May 15th, 2024
 

As I engaged with community members for my research, I could not help but notice the sharp contrasts in opinion about cultural regeneration in Paisley. Thinking back to the start of my PhD journey, I remember the informal scoping conversations I had with people who lived and worked in the town. One, in particular, stays with me: a discussion with council staff where I voiced my concerns about Paisley moving towards becoming a “Creative City.”

​

The concern was not abstract. It was rooted in my own experience of Amsterdam, where I grew up. Amsterdam has become a leading example of the Creative City model, and I have seen first-hand both the opportunities it can bring and the pressures it imposes.

​

In Paisley, I felt a stronger kinship with community organisations, who often expressed unease about the council’s cultural decision-making. Their vigilance mirrored my own reservations. This tension — between a council eager to emphasise growth and investment, and community groups more intent on protecting local identity and inclusivity — revealed to me how cultural regeneration is never neutral. Biases exist on all sides, including my own.

​

Looking back, I see clearly how my upbringing in Amsterdam shaped my perspective. It has made me both critical and cautious, qualities that colour my approach to Paisley’s regeneration and frame the way I relate to council officers and community activists alike.

​

This has been as much a reflective journey as a research project. My own experiences and assumptions are not easily set aside; they run like threads through every interview, workshop and encounter. Acknowledging this has allowed me to see more clearly how my position shapes not only my research, but also the ways I engage with the cultural dynamics unfolding in Paisley.