Research Paper with Appendices

PARK PLACE BAR & THE WEST SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD MINI-ETHNOGRAPHY/PILOT STUDY TODD WARNER

ABSTRACT:

This article describes a pilot study and mini-ethnography completed in 2013 of the West Side Neighborhood in Charleston, West Virginia and specifically one bar within the neighborhood – Park Place Bar.  The study’s primary purpose was one of “enlightenment.”  The researcher, Todd Warner, sought to learn more about the culture and the people within the culture.  The article specifically addresses the two topics of relationships and spirituality within its context. Mr. Warner hopes that “enlightenment” will make him a more effective catalyst for Christian small group multiplicative reproduction within the neighborhood. This study is the beginning of a much more in-depth ethnography. [Currently being undertaken – December 2015]

INTRODUCTION:

In July 2012, I took a class a Wheaton College that changed my life.  The class was called Launching Apostolic Movements and it was taught by author and professor, Alan Hirsch.  It was from that class that God revealed to me my purpose and calling as a “catalyst” for Christ.  As author and missiologist Neil Cole describes himself “I will be an architect of ideas, with catalytic elements to fuel the acceleration of Jesus movements [and gospel planting] everywhere.[i]

Since that moment, I have had an unexplained deep calling towards the West Side neighborhood in my hometown of Charleston, West Virginia.  Living in Charleston for the past twenty two years, I already had a very good idea which neighborhood had the worst reputation for crime, drugs, and gangs.  However, I looked into it a little further by speaking with a lot of people including two policemen that worked in the city.  They confirmed my suspicions and were very helpful in narrowing down the common meeting places and bars within the neighborhood.

I continued my research on the web and was surprised by the amount of information that could be obtained on some of the sites.  One in particular, NeighborhoodScout[ii], provided a great deal of detailed information:   West Side is an urban neighborhood of about 1500 people located on the western side of Charleston.  It is a very diverse ethnic neighborhood.  Its crime index is a 5 out of 100 (100 is safest).  This means 95% of the country’s neighborhoods are safer to live in.  It also has 100 times more crimes per square mile than the rest of West Virginia.  It has a higher divorce rate than 97% of the country.  It has a higher poverty rate than 93% of the country.

In January of 2013, I opened up my second physical therapy clinic -non-profit business – Pay IT Forward PT –   payit  in the West Side Neighborhood.  I planned to catalyze a “pay-it forward” movement (service oriented through my physical therapy) with a gospel-planting movement (Jesus-centered and Apostolic Genius oriented through weekly spiritual discussions/meetings).   My business was meant to be a “launching pad” that embodied and released all the innate power of Apostolic Genius[i]– a concept described by Alan Hirsch.

The business offered free physical therapy services to those who did not have insurance and could not afford therapy.  The only stipulation was that the patient had to agree to do three “out-of-the-ordinary” nice things for people if they benefited from the therapy. My hope was that the business would provide an avenue into the neighborhood in order to develop relationships. Over a few months, I treated several people and formed some good relationships, but not to the extent that I had expected and not with individuals that were part of the inner-fabric of the neighborhood.

At about the same time, I was introduced to a qualitative research class at Wheaton College.  Our final assignment consisted of entering an unfamiliar environment and completing a research paper on what we discovered.  As usual, God’s timing was perfect and the class, along with my previous failure to develop relationships with the PT clinic, gave me the idea and courage to dive straight into the heart of the neighborhood into one of the local bars – Park Place Bar – in order to learn, develop friendships, and discover people to mentor.   My ultimate hope was that they might become indigenous planters and catalysts for small group multiplication within the central parts of the neighborhood.  I believe that to truly impact the neighborhood, the transformation can only occur from within through “indigenization” – ensuring local believers take responsibility for the spread of the gospel[ii]. My theology and world-view also finds strong agreement with the following statements:   Every believer is an agent of the King (Christ) and has the potential for world transformation.[iii]   Salvation is not only for individuals, it is for cultures.  Each needs redeemed.[iv]  “Seek first to understand, then to be understood.”[v]

