Illusion of Permanence Interview With Arjun Appadurai by Perspecta 34[1]

7/27/2019 Illusion of Permanence Interview With Arjun Appadurai by Perspecta 34[1]

1/10

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

Accessed: 17/04/2010 13:16

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mitpress.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

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].

The MIT Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Perspecta.

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


2/10

LLUSONPER

OFANINTERVEWITHARJUNAPPADB YPERSPEC4

ISSUES OF GLOBALIZATION RE CENTRAL NTHE DISCUSSION OF THE TEMPORARYAND OFTENUNSTABLEPROCESSES OF CITIES AND CONTEMPORARY IFE.THEANTHROPOLOGIST RJUN APPADURAIHAS DEVELOPEDCONCRETECONCEPTSAND TERMS FOR UNDERSTANDINGMANYASPECTS OF GLOBALIZATION,ARTICULARLYNCITIES LIKEBOMBAY/MUMBAI. HE FOLLOWINGS A TELEPHONECONVERSATION ETWEENTHE EDITORSOFPERSPECTA34 AND ARJUN APPADURAITHATTOOKPLACEON 14 JULY2002.Inpreparationorthisdiscussion,the following exts wereconsulted:ArjunAppadurai,Modernity t Large:Cultural imensionsof Globalization(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1996); ArjunAppadurai, "Deep Democracy: Urban Governmentality and the Horizon of Politics,"PublicCulture14,1 (2002),41-47; ArjunAppadurai, SpectralHousingand UrbanCleansing:Notes on MillennialMumbai," 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 Anthropologys notoriously apricious,evenpromiscuousinits interests,butIthink t's air o say that there is arevived nterest apart from ssues of transnationalitynd flows andglobalization-inthe city.Urbananthropologyhad become fora whileasomewhat small and specializedfield,and althoughIhave to correct ormyown bias and interestand sense of myown drift, think hat'schanging,thatthereis a moregeneralresuscitationof interest nthingsurban.There area numberof reasons forthat, not the least beingthesense that inthe citya varietyof importantrans-sectionalandtransnationalhingsare being playedout. Therehas also been a standinginterest,whichcontinuesto be veryactive, inthe problematicsof space.Here,someone likede Certeauremainsan important eferencepoint.As forarchitecture pecifically,myinterest n it is not a productof

generaltheorizing r broadconceptual interests,butcomes froma sensethat it'scatchinga lot of vitaldebates and energies.The most salientfactis that inmyrecentwork nIndia,and particularlynBombay,Ihave beendeeply impressedwiththe energy, ervor, nd engagement that surroundarchitectural ircles both interms of practitioners nd intermsofteachers, students, and institutions.There s a reflection oing on among architects nIndia-which maywell be partof somethingmorewidespread about what we call a "crisisof the discipline": hatdoes itdo, whatought itto be doing,etc. Thatgeneralproblemhas alwaysinterestedme. While recognizethattherearedebates going on inEurope, he UnitedStates, and elsewhere intheworld,Isense that inplaces like India he disciplinaryrisis,whichmaybeongoing inarchitecture nd manyotherfields, including nthropology,sin a special and deep dialoguewiththe crises insocial lifeand thedevelopmentof things likeurbanplanningand housing.Thisis not aninward-lookingrisis but a crisis that is in a fruitful ialoguewitha varietyof othersocial crises and contradictions.Architectures an especially

44 Perspecta 34


3/10

Appadurai

interestingitetoday,both nplaces ike ndia ndmorebroadly,ecauseofthe kinds fglobalizinguestionsnwhichwe are nterested.

THEMODERNAND THECONTEMPORARY:LOWSAND RELATIONSOFDISJUNCTUREP34 Indevelopinga frameworkorPerspecta34 focusingontemporary rchitecture,we were interested n the ecologyof mobileformsandprocesses that influence he contemporary uiltlandscape-tourism,displacementsandmigrations, ousingmarkets,protests,and disasters natural nd man-made.You eemto claim hat these processes, when understood n"relations fdisjuncture,"resignificantnshaping heglobalizingworld.Howare these relationsof disjuncture articularlyeworcontemporary?In hisregard,what s the differencebetween the modernand thecontemporary?AA How he ideaof "relationsfdisjuncture"efines omething eworcontemporarys a tricky uestion.Clearly,lements f thekinds fthingsIrefer o byusing hetropeof"disjuncture"an be seen inearlierimesand nother ontexts,butI hinkhereare wo or three hingshatmightdefinehe newnessquestion.One s a relationalnswer,whichsthatwhilewe havehad hingsikemigrationndvariousorms f massmediationoraveryong ime,andeach has a kind fdeephistory,heirspecial elationship-asargue nmybookModernitytLarge-seemsstrikinglyifferentow han n imespast.When ouadd more pecificelementsothat, orexampleheIT informationechnology]evolution,which ffectsdirectlyr ndirectly any,many ther hingsn tsfield fforce, t'sverydifficulto see itas having smoothor continuousistory.Ifyou urtherhrown hespecial orceof theideology fthemarkets aregulativedeologyince1989,youcannot asily ee theglobalhegemony f that deologynearliereriods.Allhis s to extend herelationalnswer ndsaythat,yes,theelementswe lookat allhave heir eephistories ut heir elationsrestrikinglyifferent,ndsome ofthem, ike heIT evolution,replainlynew.Thechallenges thatwe cannotdevelop strongheory ftheirnewnessprecisely ecause heowlof Minervaas notyetflown.Asmy

