entrevista a appadurai

8/11/2019 Entrevista a Appadurai

1/10

Yale University, School of Architecture

Illusion of Permanence: Interview with Arjun Appadurai by Perspecta 34Author(s): Arjun AppaduraiReviewed work(s):Source: Perspecta, Vol. 34 (2003), pp. 44-52Published by: The MIT Presson behalf of Perspecta.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1567314.

Accessed: 14/02/2012 19:25

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Yale University, School of Architectureand The MIT Pressare collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve

and extend access to Perspecta.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mitpresshttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1567314?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1567314?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mitpress


2/10

LLUSON

P R

O

N

INTERVEWIT

RJUNPPD

Y

PERSPEC4

ISSUES

OF GLOBALIZATION RE CENTRAL NTHE

DISCUSSION OF THE TEMPORARY

AND OFTEN

UNSTABLE

PROCESSES OF

CITIES AND

CONTEMPORARY

IFE.

THE

ANTHROPOLOGIST RJUN APPADURAIHAS DEVELOPED

CONCRETECONCEPTS

AND

TERMS

FOR UNDERSTANDINGMANY

ASPECTS OF

GLOBALIZATION,

ARTICULARLYN

CITIES LIKEBOMBAY/MUMBAI. HE FOLLOWINGS A TELEPHONE

CONVERSATION ETWEENTHE

EDITORSOF

PERSPECTA

34 AND ARJUN

APPADURAI

THAT

TOOK

PLACE

ON

14

JULY2002.

In

preparation

or

this

discussion,

the

following

exts were

consulted:

Arjun

Appadurai,

Modernity

t

Large:

Cultural imensions

of Globalization

(Minneapolis:

University

of Minnesota

Press,

1996); ArjunAppadurai, Deep

Democracy:

Urban

Governmentality

and the Horizon of

Politics,

PublicCulture

14,1

(2002),

41-47;

ArjunAppadurai, Spectral

Housing

and Urban

Cleansing:

Notes on Millennial

Mumbai,

ublicCulture

2,

3

(2000),627-51; ArjunAppadurai, GrassrootsGlobalizationnd the ResearchImagination, ublicCulture 2, 1 (2000),1-19;

ArjunAppadurai,

Dead

Certainty:

Ethnic Violence

in the

Era of

Globalization,

Public Culture

10,

2

(1998),

225-47.

P34

From

the social location in which

you speak,

anthropology,

how do

you

understand

the

questions

we raise in

this

journal?

How do

you

think about

architecture

or

building?

Arjun Appadurai

Anthropology

s

notoriously apricious,

even

promiscuous

in

its

interests,

but

I

think t's air o

say

that there is a

revived nterest

apart

from ssues

of

transnationality

nd

flows and

globalization-in

the

city.

Urban

anthropology

had become

for

a while

a

somewhat

small and

specialized

field,

and

although

I

have to correct or

my

own bias and interestand sense of

my

own

drift,

think hat's

changing,

that

there

is a more

general

resuscitationof interest

n

things

urban.There are

a

numberof reasons for

that,

not the least

being

the

sense

that in

the

city

a

variety

of

important

rans-sectionaland

transnational

hings

are

being

played

out. Therehas also

been

a

standing

interest,

which

continues

to be

very

active,

in

the

problematics

of

space.

Here,

someone

like

de Certeau

remainsan

important

eference

point.

As

forarchitecture

pecifically,

my

interest

n it

is not a

product

of

generaltheorizing

r

broad

conceptual

interests,

but

comes froma

sense

that

it's

catching

a lot of

vital

debates and

energies.

The most salient

fact

is

that

in

my

recent

work n

India,

and

particularly

n

Bombay,

I

have been

deeply impressed

with

the

energy,

ervor,

nd

engagement

that surround

architectural ircles both

in

terms of

practitioners

nd in

terms

of

teachers, students,

and institutions.

There s a reflection

oing

on

among

architects

n

India-which

may

well be

part

of

something

more

widespread

about what we call a crisis

of

the

discipline :

hat

does

it

do,

what

ought

it

to be

doing,

etc. That

generalproblem

has

always

interestedme.

While

recognize

that

there

are

debates

going

on

in

Europe,

he

United

States,

and elsewhere

in

the

world,

I

sense

that in

places

like India he

disciplinary

risis,

which

may

be

ongoing

in

architecture nd

many

other

fields,

including

nthropology,

s

in a

special

and

deep

dialogue

with

the crises

in

social lifeand the

development

of

things

likeurban

planning

and

housing.

This

is not an

inward-looking

risis but a crisis that is in a fruitful

ialogue

with

a

variety

of other

social crises

and

contradictions.

Architectures an

especially

44

Perspecta

34


3/10

Appadurai

interesting

ite

today,

both

n

places

ike ndia ndmore

broadly,

ecause

of

the kinds f

globalizing

uestions

nwhichwe are nterested.

THE

MODERN

AND THE

CONTEMPORARY:LOWS

AND RELATIONSOF

DISJUNCTURE

P34 In

developing

a frameworkor

Perspecta

34

focusing

on

temporary

rchitecture,

we were interested n the

ecology

of mobile

forms

and

processes

that influence he

contemporary

uilt

landscape-tourism,

displacements

and

migrations, ousing

markets,

protests,

and disasters natural nd man-made.You eem

to claim hat these

processes,

when understood n relations f

disjuncture,

re

significant

n

shaping

he

globalizing

world.How

are these relations

of

disjuncture articularly

ew

or

contemporary?

In

his

regard,

what s the differencebetween the modernand the

contemporary?

AA How he ideaof relations

f

disjuncture

efines

omething

ewor

contemporary

s a

tricky uestion.Clearly,

lements f the

kinds f

things

I

refer o

by

using

he

trope

of

disjuncture

an be seen

in

earlier

imes

and

nother

ontexts,

but

I hink

hereare wo or three

hings

hat

might

definehe newness

question.

One s a relational

nswer,

which

s

that

while

we havehad

hings

ike

migration

ndvariousorms

f mass

mediationor

a

very

ong

ime,

and

each has a

kind

f

deephistory,

heir

special

elationship-as

argue

n

my

book

Modernity

t

Large-seems

strikingly

ifferent

ow han

n

imes

past.