One characteristic that I found interesting about the neighborhood was that there were 31 churches within a half square mile area (see figure 1 below – the red dots and balloons are churches)!  There was a much higher density of churches in that area than in any other area in Charleston. churches-area

From this finding, so many questions arose that greatly intrigued me:   “How can crime, drugs, and divorce be so prevalent in an area so saturated with churches?” -“Would they be that high if Jesus lived in the neighborhood?” -“Do the churches reach out to people within the neighborhood that usually don’t go into the church – in other words, are they mostly “attractionally-based”  or “missionally-based” churches?”- “Is there a need to provide “missionally-based” church – doing church where the non-churched people live their lives?”- “Do the people that go into bars in the neighborhood attend church in the neighborhood?” – “Is the neighborhood as bad as people describe it?” – Would the people that frequent bars be open to participating in small Christian groups and discussions –especially within the bars?”

I could have gone on and on with questions!  I realized that to really understand the neighborhood, churches, people, and culture one would have to dedicate years, not hours.  However, as Chinese Philosopher Lao-tzu declares A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.[i] This was the primary reason for the study – to begin the journey.  This 2013 study serves as a pilot study for an in-depth ethnography of the bar and neighborhood that I have just recently begun.  I hope that this missional-incarnational approach will be effective in changing lives, catalyzing a movement, and improving the neighborhood in the coming years.

FOR THE PURPOSE OF USING THIS ARTICLE ON THE WEBSITE AND FOR PRIVACY REASONS, SOME OF THE NAMES OF THE PARTICIPANTS HAVE BEEN CHANGED – SOME HAVE NOT, AS PERMISSION HAS BEEN GRANTED.

METHODS

The data was collected through a variety of methods:  participant observation, unstructured interviews -discussions, taking photographs, and formal structured interviews in order to triangulate the data.  I determined that this bar was one of the more popular local hangouts in the neighborhood through many discussions and spending considerable observation time there.  I practiced purposeful sampling by choosing this particular bar because it appeared to be a common social spot for the types of people I was trying to develop relationships – “insiders” within the “deeper” aspects of the community and an information rich naturalistic environment.

I gained entrance into the bar to do my research through the ultimate formal gatekeeper – owner Steve Fisher – by providing my business card to the bartender – Joey – on my first visit and asking Joey to give Steve my card and have him call me.  Steve called me shortly thereafter and met me in the bar for about 30 minutes on my second visit.  We spoke about my background, intentions, purposes, and the procedures I would be using when doing the research within the bar.  He and I connected very well and he was very supportive to allow the research to take place.

I developed a set of basic formal interview questions (see Appendix D) – in order to get an emic perspective, a photography consent form, and a sign.  The purpose of the sign was to provide a passive means of attracting people to me for discussions and/or interviews in order to minimize my intrusion into the bar and minimize changes in patron interactions and behaviors from my presence.  The sign was made on Microsoft Word then placed in a tall free-standing plastic stand.  I purchased two 3-ring binders and divided the binders into two sections with a labeled divider.  The two sections consisted of the first being my hand-written field notes and the second my hand-written journal/log.  I choose my field note and journal format from a selection at Staples that was specific for research and journaling with a column to the left of the body of the page layout which allowed me to write extra notes and section the notes and logs better.

When entering the bar, I took one binder, a pen, my cell-phone- for pictures and calls, my sign, a Dictaphone and tape, a little- very little – cash, removed my wedding ring and watch, and dressed very casual with sweat pants or jeans and a t-shirt – in order to fit in better.   When I entered the bar, I would usually order a beer – again, in order to fit in, but also because I enjoyed it – and sat down in a booth in the back left corner of the main bar room away from the entrance in order to observe the majority of the room.  I put my sign on the booth table facing the bar and anyone who walked in the front entrance.  I wrote down everything I observed, smelled, heard, and felt constantly in my three-ring binder and field notes/journal.  If someone approached me to talk, I would stop writing and interact with them.  I usually would ask them if they would allow me to interview them for a school project.  If they said “yes” I would then have them sit down across from me in the booth.  I would then ask them if it was “OK” to tape the discussion.  If they said “yes”, I sat my Dictaphone on the table and began the interview while using the pre-determined interview question list I had developed as a guide to the interaction.  If they said “no” to being taped – which was more often than not (see Appendix C) – I would pull out my field notes and write down the conversation as fast as possible doing my best to keep the conversation going.   When I returned home, I would place the completed notes and journal into a duplicate 3-ring binder that was sectioned with two sections exactly like the first.  I did this due to fear of someone stealing my binder and research within the bar or when I was walking to or from my car.