colleague nd riendKeithHartaysinMoneynanUnequalWorld, eare n hefirstewyearsofa revolutionhatcouldbe as longor ongerthan heagriculturalevolution.eoplewho ivedn he firstdecadesoftheagriculturalevolutionouldhardlyavebeenexpected o spinoutallitsimplicationsor he next everal enturies ndeven millennia.n hatsense,we arestill ropingndscrambling,utI hink hatdoesn'tmakeit mpossibleo sensethat, ay, heIT evolutions launchings intoadifferentind f technical nd echnologicalrder. o therearea numberofsubstantive ays oengagewithhequestion fnewness-I mainlyothatby ooking trelationsetween lements atherhan ocusing nsingle lements,ikemigrationr mass media.Another ayone can makea convincingrgumentboutnewnessisby ookingt thelogicof thedispersalfelementsikemassmedia,marketdeology,ndelectronicechnologyhathavea planetarydistributionhat sstrikingn tsreach,n tscoverage, omparedwithearlierarge evolutions,itherdeologicalrtechnological.fyouexaminethisdispersal,tproduces nexpectedelations etween ariousrdersofthings.Inallof this s a dialoguewithMarxistdeasabout he relationsamongmaterialife, echnology,ocialrelations,deology,ndso on.These deas,directings to lookatthepoints farticulationetweenlayers fsocialexistence,havebeenour trongest ssetsfor ooking ttheserelationsna kind fgeneral, ndstillnspiring,ay. fyou ookatthe relationsfemploymenthatarenowpart ftheresult fglobalcorporatetrategies,heyclearlynvolvemovements fpeople, killedandsemiskilled,nto conomicnichesatvery hortnotice.Thiscompletelyonfounds nycrude dea hata particularconomy eeninaspatiallyoundedwaycan havea simple elationshipetweenbaseelements ndsuperstructurelements,orexample, ecauseeach oftheselayers anbe seenas a part fglobal irculatoryystems.Soindeedhereareverticalelationsn hisMarxistiew,and Marxwasbyno meanswrong,but helayerseemnow o be inescapably artsofcirculatoryystems n heir wnright, ndalsoata globalevel.Therefore,he kinds fcausalitieshatunderlieMarxisthinkingabout he relationsmong, orexample,echnology,roduction,ndideology otonlyhave o be reconsidereduthave o be reconsiderednan ad hoc manner ependingn the situation.notherwords,onecannot ometo a given ituation itha strongpriorenseabouthow hecausal lowswork.Thatormeiswhat he word"disjuncture"aptures.use "relations"orefero thestrengthf the Marxistpproach,o saythatthesethingsarenotsimply andomlyappening,hat herearestructuredinteractionsetween hem.However,he forms fdispersalfthese

45


4/10

forces-ideological,echnological,ndsocial-make itdifficulto haveageneral priorienseofhow heyrelateo one another.Iwould aya further ordabout he"new rcontemporary"ygoing othequestion n "themodern nd hecontemporary."hewayIwouldmake he distinctionetween he modern nd hecontemporary,which s a verygenericway, s to saythatmodernitysaprojectwhereasthecontemporarys a condition. ifferentheoristswouldhavedifferentideasof what scriticalothiscondition-someoneikeAnthony iddenswould ee itdifferentlyrom omeone ikeFredricameson,orexample.Thecontemporarysa conditionharacterizedy,amongotherhings,the sortsoflinkage, ropinquity,nd low hatIwrite bout nmyownwork. t s theinescapableonditionnwhichotsofactorsandsocietiesfind hemselves.On he otherhand, hemodern, nd his spartlyreflectednmy itleModernitytLarge,s not afact,anepoch,or a stagebuta vision, conception, ra project. herefore, odernitys nowaprojectwitha particularet ofcharacteristics,ivenglobalizations acontemporaryondition. ndbecause t s a project,t hasmultipleshapesand ncarnations.heearlydea hat heseprojectswerenecessarilyndsomehow nherentlyonvergents one of themainhingsIargueagainstnModernitytLarge ndelsewhere.

IMAGINATION ND THEPRODUCTIONOF LOCALITYP34 Youoften talkaboutthe ways inwhich he imagination,alongsideempirical xperience,playsan importantole nconstructing patialrealities orpeople,forexample, ncities.Howis yourconceptof the production f localitya moveawayfromaspatialized ense of the local?AA The ink etween heproductionflocalitynd he ideaof theimaginations a socialpracticean deaIam stillryingodevelop urther)isactuallynexpandeddeaof the social. n hatexpandeddeaIwantnotonly o makeroom or he socialas defined yreproductiveogics-rules, egulations,ndregularities,n heway hatPierre ourdieu asspokenabout hem-but to makeroomn he social orprojects,orvisions,orwishes,andso on.And hese definedncollectiveocialways,not ust npersonal,ndividual,nd diosyncraticays.Theproductionflocalitysa reminderhateventhe mostapparently echanicalorms fsocialorder hat eem to function ithoutdesign,contingency,r ntentionalityutsimply ythe forceof routine-

