The Other Folks: René Boer - Allow complexity in your city, be imperfect
People form cities, neigborhoods, societies and communities. We live together and we depend on eachother. We know things about our friends, neighbors and family but what do others think, what do they dream about… in short, who lives around us? We start this new column with writer, researcher, and critic René Boer (37), author of Smooth City (Valiz, 2023).
Stefano: Welcome René and thanks for being the first person to be interviewed for ‘The ‘Other’ Folks’. Let’s start easy: who is René?
René: I’m 37 years old and I come from Amsterdam, born and raised. I’m a critic, curator and organiser in the fields of architecture and the arts. I also have a background in urban planning.
S: What do you remember about your study time?
R: It was very bureaucratic and very policy focused. So for me it lacked the imagination, the philosophical, the cultural.
S: How did you deal with this?
R: I became involved in various squatting groups in the city, which showed a completely different way of transforming the urban.
S: What did you learn?
R: How you can change the city together, what the power dynamics in the city are, what desires we have in regard to space and living together with others. It was an experience of living in the city in an immediate and direct way. It was very fundamental for me.
S: Did you find a connection between what you were studying and this new collective experience?
R: Over time I started to bridge and mix the professional and the personal. But that took a long time and many projects and experiments, and I think the book I wrote, (Smooth City) is one of the outcomes.
S: Why did you choose to study urban planning?
R: The excitement of the city. The intensity, the density, the spontaneity, the excitement for the collective, the life of the urban. Later, I continued with urban studies abroad.
S: And then what happened?
R: In 2010 there was a complete ban on all forms of squatting in the Netherlands. From abroad I saw how during the wave of evictions people were beaten by the police. This was the moment I decided to go back to Amsterdam.
S: To do what?
R: I needed to go back and join the communities again and support these movements striving for a different kind of Amsterdam.
S: I like that you decided to follow your feelings at that time. What are you following now, in one word?
R: I think if I had to put it in one word, I would say complexity. I don’t mean this necessarily in an intellectual way. It is engaging with the complexities that come with living with differences and multiplicity. I’m interested in how this works in the urban context and I would like to facilitate it.
S: If you have to describe in the easiest way the meaning of complexity, what would you say?
R: I think the coexistence of many things, impulses, beings, and desires, at the same time.
Engaging with the complexities that come with living with differences and multiplicity
S: A balanced coexistence?
R: Not necessarily. It can be both harmonious and conflictual. I mean, conflict is part of complexity. Of course it’s nice if people get along but sometimes conflict is unavoidable in order to grow.
S: How does modern society threat complexity?
R: People are reducing complexity everywhere in their lives. Everything becomes kind of a flattened experience. We’re losing touch with something that’s very essential to the human experience, the fact that we are complex beings.
S: Is there also a risk behind complexity?
R: There is a risk of romanticising it. A lot of people already have a lot to handle in their lives and it’s not about making it even more difficult. I’m in favour of allowing for complexity in the city in the sense of allowing for multiplicity of people and their desires.
S: Following this flattening process, that you also explain with the notion of ‘smoothness’, can we also find examples in the past?
R: There is a long history of smoothness, but there’s also a long history of people resisting these forms of control. I feel that, with particular regard to the city, forms of control are winning nowadays.
S: You are talking about how these forms of control are winning and that everything is getting more flattened, but do we have an example that can give us hope? Otherwise, we are just looking at a sinking boat without doing anything…
R: There are many, such as this newspaper or the associated initiative Vrij Beton, which is a collective project to free properties from the real estate market and to face gentrification by doing so.
S: What is your relationship with Amsterdam now?
R: That’s a really good question. And I have to say, I’m often very pessimistic about where this city is going. I feel like the city is slipping through my fingers, I’m losing it, as if what we had is disappearing day by day.
S: Why are you still in Amsterdam?
R: Because we have not reached the end yet. It’s a process, and there are still moments that show another city is possible. A few days ago I was at a performance night with amazing artists and I was surprised and honoured that these people are still willing to come to Amsterdam, to show their work and invest in the city.
S: Are you also still involved in something within the city?
R: I am. I’m currently doing a lot of projects in the city, working with a lot of communities and working on my own collective. So I’m still in. I’m volunteering in a squat and I try in many ways to be a part of this city. So, when do you abandon the sinking ship of Amsterdam? I don’t know.
S: Do you still doubt leaving or staying?
R: I have to say I’ve thought many times about leaving Amsterdam, but I’m not sure about it. In any case I’m optimistic when I see new generations keeping up the fight for the city.
S: To conclude, could you provide a tip, a suggestion or a message, for people who are reading this interview?
R: Allow for the complexity in your life and in your urban environment. That’s difficult for everyone, but nobody is perfect — that’s actually the point. The point is not to attain perfection. The point is to allow for the imperfection, reflecting the way human beings are.