Johan Leman, 9 September 2025
A “non-place” is a space where things are organized in the same way they are almost everywhere. For example: you set up an event in Brussels in such a way that it could just as well take place in Molenbeek, Schaerbeek, or Anderlecht, with visitors essentially facing something that might happen anywhere.
Anyone who knows Molenbeek well understands that it currently has a potential that far exceeds that of a “non-place.” It has an exceptional past and there is an enormous social and cultural potential, but it is clearly underdeveloped and far too rarely elevated to a level that transcends the local.
This potential, however, is within reach, and it lies precisely in those neighborhoods of Molenbeek along the canal, which today are perceived as the most problematic. The tragedy of Molenbeek is that this potential is either not seen or not developed. In fact, it goes back to three phases in time, which are quite unique for Belgium, though not unique on a European or global scale:
The traces of these three periods are there, ready to be developed. Socially and culturally, two scenarios can be followed:
First scenario: what exists is largely ignored, and “Culture” with a capital C is imported from outside, with attempts to warm up the population for its reception by activating the existing subcultures at their popular level.
Second scenario: efforts are made to raise the existing popular subcultures to a higher level and to build connections with the richness of the lost but still latent past.
The first scenario has the advantage of being quickly manageable, but it will only achieve superficial success and will soon be rejected.
The second scenario requires time, intensive work, deep solidarity between associations willing to commit locally, and of course also support and input from outside, but it will lead to lasting results.
Molenbeek 2030… which scenario will be chosen?
Back