whatwe usedtocallhabit-involvearge mounts fdeliberatettention,effort, nd abor. art f thatattention,ffort, nd abor s involvedncollectivedeasof what spossible.Therefore,or helocal o havesomespatializedmbodimentakesan effortwhichranscendshatveryspatiality.o theidea s not o,as itwere,de-spatializehelocal,orevacuate hespatialrom helocal,but o addsomethingo it.That s tosay, ormere patialityo take tsform,herehas to be aneffort,"productionflocality,"hichs muchmore omplex.Once hateffortoproducehe local sfully bserved,we will lso,amongotherhings, eta deeper enseof what tmeans o produce,nhabit,ndsustain patialrelations.Wewon'thave ubstitutedomethinglse for hespatial art fthelocalbutwillhaveenrichedhelogicof thespatialn helocal.P34 Forarchitects hisemphasison boththe materialubstanceand the imagined ocial life makes for a challengenotonlywhenreading he citybut also whenengaging nitsdesign.Whatroledophysicalplaces-areas of a city,spaces ina neighborhood-play nthe production f locality?Howdoes thetemporary ualityof thesephysicalplaces affect thisproduction?AAPhysical lacesarevery mportantn wo nverse utrelatedways.Iamthinkingfmyown nformedense ofspatial ractice ndspatiallogic nBombay articularly.n he onehand, ogo back o Bourdieu,insofar s physicalpacesarewhata person indshimselfn,eitherbroughtothem,bornn hem,orexposed othem, hey ormpart fthebackdrop gainstwhichhework f theproductionflocalitysdone.Physicalpacesarepart f the materialhat ndividualsorkrom,drawon,tosomeextent ake orgranted, nd nother nstanceshighlight,sharpen,onsciously se. On he otherhand,physical pacesarealsoobjectsoftheinterests f lotsofsocialactors.A lotof work s directedotheproduction, aintenance,eproduction,istribution,renjoymentfphysical laces.Physical laces n hisbroad ense-areas, spaces,roads, treets, ocations-havea dual elationshipith heproductionflocality.hey ormpart f theconditionf itsproduction,nd heyalsoform nimportantart f theobjectof thatproduction. neof thechallengessto take hatdialecticalelationshipnd ntroduceheplayofcontingencieso see that here ssomethingmore han implymechanicalroductionnvolvedn hisprocess.Letme movebrieflyothetemporaryualityfthesephysicalplaces,getting loseto the coreofthe interests fPerspecta 4. Theimmediatehingosayis that nsofar s spatial rrangements-homes,habitations,treets,roads, onstructionfany ype-are temporary,hey

46 Perspecta 34


5/10

Appadurai

produceanxiety.Inplaces likeBombay(andthe question,of course, ishow manyplaces are likeBombay,and to whatextent, and that is anopen matter nmy mind)-that is, verydense places withunequalaccessto spatialresources,volatilepolitics,and a growingcrisis of governanceand civilityinshort,a descriptionof manymega-cities in the poorercountries of the worldand of some mega-cities inthe wealthier ountriesinthe world, oo)-the temporarynatureof a lotof physicalplaces andspaces shoots the projectof producing ocality hroughwith a constantunder-textof anxiety.Thisanxiety s frequently rticulatedncollectiveforms,such as ethnicviolence,about whichIhave written,and has largeimplicationsor the way politics s conducted inthese cities,whether t'sthroughethnicviolenceor other forms.The questionof temporarinesshas a particular dge for victimsofphysicaldispossession-the homeless, the under-housed, he badlyhoused-with whom Iam particularlyoncerned inBombay.For hemmanythings inlifehave a temporaryquality-not only physicalresources,spatialresources,and housingbut also social, political, nd moralrelationsand relations o the sources of power.The productionof localityis an effort o producethe sense of continuitynthe face of thetemporarinessof things.A huge amount of theirsocial energyandpersonal creativitys devoted to producing, fnot the illusion, hen thesense ofpermanence inthe face of the temporary.The phenomenologyof the temporarymust be carefully istinguishedby grouplocation nthepolitical conomy of places likeBombay.Thetemporarinessof things ifyou are a high-level peculator nthe derivativesmarketof Bombayisverydeeplydifferenthanifyou are livingn a viaduct nBombay.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,Iwas usingthe phrase "illusionf permanence"because I'vealwaysloved it. It's he titleof a wonderfulbook by FrancisHutchinsaboutthe British n Indiaat the peak of theirpower.It'sa lovelyphrasebecause itcapturesa kindof desire of the imperial ystem, butsimultaneouslyhe anguishand the ambivalence nvolved nthese things:the arrogant onceit of certaingrandprojects, ike he imperial roject,but also the humble hingthatordinary eople seek constantly o create.As faras the bottom halfof the population nBombayis concerned, inmany ways life s an effort o produce,ifnot the illusion,hen the sense ofstability, rcontinuity, r somethinglikepermanenceinthe face of theknowntemporarinessorvolatility f almost all he arrangementsof sociallife-who is where,who can you love,what'savailable,where do you live,

