DIRTY PICTURES FROM A RUBBISH COURSE
FOUNDATION SEMESTER/HUMANITIES 1 GAURI BHARAT JAYASHREE BHARADAN
COURSE OUTLINE
This course focuses on how the built environment shapes, and is simultaneously shaped by, social, cultural and political relations. The lens through which these relations were studied this semester was garbage in the city. Students conducted fieldwork in three stages: CLEANING AS A WAY OF ESTABLISHING TERRITORY
Students documented cleaning practices in various sites and buildings as an expression of marking personal territory. The idea was simple - we clean places that we consider our own, and as a corollary, the extent of cleaning becomes way of claiming space. This exercise had two objectives: #1 It expanded the notion of the built environment as not just a physical construct but as a series of inhabited spaces. #2 Students were also introduced to the anthropological concept of practice. They could now discuss how spaces are structured by things people do.
DISPOSAL OF GARBAGE AND THE IDEA OF PUBLIC SPACE
In this stage, students documented where individuals from the previous exercise disposed their garbage, which in most cases was the street. We discussed why and what that told us about the street itself. By documenting the street as textured spaces that belong to nobody, i.e. where everybody throw rubbish, to places where the municipality places garbage bins as specific points within a roads scape, we developed the simple but inherently vague idea of public as ‘whatever is not private’. The objective of this stage was to develop familiarity with the concept of public spaces as sites of conflict, contestation and differentiation, rather than as utopian of harmony and consensus. Students were also introduced to the idea of social actors and agency, right to the city, and recognising access (or the lack of it) as a spatially produced discrimination.
In the final stage, students documented garbage collection and disposal as an urban network. We discussed the various elements and processes that constituted garbage as a network and the role of formal and informal institutions that are both required to keep the city working.The objective of this stage was to expand the idea of practices, places and relationships from individual sites to the city itself. By producing a complex diagram that tied together people, processes, objects, places and relationships from the previous exercises, the students re-imagined the city as a network of relationships.
REIMAGINING THE CITY AS A NETWORK
In order to attain the above mentioned understandings of garbage and its relation to the various attributes of the city, three major exercises were designed for the students.
STUDENT EXERCISES
1. Essays on various concepts : This exercise aimed at induging the students to read and eventually write about various concepts that make a city and how a system of garbage and its disposal creates social, political & economical impacts on the citizens and thier functioning. 2. City Section : In order to achieve a more practical understanding of these concept, the students were simultaneously asked to cut sections through various parts of the city to document the role of garbage and its disposal. 3. City Network Diagram : The students were then asked to make diagrams of the system in which garbage is produced and disposed, along with all the key things, people & processes it goes through.
SECTION 1 :
THROUGH LAW GARDEN Abhishek P., Anirudh Shankar, SLN Deekshit, Rithwik Behuria, C M Sanandana, Prachi Bedia, Harsh Prajapati, Aditya Setalvad, Aesha Shah, Abhiva J., Aryan Karena, Sunny Tuvar
ESSAY 1
ALMITRA ROOSEVELT
HABITUS, FIELD AND SOCIAL ACTORS
INTRODUCTION : Pierre Bourdieu, a French sociologist, anthropologist, developed and analysed a hypothesis of ‘Habitus, Field and social actors’ in his publication ‘Les Marchi des Biens symboliques’. He derives a relation between a field occupied by a social actor and the habitus of the individual and further how they differentiate spaces. HABITUS : Habitus refers to a structuring structure which defines a practice and the perception of the practice. It refers to the system of structure imposed on an individual by the socio-cultural environment. According to Bourdieu, the external and internal environments and interlinked. In simpler terms, ‘Habitus’ refers to the external environment or the nature of a social group internalized by an individual while socializing, from the beginning of the childhood. Habitus is both constructed and constructing. It is modified by our position and it affects our actions. Thus, a dialectical relation is
established. Similarly, the spaces occupied fall in order of this relationship. Let us consider a situation where a new member is introduced into a social group, for example, a student joining CEPT University. In a few weeks, the new student would familiarise with the terms that might not be known otherwise. Thus, evading a space with characteristic inhabitant such as this has influenced the way the person talks and behaves. Similarly, when the majority of the community be willing, could create another trend-setter which in turn will influence the nature of the spaces. The streets are another complex spaces which are in a constant negotiation. FIELD : A field is a setting where the social actors take their places of power or ‘positions’. Field of power and class are hierarchical. If the field is metaphorically a football court, the players- social actors take their respective places- positions in the game. The game has a set of rules which the players have to follow. The players have distinct skillset- habitus.