When

ou

add more

pecific

elements

o

that,

or

example

heIT

informationechnology]

evolution,

which

ffects

directly

r

ndirectly any,many

ther

hings

n

tsfield f

force,

t's

very

difficult

o

see

it

as

having

smooth

or continuous

istory.

If

you

urtherhrow

n

he

special

orceof the

ideology

f

themarkets a

regulativedeology

ince

1989,you

cannot

asily

ee the

global

hegemony

f that

deology

n

earlier

eriods.

Allhis s to extend

he

relationalnswer nd

say

that,

yes,

the

elementswe look

at allhave heir

eep

histories ut heir elationsre

strikingly

ifferent,

ndsome of

them,

ike he

IT

evolution,

re

plainly

new.The

challenge

s thatwe cannot

develop strong

heory

f

their

newness

precisely

ecause heowlof Minervaas not

yet

flown.As

my

colleague

nd riendKeithHart

ays

in

Money

nan

Unequal

World,

e

are

n

he

first

ew

years

of

a

revolutionhatcouldbe

as

long

or

onger

than he

agricultural

evolution.

eople

who

ived

n

he first

decades

of

the

agricultural

evolutionould

hardly

avebeen

expected

o

spin

out

all

its

implications

or

he next everal

enturies ndeven millennia.n

hat

sense,

we are

still

roping

nd

scrambling,

utI hink hat

doesn'tmake

it

mpossible

o sense

that,

ay,

he

IT

evolutions

launching

s intoa

differentind f technical nd

echnological

rder. o therearea number

ofsubstantive

ays

o

engage

with

he

question

fnewness-I

mainly

o

that

by

ooking

t

relations

etween lements

ather

han

ocusing

n

single

lements,

ike

migration

r mass media.

Another

ay

one can makea

convincingrgument

boutnewness

is

by

ooking

t the

logic

of the

dispersal

felementsikemass

media,

market

deology,

nd

electronic

echnology

hathavea

planetary

distributionhat s

striking

n

ts

reach,

n

ts

coverage,

ompared

with

earlier

arge

evolutions,

ither

deological

r

technological.

f

you

examine

this

dispersal,

t

produces nexpected

elations etween arious

rders

of

things.

In

all

of this s a

dialogue

with

Marxistdeasabout he relations

among

material

ife,

echnology,

ocial

relations,

deology,

ndso on.

These

deas,

directing

s to lookat

the

points

f

articulationetween

layers

f

social

existence,

havebeen

our

trongest

ssets

for

ooking

t

theserelations

n

a kind f

general,

ndstill

nspiring,

ay.

f

you

ookat

the relations

f

employment

hatare

now

part

f

the

result f

global

corporate

trategies,

heyclearly

nvolvemovements f

people,

killed

and

semiskilled,

nto conomicnichesat

very

hortnotice.This

completely

onfounds

ny

crude dea hata

particularconomy

eenina

spatially

ounded

way

can havea

simple elationship

etweenbase

elements

nd

superstructure

lements,

or

example,

ecauseeach of

these

layers

an

be

seen

as

a

part

f

global irculatory

ystems.

So

indeedhereareverticalelations

n

hisMarxist

iew,

and Marxwas

by

no means

wrong,

but he

layers

eem

now

o be

inescapably arts

of

circulatoryystems

n

heir wn

right,

ndalso

at

a

global

evel.

Therefore,

he kinds f

causalitieshatunderlieMarxist

hinking

about he relations

mong,

or

example,

echnology,

roduction,

nd

ideology otonlyhave o be reconsidereduthave o be reconsideredn

an ad hoc manner

epending

n the situation.

n

other

words,

one

cannot

ome

to a

given

ituation

itha

strong

prior

enseabouthow he

causal lows

work.That

or

me

is

what he word

disjunctureaptures.

use relations

o

refer

o the

strength

f the Marxist

pproach,

o

say

that

these

things

are

not

simply andomly

appening,

hat hereare

structured

interactions

etween hem.

However,

he forms f

dispersal

f

these

45


4/10

forces-ideological,echnological,

nd

social-make itdifficult

o havea

general

priori

ense

of

how

hey

relate

o one another.

I

would

ay

a further ord

about

he

new r

contemporary y

going

othe

question

n themodern nd he

contemporary.

he

way

I

wouldmake he distinctionetween he modern nd

he

contemporary,

which s a

verygenericway,

s to

say

that

modernity

s

a

project

whereas

the

contemporary

s a condition. ifferentheorists

would

have

different

ideas

of what s

critical

o

this

condition-someone

ike

Anthony

iddens

would ee itdifferentlyrom omeone ikeFredricameson,or

example.

The

contemporary

s

a

conditionharacterized

y,

among

other

hings,

the sorts

of

linkage,

ropinquity,

nd

low hatI

write bout n

my

own

work. t

s the

inescapable

ondition

n

which

ots

of

actorsandsocieties

find hemselves.On he other

hand,

he

modern,

nd his s

partly

reflected

n

my

itle

Modernity

t

Large,

s not a

fact,

an

epoch,

or a

stage

buta

vision,

conception,

r

a

project.

herefore,

odernity

s nowa

project

witha

particular

et of

characteristics,

iven

globalization

s a

contemporary

ondition. ndbecause t s a

project,

t has

multiple

shapes

and ncarnations.he

early

dea

hat hese

projects

were

necessarily

ndsomehow

nherently

onvergent

s one of the

main

hings

I

argueagainst

n

Modernity

t

Large

ndelsewhere.

IMAGINATION ND THE

PRODUCTIONOF LOCALITY

P34

You

often talkabout

the

ways

inwhich he

imagination,

alongside

empirical

xperience,

plays

an

important

ole

n

constructing

patial

realities or

people,

for

example,

n

cities.

How

is

your

concept

of

the

production

f

locality

a move

away

from

a

spatialized

ense

of the local?

AA The

ink

etween

he

production

f

locality

nd he ideaof the

imagination

s a social

practice

an

deaIam still

rying

o

develop urther)

is

actually

n

expanded

deaof the social.

n hat

expanded

deaIwant

not

only

o makeroom or he socialas defined

y

reproductive

ogics-

rules, egulations,ndregularities,

n

he

way

hatPierre ourdieu as

spoken

about

hem-but to makeroom

n

he social

or

projects,

or

visions,

or

wishes,

and

so on.