who has a space, will omeone allotyou a house, willyou get temporaryhousing,etc.In his regard, he projectof the productionof locality s an effort oworkagainstthe constant corrosionof the present,both by change andby uncertainty.Allcommunitiesknow thatthe work of producing heirown humanitys tied up inbeingable to relyon what maysubsist fromtoday to tomorrow, rom hisgeneration o the next, and so on. In hatsense, "the llusion f permanence" ummarizesa verylargeamountofwhatpeople do ina quotidianway,forexample,pumpingup a kerosenestove on the pavementto produce yourmealat nine o'clock withwhatever tis you have been ableto buy,scrounge, borrow,beg, or get.That s the productionof the illusion f permanence,thatyou willhavedinner onight,as you will omorrownight,and so on-if you are lucky. tsmoreambitiousend is the questionof havinga reliable tructure-a roofoveryourhead, a place on a piece of pavement,etc. Butina society inwhich boththe site and the means of livelihoodhave a highdegree ofvolatilityormanypeople, the work of producing tabilitys veryhard odistinguish rom he struggleto get some sense that whatyou do andwhatyou have might ast until omorrow.

STABILITY,COMMUNITY,AND THEBODYP34 InModernity at Large you introduce "diasporic publicspheres" as a prevalent product of the cultural dimensions ofglobalization. Ifthe city is made up of these diasporas, but also ofostensibly stable social forms and institutions, how are we tounderstand the relationship between the moving and the"stable"?AA Ina generalway,Ihave referredo the distinctionbetween modernityas a projectand the contemporaryas a condition.Allgroups incities likeBombayhave movementof some kindas a project ntheir ives,andmovement of some kindas a condition ntheir ives. Butfor the poor inBombay,movementis more oftena condition hana project.That s tosay, they are more often its objects than its subjects. Bysayingthis, Iamindicatinghat the questionof movement and stabilitys deeplyresponsiveto the questionof whereyou are inthe distribution f things inthiskindof place. Thatsaid, to the extent thatwe look at citiesas madeup of these diasporas,the questionis not so much an across-the-boardrelationship etween diasporicand more stable forms and institutions.

47


6/10

Rather, orparticularocial groups, everybody nthese places is to someextent tied up withnetworksof variouskindsthat extend wellbeyondthecity.And foreveryone,to some extent, they are nevertheless able to, orforcedto, or wish to producesome kindof locally egiblestability.Everybodys engaged inthis tension. The reallynteresting hing s howone group'sdiaspora s anothergroup'sstability; roups incities likeBombayformpartof the socio-spatial backdropagainstwhich othergroupsform heirprojects.So even ifyou have a groupthat is highlydiasporic, nsofaras it sediments itself ncertain ocations and takes upcertainpracticesand occupations dealingwithgoods and trades inBombay, tbecomes partof the stable backdrop or some othergroup'svision and some othergroup'seffort o move. We need a verysensitivepictureof the social morphologyof places likeBombayto attackthequestionof the relationbetween the movingand the stable because itisnot an across-the-board,generallaw underwhich allgroupsexist.P34 You have argued that ethnic violence is one kind of responseto uncertainty and a way in which community is produced. In"Spectral Housing and Urban Cleansing" the material substanceof the city-its spaces, infrastructure, and legalities-was the sitewhere this was played out. What does that say about therelationship among the body, physical space, and the idea ofcommunity?AA Ihave givena talkthat is inthe process of making tsway into aformal,written orm on my experienceof Bombayinwhich Iuse thephrase "dirt nd democracy." n hatessay Imake an analysisof thegrowinganxietyamong the middleclasses inBombay,as well as theiralliesin the municipality,bout practicesof defecation, urination,pitting,etc. These areveryserious issues inBombay,and as you watchthediscourse of cleanlinessbeingarticulated n billboards,nnewspapers, inslogans, and so on all overthe city,you beginto see that thereis a seriesof thingsbeginning o be melded together.Thefirstone is that the poorthemselves areseen as some formof social dirt.Thisharksback to thework of MaryDouglas inPurity nd Danger,a classic workarguing hatdirt s matterout of place. InBombaythe poor arecertainlymatterout ofplace, butthey are also producingmatterout of place-that is, urineandfeces-in publicplaces. It s a citydominatedby homelessness, inwhicha largepercentage of people have no access to sanitation. t s verycommon for seven oreighthundredhouseholds to shareone, two, orthreetoilets-an impossiblephysical reality. magine, na situation ikethis, also having o face an intense publicdiscourse againstthe sullying

of the city by urineand byfecal matter,and you can understandhowthere is a tendencyto see bodilywaste and the bodies of the poorassomehow connected.In he case of Bombayand Indiawe have an alarmingendencytosee the crowded areas inwhicheitherslums or homeless people exist as

partof the geographyof undesirableminorities,nthiscase Muslims,andof people who produce political iolence,these days oftentalkedabout inthe idiomof terror. ome timeago, there was a majorattack on the RedFort nDelhiby people who were allegedterrorists upportedby ordirectlyromPakistan.The newspapercoverage talkedvividly f howthese terroristswere able to make theirwayto the Red Fortby occupyingthe largelyMuslim lums that surround t,going "like ats" hrough hesesmall, crowded,filthyplaces to performacts of violence.Thediscourseof this event, and of other events since, is a disturbing onvergence ofthe horror f the state and the upper-middle lass of bodilyeffluvia,numberone, of the poor,number wo, and of dangerouspoliticalminorities, umber hree.This is the darkside of the linkamong the body,physicalspace, and the idea of community.

