1959: (Class Zone I — 9.7 Percent and the Sylvains — Those Wealthy Relatives Making Up the Multitiered Class Zone I Living Southeast of Champ de Mars and in …

1959: (Class Zone I — 9.7 Percent and the Sylvains — Those Wealthy Relatives Making Up the Multitiered Class Zone I Living Southeast of Champ de Mars and in More Distant Suburbs at Only 9.7 Percent of the Urban Population, “Family Property Was Common at This Level” and Communities Were “Less Religious” with “University Studies Remaining the Most Effective Way to Secure a High Income” — the Sylvains Being Members of Class Zone I, Comhaire-Sylvain’s Purpose Not to Reinforce Segregation but to Foreground Mobility Between the Urban Population): Those wealthy relatives made up the multitiered Class Zone I, who lived southeast of Champ de Mars and in more distant suburbs and who made up only 9.7 percent of the urban population. Comhaire-Sylvain reported that family property was common at this level and that the communities were less religious, with university studies remaining the most effective way to secure a high income in the areas of state governance, banking, shop ownership, law, and medicine. The Sylvains, for example, were members of Class Zone I. However, Comhaire-Sylvain’s purpose in using the spatial-class-culture descriptions was not to reinforce segregation between urban dwellers, but to foreground mobility between the urban population — she placed her own family in the map not to claim privilege but to make privilege legible, to show that the ethnographer was not outside the system she described.