And hese defined

n

collective

ocial

ways,

not

ust

n

personal,

ndividual,

nd

diosyncraticays.

The

production

f

locality

s

a reminderhateventhe most

apparently

echanicalorms f

socialorder hat eem to function ithout

design,contingency,

r

ntentionality

ut

simply

y

the forceof routine-

whatwe

used

to

call

habit-involve

arge

mounts f

deliberate

ttention,

effort,

nd abor.

art f that

attention,ffort,

nd abor s involvedn

collectivedeasof what s

possible.

Therefore,

or he

local o have

some

spatialized

mbodiment

akes

an effort

which

ranscendshat

very

spatiality.

o the

idea

s not

o,

as

it

were,

de-spatialize

he

local,

or

evacuate he

spatial

rom he

local,

but o add

something

o it.

That s to

say,

ormere

patiality

o take ts

form,

herehas to be an

effort,

production

f

locality,

hich

s muchmore

omplex.

Once

hateffort

o

produce

he local s

fully

bserved,we will lso,

among

other

hings, et

a

deeper

ense

of what t

means o

produce,

nhabit,

nd

sustain

patial

relations.Wewon'thave ubstituted

omething

lse for he

spatial

art

f

the

local

butwillhave

enrichedhe

logic

of the

spatial

n

helocal.

P34 For

architects

his

emphasis

on

both

the

material

ubstance

and the

imagined

ocial life makes for a

challenge

not

only

when

reading

he

city

but also when

engaging

n

its

design.

Whatroledo

physical

places-areas

of a

city,

spaces

in

a

neighborhood-play

n

the

production

f

locality?

Howdoes

the

temporary

uality

of

these

physical

places

affect this

production?

AA

Physical laces

are

very mportant

n

wo

nverse

ut

related

ways.

I

am

thinking

f

my

own

nformed

ense of

spatial

ractice

nd

spatial

logic

n

Bombay articularly.

n he one

hand,

o

go

back o

Bourdieu,

insofar s

physical

paces

arewhata

person

indshimself

n,

either

brought

o

them,

born

n

hem,

or

exposed

o

them,

hey

orm

part

f

the

backdrop gainst

which

he

work f the

production

f

locality

sdone.

Physicalpaces

are

part

f the materialhat ndividualsork

rom,

draw

on,

to

some

extent

ake or

granted,

nd

n

other nstances

highlight,

sharpen,

onsciously

se. On he other

hand,

physical paces

arealso

objects

oftheinterests f lotsof

social

actors.

A lot

of work s directedo

the

production,

aintenance,

eproduction,

istribution,

r

enjoyment

f

physical laces.

Physical

laces

n

hisbroad

ense-areas,

spaces,

roads,

treets,

ocations-have

a

dual

elationship

ith

he

production

f

locality.hey

orm

part

f the

condition

f its

production,

nd

hey

also

form n

important

art

f the

object

of that

production.

neof the

challenges

sto take hatdialectical

elationship

nd ntroducehe

play

of

contingencies

o see that here s

something

more

han

imply

mechanical

roduction

nvolved

n his

process.

Let

me move

briefly

o

the

temporaryuality

f

these

physical

places,getting

lose

to the core

of

the interests

f

Perspecta

4. The

immediate

hing

o

say

is that nsofar

s

spatial

rrangements-homes,

habitations,

treets,roads,

onstructionf

any

ype-are

temporary,

hey

46

Perspecta

34


5/10

Appadurai

produce

anxiety.

In

places

like

Bombay

(and

the

question,

of

course,

is

how

manyplaces

are like

Bombay,

and to what

extent,

and

that

is

an

open

matter

n

my mind)-that

is,

very

dense

places

with

unequal

access

to

spatial

resources,

volatile

politics,

and a

growing

crisis of

governance

and

civility

in

short,

a

description

of

many

mega-cities

in the

poorer

countries of

the

world

and of some

mega-cities

in

the

wealthier ountries

inthe

world,

oo)-the

temporary

natureof a lotof

physical

places

and

spaces

shoots the

project

of

producing

ocality hrough

with a

constant

under-textof

anxiety.

This

anxiety

s

frequently

rticulated

n

collective

forms,

such

as

ethnic

violence,

about which

I

have

written,

and has

large

implications

or the

way politics

s conducted

in

these

cities,

whether t's

through

ethnic

violence

or other forms.

The

question

of

temporariness

has

a

particular dge

for victimsof

physicaldispossession-the

homeless,

the

under-housed,

he

badly

housed-with

whom

I

am

particularly

oncerned

in

Bombay.

For

hem

manythings

inlifehave a

temporaryquality-not only physical

resources,

spatial

resources,

and

housing

but also

social,

political,

nd moral

relationsand relations o

the

sources

of

power.

The

production

of

locality

is an effort o

produce

the sense of

continuity

n

the face of the

temporariness

of

things.

A

huge

amount of

their

social

energy

and

personal creativity

s

devoted to

producing,

f

not

the

illusion,

hen the

sense of

permanence

in

the

face of the

temporary.

The

phenomenology

of the

temporary

must be

carefully

istinguishedby group

location

n

the

political

conomy

of

places

like

Bombay.

The

temporariness

of

things

if

you

are a

high-level

peculator

in

the

derivativesmarketof

Bombay

is

very

deeply

different

han

if

you

are

living

n a

viaduct

n

Bombay.

P34 Would

you

elaborate

on the

phrase

illusion of

permanence

in the context of

the social

life of

Bombay

or

cities like

Bombay?

AA

Yes, well,

you

know,

I

was

using

the

phrase

illusion

f

permanence

because I've

always

loved

it. It's

he titleof

a

wonderfulbook

by

Francis

Hutchinsabout

the British n Indiaat

the

peak

of their

power.

It's

a

lovely

phrase

because it

captures

a kindof desire of the

imperial ystem,

but

simultaneously

he

anguish

and

the ambivalence

nvolved

n

these

things:

the

arrogant onceit

of certain

grandprojects, ike

he

imperial roject,

but also the humble

hing

that

ordinary eople

seek

constantly

o create.

