthermore, Jesse stated that: “during the constructions of the mosque there was not enough space for the mosque, so we shared our church”. Also during the last years when a lot of Syrian refugees entered the Netherlands, this partnership was important according to Jesse, he stated: “A lot of refugees came to the Ulu mosque, Christian Syrians, Muslim Syrians, Protestant Syrians, all of them. For the Ulu mosque this is not a problem since they have a place for all religions. But they mentioned to the Christians that we were also there, so eventually these Syrians went to our church.” The opportunity to act as an investor, creator and owner of places and events, such as the board of the mosque is doing, contributes to belonging (Block, 2009). Belonging is important, because it creates the welcoming of strangers, such as refugees, and it reinforces the feeling of community. Jesse explained that they both want to help the refugees, but that the resources of the church and mosque were limited. What the mosque did was responding to refugees’ question for language courses. The Ulu mosque came up with lessons to learn the Dutch language. This was followed by the church, the Jewish synagogue and the Protestant church. According to the chairman these kind of actions arouse a lot of sympathy in the neighbourhood and improved the access to language acquisition of Syrian refugees. Further, the church and mosque in Lombok, are trying to create awareness about the importance of religions peacefully living next to each other. Therefore, each 4th of May, a common service is organized by the imam, priest and rabbi. These interreligious prayers, always address the importance of peacefully living together. Examples of slogans used at these interreligious prayers are: ‘Did we learn something?’, ‘Do we pass on freedom?’, which refer to the second World War. With these events, the imam, priest and rabbi try to increase the idea of symbolic interaction between those religions and to form an overarching community (Chavis & Wandersmann, 1990). These moments of community will according to Lewis (2010) provide security, by creating a shared sense of belonging and contributing to integration. Thus overall, the mosque tries to be the connecting factor between different religions. They want to share and open up their places to include others and hereby create a meaningful place for everyone.

3.5 Men and women area: a place for discussion? 3.5.0 Introduction The men area is a place where, just as in the women area, norms and values can be discussed (see Figure 21). There are always men gathered in this area to drink tea, coffee, or to chit chat with each other. The women area is less visited, but there is always place for conversations and tea. The atmosphere in these area’s is relaxed, with many places to sit, and bowls on the table filled with Figure 21. Location men and women area biscuits.

3.5.1 Men area: A school for norms and values? Within these areas the negative stereotypes of native Dutch are often discussed. The board of the Ulu mosque is also aware of the differences between Islamic and native Dutch norms and values. As a response to those differences they try to discuss this. When I talked with Ali (Dutch-Turk, 47) about these discussions and perceived differences he stated: “Well, we [Muslims and non-Muslims] look more alike than we think, or than some people want to think and want to accept. But in the end we are all people and it all about respecting each other. And to me that is the backbone of religion, but also the backbone of the secularized Dutch society who like to see themselves as open-minded and accepting.” Still, the board of the Ulu mosque values the differences as important enough to discuss them. Therefore every week men gather to discuss the changing norms and values and the role of the mosque herein. They talk about the importance of social media for them, and till what extent these social media accounts should be used. With conducting these discussions the board of the Ulu mosque tries to discover until what extent they can bridge the perceived gap between native Dutch and Muslims.

3.5.2 Women area: A school for norms and values? In the women area a similar trend is occurring. These gatherings in the common rooms are also used to discuss traditions and norms and values. Turkish, Syrian, Iraqi and Dutch women come together in the women area to discuss, talk, but also to laugh about their different norms and values. Accessible topics such as how to answer the phone in the Netherlands or in Syria are discussed. But also how the Netherlands is perceived, is topic of discussion. Multiple women delineate the idea of: “Here [in the Netherlands] they are free. They can do whatever they want, you can smoke and drink as much as you want and no one will judge you, even if you are religious it does not matter. That is so different in our country, people will think you are a bad person when you smoke, but here no one cares.” This statement illustrates the perceived gap between Dutch norms and values and the Islamic norms and values. Although, this idea was put into perspective by women who stated that native Dutch people also get judged when doing this. The lessening of the perceived gap contributes to processes of belonging. A sense of belonging is more easily created when one perceives oneself as similar compared to the other. This makes it easier to understand each other, then when the perceived gap is relatively bigger (Bhugra & Becker, 2005).

What Lewis (2010) also noticed in her study, was that these community moments are used to negotiate the relation between ‘here’ and ‘there’. Thus, the mosque provides a place where norms, values and habits of the country of destination and of the country of origin are discussed and compared. This negotiation results in a new form of integration where both the countries are combined. This goes against the idea that traditional habits, norms and values hamper integration. Or the idea that integration can only be ‘reached’ by community activities that focus on the country of destination (Lewis, 2010). The meetings in the women area are, when talking about differing norms and values, important in understanding each other’s culture (Bhugra & Becker, 2005). The creation of understanding, acceptance and appreciation is for both, the Muslim population and the non- Muslim population a dynamic process which contributes to a sense of belonging. The atmosphere in which these habits, norms and values were discussed was very open and warm, there were no right or wrong answers. Personal and sensitive habits are discussed, which are according to Kubra (Dutch-Turk, 21): “unsuitable to discuss when we are together with family, we just don’t do that in our culture”. For especially the older Syrian and Iraqi women it appeared to be sensitive topics, they were giggling but still involved in the conversation. The discussion touched upon topics such as the menopause but also about how marriages in different cultures come about. Everyone was participating and willing to share their experiences. These moments of commuting and discussing these topics are known for improving trust (Leigh, 2006). The creation of trust is a cornerstone in creating a strong community (McNeeley, 1999). Face-to-face interactions such as the interactions during these gatherings strengthen trust and create a sense of belonging. Symbolic interactions takes place through these moments of sharing norms and values. This in combination with making use of a place, a sense of community is encouraged and beneficial for integration.