I entered the bar to do research on six different occasions that totaled ten hours (see Appendix C) over a ten week time frame.  The times that I spent in the bar were between 12:30 p.m. to 6:45 p.m. – therefore, primarily in the afternoons – and primarily on weekends.   I was advised by the owner and the informal gatekeeper of the bar -“Skillet” – that I should avoid coming after dark secondary to the dangers walking to and from my car.

I did formal structured interviews with the questions with six people including one very long 1.5 hour interview with “Skillet.”  Of those six, only two would allow me to record the interviews (see Appendix C).  I had those two interviews transcribed and typed.  I also had the 28 pages of hand written notes typed.   For explanation of coding and determining categories and themes please refer to Appendix A (two pages).

CONTEXT

The West Side neighborhood is a small ethnically diverse neighborhood – about 60% black, some white, Irish, Hispanic, and Italian[ii] – located on the western side of Charleston, West Virginia.  The residents in this neighborhood number between 1500-2000 people.  Crime, drugs, partying, and divorce are prevalent within the neighborhood as noted by the information in the “Introduction” of this paper.  The patrons within Park Place Bar made nearly three times the negative comments about the neighborhood as they did positive (10 vs. 26).  The negative comments consisted of drug infestation, violence, lack of personal safety, lack of police protection and attention, unemployment, nothing for the kids, stabbings, shootings, prostitution, and that the young people did not seek work or attend church.  One person even stated “I have nothing good to say about the neighborhood.” The positive comments included convenience to the bigger city, good restaurants, good friends, the new elementary school, and strong bonds of friendship.  The patrons reported that there were many challenges to the youth in the neighborhood including them constantly getting exposed to things{drugs, violence, sex), having single parents, not being able to attend summer camps secondary to poverty,  parent incarcerations, illiteracy, poor education, no foundation for going to church, unemployment, and lacking role models in order to make good decisions.  The bar patrons made several suggestions for improvement of the neighborhood with one standing out repeatedly more than any other – the need for better police patrols and action.  I was told –whether this is true or not – that the police primarily came into the neighborhood only after violence had occurred and then would leave as quickly as they had entered.  This comment regarding the need for better police patrols to decrease crime and to pay more attention to the neighborhood was mentioned to me in some form or the other without my specific leading in 5 of the 6 structured interviews that I conducted (83% or the respondents).  Other neighborhood improvement suggestions included -in order of most often suggested:  providing free activities for the kids to keep them out of trouble, improving education, and providing more jobs.

The Park Place Bar is an establishment in the central part of the West Side neighborhood in Charleston, West Virginia.  It is owned by Steve Fisher.  Steve is a medium built white male about 55 years of age.  He declares that he is a Baptist and has accepted Jesus as his Savior.  He hasn’t gone to church for about ten years.  He is a very nice fellow and seems very Down-to-Earth.

The physical layout of the bar is primarily in the shape of a rectangle with the front door being on one of the shorter sides facing the street.  There is one large front room that contains a large bar located on the right as one walks in the door.  There is a second smaller room behind the first with a pool table and two small restrooms.  There is one small room with a closed door with gambling machines immediately to your left as you enter the front door.  There is a Sports Bar motif with TVs, a juke box, sports paraphernalia, and booths.   The bar does not serve liquor – only beer – and has a very limited selection of food.  The lighting is good up front near a couple large windows and has more shaded and dimly lit areas towards the back.  The bar is well kept with a pleasant smell and temperature.  There are several surveillance video cameras located throughout the bar from the ceiling.