As faras the bottom halfof the

population

n

Bombay

is

concerned,

in

many ways

life s an effort o

produce,

if

not

the

illusion,

hen the

sense of

stability,

r

continuity,

r

something

like

permanence

in

the face of

the

known

temporariness

or

volatility

f

almost all he

arrangements

of social

life-who

is

where,

who can

you

love,

what's

available,

where do

you

live,

who has a

space,

will omeone allot

you

a

house,

will

you get temporary

housing,

etc.

In

his

regard,

he

project

of the

production

of

locality

s an

effort

o

work

against

the constantcorrosionof the

present,

both

by change

and

by

uncertainty.

All

communitiesknow that

the work of

producing

heir

own

humanity

s tied

up

in

being

able to

rely

on what

may

subsist from

today

to

tomorrow,

rom his

generation

o the

next,

and so on. In

hat

sense,

the

llusion f

permanence

ummarizesa

very

large

amount

of

what

people

do

in

a

quotidian

way,

for

example,

pumping

up

a

kerosene

stove on the

pavement

to

produce your

meal

at

nine o'clock

with

whatever

t

is

you

have been ableto

buy,scrounge,

borrow,

beg,

or

get.

That s the

production

of the illusion f

permanence,

that

you

will

have

dinner

onight,

as

you

will

omorrow

night,

and so on-if

you

are

lucky.

ts

more

ambitious

end

is the

question

of

having

a reliable tructure-a

roof

over

your

head,

a

place

on

a

piece

of

pavement,

etc. Butin

a

society

in

which both

the site and the means of

livelihoodhave a

high

degree

of

volatility

or

many

people,

the work of

producing tability

s

very

hard

o

distinguish

rom he

struggle

to

get

some sense that what

you

do

and

what

you

have

might

ast until

omorrow.

STABILITY,COMMUNITY,

AND THE

BODY

P34

In

Modernity

at

Large

you

introduce

diasporic

public

spheres

as a

prevalent product

of the

cultural dimensions of

globalization.

If

the

city

is made

up

of

these

diasporas,

but also of

ostensibly

stable

social forms and

institutions,

how

are

we

to

understand

the

relationship

between the

moving

and the

stable ?

AA In

a

generalway,

I

have

referred

o

the distinctionbetween

modernity

as a

project

and the

contemporary

as a

condition.All

groups

in

cities like

Bombay

have movement

of

some

kindas

a

project

n

their

ives,

and

movement of some kind

as

a condition n

their ives. But

for the

poor

in

Bombay,

movement

is more oftena condition hana project.That s to

say, they

are more often its

objects

than its

subjects. Bysaying

this,

I

am

indicating

hat the

question

of

movement and

stability

s

deeply

responsive

to the

question

of where

you

are

in

the

distribution f

things

in

this

kindof

place.

That

said,

to

the extent

that

we look at citiesas

made

up

of these

diasporas,

the

question

is not

so much an

across-the-board

relationship

etween

diasporic

and

more stable forms and

institutions.

47


6/10

Rather,

or

particular

ocial

groups,

everybody

n

these

places

is to some

extent tied

up

with

networksof various

kindsthat extend well

beyond

the

city.

And for

everyone,

to

some

extent,

they

are nevertheless able

to,

or

forced

to,

or wish to

produce

some

kind

of

locally

egiblestability.

Everybody

s

engaged

in

this tension. The

really

nteresting hing

s

how

one

group's

diaspora

s

another

group's

stability;

roups

in

cities

like

Bombay

form

part

of the

socio-spatial backdrop

against

which other

groups

form heir

projects.

So

even

if

you

have a

group

that is

highly

diasporic,

nsofaras it sediments

itself n

certain

ocations and takes

up

certain

practices

and

occupations dealing

with

goods

and trades

in

Bombay,

t

becomes

part

of the stable

backdrop

or some other

group's

vision and

some other

group's

effort

o move. We need a

very

sensitive

picture

of the social

morphology

of

places

like

Bombay

to

attack

the

question

of the

relationbetween the

moving

and the stable

because

it

is

not

an

across-the-board,

general

law under

which all

groups

exist.

P34 You have

argued

that ethnic violence

is one kind of

response

to

uncertainty

and a

way

in which

community

is

produced.

In

Spectral

Housing

and Urban

Cleansing

the material substance

of

the

city-its spaces,

infrastructure,

and

legalities-was

the site

where

this was

played

out.

What

does that

say

about

the

relationship

among

the

body, physical

space,

and

the

idea

of

community?

AA I

have

given

a

talk

that is

in

the

process

of

making

ts

way

into a

formal,

written orm on

my experience

of

Bombay

in

which I

use

the

phrase

dirt nd

democracy.

n

hat

essay

Imake an

analysis

of the

growing

anxiety

among

the middleclasses

in

Bombay,

as well as their

allies

in the

municipality,

bout

practices

of

defecation, urination,

pitting,

etc. These

are

very

serious issues

in

Bombay,

and

as

you

watch

the

discourse

of cleanliness

being

articulated

n

billboards,

n

newspapers,

in

slogans,

and so

on all over

the

city,you

begin

to see that there

is a series

of

thingsbeginning

o be melded

together.

The

first

one

is that the

poor

themselves are

seen

as

some

formof social dirt.Thisharksback to the

work of

MaryDouglas

in

Purity

nd

Danger,

a classic

work

arguing

hat

dirt s matterout of

place.

In

Bombay

the

poor

are

certainly

matterout

of

place,

but

they

are also

producing

matterout of

place-that

is,

urineand

feces-in

public

places.

It s a

city

dominated

by

homelessness,

inwhich

a

large

percentage

of

people

have

no

access

to

sanitation.

t s

very

common for seven or

eight

hundred

households to

share

one,

two,

or

three

toilets-an

impossiblephysical reality. magine,

n

a

situation ike

this,

also

having

o face an intense

public

discourse

against

the

sullying

of

the

city by

urineand

by

fecal

matter,

and

you

can

understandhow

there is a

tendency

to

see

bodily

waste and the bodies of the

poor

as

somehow connected.

In

he case of

Bombay

and

India

we have an

alarming

endency

to

see

the

crowded areas

in

which

eitherslums or

homeless

people

exist

as

part

of the

geography

of undesirable

minorities,

nthiscase

Muslims,

and

of

people

who

produce political

iolence,

these

days

often

talked

about

in

the idiomof terror. ome time

ago,

there was a

major

attack on the

Red

Fort

n

Delhi

by people

who were

alleged

terrorists

upported

by

or

directly

rom

Pakistan.

