[Urbanstudy] anarchic terrains and the burden of the nation state

Thu Sep 15 23:52:54 IST 2005

hi
this discussion is too interesting to still be lurking.
that was a cool juxtaposition by arkaja. example of the flourishing dilli 
haat, which is soon to be replicated in another part of delhi. while banning 
tehbazaari in the same city. so a fetishized nostalgic space for a cultural 
form that you are simultaneously destroying. the anthropologist renato 
rosaldo in another context called this "imperialist nostalgia" for white 
people's nostalgia for a culture they have destroyed themselves. 
photographing tribes (thus embalming them in a sense), preserving them thus 
while destroying them . 
or maybe its just 'modernity' :)
 but had some questions:
for arkaja:
you say
"On the other hand, most of Delhi's residential areas have formal and 
informal spaces quite close together, and a constant exchange between the 
two. Delhi's model, constantly threatened by the courts and resident welfare 
associations, is far more in tune with North Indian reality" 
can you please explain and unpack that. what are these "informal spaces". 
what kind of "constant exchange"? where in delhi? what do you mean by "north 
indian reality"? do you think "north indian" cities including are a type? or 
do you just find heuristically useful to oppose it to bangalore?
 For solly:
-"state learning to be quiet listeners"? sounds quite cool. any examples you 
can think of.
-tehbazaari might go back to shahjahan, but whats interesting is what kind 
of negotiation enabled this to exist till now in its modern form, and what 
are the changing histories of its legal and material form in the new modern 
imperial capital of the british and the indian state. all i am trying to say 
is instead of looking at it as a "traditional" practice, it might be more 
productive to see it as a "modern" one with a long and complicated history.
 best,
anuj
   On 9/15/05, solomon benjamin <sollybenj at yahoo.co.in> wrote:
 