The demographics of the bar patrons during my research consisted primarily of about 80% male to 20% female with ages varying from early 20s to 90s with the majority between 45-60 years of age.    The ethnicity of the patrons consisted primarily of black people (@75%) with the sub-majority being white (non-Hispanic) people (@20%).  It should be noted that these observations occurred during weekend afternoons and most likely changes with the night crowd. Five people that I interviewed reported they had been coming to the bar between 3- 8 years indicating a considerable longevity of attendance.    The average time lived in the neighborhood by seven patrons was 6 years providing me with a fairly good experience base for answering neighborhood questions.  Several of the patrons I had interviewed had had difficult family histories including divorce (several people) – and one being taken away from his parents and put into a foster home.

SIGNIFICANT FEATURES

As mentioned above, the data suggestion for more police patrols and protection might be significant.  However, the two themes that I found the most revealing personally and potentially useful for my calling and purposes were RELATIONSHIPS and NEIGHBORHOOD VIEWS/OPONIONS OF CHRISTIANITY.  I will expand on those two themes in this section.

Relationships

As mentioned previously, I met with the owner Steve Fisher on my second visit to the bar and we spoke for about thirty minutes.  He was initially suspicious of me as possibly being an undercover police officer, but fortunately we discovered we had a mutual friend which alleviated his suspicions.  He and I connected – there was a great connection between us.  Most surprising about Steve was that he not only gave me permission – stating “you can do whatever you need to do here,” but also suggested that I could start a church (small group) in the bar on Sundays after our first meeting.  That really surprised and inspired – and is still inspiring – me

Upon my first visit to the bar in which I was writing in my journal, James – better known as “Skillet” (see photos on website) “scoped me out”-  as he described.  He approached me only minutes after I had sat down and was curious to the point of a polite interrogation.  We spoke a second time another day briefly, and lastly, and most importantly, for over 2 hours on my last visit to the bar.  This last connection between us was a very strong one.  After I recorded about one hour, I simply turned off the recorder and we talked and talked.

Skillet appears to be the informal gatekeeper in this setting.  He expressed to me that after our first discussion he told his friends that I was “alright.”  I found this very interesting because soon after our initial conversation on day one, two of his friends – Fred and Henry approached me and allowed me to interview them.   Not only is Skillet the gatekeeper, he also appears to be the “father-figure” within the bar.  For example, someone that watches over others.  In one occasion, I watched him approach a young woman who seemed upset and was talking to herself and shaking in a booth behind me.  I overheard him ask her if she was doing alright and if he could do anything to help her.  He has lived in the neighborhood for about ten years and has been coming to the bar for five.  He told me that he plans to retire there.

He was very encouraging to me about my ideas of small group catalyzation and my desire to learn about the neighborhood.  On our last conversation he said “If you really want to know what goes on in this neighborhood, you need to see what goes on during Thursday through Saturday night.”  He proceeded to offer to drive me around and show me every street corner and bar and to explain to me what is actually occurring within the safety of his car.”  I told him that I’d like to do that and he gave me his cell telephone number.  I plan to do this with him in the near future.  I especially enjoyed one quote from Skillet “Enjoy the day and try to do something good for somebody.  At least put a smile on someone’s face.”  I believe that Skillet can be an informant for me regarding what is really happening in this neighborhood, but beyond and much more important than that, I believe that he and I can develop a long-lasting friendship.   He nicknamed me “White-Chocolate” during our last conversation.  I took this as a positive suggestion of inclusion, but don’t tell anyone.

Another significant finding was the “A-MEN” group of which Skillet is a member – more appropriately a leader.  The group was called that because – at least at one time or another – many of its informal members go to or have gone to church.   The group is made up of about 4-5 black males between the ages of 50-70 years of age.  It’s a very close knit group that has been present every time I have entered the bar.  They sit in the same area all the time near the front of the bar just to the right as you walk in the door – the other bar patrons appear to be aware of the informal rule to sit elsewhere.   Skillet, Fred, and Henry each described this “club” with terms of real endearment and caring.  For example, Skillet says that the group was his safe haven when his mom was dying and Fred reports that the group adopted him.