The

newspapercoverage

talked

vividly

f how

these terroristswere able

to make their

way

to the Red

Fort

by

occupying

the

largely

Muslim lums that surround

t,

going

like ats

hrough

hese

small, crowded,

filthyplaces

to

perform

acts of violence.Thediscourse

of this

event,

and of other events

since,

is

a

disturbing onvergence

of

the horror f the state

and the

upper-middle

lass of

bodily

effluvia,

number

one,

of the

poor,

number

wo,

and of

dangerous

political

minorities,

umber hree.

This is the

darkside of

the link

among

the

body,

physicalspace,

and the idea of

community.

Anthropologists,

articularly,

ave

always

been sensitive

to

the

positive

dimensions

of

the

ways

in

which

many

human

communities

have

constructed

their deas of moral

solidarity,

ocial

solidarity,

nd cosmo-

logical

regularity y

playing

on

signs,

symbols,

indexes,

and icons

variously

deployed

off the

body

as

a

foundational

map

of

coherence.

In

the

examples

I

have

just

given,

we see the

dystopian

version. In hose

places

of the

world,

mega-cities

among

them,

where

physical

co-

habitationhas become

enormously

trained,

he

potential

of the

body

to be a

trope

for

community,

or

solidarity,

rust,

ntegrity,

nd

integration,

takes

just

the reverse form:bodies

become a site for the locationof

fear,

images

of

pollution,

ontamination, ilth,

and

danger.

REDUNDANCY

ND

FORMS

OF GOVERNANCE

P34 You mention

redundancy

as a

concept

that

describes

the

competing and overlapping forms of governance taking the place

of the nation-state.

How is this

an

emerging concept

for the

organization

of social

life in

cities,

but

also

in relation to

transnational definitions

of

locality?

AA

In

ormulating

he idea of

redundancy,

what

I

was

trying

o

point

to

is

that in

particular

ocieties

in

which we feel there

is no ruleof

law,

or

48

Perspecta

34


7/10

Appadurai

where

here s a kind f

chaos,

on closer

nspection

t

often urns

ut hat

there

s

a

multiplicity

f

claims

nvolvingovereignty,egitimacy,

nd

power.

t sa matter f too

much,

not

oo

little. n he

large

ities

hatare

emerging

owas new

orms f

the

city-state,

s

manypeople

have

suggested,

or

city-regions,

o

use

another ecent

phrase,

his s

especially

rue.There s a

multiplicity

f

claims

n he idiom f

power:

ver

particularpaces, particular

esources,

articular

elations. ouhave

social

orces,

ocial

movements, ongovernmentalovements, opular

movements,

municipal

ovements,

ity

governments,

tate

governments,

ederal

overnments,

ll

exercising

ery omplexpower

claims ver

groups

nd

bodies,

ocations,

esources,

tc.

In

a

way,you

coulddefine

mega-cities

s

engaged

na

complex

battlebetween

competing

laims o

legitimateovernance.

ou ouldeven

say

that

his

battle s

virtually

definition

f

what hese

city-states

re.

As faras the transnationalefinitionf

locality

s

concerned,

many

f

these

playerssocial

movements,

municipalovernments,egional

governments,

rans-federal

overnments)

re

nfinitely

inkedo either

their

ounterparts

r

other

nterests,

ot east

global

orporations,

hich

are ransnational

orces,

ransnational

layers,

ransnational

ovements,

andso

on. The

multiplicity

f

redundancy,

he too-muchness f claims

over

egitimate ower,

s

intimately

onnected o

the transnational

networksnwhichmany f theseagenciesandmovements re

implicated

ndof which

hey

area

part.

P34 How is a new

ecology

of

expertise

being

shaped

by

emergent organizational

orms like the

Alliance,

what

you

call

a

deep

democracy ?

AAThis s a

very

entral

uestion

o

my

ownresearch.

Movementsike

the

Alliance,

hich havestudied

n

Mumbai,

re

doing

what imilar

movements

ave

done

for

ome

time,

whichs

change

he

relationship

between

hose

in

power

and hose

outsideof

it,

n

particular

o

makea

powerful

nowledge

laim,

ympathetic

o

the

thought

f

people

ike

PauloFreire.

hisAlliance

rings

ogether

nongovernmental

organization

alledSPARC

Society

or he Protectionf AreaResource

Centers), grassrootswomen's rganizationalledMahilaMilan,ormed

by

formerex workers

n

one

of

the

toughest

parts

of

Bombay,

nd

a

national

rganization

alledNSDF

National

lumDwellers

ederation).

The

poor

knowa

great

dealabout

heir wn

experiences

ndabout

the conditions f their

xperiences.

hosewho claim o be concerned

about

poverty

nd

mprovedquity

n

cities

and

societies

as a whole

need

to

make

room

or

he

expertise

f the

poor.

Thosemobilized

populationsmong

he

poor

who

havebecome

explicitlyoliticized

n

termsof urban ndsocial

governance

re

now

making

t

a central

art

f

their wn

deological

nd

practical

trategies

o

say

that

hey

are

ooking

not or

knowledge

ut oraneven

playing

ield n which o

exercise

he

knowledgeheyalready

ave.

This

akes

many

orms,

he most

general

being

he

cynicism

n

many

pro-poor

movements

boutall orms f

technical

xpertise

hatare

brought

o

them,

on

the

grounds

hat t

s,

first,

arremovedrom heir wn

ife, econd,usually nilaterallymposed,

and, hird,

roven

o be

technically

orthless,

or

example,

n

relationo

very

oncrete

matters

ike

water

r

housing.

Basedon

this,

a new

ogic

s

beingput

nto

place.

These

pro-poor

movements,

ncluding

heones

I

have

studied,

re

seeking

o

become

active

partners

n

defining,

or

example,

what

t

means o be

a

skilled

builder. ather

han

aying,

Don't

ell

us

anything,

e

know

verything,

whichwouldbea

very impleminded

eversal,

he answer s: Wewould

like o

become

players

n

he

question

f

how

you

build

dequate

housing

or

he

poor

na

city

ike

Bombay.