3.5.3 The creation of trust within these areas Idir has also experienced the trustworthiness of the Muslim community. According to him this is one of the strongest aspects of the community. It distinguishes the Muslims and the non- Muslim community. He stated: “People help each other. I compare it to the mosque abroad, if you were really lost there and needed information, I don’t know it felt more honest to go there and ask someone of your own group. It feels more honest, not like they are going to screw you over.”

The mosque is by more people described as useful in creating a community that is connected and trustful, due to Islam creating tighter social connections. The men and women area seem to be the right places where networks of interpersonal ties are created. Those ties are based on the support of each other, solidarity sentiments and activities, and housing in a common locality, which suit the definition of community of Chavis and Wandersman (1990). Interpersonal ties based on support, solidarity and trust are reflected in how this place connects people and provides access to health care. Many studies are done on the accessibility of healthcare for migrants. Language barriers, differing beliefs about illness and hesitation to look for help outside the family, all prevent migrants from accessing healthcare (Giacco, Matanov, Priebe 2014). The mosque is a place where people are trusted and therefore often approached for information instead of that professional health organisations are approached. As Mounir (Dutch-Turk, 26) described: “People ask questions regarding healthcare in the mosque, people will help you or recommend you a doctor. However, I think that this is especially the case for new migrants”. Fatma (Dutch-Moroccan, 24) confirmed that: “the mosque is a place where a lot of people come to gather information regarding healthcare, and definitely ask for it”. Thus, for those interviewees the community improves the access to health care as literature on social service hubs assumes (Ley, 2008; Fulton, 2011).

3.5.4 The community and economic placemaking activities The network and social connections in the women area are also used for economic placemaking. For some, this place is a spin off for new services they can provide, whereby jobs and incomes are generated. An example of this is Kimya (Syrian, 28), she showed by sharing her own experience how important the religious community can be for economic opportunities for women. Back in the days when she lived in Syria she was passionate about everything that had to do with hair and make-up. She explained that: “For Islamic women here in the Netherlands who wear a headscarf it is sometimes difficult to go to a hairdresser, because hairdresser shops are visible and mostly constructed out of glass in the middle of a shopping street and it is not desirable that people can see you without headscarf.” For a lot of Muslim women it is a barrier to go to a Dutch hairdresser, because they feel uncomfortable in this situation. Now Kimya has the opportunity to cut hair of other Muslim women and earn some money. She stated that the religious community and the network here are of major importance to her. Muslim women recommend here service to other Muslim

60 women and throughout this network she was able to make a living out of her hobby and to maintain a job.

3.5.5 Mosque or childcare? In the women area there is also place for children. On the playground in the women area toys are scattered everywhere. Nissrine (Dutch-Moroccan, 21) stated men go more often to the mosque than women do. A “culture thing” she said laughing. This childcare is a practical solution for woman who cannot visit the mosque, because there is no one to watch the children. Therefore, this rooms offers a solution. Sarah (Dutch, 38) stated: “Sometimes it happens that someone else can watch your children in this room, so that you can go and pray in the mosque. Because having little kids, makes it harder to find time to pray, but not if there is also place for kids in the mosque.” This new function of the women area increases the opportunity for women to make use of the mosque, broaden their network and value the mosque differently. Due to this childcare, these women have the opportunity to create a sense of belonging and a sense of community within the mosque.

3.6 Meet & Greet: the importance of a community? The third, fourth and fifth floor of the mosque are used for prayers. This is the place where most people meet each other. It is a place that has an impact that goes beyond religious practices. This area suggests to be indispensable in creating a sense of community and setting up a network which provokes access to markers Figure 22. Prayer area and means. The community appears to be one of the major actors in creating placemaking, belonging and access to the labour market, health care and education. However according to Mounir community moments should not be overestimated. Mounir (Dutch-Turk, 26) states that the community plays an important role in his life: “Even though I am not aware of it, 99% of the people in my surroundings are Islamic. Like I said before, we are one. We see

61 each other every Friday, so everyone knows each other”. At the same time he places the importance of the community in perspective: “The religious community is just like every other community and existing of a lot of people, but not everyone is equally helpful, one helps, the other does not. Like I said in the beginning I think that is the case for every community.” Even though Mounir thinks the importance of the community is overestimated, he also confirms the importance of the mosque as an actor in creating places where people can meet: “After the prayers I met someone from Amsterdam, he visited the Friday prayers because he was in Utrecht because of work. After the prayers we talked for a Figure 23. Location Prayer Area long time, we are now still in touch.”. According to Nissrine (Dutch-Moroccan, 21) and Fatma (Dutch-Moroccan, 24) the Islamic community is not overestimated, but a different community than other communities. As Nissrine said this difference is based on norms and values: “The community expects certain things, because everyone always helps each other because this is the norm”. Sarah, the Dutch woman of 38 who converted to Islam could perfectly illustrate the experienced differences between those communities. Sarah putted that: “The Islamic community is much more tight than Dutch communities can be. Dutch people are more individualistic and care about themselves, the Muslim community is focused on each other, people help each other and care about each other. So, the Muslim community is more willing to help, than the Dutch community. Fatma (Dutch-Moroccan, 24) confirms this by stating: “my religion plays a role in the norms and values I have. Many norms and values, which I grow up with are based on my religion. For example love your neighbour or follow your heart”. As an example of the difference between the Islamic community and the non-Islamic communities Fatma explains: “Sometimes I see people around me who are not raised in a religious way and they can be so rude. This behaviour would never come to my mind. I also think that our community is more focused on family and neighbours, people in your area. You will always be there for each other, and in ‘your’ Dutch community this feeling is less strong.”