SOCIAL ACTORS : The social actors are influential people who can modify the field of theirs through capitals such as the capital of resource, education, authority, etc. These social actors can modify the spaces through practices of inhabitation. In the society, men play the role of social actors subjugating women. The norms of how women must behave in the society were established by these social actors and thus leading to gendered spaces. Situations of women being unable to prevail in dark places at night are dominated by the presence of men. Thus, in this way spaces get differentiated. The architecture of spaces is defined by codified regulations of the states but are also governed by the non-codified conformations- norms of the sociocultural environment. Norms are understandings or mutual agreements over an issue which is prevalent over larger sectors of the society. For example, a teacher wearing a tattoo is perceived to be an unacceptable attitude even though it isn’t a rule. Such norms govern the differentiation of spaces in a society.
POLITICAL CLAIMS : Let us consider the scenario of a road-side temple. The legitimisation of a public space by the religious group is not considered a crime due to the cultural capital the social actors possess. Such social actors maintain their power through various ways of educational pedagogy to retain their capital. Another example of social actors influencing spaces is the time when Apoorva Amin’s architectural style was widely replicated throughout the city. Thus, the style of architecture eventually became a norm for other architects. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INDIVIDUALS AND STRUCTURES: Through the concept of ‘Habitus, Field and Social actors’, Bourdieu pins a relation between individuals and larger structures. The social actor, as an individual, project impressions about the spaces perceived.
ESSAY 2
NAMRATA UKANI
FORMALITY & INFORMALITY IN INDIAN CITIES
Indian cities function through a combination of formal and informal institutions and actors. The formal institution is the government which supposedly claims all the work to be done, but that usually doesn’t happen hence informal institutions i.e. private contractors come into picture. Let’s discuss the formal and informal institutions and actors in the context of garbage collection. The Municipal Corporation is a system which is responsible for garbage collection, its segregation, disposal and recycling. For all these tasks the Municipal Corporation appoints officials and workers. Thus, garbage from urban settlements ideally has to be dealt in a systematic way by the municipal corporations but this doesn’t happen because of certain loopholes in the system. The workers are usually paid less, overburdened with work and fall sick due to constant exposure to harmful toxins and chemicals present in the garbage. In order to keep the shops and the households clean, the
owners appoint private workers. This is how informal actors come into picture. The task of garbage collection is hard. It gets harder if the workers start late and the road is full of vehicles and carts. But there is a job harder than this the job of manual scavengers. Manual scavengers are people; generally of the lower caste, dalits, or ‘harijans’ as Gandhiji named them. They are the ones who get into the narrow alleys of manholes and clean it. They are the ones who are approached when the drainage of a household gets clogged. Manual scavengers have to start their day early. Around 4 or 5, because if they start late and people start flushing, their task gets harder. Before getting into the manhole, they usually drink alcohol. Going into a manhole sober is impossible. There are times when their contractors give them oil to apply to their bodies before going in, but they are so poor that they take the oil home to feed their families instead. The sight of a moving cockroach inside the manhole is a respite for them as it indicates that the manhole is not too toxic. There have been hundreds of recorded deaths and even
more of unrecorded deaths that have occurred due to these scavengers getting into toxic manholes. In the age of thriving technology these people are forced to clean septic tanks and sewage systems. These deaths can be decreased if they are provided with proper equipment like helmet, torch, jacket, boots, etc. but this kit is too expensive and thus these people are forced to go in naked. The government has enough funds to the concerned authority to provide manual scavengers with proper equipment but the money directed often ends up fattening the pockets of the politicians. Even the Indian Railways appoints a lot of scavengers for cleaning of the railway tracks. Officially the Delhi Government has ordered a ban on manual cleaning of sewers. But in reality, these people do exist and work in all the states especially Gujarat, Maharashtra and Rajasthan. Though formally banned but informally they are the only ones to get into the narrow alleys.
There’s a little poem on these informal actors written by a girl who was moved deeply after reading an article on scavengers. “We respect the soldiers at the borders who fights enemies and dies. Why don’t we respect the manual scavengers, who cleans the drainage, fights diseases and dies? They are humans, aren’t they? We can’t do that work even for a day. In a world without them, How will you find your lost, precious gem? Then, at a sight of them, Why do we go away? Why don’t we stay? Why can’t any respect we pay? Why don’t we have kind words to say? Next time you call a scavenger, Feed him food. Treat him good. Cleaning the sewage systems and gutters, They are the true soldiers!”