There were others that spoke of the bar and the relationships within the bar in positive terms.  For example, nearly everyone I interviewed told me that they came to the bar because of friendships and one female (Tasha – name changed) reported that she came to the bar because it was the only place she knew that was safe.   There is definitely a community and personal need that this bar is providing to many within the community.

I found it interesting how many white people would come into the bar by themselves. Once they came into the establishment they would sit alone and watch TV and drink beer.  They seemed to ignore the other black patrons.  I did not notice much interaction between the black and white patrons with the exception of the bar tender Joey (white) and the black patrons – including the A-MEN group .  Even though they didn’t interact much, each ethnic group appeared to get along fine and without any type of confrontation or personal discomfort.  However, it was interesting to note the informal defined areas of where people could sit and socialize.

Lastly – although I could write about at least ten more interesting things – one of the most enlightening lessons I learned came from my newfound understanding of linguistics.  From the moment I first entered the bar I heard continual profanity – at least profane to the average American- and “street talk.”  The words “Fu..”, “Sh..”, “GD”, “Ni….”, “MFER” were used in 90% of the conversations between all ethnicities.  This included being used lavishly in the A-MEN group.  I also heard the following words and phrases “popp’n off”, “pack’n”, and “brotha.”   I guarantee I heard at least 200 profane words an hour.  However, I rarely heard any of the words used to belittle or berate someone.  I rarely heard the words used in anger or discontent.  Ninety-nine percent of the time the words were being used with laughing, stimulating conversations, as loving greetings – “What’s up Mother FEEER?” – or with pats on the back, smiles, and genuine comradery.

It also became very apparent that the moment someone sat down to talk with me these profane words stopped – or at least the majority of them stopped.  It was apparent to me that if you were “in” the group than you were spoken to with the “groups language” indicating a close-knit inclusion and bond between you and the group.  In my case, I was an outsider – not from this bar, this neighborhood, and at times –not of the same ethnicity – therefore, I wasn’t spoken to the same way.  This was a major lesson for me that language –even language that some deem profane – is a strong bonding force between and for people.  The members of this culture know that the people in South Hills – the upper class neighborhood – don’t speak that way – this motivates them even more to be different and find uniqueness for their culture and ethnicity through this avenue.  I must note that I was beginning to feel more accepted and included towards the end of the study.

Neighborhood Views/Opinions of Christianity

Of the bar patrons I interviewed and the owner, 6 out of 7 said that they were Christian.  However, only one reported attending church regularly.  One, Tommy (name changed), reported that he believed in God and Jesus but that he had considerable doubts and really wasn’t a Christian. Three patrons – Fred, Skillet, and Henry (black males) – showed strong interest in attending a small group church service in the bar on Sundays. One patron, Tasha (black female), showed slight interest.  These four felt that a small group in the bar could work.  One man stated “You would be surprised how many people would be interested and come to that.” However, Tommy and Robert (white males) felt that it absolutely would not work.

It was also mentioned by 4 of 7 interviewees that people in the neighborhood do not want to hear about Jesus.   I wondered if this was because of the saturation of churches within the area and the practices of those churches.   It was also mentioned a couple times to me that religion and politics aren’t something you talk about much in the neighborhood. When asking the patrons what the neighborhood thought about church:  two said neutral, two said positive, and two said negative.  When asking about what the neighborhood thought about Jesus:  two said positive and three said negative.  I found this a little surprising as I expected Jesus to rate higher than church in the neighborhood.  The comment was made by two observers that church-goers in the neighborhood don’t practice what they preach – indicating the possibility and perception that some Christians in the neighborhood seem hypocritical and judgmental to the unchurched.