These statements show that experiencing a community differently, results in different experiences of ‘tightness’ of the community. It provides insight in how the community can be valued in different ways and that who belongs to the community is a dynamic process which results in different evaluations of the community which is in line with the idea of Block’s work on communities (2009). The focus of Fatma on “your” Dutch community reflects on my own position. She perceived me as being part of the ‘other’ community, the community to whom they feel they have to prove themselves. This might have consequences for how they speak about the community and describe the importance and benefits of the community.

3.7 The paradox of a community Despite that the community suggests to be important, it also suggests to be a paradox for some respondents. As this study shows, the community is by many respondents experienced as something valuable, an actor which is beneficial for creating a sense of belonging, feeling at home and for access to the labour market, health care and education. Nevertheless, at the same time respondents tend to keep themselves distant from the Muslim community. The topic “gossiping in the mosque” is multiple times mentioned by Mounir, Idir, Ilyas, Nissrine and Aliyah. An example of this is when Idir (Dutch-Bosnian, 22) stated: “I prefer not to join the community, so I avoid contact with them [...] they gossip a lot and I know what they think about me, so that is what I don’t like”. He continuous with explaining that him being homosexual is not accepted by the Muslim community, and therefore he does not feel welcome. Mounir (Dutch-Turk, 26), also homosexual, confirms that he experienced the social control as mentioned by Kong (2011) as oppressing. Due to not being able to be fully himself, since he had to: “suppress my homosexual identity, because this is not allowed by the community”. That Muslims feel oppressed by their own community, also happens regarding practicing Islam. Ilyas (Dutch-Turk, 26) states that: “Some people only pray at the mosque, because they are afraid that other Muslims will have an opinion about them not praying at the mosque”. However Idir also states: “At the mosque you meet new people which is special. All my friends come there, it is something you share. That is what creates connectedness, togetherness and that is unique at that moment”. Aliyah (Pakistani, 23) experienced a similar contradictory feeling:

“I want to keep myself distant from the Muslim community, because they are so much focused on one identity, but on the other side I like the mosque because people with different ethnic background mingle her, but still there is something in me what wants to keep myself distant from the community.” It shows that the community cannot be seen as a homogenous group. Who exactly belongs to this group according to the respondents, is a dynamic process which changes over time. This is in line with the findings of Block (2009) that boundaries of a Muslim community are not set but fluid. This fluid perspective on who belongs to the community makes it possible to value the community as valuable or non-valuable, which results in the paradox of the community.

3.8 The community: desirable or not? Multiple respondents have raised their concerns about the desirability of the informational influence of the mosque. The community sometimes seems to be an innocent actor as for example in finding a house: “If someone wants to sell their house and someone knows someone via via who also has an Islamic background, than you will choose the one which you are familiar with, thus the one with the Islamic background” as mentioned by Isis (Dutch- Moroccan, 19). However, with including Muslims, native Dutch are at the same time excluded. This is not only applicable to this example of Isis, but to all examples regarding economic and housing opportunities obtained through networks or a social structure (Portes & Landolt, 2000). Inclusion of Muslims means a closure for opportunities for third parties. Other respondents raise their concerns about the powerful position the mosque has, and that this position should be used in a responsible way. Nissrine (Dutch-Moroccan, 21) is one of the respondents who is concerned about the provision of information: “But I think that the question is if they will get the right information and right contact persons? I mean for example someone has psychological problems than it is important to get the right treatment and from our culture someone might be seen as possessed, and people do not always understand why you should talk about problems. The mosque and highly religious people can advise to go to someone who uses Islamic ways or traditions in health care, and I don’t think this is desirable.” Nissrine her opinion is contradicting existing literature which states that the mosque is helpful for people who are not sufficiently proficient in Dutch. According to the literature, the mosque functions as bridge into society, by providing necessary information (Ley, 2008; Hirschman, 2004). However Nissrine argues that:

“[...] it is a deeper issue. It happens a lot that Islamic people in the Netherlands do not have a proficient knowledge of the Dutch language. They often separate themselves from Dutch society. So what do you get... these people are asking for advice of the imam or other people who they often seen in the mosque. These people will give advice based on their knowledge and their point of view.” She argues that the function of the mosque, the service hub, is increasing the gap between Muslims and Dutch society. The concerns she raises are important to keep in mind. The mosque contributes to a sense of belonging, a sense of community and creating placemaking, but the content of the distributed information is important regarding accessing markers and means. Most examples mentioned by the respondents about how the board of the mosque, the imam or the Islamic community improves the access to new jobs, new houses and education shows the positive side of the Muslim community. Fatma, confirms Nissrine her concerns, regarding the access to healthcare. Fatma (Dutch-Moroccan, 24) refers to the differing ideas about what desirable health care entails, she states: “I mean someone with psychological problems might in our culture be seen as possessed, but in Dutch society this would be seen as absurd, people in the mosque might advise to see someone who uses these traditional ways of healing, but do we want this?” Nevertheless, Bhugra and Becker (2005) mention that rites and rituals which are used during traditional ways of health care can create a sense of belonging. However, this study did not find negative nor positive effects of the community on health care, it is interesting to shine a light on the desirability of the mosque as social service hub.