ESSAY 3
AASHKA DAVE
WAYS OF LOOKING AT INDIAN STREETS
It is a very common notion, one that holds true in all senses for all cities in the world, streets maketh the city. Each street has a character of its own which ultimately shapes that of the city. Evolution of humanity is nowhere more closely reflected as it can be interpreted by their streets. And more so in India than any other place in the world. Indian streets have a multitude of activities taking place on them which makes them quite different from the streets present anywhere else in the world. Over the years there have been many different studies of the Indian streets, by both Indians and westerners, each having some common points yet at the same time being quite different. From Dipen Chakraborty talking about the dirty streets and the people hanging out on them to others like Apurva Appadurai who saw streets as a cultural hub, a space which gives the country its identity, there have been several attempts at studying Indian streets, with each one viewing the street as a different entity. These can essentially be classified into
three main categories. The first group views the street as being either developed and modern or as premature which seems a bit black and white. Added to this is the question of what one means by “modern�. For a person living in India, the streets may appear quite modern but for someone else, this opinion may change drastically. Indian streets are dirty and congested and for someone coming from the west, it may appear as though they have entered a new world entirely. A street in this case is seen as a place for walking or merely for transportation. Such a generalized notion, however, cannot be considered when we look at Indian streets. What sets Indian streets apart from many other streets of the world is the fact that the street in itself houses various activities.This is where the first method fails. By looking at the street as only a space where people walk, many facets of the Indian street gets lost. At the same time, one cannot always compare the Indian streets with the ones in the west. In a place where a lot of activities take place on the streets keeping a check on each one of these is not possible unlike the ones in the west where rules and
regulations are thoroughly followed. The second method sees the street to be in a constant state of flux. According to this method, a street can be viewed as a space which is constantly being shaped by the different activities taking place in it. It functions through a series of negotiations, a state of constant push and pulls. This method too has its shortcomings as it does not take into consideration the previous principle. And so, a third method emerges which is the culturalist’s perspective which is a relatively better way to study the Indian street. This is an effective and important method as it highlights the differences in urban spaces. It recognizes the existence of multitude of activities that take place in the Indian street. It sees the street as not just a space but as an abstract entity as well as a living experience. It considers the street as not just a space for walking but also as a pace meant for eating, sleeping, hanging out and at the same time, also as a space where people wash utensils or cook food or even stand and brush their teeth. For a country like India, the culturalist’s perspective is much more appropriate as the character of the country
cannot be better described in any other setting than the street. The street can be viewed as a cultural center where people come together to not only walk, eat or shop but also as a place where they come to hangout and discuss various things. It is formed by the movement of the cars and the people, the signs and hoardings which are present and buildings which lay along it. It is a space of interaction where one encounters technology, sociality and the politics of the modern world. The Indian street is an amalgamation of culture, a place where the line between public and private gets blurred. The other two ways fail to look at the street with such diversity with the first way overlooking the aspect of the different uses of the street and the second one not considering the rules which govern the streets. Thus, one can conclude that although the Indian streets have been studied in various forms across the years with each one being different, it is important to note that the culture of the Indian street is due to the different activities taking place on in it be it the quintessential ones like walking or be it the ones more specific to India like marriage processions.
DIAGRAM 1
AHMEDABAD CITY GARBAGE NETWORK
SECTION 2 :
THROUGH MALAV TALAV Agrima Manglik, Ritvi Broker, Anoushka Mittal, Vatsal Sanghvi, Sharvi Shah, Ishita Sojitra, Harshal Gajjar, Dhruv Patel, Darshan Patel, Arsh Kania
GARBAGE, MODERNITY AND CITIZEN’S GAZE
ESSAY 4
SHREYA SHRIDHAR
It is a generally perceived notion that Indian streets and cities are dirty. This is a fact that all Indians and foreigners unanimously agree to. But the question then arises- since when has this notion been prevalent and when did we begin to agree to it? When the Europeans entered India under the pretext of trade but with the intent of colonization, the most noticeable aspect of the country was the dirt, filth and humidity that lingered in the air. The entire scene must have appeared unkempt, filthy, overcrowded and chaotic. This was a sharp contrast to the neat orderly lanes seen in Europe, and hence their senses must have been overwhelmed. There are European writings dating back to the 19th century where the unhygienic conditions of India have been noted. M.A. Sherring even termed the water of Banaras as ‘deadly’. The waters bred diseases like