We

have deas

about

inance,

about

design,

about

tructure,

bout

ewage,

about

drainage.

t

irst

glance,

his ooks ike kind f

vague

populist osition,

ut t s

actually

subversive

osition,

ecause tcalls nto

question

he

entire rchitecture

of

knowledge

n which

he

post-World

War

I

development

machine

s

founded.

Depending

n

the

context,

depending

n the

project,

epending

n

the issue

n

question,

hese contestations re

restructuring

hat t

means

to have

specialized

nowledge.

o

ake

on one

deep

implication,

here s

a

virtuallyomplete

divorce f

the

ideaof effective

nowledge

nd he

idea

of

research

mongmany

f these

pro-poor

movements. hat

ingle

matter

ompletelyhanges

he conditions nder

which

xpertise

s

defined.

f

you say

I

m interested

n

reliable

nowledge,

ut

I

really

ave

no

interestwhatsoever

n

what

you

call

research,

e

have he

beginnings

f the kind f debate

n

progress

oday.

t s not

ust

a matter

of

a contestover

power

nd

knowledge.

t

s

a

debateabout he

deep

protocols

hat

urround

he

production

f

knowledge.

THEPOLITICSOF THE

VISIBLE

P34

Youhave

said that the urban

poor

in

Mumbai

re

citizens

withouta

city.

What

s

the

politics

of

becoming

visible for the

poor

in Mumbai?

f

t is not

merely

iving

n the

geography

of the

city,

what is it that makes one a citizenin a

city?

49


8/10

AA

Actually,

o reverse the terms

of the

question,

what

the

poor

in

many

cases

are

seeking

is the

privilege

f

being

invisible.

They

suffer roma

surplus

of

visibility,

s

I

have tried

o

suggest

in some of

my

other

work.

One

of

the

troubles

with

being poor,

and

certainly

with

being

homeless,

in

Bombay

is

that

you

are

on

permanent

view.

A

very

arge

part

of

the

production

of

locality,

f

the work of the

imagination,

f the laborand

vision of

social

reproduction

or

the

disenfranchised,

or the

homeless,

the

poor,

in

places

like

Bombay

is how to

cope

with

being

permanently

and

inescapably

on

view.A lot of

physicalarrangements,

ncluding

many

of

the

arrangements

hat

we would call

temporary pieces

of cloth

between

rooms,

strung-up

plastic

pieces

over

your

head),

have to do

with

insulation,

rom he wear and tear

of natural

orces,

from

noise,

from

pollution,

but

very

often

from

he

gaze

of other

classes,

especially

the

middle

classes,

and

of

the state.

In

a

way,

what the

poor

often seek

in

places

like

Bombay

is the

privileges

of

invisibility.

From

his

point

of

view,

citizenship

s the

ability

o exercise effective

power

in the

city

in invisible

ways,

behind the front

stage,

by

having

access

to

people

and relations o resources that do

not

have

to be

advertised.

In

a

funnyway, transparency

s

the

baneful,

unchosen

conditionof

the

poor.Although

t's

considered

a virtue nthe

high-minded

discourse

of

many

governments,

philanthropies,

multilaterals,

nd so

on,

in

fact

it is a

condition

withouta

choice;

it is

a

prison

or the

poor.They

live n

transparency.

n

short,

this is the fishbowlkindof

transparency.

The

power

of

people

who are

truly

itizens

in

a

place

like

Bombay

is the

power

to-not

necessarily

corruptly

ut

simply nvisibly-have

social

effects inrelation o theirown social

projects.

The

poor

have

the

least

optimalrelationship

etween

visibility

nd

power:

too much

visibility,

oo little

power.

What

hey

seek

is

to reduce

their

visibility-not

in the

political

ense

of the term as a

metaphor

or

voice,

butdirect

visibility-in

erms

of

the

gaze,

in

the interestsof

affecting

what

has been called the nervous

system

of

power

in

a

city

ike

Bombay.

A

bad

mix

of

visibility

nd

effective

power

defines the

citizenship

of

the

poor,

and what

they

seek is to

change

that mix: ess

visibility,

ore

power.

HOUSINGANDTHEPOLITICS

OF PATIENCE

P34

In

Deep Democracy you

state,

Housing

can be

argued

to

be

the

single

most critical site of this

city's

politics

of

citizenship.

What

are

the different causalities and

relationships

at work

that

make

housing

such a nexus of issues

(ethnic

violence,

power

inequalities,

real-estate

speculation,

class

proximity)

in

Bombay?

AA

Housing,

perhaps

more

than

any

other

single

dimension

of life n a

place

like

Bombay,brings ogether

issues of what others have called

recognition

and redistribution.

t s the

place

where

questions

of

dignity,

questions

of

equity,

and

questions

of

security

come

together.

Housing

allows

you

to

pick

the

conditions

of

your

own

visibility.

t

doesn't make

you

invisible,

t doesn't make

you

over-visible,

t

gives

you

a

say

in whom

you

are visible

o,

in who is visible o

you,

and underwhat conditions.The

effort o combat the

tyranny

f the

temporary

s

substantially

ddressed

in a

place

like

Bombay

throughhousing.

What t means

to be

wealthy

s

intimately

ied

up

with

what

it

means

to have secure

enure. We used to

thinkof

tenure

as

being

land

tenure,

and

largely

as an

agrarian

ssue.

It

s now

a

profoundly

rban ssue

through

which the

urban

poor

are

seeking

to make their

spatial

existence

legallyrecognized.

Housing

s also

the

place

where

key

forces tend to crisscross on

anotherdimension

n

which,

like

redistributionnd

recognition,

t

catches

a maximum

ension:

inrelationo technical and culturalmatters.

Housing

is a

place

where infrastructure eets

the

living

outines

of

social life.

It s

unlike

ewage, drinking

water,

electricity,

nd

many

other

absolutely

critical ormsof infrastructure.t s the

place

where such infrastructure

meets issues of

dignity,

f

style,

of social

standing,

of allthe

things

that

make humans humans. No

single

other

arrangement tages

the

complex

and visible

negotiationgoing

on between technical and cultural eatures

in

social life.