Anthropologists, articularly,ave alwaysbeen sensitiveto thepositivedimensionsof the ways inwhichmanyhumancommunitieshaveconstructedtheir deas of moral olidarity,ocial solidarity, nd cosmo-logicalregularity y playingon signs, symbols, indexes, and iconsvariouslydeployedoff the body as a foundationalmap of coherence. Inthe examples Ihavejustgiven,we see the dystopianversion. In hoseplaces of the world,mega-citiesamong them,wherephysicalco-habitationhas become enormously trained, he potentialof the bodyto be a tropeforcommunity,orsolidarity,rust, ntegrity,nd integration,takes justthe reverse form:bodies become a site for the locationof fear,images of pollution, ontamination, ilth,and danger.

REDUNDANCY NDFORMSOF GOVERNANCEP34 You mention "redundancy" as a concept that describes thecompeting and overlapping forms of governance taking the placeof the nation-state. How is this an emerging concept for theorganization of social life in cities, but also in relation totransnational definitions of locality?AA In ormulatinghe idea of redundancy,what Iwas trying o pointto isthat inparticularocieties inwhich we feel there is no ruleof law,or

48 Perspecta 34


7/10

Appadurai

wherehere s a kind fchaos,on closer nspectiontoften urns ut hatthere sa multiplicityfclaimsnvolvingovereignty,egitimacy,ndpower. t sa matter f toomuch,not oolittle. n helarge ities hatareemerging owas new orms fthecity-state, s manypeoplehavesuggested,orcity-regions,o useanother ecentphrase,his sespeciallyrue.There s a multiplicityfclaimsn he idiom fpower: verparticularpaces, particularesources, articularelations. ouhavesocial orces, ocialmovements, ongovernmentalovements, opularmovements,municipal ovements,itygovernments,tategovernments,ederal overnments,llexercisingery omplexpowerclaims vergroups ndbodies, ocations,esources, tc. Ina way,youcoulddefinemega-citiess engaged na complexbattlebetweencompetinglaims o legitimateovernance. ou ouldevensaythat hisbattle svirtuallydefinitionfwhat hesecity-states re.As faras the transnationalefinitionflocalitysconcerned,many ftheseplayerssocialmovements,municipalovernments,egionalgovernments,rans-federalovernments)re nfinitelyinkedo eithertheir ounterpartsrothernterests, ot eastglobal orporations,hichare ransnationalorces, ransnationallayers,ransnationalovements,andso on. Themultiplicityfredundancy,he too-muchness f claimsover egitimate ower,s intimatelyonnected othe transnationalnetworksnwhichmany f theseagenciesandmovements reimplicatedndof whichheyarea part.P34 How is a new "ecologyof expertise"beingshaped byemergent organizationalorms like the Alliance,whatyou calla"deepdemocracy"?AAThis s avery entral uestiono myownresearch.MovementsiketheAlliance, hich havestudiednMumbai,redoingwhat imilarmovements avedonefor ometime,whichschange herelationshipbetween hoseinpowerand hoseoutsideofit, nparticularo makeapowerfulnowledgelaim, ympatheticothethought fpeople ikePauloFreire.hisAllianceringsogether nongovernmentalorganizationalledSPARCSocietyor he Protectionf AreaResourceCenters), grassrootswomen's rganizationalledMahilaMilan,ormedbyformerex workersnoneofthetoughestpartsofBombay,ndanationalrganizationalledNSDFNationallumDwellers ederation).Thepoorknowa greatdealabout heir wnexperiencesndaboutthe conditions f their xperiences. hosewho claim o be concernedaboutpovertynd mprovedquityncitiesandsocietiesas a wholeneedto makeroom or heexpertise f thepoor.Thosemobilized

populationsmong hepoorwhohavebecomeexplicitlyoliticizedntermsof urban ndsocialgovernancerenowmakingta central art ftheir wn deologicalndpracticaltrategiesosaythat heyare ookingnot orknowledge ut oranevenplayingield n which oexerciseheknowledgeheyalready ave.This akesmanyorms,he mostgeneralbeing hecynicismnmanypro-poormovementsboutall orms ftechnicalxpertisehatarebroughtothem,onthegroundshat t s,first,arremovedrom heir wn ife, econd,usually nilaterallymposed,and, hird, roveno betechnicallyorthless,orexample,nrelationovery oncretemattersikewater rhousing.Basedonthis,a new ogic sbeingput ntoplace.Thesepro-poormovements,ncludingheones Ihavestudied, reseeking o becomeactivepartnersndefining,orexample,what tmeans o bea skilledbuilder. atherhan aying,"Don'tellusanything, e know verything,"whichwouldbeavery implemindedeversal,he answer s:"Wewouldlike o becomeplayersn hequestion fhowyoubuild dequatehousingor hepoor na city ikeBombay.Wehave deasabout inance,aboutdesign,about tructure,bout ewage,aboutdrainage."t irstglance, his ooks ike kind fvaguepopulist osition, ut t sactuallysubversiveosition, ecause tcalls ntoquestionheentire rchitectureofknowledgen whichhepost-WorldWarIdevelopmentmachinesfounded.Dependingnthecontext,dependingn theproject, ependingnthe issue nquestion,hese contestations rerestructuringhat tmeansto havespecializednowledge. o akeon onedeepimplication,here sa virtuallyompletedivorce ftheideaof effective nowledgend heideaofresearchmongmany f thesepro-poormovements. hat inglematterompletelyhanges he conditions nderwhich xpertisesdefined.fyou say"I m interestednreliablenowledge, utIreally avenointerestwhatsoevernwhatyoucallresearch,"e have hebeginningsf the kind f debate nprogressoday. t s not usta matterofa contestoverpower ndknowledge.t sa debateabout hedeepprotocolshat urroundheproductionfknowledge.