Two interesting things occurred during the questioning on spiritual matters:  One person became very emotional when I asked him about Jesus – so emotional he cried and had to go outside for a moment before returning to continue the discussion with me.  I found out later that he was having marriage problems and hadn’t been to church for a while.  He also was the person that made the comment – noted above – about how surprised I would be regarding how many people would attend a small group in the bar on Sundays.

The other interesting thing was that Tasha had accepted Jesus because she found it to be her best alternative.  She stated that things had gotten so bad with addiction and her broken life that she wanted a change in her life – and that change was Jesus.  She reported that since accepting Jesus in 2010 her life had turned for the better and that she was currently taking classes at Garnet Community College trying to get a degree in business administration.  I found this the perfect example for how God can use suffering with the best interest of a person.

CONCLUSION

The primary purpose of this study was to provide cultural enlightenment regarding the West Side neighborhood and Park Place Bar.  I wondered if I could develop relationships and become more accepted within the setting and the answers have been a resounding “yes!”  My newfound relationship with owner Steve Fisher –, Fred, Henry, Tasha, Tommy, and Robert has been surprising enough, but when I factor in the deeper and more significant relationship that has developed with Skillet, I am dumbfounded.   I have been able to discover this relationship with Skillet – the bar’s informal gatekeeper, the bar’s leader of the A-men group, the bar’s “Father-Figure,” and a major informant to what goes on in the “tougher aspects” of the neighborhood – over only  ten hours of participation.  The success I have had with developing relationships within this study is extremely inspiring to me and I believe intended by God to move me forward.  Therefore, this pilot study has provided me with adequate desire, education, and enlightenment to believe that a more in-depth ethnographic study is well worthwhile.  This research and mini-ethnography has proven a far more effective way to develop relationships and learn the culture of the West Side neighborhood as compared to my previous plan of using a nonprofit physical therapy clinic.

The Park Place Bar serves the important function of providing a place for its patrons to feel  needed and wanted as part of a group, a place to develop lasting meaningful relationships,  a place to come to feel safe when other places – including home – are not, and a place to receive emotional support to get through tough times.  I’ve heard people say that the best thing that could happen to a crime-ridden area is to remove all the bars in the area.  In this case, that would only have destructive effects on the neighborhood and the many individuals that find friendships and solace here.

I have learned that profanity can be a positive tool to bond people together.  I have learned of the challenges youth face in this type of environment and neighborhood.  Activities and support for the youth in the neighborhood appear to be poor.  I have learned that police patrols and more preventative action by police may be needed to improve conditions and safety.

I have learned that starting a small group church in the bar is a real possibility and some people are interested in me doing so.  I have learned that there exists a fairly significant positive/negative dichotomy between how people in the neighborhood view Christianity, Church, and Jesus and that I will need to show respect for those he don’t want to hear about or be involved with it.

I hope that others also find enlightenment from this study and my conclusions in order that they may be more effective in ministering and understanding crime-ridden and drug-infested neighborhoods.  I hope that the study leads others towards being less judgmental of profane language, bars, and non-church goers.

My ultimate hope is that this study and the more in-depth future ethnography combined with catalyzing a missional church multiplicative Jesus movement will one day serve as a model for others wanting to transform downtrodden neighborhoods.  Of course, this is dependent on successfully transforming lives and the neighborhood over the coming years.

Beyond this particular study – with this being my first experience and paper dealing with qualitative research –  I have learned that qualitative research is something God definitely wants me to incorporate into my calling and purpose as a catalyst for small group multiplicative reproduction and towards launching and maintaining a viral Jesus movement.  StrenghtFinders2.0 has designated my two top strengths (taken twice in the last 3 years) as Learner and Achiever – I am made for qualitative research.  I see the world as a classroom and these lessons have enlightened me to understand how qualitative research and I are a perfect fit.  I will continue to expand on this pilot study and research.  I hope that its missional-incarnational approach will be effective in changing lives and improving the neighborhood in the coming years.