dengue and cholera, which took the lives of many. However, these same waters are perceived as holy by Indians. When they put flowers in the river, they become floral offerings, not pollutants which would eventually rot and decompose, causing the waters to reek with their stench. Another aspect of Indian streets which shocked the Britishers were the bazaars. They were maintained poorly, and were nothing short of filthy, clustered and chaotic. They were accustomed to pillared verandas with beautiful foliages and an overall fairy- like ambience, not a phantasmagoric nightmare. But what is the cause and where is the source of all this filth? It is a common notion that the areas that we clean are our own and the areas we throw our waste belong to others. In India, the cleaning of houses is done not only as a physical requirement, but also to provide a sense of holiness, purity and sanctity. The act of cleaning forms a ‘protected sphere’. However, the street is an abstract idea- an area of anonymity. It is unprotected and unknown to us. It serves as a
demarcation between the protected sphere and the system. Hence, when garbage is thrown from our houses onto the streets, it becomes someone else’s responsibility. Europeans noted that as citizens of the country, Indians have a strong lack of a sense of responsibility. They do not have a civic sense or agreement, nor do they have any regard for public health or order. They cannot differentiate between public and private behaviour. Activities like sleeping, washing of clothes, bathing and peeing which are meant to be done privately have shamelessly been brought out into the public realm, thereby diminishing the boundary between the private and public realms. As citizens do not seem to be able to differentiate between public and private, it brings about a lack of modernity thereby leaving our country in a state of incomplete modernity. As citizens of the country, we are so used to seeing garbage and filth everywhere that we have normalized it as a part of our lives. The same galis which seem threatening, unwelcome and unsystematic to foreigners are friendly to the Banarasi men as they feel free to roam and pee anywhere and everywhere. When Britishers came to India, they bestowed us with
subjecthood, but not citizenship. The presence of dirt and the random organization of the streets was very unsettling to them. This is because the randomness took away their control and orderly systems. They could not keep an eye on everyone. As citizens, we only take up responsibility for our own territories and leave the rest to the system. The streets, like bazaars, belong to no one. Hence no one takes the initiative of maintaining them. If public health is to be maintained, these old bazaars need to be replaced with newer, sterile supermarkets. Capitalization, however, has failed the citizens. They are expected to forgo these bazaars without installation of the new supermarketsa demand which seems to be quite irrational. Another aspect which Dipesh Chakraborty dealt with was the difference between the responsibilities of a person as a citizen versus as an ethnosociologist. This was a dilemma faced by Nita Kumar when one of her subjects passed away owing to the filthy conditions of the galis and slums in which he resided. As a citizen, intervening and calling the authorities to take action would be the
right thing to do. However, as an ethnosociologist, it would affect her study. The question then arises- what do we do with the knowledge we have of the filth and the dirt prevalent everywhere? Do we give in to non-bourgeois ideals and stay the way we are, without even budging to claim responsibility? Or do we follow bourgeois ideals and ensure that the system id effective in its actions? In order for the system to be effective, there can be no disjunction between the individuals of the society and the system itself. Both parties must compromise and cooperate to maintain the cleanliness of the city.
ESSAY 5
VARISHA CHAUHAN
GENDERED SPACES
Whenever a girl enters a public space, the most frequent question that is asked either symbolically or by strange looks is “why is she here?�. All of us have either seen or been a victim of situations where men that loiter on roads pass comments or try to physically assault a woman. In all metropolitan cities a common site that can be seen is that of men loitering or gathered at tea stalls, pan gallas etc. And the body language of the woman is always closed, composed and scared of being raped. A woman is not seen smoking a cigarette or hanging around with friends on a tea stall especially in Indian cities. In India most of the women use public space as a means of transition. The public space acts as a temporary space where they have to be present in the most transparent way possible so that they do not attract a lot of attention. Hence Indian streets are used by women just to go from destination A to destination
B. The physical, mental as well as cultural behavior of a man verses that of a woman is completely different on the street or any public space that is supposed to be accessible by all. Therefore yes, public spaces are gendered and this question can be answered by every citizen of India who has experienced street life. Even if a small three year old child is asked how his parents live, he is able to identify how men in India are allowed to loiter and women are not. Women are expected to stay at home whereas the outdoor ( the public space) is considered as the domain of men. Women in India are continuously and vigorously reminded of their rights to public spaces but even after all this one can not hold women indoors all the time. This is the reason why women’s time in public is continuously negotiated. These negotiations take place on three different points. Time. Company. Attire No wonder women in India are asked not to go out late at night with a boy, wearing inappropriate clothes. Every teenager might have heard her father complaining about the kind of clothes that she is wearing at a certain point
of time. All these negotiations if not followed by women are considered as disobeying their social norms that have been gradually created through all these years. And men then consider it their duty to punish these women who violate these so called social norms. Here comes the picture of street harassment and rapes. These cause a change in the mindset of the people of the society and this change is reflected in the way urban societies and its infrastructure is designed. These particular mindset reflect that women in Indian societies are expected to not spend much time in public and so the proportion of space that is provided to them while designing a space is kept less. For example in Bombay airport there is one queue for women whereas four queues for men. These designs then act as symbols for how men and women are supposed to use public space. In Bombay in the ladies compartment of the train, every woman considers herself to be at ease. She feels free to keep her legs open and talk loudly. She is free to use a public space because here she is not afraid of strange eyes staring at her. Whereas if a girl goes in the