THEPOLITICSOF THEVISIBLEP34 Youhavesaid that the urbanpoorinMumbai re"citizenswithouta city."What s the politicsof becomingvisible for thepoorin Mumbai? f t is not merely iving n the geographyof thecity,what is it that makes one a citizenin a city?

49


8/10

AAActually,o reverse the terms of the question,whatthe poor inmanycases areseeking is the privilege f beinginvisible.Theysuffer romasurplusof visibility,s Ihave tried o suggest in some of myotherwork.One of the troubleswithbeing poor,and certainlywithbeing homeless, inBombayis thatyou areon permanentview.A very argepartof theproductionof locality, f the work of the imagination, f the laborandvision of social reproductionorthe disenfranchised, or the homeless,the poor,inplaces likeBombayis how to cope withbeingpermanentlyand inescapablyon view.A lot of physicalarrangements, ncludingmanyof the arrangements hatwe would calltemporary pieces of clothbetween rooms, strung-upplasticpieces overyourhead),have to dowithinsulation,rom he wear and tearof naturalorces, fromnoise, frompollution,butveryoftenfrom he gaze of otherclasses, especiallythemiddleclasses, and of the state. Ina way,what the pooroften seek inplaces likeBombayis the privilegesof invisibility.From his pointof view,citizenship s the abilityo exercise effectivepower in the cityin invisibleways, behind the frontstage, by havingaccess to people and relations o resources that do not have to beadvertised.Ina funnyway, transparency s the baneful,unchosenconditionof the poor.Although t'sconsidereda virtue nthe high-mindeddiscourse of manygovernments,philanthropies,multilaterals,nd so on,infact it is a conditionwithouta choice; it is a prison or the poor.Theylive ntransparency. nshort,this is the fishbowlkindof transparency.Thepowerof people who aretruly itizensina place likeBombayis thepowerto-not necessarilycorruptly utsimply nvisibly-have socialeffects inrelation o theirown social projects.The poorhavethe least optimalrelationship etween visibilityndpower:too muchvisibility,oo littlepower.What heyseek is to reducetheirvisibility-notin the political ense of the term as a metaphor orvoice, butdirectvisibility-in ermsof the gaze, inthe interestsof affectingwhathas been called the nervoussystem of powerina city ikeBombay.A bad mixof visibilitynd effectivepowerdefines the citizenshipof thepoor,and whatthey seek is to change that mix: ess visibility, orepower.

HOUSINGANDTHEPOLITICSOF PATIENCEP34 In "Deep Democracy" you state, "Housing can be argued tobe the single most critical site of this city's politics of citizenship."What are the different causalities and relationships at work thatmake housing such a nexus of issues (ethnic violence, powerinequalities, real-estate speculation, class proximity) in Bombay?

AA Housing,perhapsmorethananyothersingledimensionof life n aplace likeBombay,brings ogether issues of what others have calledrecognitionand redistribution.t s the place wherequestions of dignity,questions of equity,and questions of securitycome together.Housingallowsyou to pickthe conditionsof yourown visibility.tdoesn't makeyou invisible,t doesn't makeyou over-visible,tgives you a say in whomyou are visible o, in who is visible o you, and underwhat conditions.Theeffort o combat the tyranny f the temporarys substantially ddressedin a place likeBombaythroughhousing.What t means to be wealthy s intimatelyied up withwhat itmeansto have "secure enure."We used to thinkof tenureas being landtenure,and largelyas an agrarianssue. It s now a profoundly rban ssuethroughwhich the urbanpoorareseekingto make theirspatialexistencelegallyrecognized.

Housing s also the place wherekeyforces tend to crisscross onanotherdimension nwhich,likeredistributionnd recognition, tcatchesa maximum ension:inrelationo technical and culturalmatters.Housingis a place where infrastructure eets the living outinesof social life.It sunlike ewage, drinkingwater,electricity, nd manyotherabsolutelycritical ormsof infrastructure.t s the place where such infrastructuremeets issues of dignity, f style, of social standing,of allthe thingsthatmake humans humans. No singleotherarrangement tages the complexand visiblenegotiationgoing on between technical and cultural eaturesinsocial life.Given ts nature,housingcan alwaysvanish,even forpeoplewho areeconomicallyverywelloff. Forpeople who aren't, toften doesn'texist inthe firstplace.It s thistension,where these two axes meet, inwhichhousingdwells.One is the recognitionand redistributionxis, and the other is theaxis, as far as urbanmorphologyand design and materialityo, betweenthe technicaland the cultural imensions of social life.P34 How have the poor's needs to define their own space throughwhat you refer to as a "politics of patience" and "deepdemocracy" rubbed up against the more abstract designs ofplanners, developers, and state authorities in Bombay?AA A major ssue inthe politicsof housinginBombayis the questionofrelocationand rehabilitationorhomeless populations hathave beenliving longthe railroadracks. These populationshave been at thecenter of the politicsof the state versus the poorand also face the rageof middle-class commuters whose trainshave been slowed down byshacks close to the tracks. Familiesive, nsome cases, intemporaryshacks two, three,four eet fromwhere commuter rainsrun.Regularlypeople are injured r killed,and as a result hese slumpopulationshave