APPENDICES:  Following Pages 12 -18

END-NOTES:  After Appendices

APPENDIX A:  CODING, AXES/CATEGORIES

Once all data had been typed and organized, I coded all of it through unitizing it with a pencil.  I then categorized it by creating categories – assigning each category with one, two, or three letter abbreviations – and applying the system to the documents.  I then used the Weft QDA program taught to us during class to “chunk” the data and develop “themes/axes.” [See Appendix A- next page- and B).  Once the data had been chunked – using Microsoft Word – I typed the Themes/Categories into a summary sheet which was exactly the same as the one on Weft QDA.  I then copied and pasted the individual “chunked” categories onto Microsoft Word Documents providing each the appropriate theme and category title.  I then corrected many typos where the transcriber had left blank spaces.  I then organized the “chunked” categories data into a three –ring binder in the same order it was listed on the Summary.  Once this was completed I reviewed the chunked data  and  using axial coding – made adjustments several times to the summary sheet and Weft QDA category list – and lastly decided upon 7 basic themes or axial codes with each having categories.(See Appendix A).  I created one ALL-ENCOMPASSING AXIAL CODE (see Appendix B).  After carefully reviewing the chunked data, themes, and axial codes I determined to focus the focus on this paper on two axial codes and their respective categories:  RELATIONSHIPS and NEIGHBORHOOD VIEWS & OPONIONS OF CHRISTIANITY.

APPENDIX A continued on next page with axes and categories.

APPENDIX A (continued):   AXES AND CATEGORIES

ALL-ENCOMPASSING AXIS:  WEST SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ENLIGHTENMENT

NEIGHBORHOOD DESCRIPTION & INFORMATION (AXIS 1)

  • Positive Neighborhood Description by Patrons PND
  • Negative Neighborhood Description by Patrons NND
  • Neighborhood Data ND – web statistics and patron basic information.

BAR DESCRIPTION & INFORMATION (AXIS 2)

  • Bar description BD –patron description of bar (non-physical)
  • Physical Description/Layout of Bar PD
  • Demographics of Bar Patrons D – ages, sex, ethnicity of patrons

BAR PATRON DESCRIPTION & INFORMATION (AXIS 3)

  • Time spent in Bar TB
  • Length of time spent in Neighborhood L
  • Family-current situation F
  • Education E
  • Work History WH
  • Ethnicity E
  • Family History FH – excluding current family situation
  • Personality/Characteristics PC
  • Names N

RELATIONSHIPS (CATEGORY & AXIS 4) R

  • Bar ethics/Behavior BE – behavior observed by patrons and employees
  • Bar Owner BO
  • Linguistics L
  • Researcher’s Personal Experiences RPE – emotions felt by researcher
  • Quotes Q

YOUTH & COMMUNITY LEADERS (AXIS 5)

  • Youth Challenges YC – within the neighborhood
  • Youth Education YE – within the neighborhood
  • Community Leaders CL– within the neighborhood

NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT SUGGESTIONS (AXIS 6)

  • Neighborhood suggestions by Bar Patrons NS
  • Police Action PA – lack of/or actual action taken routinely by police in the neighborhood.

NEIGHBORHOOD VIEWS/OPINIONS OF CHRISTIANITY (AXIS 7)

  • Religious beliefs of those in the neighborhood as described by bar patrons RBN
  • Religious beliefs of Bar Patrons RBP
  • Church-Spiritual History/Attendance of Bar Patrons CH

APPENDIX B:  ALL-ENCOMPASSING AXIAL CODE

axial-code

APPENDIX BB:  RELATIONSHIPS & SPIRITUALITY AXIAL CODES

spiritually-axial-code

spiritually-axial-code-2

APPENDIX C:  DATA COLLECTION DETAIL

DateTimeResearch TypeLocationParticipants/

Interviewees***

Total Time
5-1-20135-5:30 p.m.Observation, DiscussionPark Place BarJoey – Bartender30 minutes
5-6-20134-4:30 p.m.DiscussionPark Place BarSteve Fisher, Owner30 minutes.
7-6-201312:30-2:30 p.m.Observation, DiscussionPark Place BarJames “Skillet”2 hours
7-7-20133:50 – 5:50 p.m.Observation, Discussion, Formal InterviewsPark Place BarFred (interview- transcribed)

Tommy (interview)

2 hours
7-13-20133:14-6:14Observation, Discussion, Formal InterviewsPark Place BarHenry (interview).