general compartment of the same train, her behavior changes. She closes herself up, avoiding eye contacts. Also, when she is there, the men ask themselves as well as her “why is she here?�. Women are not expected to use public spaces the way that men do. And that is what makes all the difference. Small children are continuously fed with information that the father or the man in the family is the one who earns and hence is the most powerful person in the family. He is independent to do whatever he wants. Whereas the woman or the mother or the sister is supposed to do household work. Symbols like public washrooms where there are pictures of women wearing a sari covering her head and men being men produce norms of how men and women are supposed to behave and dress in public. Women are expected to wear sober, decent clothing and men do not have any restrictions regarding that. The problem with Indian societies is that even though women posses a very important role in the economy they have to be given certain rights so that they do not get oppressed by men. It does not come naturally to men and women to share public space equally. Continuously campaigns
to save girls child and woman rights have to be carried out to treasure the rights and respect for women. The public spaces are gendered not only on the street level but also spiritually. The temple of Shiva or the mosque that is a place of worship is not accessible by both men and women equally. When such great ideals differentiate between men and women then their inequality at an informal street level is more or less expected. Even after all this there have been a lot of changes in the women are treated than years ago. Today a girl can sometimes go alone at night without the fear of being raped. Earlier the symbols of male and female restrooms showed typical features of male and female attires but now they have abstract symbols that do not restrict the way a woman has to dress. Concluding, norms are basically mindsets of a group of people belonging to the same society where the same set of thoughts have been passed continuously through generations. The norms govern the way people act and are expected to act when in a public space. And even if there are people who might not want to follow these norms, they
have to face challenges because these norms have been developed and are in existence since a very long time. The symbols in urban designs of spaces show lot of Difference in the way women and men behave in public spaces.
ESSAY 6
SANDRA PALATHINGAL
ARCHITECTURE OF INTITUTIONS: SOCIETY, CULTURE & POLITICS
People’s ideologies change over centuries. There might never be a consensus on how activities are should run. Every institution is a result of a series of ideas, thought process and negotiation. And every institution is subject to change over time. Prisons are an example of continuous change over centuries affected by social, cultural and political conditions. Deterrence is the main aim of a prison. The method in which this was made to happen has changed over centuries. The need for prisons arised in the 16th century London when it was decided that criminals should be confined rather than executed or whipped. In earlier times castle towers, dungeons, town hall cellars etc. were used to confine the wrongdoers. These were dark dingy paces where prisoners had no connection with the world outside.
However, by the 18th century the need for reforming prisons arised. Different communities had different ideas of how a prison should be. The evangelicals argued that solitude and prayer was the best way to reform a criminal. However the utilitarians took the stand that what criminals needed was discipline and work to keep them engaged. The separate system and the silent system were two of the systems which underwent much debate. In the separate system, prisoners are locked in separate cells in complete isolation. They had separate areas for different activities they did. In the silent system, prisoners work together. However, no conversation is allowed. In the prison criminals were classified into various categories like degree of crime, gender and age. This was to prevent criminals from corrupting each other mentally. The Pentonville prison was an institution into whose construction went much thought and negotiations. The
heating system in the prison was something thoroughly thought of. Cold air from the basement was allowed to pass over hot pipes which was heated with the help of boilers. Hot air entered the separate cells through the opening at the top of the cell. The foul air left the cell from the opening at the bottom. However due to errors in the system it took weeks to heat up the cell and more time to lower the temperature. The principle that hot air rises was neglected in the construction. The prison had a radial arrangement of wings. This allowed high level of control for the prison authorities. The security system was also properly administrated using iron loop in walls, bolts and heavy doors. The architectural elements that needed to be taken care of while building a prison is the size of cells, thickness of walls, bolts and locks and sound-proofness. A number of experiments were conducted to make the walls soundproof since it was very important to prevent conversation among jail inmates.
The inmates of pentonville prison attended chapel ‘separately’. There were separate stalls for each prisoner while attending sermon. The prisoners also had separate spaces for exercise. In different periods of time the functionality of institutions are largely influenced by the views and interactions of the dominant group. There will always be difference in options about what is right and what is wrong. Decisions are taken as a result of overall consensus. The structure had to meet the requirements of people at that time.
DIAGRAM 2
AHMEDABAD CITY GARBAGE NETWORK