Approved urban colonizers may act in public as if at home

Evidence

In each of these instances, the individual, lacking the tacit approval of those in charge, was required to act in such a way as to suggest that his use of the setting was a legitimate one-he was required to act, in effect, as if he were in a public place. … In contrast, colonizers blessed with approval need be prepared for no such performances. They are free, rather, to behave (at least within limits) as if they were in the privacy of their own homes. Thus, some pensioners in bus depots make no pretense of being there to take a bus. They carry nothing to suggest that they might be traveling and move about the depot in an easygoing, unhurried way. No one watching could possibly assume their presence was in any way related to the hurry-up business of travel. They make no bones about the fact that they know one another, often hailing each other by first name across the room. When a pensioner sits down to take a nap, he does so purposefully, settling himself as comfortably as possible, making no attempt to suggest that the resulting nap is accidental. Their dress is casual, often sloppy, usually wrinkled, although most generally clean. A few do affect a suit and tie, sometimes even a hat, but the various items of apparel seldom match, and no one would be likely to take them for traveling businessmen. — Lyn H. Lofland, World of Strangers_ Order and Action in…, 748

Categorization

• DEFINE: Concretely defines ‘backstage language’ as the relaxed behavior approved residents may display in colonized public settings, versus the performance demanded of the unauthorized.
• ADDENDUM: The distinction between approved colonizers behaving as-if-private and unauthorized users performing legitimate use parallels civil inattention’s limits—relevant to the reader’s cross-reading of Simmel and Lofland.