3.9 Conclusion Overall, the mosque can be seen as a place where people create or maintain their network. The placemaking events within the mosque such as meeting in the ‘kebab factory’, the markets, the discussions within the men and women area, and the youth centre all contribute to access to education, jobs, incomes and health care and therefore contribute to integration. Furthermore, these places provide the opportunity to create a sense of belonging, a sense of community and a network within their own Muslim community. But it also provides a place where non-Muslim and Muslim individuals come together. It provides an opportunity where people get to know each other, where understanding about each other’s cultures is created and where they learned to trust each other. Together, Muslims and native Dutch, are making use

65 of the same space and with these symbolic and face-to-face interactions community building and belonging are fostered. With this, the imagined gap between the Non-Muslims and Muslims can be declined, or as Mounir stated: “we are all different, but in the mosque we are one”.

4 Conclusion and Discussion Interviews and observations are conducted to answer the following questions: How does the Ulu mosque in Lombok contribute to integration of first and second generation migrants in terms of belonging, community building and access to markers and means?

• How does the Ulu mosque creates a meaningful place and thereby contribute to the integration process of first and second generation migrants in terms of belonging, community building and access to markers and means? • How does the place design of the Ulu mosque contribute to the integration process of first and second generation migrants in terms of belonging, community building and access to markers and means?

The first sub question is answered in Chapter 2. This Chapter provides insight in the importance of the existence and aesthetics of the Ulu mosque in creating a meaningful place. Due to its existence, aesthetics, and visibility different forms of belonging, feelings of acceptance and recognition are created. Observations showed the importance of markets in creating belonging and in community building between native Dutch and Muslims. The markets illustrated that feelings of belonging are context specific and dynamic processes and it showed how the market can function as a place where native Dutch are put in the position of the ‘other’. The mosque provides immigrants a meaningful place by reminding them of home, or offering a second home, where they can deal with their loss, and where ‘here’ and ‘there’ come together and create a sense of belonging (Lewis, 2010). The connections and togetherness Muslims experience at the mosque, in the background of Islamophobia, contribute to creating a shared identity, community building and belonging (Kraus, 2006). In the mosque Muslims have a shared understanding about what Islam entails, an understanding which the native Dutch outside the mosque seem to miss, but which creates ‘binding’ among Muslims. The markets provide native Dutch and Muslims an opportunity to gather and create understanding which counters the negative discourse on Muslims (Phoenix, 2011). The social processes and interactions occurring at these markets do not solely develop a place in a

67 material form, but also create a meaningful place, where people relate to, and feel connected to. Thus, overall the existence of the mosque contributes to integration by creating belonging and community building for Muslims. It also offers multiple opportunities to ‘bridge’ the gap between native Dutch and Muslims. Chapter 3 aims to answer the second sub questions. Through interviews and observations the meaning of different functional places within the mosque and how these places contribute to integration in terms of belonging, community building and access to markers and means. One of these places is the ‘kebab factory’, providing economic opportunities, but also functioning as a meeting place. It serves as a place where networks are established and communities are built. This place produces symbolic interactions among its users, which creates a sense of community. The youth centre of the mosque provides homework support and at the same time increases access to jobs, incomes and education. On the second floor of the mosque the men and women areas are situated. Here, new people can be met and norms and values are discussed. At the same time these norms and values, and the existence of the mosque in general, result in negotiations about the relation between ‘here’ and ‘there’. Discussing the different norms and values leads next to community building, also to understanding about each other’s cultures and hereby lessens the gap between Muslims and non-Muslims. By improving understanding, contact, and trust, a sense of belonging and a sense of community are fostered and the gap between native Dutch and Muslims is bridged. However, Chapter 3 provides at the same time insight in the paradox of the community. Not every respondent experiences the community as valuable, and some even question the desirability of the role of the mosque in integration. Overall, Chapter 3 illustrates the meaningful places within the mosque and how these places contribute to integration by providing an opportunity for community building, belonging and access to markers and means. In closing, the mosque can function, as this case study illustrates, as a beneficial actor in the process of integration, instead of being a barrier. It provides Muslims a place where different forms of belonging and different ways of community building are fostered, and where access to different institutions is generated. This study has gone beyond the existing literature about immigrants, integration and religion in three ways: (1) by perceiving integration in terms of belonging and access to markers and means; (2) by focusing on the perspective of people with a migration background on integration; and (3) by considering the role of the native population in integration.

The scholars who were consulted the most, were introduced throughout this study. These scholars have a background in political science of religion, anthropology, sociology, psychology and urban planning. The use of these disciplines is reflected in the applied concepts, for example in integration. The concept of integration goes in this study beyond the socio-psychological definition which is usually applied in studies focusing on religion and integration. Therefore this study contributes, by deriving concepts from various disciplines, to an inclusive approach of religion, immigrants and integration. However, Lombok’s situation is exceptional. Most people in Lombok live there by choice. This results into increasing support for connections within the neighbourhood and acceptance of differences between people (Beate Volker in Zuithof, 2003). People want to live in Lombok because of its multicultural character, what suggests to be an explanation of the acceptance and appreciation of the aesthetics and visibility of the mosque. This accepting environment improves as discussed in Chapter 2 a sense of belonging and feeling at home by allowing Islam to be part of the dominant city image. However, this specific situation as in Lombok is not applicable to every other neighbourhood. The municipality of Utrecht played an important role in the decision-making process of the aesthetics. This municipality was previous known for being less supportive and determining the influence and visibility of Islam (Landman & Wessels, 2005). Nowadays, it is a supportive municipality aiming for diversity and tolerance, which makes the aesthetics and visibility of the mosque possible. The conditions of inclusion which the mosque had to meet were manifested in a place where people can learn about and experience Islam. In terms of generalizability this means that these specific characteristics of the neighbourhood and the supportive municipality are important actors in these positive outcomes, but cannot be found in every other neighbourhood and municipality. The aesthetics and visibility reflect the power relation between the authorities and the Muslim community, which are specific for this place. However, despite the aesthetics of the mosque, community formation is something which can take place in almost every mosque. Or as Maussen (2004) stated; mosques might look “dull” buildings from the outside, on the inside mosques are meaningful places. The aspects mentioned by the respondents such as reminding them of home are feelings which can be provoked in every mosque, regardless of how the mosque looks like. It is about coming together, community building and belonging which occurs through symbolic interactions which arouse when making use of the same place. These interactions can occur in every mosque, and therefore community building suggests to contribute to integration in other mosques as well.