Given

ts

nature,

housing

can

always

vanish,

even for

people

who

are

economicallyvery

well

off. For

people

who

aren't,

t

often doesn't

exist

in

the first

place.

It

s this

tension,

where these

two

axes

meet,

in

which

housing

dwells.

One is

the

recognition

and redistribution

xis,

and the

other is

the

axis,

as far as

urban

morphology

and

design

and

materiality

o,

between

the technicaland the cultural imensions of social life.

P34 How have the

poor's

needs to define their

own

space

through

what

you

refer to as a

politics

of

patience

and

deep

democracy

rubbed

up

against

the

more abstract

designs

of

planners, developers,

and state authorities in

Bombay?

AA A

major

ssue

in

the

politics

of

housing

in

Bombay

is

the

question

of

relocation

and

rehabilitation

or

homeless

populations

hat

have been

living long

the

railroadracks. These

populations

have

been

at

the

center of the

politics

of the state versus the

poor

and

also face the

rage

of

middle-class commuters whose trains

have

been slowed down

by

shacks

close to the tracks. Families

ive,

n

some

cases,

in

temporary

shacks

two, three,

four eet

from

where commuter rainsrun.

Regularly

people

are

injured

r

killed,

and as a result hese slum

populations

have

50

Perspecta

34


9/10

Appadurai

been

slowing

the trains

down,

sometimes

stoning

trains,

causing

damage,

etc. This

is a hot issue. These

railway-track

wellerswere

being

forcibly

emoved with ractors

brought

n

by

the

city

government

and

the

railways

o

demolish homes.

One of the

major riumphs

of the Alliance s its success

in

breaking

logjams

hat arose

in

negotiations

among

the Indian

ailways,

he Indian

government,

he

government

of

the

city

of

Bombay,

various

municipal

authorities, nd the WorldBank(whichhas a major ransportation roject

in

Bombay).

The

Alliance

managed

to make its

way

intothis

incredibly

complex

local, national,

global

politicsby

showing

that it has the

ability

o

persuade

these slum dwellers

o move to

temporaryquarters,

n some

cases

built

by

the

Alliance

members,

in other

cases

by

the state. The

Alliance nterveneson behalf

of the

urban

poor,

saying,

We

will

get

these

people

to

voluntarily

move if

you

provide

reliable

housing,

in

a reliable

manner,

hrough

our

good

offices-and

we

will

promise

that those homes

you provide,

n

particular

arts

of the

city,

willnot be

abused,

sold,

put

back on the

market,

etc. We

will

guarantee

hat we know

who these

people

are

familyby family;

we'll

place

them

in

a reliable

way

in

the

spaces

allotted o them.

They

have

peacefullypersuaded

the slum

dwellers

o demolish their

own houses-which

is

revolutionary

ecause

demolition

s

usually

what's done to them-on

the

promise

of relocation.

Thisis possiblyone of the greatcrises and dramasof urban

governance

involving ousing

in

Bombay.

It'san

example

of

where

the

people

who dwelled

on

these

tracks were

dealing

with

one

of

the

cruel

forms of

temporariness,

where trainsare

whizzing

by

two feet

from

your

three-year-old

hild.

They

have shown

patience

in

waiting

or

a

better

solution,

and

indeed that has been

delivered

by

the

Alliance,

hrough

ts

very complex

forms of

political

negotiation

and deliberation

with

other

agencies.

TheAlliance tselfhas shown

its own forms of

patience

in the

face

of

emergency.

It

has

built

up

its

political

ssets

through

patience

in

dealing

with

city

politics,

developers,

the

World

Bank,

and

multiple

ther

players.

It

has

deployed

all

of that

capital,

which is itself

builton

the

politics

of

patience

in

the face of

emergency,

to

persuade

these

slum dwellers

on

the tracks

to demolishtheir

own

homes,

to

bid

good-bye

to secure

forms

of temporaryhousinginexchange for uncertain orms of permanent

housing.

These slum

dwellers

had to be

convinced

that what is

at the

other end won't be taken

away

from

hem. That's

at least

an

example

of

the

play,

he

deep play,

and the

multiple

evels

of

play,

between different

temporalities,

different

enses of

emergency,

and different

ormsof

patience

in the

politics

of

housing.

The

rubbing

p

of

these two kinds

of

visions would

be much

more

brutal,

much more

unproductive,

much

more

sterile,

much

more

violent,

and much more

zero-sum

were itnotfor the

negotiation

by

groups

like

the Allianceof the different

rgencies

and

emergencies

of the state and

other

agencies

in relation o the

urgencies

and

emergencies

of the

poor.

The

Alliance

has

managed

to

find

points

of mutual

productivity,

herefore

preventing

he kind

of brutal rictions

hat

often

happen

when these kinds

of visions

bump up

against

each other.

EXPERTISEAND RESEARCH

P34 The

apprehension

in

believing

in

architecture's and

urbanism's

capacity

to effect social

change

could

perhaps

benefit

from a

thorough understanding

of how

people imagine

and

understand

their urban

landscapes-how they

negotiate

the

terms and conditions of the

city's

various economies. Could

you

comment on the difficult translation

between how

people imagine

and

produce

these urban

landscapes

and

how

researchers and

architects

read these

processes?

AA One of the

things

that

poorerpeople

do

to

negotiate

the

complex

realities f the tensions between

the

temporary

and the

permanent,

and

so

on,

is

constantly

seek to be informed bout

the

social forces at

play

n

their

environment.

Everybody

s

doing

this,

but

poorer people

are

doing

this

especially,

seeking

to amass as much

knowledge

as

possible

about

who is

who,

what is

what,

who's related o

whom,

and

why.

For

example,

a

newspaper

boy

who

is

dropping

a

newspaper

at

your place

will

ee

you

talking

o

somebody

else,

and he

will

eitherask

somebody

else

or,

if

he

can,

ask

you

who that

person

was,

or what she was

doing,

or

why

she

was there.

At first

sight,

it seems

(a)

rrelevant,

b)

mpertinent

nd

rude,

but what

is

happening

s

a constant

archiving.

na

general

way,

what the

poor

seek

to do

in

cities

like

Bombay

is to

constantly

renovate his

archiveof

knowledge,

of

people,

of

relations,

of

resources.