> Hi
> I think Arkaja's observations are useful in several
> ways. One is that cities as 'anarchic' terrains or to
> be perhaps more specific, 'a legal feild' (to borrow
> from Omar Razza) or space for political claim making,
> vary a lot. In extending that argument, different
> parts of the city open up varied 'anarchic
> territories' and these are not just the physical form,
> but rather complex local histories. Thus, two revenue
> layouts both DC converted and 'equavalent' in legal
> charecteristics would be quite different if one was in
> Mysore road and another was adjecent to Koramangala.
> 
> If so, then there is something about city terrains
> that go beyond legalistic or institutional
> descriptions but have to do with a variety of local
> histories which today interface globally.
> 
> The second point in Arkaja's email which we also saw
> in the KR market, is that older forms of claim ing are
> being overruled on various grouds. She gives an
> example of the tezbazari system which I remember as a
> way, via municipalized and hense relatively accesible
> claim making, open to a range of hawkers and new
> migrants. Now of course, we have the NGOs who either
> on a rights framework or then one of master planning
> aim to rid the city of slums, and as part of this, to
> sanitize via planning -- the hawking zones that
> result, are devoid of the essential politics which an
> 'anarchic' territory (to link to the first) opens up.
> I suspect here the interesting and important issue is
> to read the city from two cross registers:
> The process and claiming of 'law' ... and in parallel,
> the process and claiming of selltlenmt and occoupancy.
> 
> 
> This is not easy, as for a momemnt, we would need to
> rid ourselves of the burden of the Nation State, its
> constitutional underpinnnings (the responsability to
> enforce the constitution) and in the second, to plan
> for equity and efficiency! Instead to learn to be
> quiet listerners.
> Cheers
> Solly
> Arkaja, do you think you can get hold of the rules and
> regulations of the Tezbazari system and if possible on
> its historical origins. I heard it came from the time
> of Shah Jahah or linked to the Chandni Chowk in Old
> Delhi?
> 
> --- arkaja at vsnl.net wrote:
> 
> > On the value of anarchy, I could not agree more.
> > There is a big difference between anarchy in
> > Bangalore, and the anarchy in Delhi. Bangalore, or
> > at least the posher parts of Bangalore, is far more
> > tightly controlled - which I think makes the
> > informal service sector in Bangalore quite
> > non-existent. On the other hand, most of Delhi's
> > residential areas have formal and informal spaces
> > qute close together, and a constant exchange between
> > the two. Delhi's model, constantly threatened by the
> > courts and resident welfare associations, is far
> > more in tune with North Indian reality than
> > aspirational Bangalore.
> >
> > As just another example of how ridiculous master
> > plannning can be - Dilli Haat flourishes with the
> > blessings of the planners, while the courts (High
> > Court or Supreme Court?) recently banned tehbazaari
> > (MCD licensed street stalls)in its full blooded
> > form. The MCD has also just demolished a large area
> > of such tehbazaari stalls from the Jama Masjid area.
> > I think it goes without saying that tehbazaari has a
> > much more important place in the economy and culture
> > of Delhi than Dilli Haat. And as a part of the
> > anarchism that Solly talks of, tehbazaars find a way
> > of getting back on their feet in spite of high level
> > court orders and MCD sanitizing drives.
> >
> > Arkaja
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: solomon benjamin <sollybenj at yahoo.co.in>
> > Date: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 5:33 pm
> > Subject: [Commons-Law] on whose behalf?
> >
> > > Dear Jayna,
> > > The main point here is that I think we need to
> > move
> > > beyond a normative box of assuming that much of
> > the
> > > political debate around cities and planning needs
> > to
> > > be contained in a constitutional enclosure of the
> > > 74th. CA or then, within Master Planning (as
> > defined
> > > in part by the various Town and Country Plannng
> > acts
> > > among other inferences) which is only one form of
> > > intervening in cities. I was intending in my email
> > to
> > > open up both the legal and institutional
> > categories
> > > towards a broader way in which various types of
> > > legalities get defined, and in which various types
> > of
> > > public interventions get made from different
> > levels of
> > > government -- pushed ahead by particular groups in
> > > society. This seems certainly more complicated and
> > > when one looks at detailed cases of how law is
> > > 'formed' the situation is much more fluid. I am
> > > thinking here not just of Santos, but also work on
> > > venezula by Krast, Swartz (the evolution of laws
> > in
> > > the barrios of caracas), the work of Omar Razzar
> > in
> > > Jorden, work in Hyderabad Sindh, and our own work
> > here
> > > in Bangalore. In these cases, one finds that
> > > legislators framing 'the law' or planners planning
> > > 'the master plan' or activists defining 'the
> > public
> > > participation' being side lined by a range of
> > actors.
> > > These are not just the evil developers or greedy
> > vote
> > > hungry politicians, but a range of poorer groups
> > who
> > > in their own quiet ways, act, dis-trusting of
> > those
> > > who act on their behalf. Thats the 'un-ease' part!
> > > Hope this makes things more clear.
> > > Cheers
> > > Solly
> > > Perhaps a meet at the ALF for an extended
> > discussion?
> > >
> > >
> > > --- Jayna Kothari <jaynakothari at justice.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Dear Solly,
> > > >
> > > > I am just curious about some of the comments you
> > > > made......
> > > >
> > > > I
> > > > > refer to here not a debate of the 74th, CA and
> > if
> > > > the
> > > > > participatory process is linked to that or
> > not.
> > > > > Instead I am pointing to the centrality of
> > > > politics,
> > > > > the value of anachism, of fluidity, of
> > > > > un-predictability, which planners and
> > > > administrators
> > > > > find great unease.
> > > >
> > > > while the centrality of politics is not really
> > > > denied,
> > > > what is thus value of anarchism or
> > > > fluidity/unpredictability in planning that you
> > are
> > > > referring to?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > cheers,
> > > > Jayna
> > >
> > >
> > > Dr. Solomon Benjamin
> > > #32, 2nd. 'A' Cross, 10th. Main
> > > Koramangala, 4th. 'C' Block
> > > BANGALORE 560034
> > > INDIA
> > > Phone: 91-80-2552-5485
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> __________________________________________________________
> >
> > > Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your partner now. Go
> > to
> > >
> >
> http://yahoo.shaadi.com_______________________________________________
> > > commons-law mailing list
> > > commons-law at sarai.net
> > >
> > https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/commons-law
> > >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________________
> Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your partner now. Go to 
> http://yahoo.shaadi.com
> _______________________________________________
> Urbanstudygroup mailing list
> Urban Study Group: Reading the South Asian City
> 
> To subscribe or browse the Urban Study Group archives, please visit 
> https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/urbanstudygroup
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20050915/ed878f97/attachment.html