The size of the Ulu mosque makes it capable of functioning as an overarching mosque that goes beyond ethnicity. Because of its size it is capable of creating belonging to a broader community, it creates a community that goes beyond ethnicity. A smaller mosque might not have the same capacity and therefore it might separate the community instead of connecting it. Concluded can be that this study contributes by its definition of integration, by perceiving integration as a two-way process, and by taking into account the immigrants’ perspective. Furthermore, it contributes by extending literature on placemaking, community building and belonging. This revealed new insights in the indispensable impact of the mosque on integration. Therefore, when setting up new policies regarding integration the role of the mosque should be taken into account, since this is an important and promising factor and actor in immigrant integration. The outcomes of this study are in line with existing literature on spiritual places functioning as social service hubs. It contradicts the European literature on immigrant religion as barrier to integration. The definition of integration and the perspective of this study, and maybe even my own position, might have been decisive for these outcomes. Perceiving integration from the immigrants’ perspective is an under researched topic. This is the same for integration in terms of belonging, community building and access to markers and means. The use of a different perspective and definition of integration might be reflected in the derived results which differ from the outcomes in European literature. The Ulu mosque is a unique mosque because of its aesthetics, location and visibility. Since most mosques find themselves in marginalized spaces, future research is recommended to unravel the role of these marginalized mosques in integration. Do these less visible mosques also provide a promising function in the process of integration? Furthermore, this study suggests that the context of the migrant, in terms of country of origin, is of considerable importance in the experience of belonging and community building. This might be due to the perceived gap between migrants and native Dutch. Respondents with different ethnic backgrounds valued the importance of the mosque and community differently and vary in their experiences of belonging. Unfortunately due to the sample size and the scarce diversity of ethnic backgrounds, the insights are so far limited. However, it is valuable to obtain a more inclusive image of how people relate to the mosque. When aiming for a meaningful place, enhancing understanding about how, when and where belonging and community building are occurring is important. Therefore, for future research is

70 recommended to investigate if ethnic background plays a role in how the use of the mosque is valued. Thus the mosque and community play a valuable role in integration. However, concerns were raised about the content of the distributed information by the mosque. First and second generation migrants are a difficult reachable group by for example health organisations and therefore have less sufficient knowledge about health related issues. The mosque can play a connecting and valuable role in connecting the migrants and these organizations, because mosques are known for their low threshold relationships with migrants. Therefore health organization should work with the mosque to expand and enhance professional services. Recommended is that the mosque, health organizations, policy makers or organizations which are concerned with integration or immigrants, maintain and/or improve their relationship. The board of the Ulu mosque has a close relationship with the migrants, the board knows what migrants want and need, but at the same time the mosque can provide and circulate professional information about these organizations to migrants. Mosques can function as a connecting and binding actor between the migrants and those organizations. Lastly, a recommendation can be made about the aesthetics of mosques. This study argues that the aesthetics and visibility of the mosque are important for integration. Therefore recommended is that during the construction of new mosques, Muslims get more space to implement aesthetics in which they can recognize themselves. However, this should go in close association with conditions such as transparency and inclusion, due to its importance for reducing negative stereotypes. These mosques will just as the Ulu mosque contribute to integration. It will provide a place where a sense of belonging is created among Muslims, but also among Muslims and native Dutch. It will provide a place where new communities will be established. Thus people will be stimulated to cross bridges and finally be aware that the bridge no longer exists.

5 Bibliography Ager, A. & Strang, A. (2008). Understanding integration: A conceptual framework. Journal of refugee studies, 21(2), 166-191.

Ahmad, I., & Szpara, M. Y. (2003). Muslim children in urban America: The New York city schools experience.Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, 23(2), 295-301.

Algemeen Nederlands Persbureau (2015, december 19). Minister Ascher bezorgd om Utrechtse moskee. Retrieved March 16, 2018, from https://www.ad.nl/utrecht/minister-ascher-bezorgd-om-utrechtse- moskee~a274b53b/

Al Jazeera [HedefMedya]. (2015, December 1). Al Jazeera Westermoskee. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOBB0nffiEE&t=2208s

Alleato. (2011). Brochure Turkse en Marokkaanse moskeeën in Utrecht. Retrieved from http://www.50jaargastarbeidersutrecht.nl/Portals/0/content/cultuur-en- religie/moskeeen/MoskeeenInUtrecht.pdf

Aziz, R. A., & Liu, O. P. (2011). Placemaking, place names, and local myths and legends. Planning Malaysia Journal, 135-148.

Benson, M., & Jackson, E. (2013). Place-making and place maintenance: Performativity, place and belonging among the middle classes. Sociology, 47(4), 793-809.

Bonino, S. (2015). Visible Muslimness in Scotland: between discrimination and integration. Patterns of Prejudice, 49(4), 367-391.