That n

itself s

a

laborious

process,

but

it is

done

allthe time. You do not know whatwill

become relevantat

a

particular oint,

when

something

temporary

becomes

even less

than

that,

or

threatens

to

disappear,

or

something

unattractive ecomes

permanent:

or

example,you

are

totally

without

housing,

and it ooks like

you

will

be

that

way

forever.

The

relation

f actors

of

this

type,

and theirvisionsof who

they

are,

what

they

are

doing,

and how

they

survive,

o researchers

and architects

s

very mportant,

nd

I

hink t

is

at the heartof

many

of

the

crises we are allconcerned

with.

One

point

I

began

to articulatewhen we talkedabout

expertise

earlier

s that as the urban

poor

become

more

politicized

n

places

like

Bombay,

hey

are

redefining

he

terms of

the relationsbetween

key

elements

that we take to be

associated,

like

research,

theory,

esting,

hypothesis,

intervention,

nd

so on. We on the academic side tend to

have

a naturalized

rotocol

between the relationsof these

things.

The

51


10/10

poor

are now

in

a

position

o

begin

to

systematically

disaggregate

those

things

and to

say,

Todo

A,

why

do we need

B?

That s one site

of

debate,

but the other is

something

even more

central. It s the

subject

of

another

paper

that

I

have

just

written

n

the

context of a collective exercise

undertaken

by

the World

Bank n

regard

to relationsbetween

anthropologists

and

economists,

between

culture

and

development

in

relation

o

poverty,

called

The

Capacity

o

Aspire.

The essential

point

here is that

in

the kindof

dialogue

of the deaf

between

anthropologists

and

economists,

or

people

on the culture ide

and

people

on the economic

side,

anthropologists

have

essentially

handed over the

entire

business

of the future o economics.

Culture tself

is

substantially,

y

however

sophisticated

a

definition,

een as a kindof

rearview

mirror,

abit,

radition,

norm,

etc.,

but

always

looking

back.The

question

of the future-of

people's

wishes, choices,

projects,

visions,

etc.,-has

been

more or less handed over to the

domain

of

economics,

of individuals' hoices

and

preferences,

and so

on.

Whatwe

in

anthropology

need to

do,

and

Iwill

come to architecture

n a

second,

is

firstof allto

recognize

thatthere is a whole

way

in which the future tself s

culturally

ormed

as

much as the

past

is.

People

in

communities

always

have

visions,

expectations,

plans,

wants,

and these are not

just

disaggregated,

individual

hings;

these arealso formed

collectively.

We in

anthropologyby

and

large,

with

tinyexceptions

here and

there,

have

totally

ailed o catch

this,

and we end

up

therefore

n

this standoff

with

economists,

saying,

You on't understandhow

people operate,

and

You re too individualistic.

hat s all

fine,

but what

have

we done

about

it?

Very

ittle.

Within

hat

general

framework have tried o

argue

that one of

the

capacities (in

he

language

of

capacity

building

hat has now become

standard

n

respect

to

the

poor)

s

what

Icall

the

capacity

to

aspire.

The

effort

s

to

recognize

that

poor

people

have

visions for where

they

would

like o

go,

for

hope

itself,

but

aspirations

need to be seen as more

complex

than

simply

solated desires or wishes. This

capacity,

I

argue,

is

not

simply

a

generalizedgood

but

something

that is

unequally

distributed.

Poverty

ould

be defined as

having

a bad

place

in

the

distribution f

the

capacity

to

aspire.

I

argue

that this

capacity

is

improved he more chance you have to exercise it. In hatargument he

recommendation

s that we need

to

look

carefully

t how the

capacity

to

aspire

is

distributed

nd

why

the terms of

recognition

are

always

skewed

against

the

poor.

It'snot a cultural

povertyargumentsaying

that the

poor

don't have visions

or

hopes,

but rather hat this

capacity develops

only

through

use. Those who use

it

more,

obviously,develop

it

more. And

if

you

do not have the occasion

to

use

it

a

lot,

it

is

going

to

suffer.

This

brings

me to the business

of architecture nd urban

planning

and these kinds of

disciplines,

n

that

they

rarely

ake into account this

aspirational

aculty.

They

rarely

ake

into

account

that

the

homeless,

or

the

poorly

housed,

or

the

under-housed,

or the

disenfranchisedhave

projects,

have

visions,

have

strong

ideas about where

they

would

like

o

live

and

how.

More

mportant,

hey

have

a

particular

lace

in

this

economy

having

o

do

with he

capacity

to

aspire.

In

relation

o

housing

and issues

of

built ormand

space,

practices

that

architectsand urban

planners

are involved

n,

they

should

not

just

add this

understanding

n

but

place

this concern at

the

center

of

their

work.

So when

you say

the

difficult

ranslationbetween how

people

imagine

and

produce

these

urban

andscapes

and

how researchers

and

architects read' hese

processes,

I

would

say

that

by

and

large

researchers end to

precisely

read

the

forms,

but

I

don't

think

hey

adequately

read the

reader.

To

put

it

simply,

architectsand

planners

often do not

recognize

that

the

people

whose

concerns

they

are

seeking

to

address have

very

complicated aspirationalmaps,

in

which

spatial

ssues

play

a

part.

The

issue is

not to

cut

straight hrough

o

get

the

quickest

road from

he

designer's

head or mandate or

professional

context to

delivering

he

house,

the

road,

the

shopping

mall,

he

train

tation,

but to

figure

out

where those

elements

actually

might

it

more

fruitfully

nto

strengthening

what

I

call the

capacity

to

aspire.

Whether tis

architecture,

r urban

planning,

or

a softer

discipline

like

anthropology,

which

is

simply rying

o

make

an

interpretive

contribution,

ngaging

that

capacity,

ts

distribution,

nd the

forms

it

takes-that

is the central

challenge.

In

short,

we need to be

newly

alert

o

the

danger

that

in

pursuing

he

aspirations

of

urban

planning

or the

fantasies of

architects,

we

might neglect

the

centralasset

we need to

recognize:

he

capacity

to

aspire

of the urban

poor.

Such

aspirations

centrally

nclude he

ways

in which

the

poor

might

wish to

shape

their

spaces.

This fact should

compel

a

new

humility

bout the

techniques

and

technologies

of

the

expert.

52

Perspecta

34

entrevista a appadurai

Documents