Tasha (interview)

Joey –bartender

Robert (interview)

3 hours
7-14-20134:45-6:45Observation, Discussion, Formal InterviewsPark Place BarJames “Skillet”( very long interview transcribed)

Donald

2 hours
Total Time                                                                                                                                                          10 hours
 

   ***

If “interview” is noted, this means a formal interview with specific questions prepared – See Appendix D.  If “interview” is not specified it means a discussion took place.

 

Besides the participants listed, there were always many people in the bar and a bar tender present.

 

APPENDIX D:  FORMAL INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

What is your name?

Where are you from?

How long have you lived here?

How long have you come to this bar?

What do you like about this bar and the neighborhood?

What do you dislike about the neighborhood?

What are your religious beliefs or convictions?

Can you tell me about how you came to believe this way?

Do you think religion influenced your life and how?

Do you attend a church regularly?

Do you pray regularly?

What do people in the neighborhood say about church?

What do people in the neighborhood think about Christians?

What do people in the neighborhood think about Jesus?

Would you be interested in participating in a small group discussion on Jesus and scripture in this bar on Sundays for about one hour?

APPENDIX E, F, G:  LONG INTERVIEW WITH SKILLET, SIGN USED, PHOTOGRAPHS

Removed from website version of paper secondary to length and privacy issues.

APPENDIX H:  PHOTOGRAPHS

Removed from website version of paper – similar and higher quality photographs included on website.

APPENDIX I:  LAY SUMMARY

lay-todd-warnerTodd Warner graduated with honors from West Virginia University in 1993 with a Bachelor of Science Degree in Physical Therapy.  He opened Dynamic Physical Therapy & Hand Center, LLC in October 2003. The company grew dramatically and he was voted “Best Physical Therapist” 10 years in a row from 2004-2013 in Charleston, West Virginia by the readers of the Charleston Newspapers. He successfully sold his business April 2015. He met the love of his life, Kimberly (see pictured), in 2003, and married in 2004.  They have five wonderful children and are happily married.  Mr. Warner was transformed by accepting Jesus Christ in 2004.   In 2012, he was accepted into the Master’s Graduate Level Evangelism & Leadership Program at Wheaton College in Chicago, Illinois. It is through these classes – and specifically one class by Professor and Author Alan Hirsch – that Mr. Warner found his calling as a “Catalyst for Missional – Jesus Movements.”  In 2015, he graduated with honors from Wheaton College in Chicago, Illinois with a Master’s Degree and soon thereafter opened Catalyze, Inc. – a nonprofit organization that seeks to positively transform individuals and neighborhoods; educate and inspire Christians to be more active in their faith; and catalyze small Christian group creation, reproduction, and multiplication.

[1] Neil Cole,  Church3.0  (San Francisco, CA:  Jossey-Bass, 2010)  169

[1] http://www.neighborhoodscout.com/wv/charleston/west-side/

[1] Alan Hirsch,  The Forgotten Ways  (Grand Rapids, MI:  Brazos Press,  2006)  24-25, 78-81

[1] Steve Addison,  Movements That Change The World  (Downers Grove, IL:  Intervarsity Press,  2011) 116

[1] Alan Hirsch and Deborah Hirsch,  Untamed  (Grand Rapids, MI:  Brazos Press,  2010) 136

[1] Neil Cole,  Church3.0  (San Francisco, CA:  Jossey-Bass, 2010) 25

[1] Neil Cole, Organic Leadership:  Leading Naturally Right Where You Are (Grand Rapids, MI:  BakerBooks, 2009). [Kindle Edition].  Retrieved from Amazon.com.  Location 2739

[1]http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/24004.html

[1] http://www.neighborhoodscout.com/wv/charleston/west-side/