Boschman, S., Kleinhans, R., & van Ham, M. (2017). Ethnic differences in realising desires to leave urban neighbourhoods. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 32(3), 495-512.

Bhugra, D., & Becker, M. A. (2005). Migration, cultural bereavement and cultural identity. World psychiatry, 4(1), 18.

Block, P. (2009). Community: The Structure of Belonging: Easy Read Comfort Edition. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Brace, C., Bailey, A. R., & Harvey, D. C. (2006). Religion, place and space: a framework for investigating historical geographies of religious identities and communities. Progress in Human Geography, 30(1), 28-43.

Brandpunt. (2017). Op eigen kracht: Samen leven in Utrecht. Retrieved January 15, 2018, from https://www.npo.nl/brandpunt/21-02-2017/KN_1688472

Brettell, C. B. (2003). Anthropology of migration. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Brooks Hollifield, E. (2014). Understanding why Americans seem more religious than other Western powers. Retrieved, June 23, 2018, from https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/15/americans- more-religious_n_4780594.html?guccounter=1

Cameron, C., Epstein, D., & O'halloran, S. (1996). Do majority-minority districts maximize substantive black representation in Congress?. American Political Science Review, 90(4), 794-812.

Cañas, S. (2008). The Little Mosque on the Prairie: Examining (multi) cultural spaces of nation and religion. Cultural Dynamics, 20(3), 195-211.

Chavis, D. M., & Wandersman, A. (1990). Sense of community in the urban environment: A catalyst for participation and community development. American journal of community psychology, 18(1), 55- 81.

Connor, P. (2009). Immigrant religiosity in Canada: multiple trajectories. Journal of International Migration and Integration/Revue de l'integration et de la migration internationale, 10(2), 159-175.

Crijnen, T. (2004, September 17). De poldermoskee komt langzaam meer in zicht. Retrieved March 14, 2018 from https://www.trouw.nl/home/de-poldermoskee-komt-langzaam-meer-in-zicht~a09c26e2/

Dey, A. K. (2001). Understanding and using context. Personal and ubiquitous computing, 5(1), 4-7.

Donley, L. W. (1987). Life in the Swahili town house reveals the symbolic meaning of spaces and artefact assemblages. African Archaeological Review, 5(1), 181-192.

Donofrio, T.A. 2010. 'Ground Zero and Place-Making Authority: The Conservative Metaphors in 9-1 1 Families' "Take Back the Memorial.' Western Journal of Communication, 74, (2)

Duyvendak, J. W. (2011). The politics of home: belonging and nostalgia in Europe and the United States. Springer.

Dyck, I. (2005). Feminist geography, the ‘everyday’, and local–global relations: hidden spaces of place‐ making. The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe canadien, 49(3), 233-243.

Edwards, K. L., Christerson, B., & Emerson, M. O. (2013). Race, religious organizations, and integration. Annual Review of Sociology, 39, 211-228.

Ehrkamp, P. (2010). The limits of multicultural tolerance? Liberal democracy and media portrayals of Muslim migrant women in Germany. Space and Polity, 14(1), 13-32.

Erdal, M. B., & Oeppen, C. (2013). Migrant balancing acts: understanding the interactions between integration and transnationalism. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 39(6), 867-884.

Fleischmann, F. (2016). Nederlanders moeten óók op integratiecursus. Retrieved, June 16, 2018, from https://www.sg.uu.nl/nieuws/2016/nederlanders-moeten-ook-op-integratiecursus

Foner, N., & Alba, R. (2008). Immigrant Religion in the U.S. and Western Europe: Bridge or Barrier to Inclusion? The International Migration Review, 42, 360–392.

Fulton, B. R. (2011). Black churches and HIV/AIDS: Factors influencing congregations’ responsiveness to social issues. Journal for the scientific study of religion, 50(3), 617-630.

Gemeente Utrecht. (2017). Plan van Aanpak Placemaking. Retrieved February 26, 2018 from https://www.utrecht.nl/fileadmin/uploads/documenten/bestuur-en- organisatie/beleid/omgevingsvisie/_deelgebied-BeurskwartierLombokplein/2017-BIJLAGE-12- Plan-van-Aanpak-Placemaking-januari-2017.pdf

Gemeente Utrecht. (2018). Etniciteiten in Utrecht. Retrieved February 20, 2018, from https://utrecht.buurtmonitor.nl//jive?presel_code=p635828479780996359

Giacco, D., Matanov, A., & Priebe, S. (2014). Providing mental healthcare to immigrants: current challenges and new strategies. Current opinion in psychiatry, 27(4), 282-288.

Giddens, A., & Sutton, P. W. (2010). Sociology: introductory readings. Polity.

Green, T. H. (2010). The resistance to minarets in Europe. Journal of Church and State, 52(4), 619-643.

Greiner, C., & Sakdapolrak, P. (2013). Translocality: Concepts, applications and emerging research perspectives. Geography Compass, 7(5), 373-384.

Groot, de, Laar, van (2012, June 20). Dit is geen wijk, maar een gevoel. De Groene Amsterdammer. Retrieved March 2, 2018, from https://www.groene.nl/artikel/dit-is-geen-wijk-maar-een-gevoel

Hall, S., & Datta, A. (2010). The translocal street: Shop signs and local multi-culture along the Walworth Road, south London. City, Culture and Society, 1(2), 69-77.

Hennink, M., Hutter, I., & Bailey, A. (2010). Qualitative research methods. Sage.