50 Perspecta 34


9/10

Appadurai

been slowingthe trainsdown, sometimes stoningtrains,causingdamage, etc. Thisis a hot issue. These railway-trackwellerswere beingforcibly emoved with ractorsbrought nbythe citygovernmentandtherailwayso demolish homes.One of the major riumphsof the Alliance s its success inbreakinglogjams hat arose innegotiationsamong the Indian ailways,he Indiangovernment, he governmentof the cityof Bombay,variousmunicipalauthorities, nd the WorldBank(whichhas a major ransportation rojectinBombay).TheAlliancemanagedto make its way intothis incrediblycomplex local, national,globalpoliticsby showingthat it has the abilityopersuadethese slum dwellers o move to temporaryquarters, n somecases builtby the Alliancemembers, in othercases bythe state. TheAlliance nterveneson behalfof the urbanpoor,saying, "Wewillget thesepeople to voluntarilymove ifyou providereliablehousing,ina reliablemanner, hroughourgood offices-and we willpromisethat those homesyou provide, nparticular artsof the city,willnot be abused, sold, putback on the market,etc. We willguarantee hat we knowwho thesepeople arefamilyby family;we'llplace them ina reliableway inthespaces allotted o them."Theyhave peacefullypersuadedthe slumdwellers o demolish theirown houses-which is revolutionaryecausedemolition s usuallywhat's done to them-on the promiseof relocation.

Thisis possiblyone of the greatcrises and dramasof urbangovernance involving ousinginBombay.It'san exampleof wherethepeople who dwelledon these tracks were dealingwithone of the cruelforms of temporariness,where trainsarewhizzingbytwo feet fromyourthree-year-old hild.Theyhave shown patience inwaiting ora bettersolution,and indeed that has been deliveredbythe Alliance, hrough tsvery complex forms of politicalnegotiationand deliberationwithotheragencies.TheAlliance tselfhas shown its own forms of patience in the face ofemergency.Ithas builtup its political ssets throughpatience indealingwithcitypolitics,developers,the WorldBank,and multiple therplayers.Ithas deployedallof thatcapital,which is itselfbuilton the politicsofpatience inthe face of emergency,to persuadethese slum dwellersonthe tracksto demolishtheirown homes, to bidgood-bye to secure formsof temporaryhousinginexchange for uncertain orms of permanenthousing.These slumdwellershad to be convincedthat what is at theother end won't be taken awayfrom hem. That'sat least an exampleofthe play, he deep play,and the multipleevelsof play,between differenttemporalities,differentenses of emergency,and differentormsofpatience in the politicsof housing.The "rubbing p"of these two kindsof visions wouldbe muchmorebrutal,much moreunproductive,muchmoresterile,much moreviolent,and much morezero-sumwere itnotfor the negotiationbygroups like

the Allianceof the different rgenciesand emergencies of the state andotheragencies in relation o the urgenciesand emergencies of the poor.TheAlliancehas managedto findpointsof mutualproductivity,hereforepreventinghe kindof brutal rictions hatoften happenwhen these kindsof visionsbump up againsteach other.

EXPERTISEAND RESEARCHP34 The apprehension in believing in architecture's andurbanism's capacity to effect social change could perhaps benefitfrom a thorough understanding of how people imagine andunderstand their urban landscapes-how they negotiate theterms and conditions of the city's various economies. Could youcomment on the difficult translation between how people imagineand produce these urban landscapes and how researchers andarchitects "read" these processes?AA One of the thingsthatpoorerpeople do to negotiatethe complexrealities f the tensions betweenthe temporaryand the permanent,andso on, is constantlyseek to be informed bout the social forces at play ntheirenvironment.Everybodys doingthis, butpoorer people are doingthis especially,seekingto amass as much knowledgeas possible aboutwho is who, what is what,who's related o whom, and why.Forexample,a newspaperboy who is droppinga newspaperat your place will ee youtalking o somebody else, and he willeitherask somebody else or,ifhecan, ask you who thatpersonwas, or what she was doing,orwhyshewas there.At firstsight, it seems (a) rrelevant,b) mpertinent nd rude,but what is happening s a constant archiving. na generalway,what thepoorseek to do incities likeBombayis to constantlyrenovate hisarchiveof knowledge,of people, of relations,of resources.That nitself sa laboriousprocess, but it is done allthe time. You do not know whatwillbecome relevantat a particular oint,when somethingtemporarybecomes even less thanthat,orthreatensto disappear,orsomethingunattractive ecomes permanent:orexample,you aretotallywithouthousing,and it ooks likeyouwillbe thatwayforever.Therelation f actorsof thistype,and theirvisionsof who theyare,whattheyaredoing,and howtheysurvive, o researchersand architects s very mportant, nd I hink tisat the heartof manyof the crises we are allconcernedwith.One pointIbegan to articulatewhen we talkedabout expertiseearliers that as the urbanpoorbecome morepoliticizednplaces likeBombay, heyareredefininghe terms of the relationsbetween keyelements that we take to be associated, likeresearch,theory, esting,hypothesis, intervention, nd so on. We on the academic side tend tohave a naturalized rotocolbetween the relationsof these things.The