Hoekstra, D. (2015, June 25). Ulu-moskee verguld met gebedshuis “voor iedereen”. Retrieved February 20, 2018, from https://www.ad.nl/utrecht/ulu-moskee-verguld-met-gebedshuis-voor- iedereen~a9d3b8c4/

Huisman, C. (2013). Een moskee voor de hele buurt. Retrieved February 17, 2018, from https://www.volkskrant.nl/dossier-archief/een-moskee-voor-de-hele-buurt~a3508795/

Hirschman, C. (2004). The Role of Religion in the Origins and Adaptation of Immigrant Groups in the United States. International Migration Review 38, 1206–1233.

Islamitische Stichting Nederland. (2017). Jaarverslag Islamitische Stichting Nederland 2017. Retrieved from http://isndiyanet.nl/isn-jaarverslag/isn-verslag-activiteiten-2017/

Jackson, M., J. Jonsson & F. Rudolphi. (2011). Ethnic inequality in choice-driven educational systems: A longitudinal study of performance and choice in England and Sweden. Sociology of Education. (85:2), 158-178.

Kong, L. (2001). Mapping ‘new’ geographies of religion: politics and poetics in modernity. Progress in human geography, 25(2), 211-233.

Korteweg, A., & Yurdakul, G. (2009). Islam, gender, and immigrant integration: boundary drawing in discourses on honour killing in the Netherlands and Germany. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 32(2), 218–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870802065218

Kraus, W. (2006). The narrative negotiation of identity and belonging. Narrative inquiry, 16(1), 103-111.

Kuo, F. E., Sullivan, W. C., Coley, R. L., & Brunson, L. (1998). Fertile ground for community: Inner-city neighborhood common spaces. American Journal of Community Psychology, 26(6), 823-851.

Kuppinger, P. (2008). Mosques in Stuttgart Struggling for Space. ISIM Review, 21, 2.

Kuppinger, P. (2014). Mosques and minarets: Conflict, participation, and visibility in German cities. Anthropological Quarterly, 87(3), 793-818.

Landman, N., & Wessels, W. (2005). The visibility of mosques in Dutch towns. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 31(6), 1125-1140.

Leigh, A. (2006). Trust, inequality and ethnic heterogeneity. Economic Record, 82(258), 268-280.

Lewis, H. (2010). Community moments: Integration and transnationalism at ‘refugee’ parties and events. Journal of refugee Studies, 23(4), 571-588.

Ley, D. (2008). The immigrant church as an urban service hub. Urban Studies, 45(10), 2057- 2074.

Littlefield, M. B. (2010). Social services, faith-based organizations, and the poor. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 39(6), 1014-1026.

Mackenzie, A. (n.d.). Placemaking and Place-led Development. Retrieved March 20, 2018, from https://www.pps.org/article/placemaking-and-place-led-development-a-new- paradigm-for- cities-of-the-future

Markusen, A., & Gadwa, A. (2010). Creative placemaking. Washington, DC: National Endowment for the Arts.

Martinović, B. (2013). The inter-ethnic contacts of immigrants and natives in the Netherlands: A two- sided perspective. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 39(1), 69-85.

Maussen, M. (2004). Policy discourses on mosques in the Netherlands 1980–2002: Contested constructions. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 7(2), 147-162.

Mayer, J. (2007). ‘In God have I put my trust’: refugees and religion. Refugee Survey Quaterley, 26(2), 6- 10

Mazumdar, S. (1992). Women, Culture and Politics: Engendering the Hindu Nation. Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East, 12(2), 1-24.

Mazumdar, S., & Mazumdar, S. (2009). Religious placemaking and community building in diaspora. Environment and Behavior, 41(3), 307-337.Martinovic, 2013

McNeely, J. (1999). Community building. Journal of Community Psychology, 27(6), 741-750.

Meder, T., & Dibbits, H. C. (1999). Kasbah in de Kanaalstraat. Beeldvorming in en rond een multi- etnische stadswijk: een verkenning. Volkskundig Bulletin, 25.

Milligan, M. J. (2003). Displacement and identity discontinuity: The role of nostalgia in establishing new identity. Symbolic Interaction, 26, 381-403.

Mitchell, R. E., & Reid, D. G. (2001). Community integration: Island tourism in Peru. Annals of tourism research, 28(1), 113-139.

Morey, P., & Yaqin, A. (2010). Muslims in the Frame. Interventions, 12(2), 145-156.

Moskeewijzer. (2018). Dichtstbijzijnde Moskeeën. Retrieved March 2, 2018, from https://moskeewijzer.nl/

NOS. (2017, March 14). Het aantal moslims stijgt, maar met hoeveel? Retrieved February 17, 2018, from https://nos.nl/artikel/2163084-het-aantal-moslims-stijgt-maar-met-hoeveel.html

Nuyts, K. (2017). “Community Building” Wat is dat? Kennisplein. Retrieved from https://www.kennisplein.be/Pages/Community-building.aspx

Önen, I. (n.d.) . Ulu Moskee te Lombok. Retrieved May 25, 2018, from http://onen.sharebox.nl/nl/project/gerealiseerd/ulu-moskee-lombok-te-utrecht

Özbilgin, M. F., & Woodward, D. (2004). ‘Belonging’and ‘otherness’: sex equality in banking in Turkey and Britain. Gender, Work & Organization, 11(6), 668-688.

Phalet, K., & Ter Wal, J. (2014). Moslim in Nederland. Religie en migratie. Sociaal-wetenschappelijke databronnen en literatuur. The Hague: Social and Cultural Planning Office.

Phoenix, A. (2011). Somali young women and hierarchies of belonging. Young, 19(3), 313-331.

Portes, A., & Landolt, P. (2000). Social capital: promise and pitfalls of its role in development. Journal of Latin American Studies, 32(2), 529-547.