51


10/10

poorare now ina position o beginto systematicallydisaggregatethosethings and to say, "Todo A,why do we need B?"That s one site of debate, but the other is somethingeven morecentral. It s the subjectof anotherpaperthat Ihavejustwritten nthecontext of a collective exercise undertakenbythe WorldBank nregardto relationsbetween anthropologistsand economists, between cultureand developmentinrelation o poverty,called"TheCapacity o Aspire."The essential pointhere is that inthe kindof dialogueof the deafbetween anthropologistsand economists, or people on the culture ideand people on the economic side, anthropologistshave essentiallyhanded over the entirebusiness of the future o economics. Culture tselfis substantially, y howeversophisticateda definition, een as a kindofrearviewmirror,abit, radition,norm,etc., butalwayslookingback.Thequestionof the future-of people'swishes, choices, projects,visions,etc.,-has been more or less handed over to the domainof economics,of individuals' hoices and preferences,and so on. Whatwe inanthropologyneed to do, and Iwillcome to architecturen a second, isfirstof allto recognizethatthere is a whole way in which the future tself sculturallyormedas much as the past is. People incommunitiesalwayshave visions,expectations, plans,wants, and these are notjustdisaggregated, individualhings;these arealso formedcollectively.We inanthropologyby and large,withtinyexceptions here and there,havetotally ailed o catch this, and we end up therefore nthis standoffwitheconomists, saying, "You on't understandhow people operate,"and"You re too individualistic."hat s allfine,but what havewe done aboutit?Very ittle.Withinhatgeneralframework have tried o arguethat one of thecapacities (in he languageof capacitybuildinghat has now becomestandard nrespect to the poor) s what Icall"thecapacityto aspire."Theeffort s to recognizethatpoor people have visions for wheretheywouldlike o go, forhope itself,butaspirationsneed to be seen as morecomplex than simply solated desires or wishes. Thiscapacity,Iargue, isnot simplya generalizedgood butsomethingthat is unequallydistributed."Poverty"ould be defined as havinga bad place inthedistribution f the capacityto aspire.Iarguethat this capacityisimproved he more chance you have to exercise it. In hatargument herecommendation s that we need to lookcarefully t how the capacitytoaspireis distributed nd whythe terms of recognitionarealwaysskewedagainstthe poor.It'snot a culturalpovertyargumentsayingthat the poordon't have visionsor hopes, but rather hat this capacity develops onlythroughuse. Those who use itmore,obviously,develop itmore. Andifyou do not have the occasion to use ita lot, itis going to suffer.Thisbringsme to the business of architecture nd urbanplanningand these kinds of disciplines, nthatthey rarelyake into accountthis

aspirationalaculty.Theyrarelyake intoaccount thatthe homeless, orthe poorlyhoused, orthe under-housed,or the disenfranchisedhaveprojects,havevisions,have strongideas about wheretheywouldlike oliveand how. More mportant,heyhave a particular lace inthiseconomy having o do with he capacityto aspire.Inrelationo housingand issues of built ormand space, practicesthatarchitectsand urbanplannersare involved n,theyshould notjustadd this understandingnbutplace this concern at the centerof theirwork.So when you say "thedifficultranslationbetween how people imagineand producetheseurban andscapes and how researchersand architects read' heseprocesses," Iwouldsay that by and largeresearchers end to preciselyreadthe forms,butIdon'tthink hey adequatelyread the reader.Toput itsimply,architectsand plannersoften do not recognizethatthe people whose concerns they areseekingto address have verycomplicated aspirationalmaps, inwhichspatial ssues playa part.Theissue is not to cut straight hrough o get the quickestroad from hedesigner'shead or mandate or professionalcontext to deliveringhehouse, the road,the shoppingmall, he train tation,but to figureoutwhere those elements actuallymight itmorefruitfullyntostrengtheningwhatIcall "thecapacityto aspire."Whether tis architecture, r urbanplanning,ora softerdisciplinelikeanthropology,whichis simply rying o makean interpretivecontribution, ngagingthatcapacity, tsdistribution,nd the formsittakes-that is the centralchallenge.Inshort,we need to be newlyalert othe dangerthat inpursuing he aspirationsof urbanplanningor thefantasies of architects,we might neglect the centralasset we need torecognize: he capacityto aspireof the urbanpoor.Such aspirationscentrallynclude he ways in whichthe poormightwish to shape theirspaces. This fact shouldcompel a new humility bout the techniquesandtechnologies of the expert.

52 Perspecta 34

Documents

Illusion of Permanence Interview With Arjun Appadurai by Perspecta 34[1]