Read, S. (2012). “Technology and the Body Public”,. Retrieved from http://www.tudelft. academia.edu/StephenRead

Razack, S. (2008). Casting out: The eviction of Muslims from Western law and politics. University of Toronto Press.

Roose, E. (2009). The architectural representation of Islam: Muslim-commissioned mosque design in the Netherlands. Amsterdam University Press.

Rubertone, P. E. (2008). Archaeologies of Placemaking. One World Archaeology Series.

Saar, M., & Palang, H. (2009). The dimensions of place meanings. Living reviews in landscape research, 3(3), 5-24.

Schinkel, W. (2008). De Gedroomde Samenleving. Klement.

Schinkel, W. (2009). “De productie van marginaliteit”. In The Mosque. Political, Architectural and Societal Transformations, eds. Ergün Erkoçu and Cihan Bugdaci, Rotterdam: NAi Uitgevers, 2009, pp. 70–78.

Slootman, M., & Duyvendak, J. W. (2015). Feeling Dutch: the culturalization and emotionalization of citizenship and second-generation belonging in the Netherlands. Fear,anxiety, and national

identity: immigration and belonging in North America and Western Europe. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 147-68.

Smeekes, A., Verkuyten, M., & Poppe, E. (2011). Mobilizing opposition towards Muslim immigrants: National identification and the representation of national history. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50(2), 265-280.

Sterckx, L. en B. van der Ent (2015). Met twee maten gemeten. In: W. Huijnk, J. Dagevos, M. Gijsberts en I. Andriessen (red.). Werelden van verschil. Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau.

Strang, A., & Ager, A. (2010). Refugee integration: Emerging trends and remaining agendas. Journal of Refugee Studies, 23(4), 589-607.Arango, V. B. (1998). Migrants in Europe: Between integration and exclusion. Metropolis.

Sunier, J. T. (2009). Beyond the domestication of Islam. A reflection on research on Islam in European societies.

Tamimi Arab, P. (2015). Amplifying Islam: Pluralism, Secularism, and Religious Sounds in The Netherlands (Doctoral dissertation, University Utrecht).

Tamimi Arab, P. (2013). Mosques in the Netherlands: Transforming the meaning of marginal spaces. Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, 33(4), 477-494.

Tubergen, van, F. (2007). Religious Affiliation and Participation among Immigrants in a Secular Society: A Study of Immigrants in The Netherlands. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 33(5), 747– 765. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691830701359181

Van Dijk, H. (1999). Twentieth-century Architecture in the Netherlands. 010 Publishers.

Velasco González, K., Verkuyten, M., Weesie, J., & Poppe, E. (2008). Prejudice towards Muslims in the Netherlands: Testing integrated threat theory. British Journal of Social Psychology, 47(4), 667-685.

Versteegh, K. (2015). Moskee nee, klinkt het vaak. Retrieved from https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2015/03/12/moskee-nee-klinkt-het-vaak-1473625-a738418

Vliegenthart, R. (2007). Framing immigration and integration: Facts, parliament, media and anti- immigrant party support in the Netherlands.

Wouters, I, L. (1985). 'De wijk in het midden van de stad. Nederlanders en buitenlanders in de buurt Lombok, in: E Bovenkerk, K. Bruin, L. Brunt en H. Wouters: Vreemd volk, gematigde gevoelens. Etnische verhoudingen in een grote stad. 7o-153

Yang, F., & Ebaugh, H. R. (2001). Transformations in new immigrant religions and their global implications. American Sociological Review, 269-288.

Zuithof, M. (2003, Oktober 15). Integratie in voorbeeldwijk Lombok ‘Geen Disneyland voor Allochtonen. Retrieved March 2, 2018, from https://www.zorgwelzijn.nl/integratie-in- voorbeeldwijk-lombok-geen-disneyland-voor-allochtonen-zwz012824w/

6 Appendix 6.0 Appendix A. Topiclist

Appendix A. Topic List Migration background • Reasons for migration (of parents) • Important organizations • Role mosque / religion

Meaning of religion • Practice of religion • Role of religion in life • Expected role of religion in country of origin (of parents) • Discrepancy between role of religion now and expected?

Meaning mosque • Meaning of mosque • Meaning of mosque in CoO • Discrepancy? • Atmosphere in mosque • Role of board mosque? What do they address? • Experienced religious function and socio-cultural function

• Reaction to new migrants

• Beneficial in life

Muslim community • Role of community in life • How much contact? • Where? Contact in mosque or also outside? • The community and atmosphere

• Friends, communities outside mosque?

• Difference between Muslim community and other communities ? Belonging • Beneficial in life • Where do you feel at home? • Where do you not feel at home? • And at the mosque? • And around the community?

6.1 Appendix B. Codebook Nameme SourcesSources References Background mosque 1 1 General markers and means 11 20

Access employment 5 7

Access health care 5 5

Access housing 7 9

Access schools 6 6

Ataturk 1 1 Belonging 0 0 Understanding 2 3 Connectedness 6 10

Memory of the past 4 6

Mosque as second 3 6 home Feeling at home 8 12 Meaning mosque 10 19 Prestige building 2 6 Other religions 1 1

Desirable role mosque 8 9

Goals mosque 2 5 Mosque as meeting 7 11 place Atmosphere mosque 2 2 Unique mosque 3 7

Community 3 5 Community - negative 2 2 relation No feeling at home 4 4

Gossiping 5 7 Social contacts 6 9 Public mosque 1 1 Role religion in life 6 6 Context 9 11 Non-religious mosque 6 6 visit Practising Islam 8 8

Collaboration 2 3 Support organizations 7 7