Re: [Urbanstudy] Re: Problematizing Definitions

I am still interested in understanding the 'general meaning' of the term
culture? What constitutes culture? And what constitutes acts of
culturality?
Cheers,
Zee


> zainab,
> i remember once suggesting dipesh chakrabarty's
> provincializing europe in response to something you
> said. one thing i learnt from this book is to think
> about the universal as a placeholder. it is always the
> particular that occupies that place. the challenge is
> in finding ways of translating one particular into the
> other without using a middle term. useful as this is,
> somehow it seems to gloss over the complexity of power
> relationships in our daily life. i find this
> particularly distressing in our debates on the rights
> discourse. ragpickers have a sense of rights and
> entitlements too, i suspect, which our own sense of
> rights and universality blocks out in such a way that
> we either impose our notion of rights on their
> experience or we slip into a rationalization of our
> outsiderness. hence the importance of the kind of
> writing you do. it allows us to think about how we
> talk with other people. keep posting.
> anant
>
> --- Priyasha Kaul <priyashakaul@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> hi zainab,
>>       enjoyed you writing, as always. I agree with
>> you on the
>> problematics of the entire 'rights discourse', but i
>> feel as much as
>> it is derided in "intellectual circles" today, it
>> continues to be
>> important because even though the city as a public
>> space and its
>> subjective carving out in the lived sense remains
>> wildly different
>> from differing standpoints, the important thing is
>> that those
>> experiences and understandings are at one level
>> related to ones rights
>> in the everyday sense of living rather than an
>> objective/bounded and
>> defined legal sense. and the enforcement of these
>> rights is
>> necessarily related to power (in the foucauldian
>> sense) which
>> privileges the rights and understandings of some in
>> society over
>> others.
>>
>>  "Intervention" or alternatively the lack of it,
>> therefore, in
>> whatever form, be it through government agencies or
>> the NGO-type,
>> becomes a doubly problematic issue since it tends to
>> become a
>> phenomenological exercise in what they think are the
>> "rights" of the
>> rest of society.
>>
>> Best
>> Priyasha
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 12/20/05, zainab@xxxxxxxxx <zainab@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>> > Dear Mr. Reddy,
>> > Reading your email, some questions come to my
>> mind:
>> > a). Is there anything as universal rights? What
>> constitutes universality?
>> > b). How do we define culture? What acts constitute
>> culturality?
>> > c). What is the relationship between culture and
>> lifestyles?
>> > Regards,
>> > Zainab
>> >
>> >
>> > > It is not so much about definitions as it is
>> about
>> > > conceptualizations--cluster of concepts, which
>> are part of some theory.
>> > > And
>> > > such a theory filters what you experience of.
>> > >
>> > > In the first case, it sounds like there is only
>> one way of describing, or
>> > > like the rights-talk (or its variants) is the
>> best way of describing.
>> > > Here,
>> > > the debate is not so much definitions, but to
>> what extent theory of rights
>> > > does captures the experience of the natives? If
>> one denies the
>> > > rights-talk,
>> > > one is not denying the phenomenon, that is, a
>> coarse description competing
>> > > theories accept.
>> > >
>> > > Abt the second case. Surely the ragpicker's
>> experience is different from
>> > > yours. Do your and his experiences share any
>> common structures? Assuming
>> > > that a common structure is being shared, the
>> only way to defend such a
>> > > possibility is linking it to 'collective
>> culturality'.: again, people
>> > > resort
>> > > to their pet notions of what culture is.
>> > >
>> > > Idem for the third case.
>> > >
>> > > All these cases share one thing: does whatever
>> is seen in some place
>> > > constitute culturality? Those who answer in the
>> affirmative share this
>> > > claim
>> > > as well: every practice is cultural; and such
>> claims do have nothing to
>> > > say
>> > > about cultural differences, except that cultural
>> difference is a
>> > > difference
>> > > in beliefs. The explanatory relation between
>> practice and belief is
>> > > defensible only within the ambit of semitic
>> theologies.
>> > >
>> > > Best,
>> > > Reddy, V.
>> > >
>> > > On 12/15/05, zainab@xxxxxxxxx <zainab@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> There are some of these days when I think about
>> 'definitions' and I am
>> > >> bothered ?
>> > >>
>> > >> 15th December 2005
>> > >>
>> > >> I have suddenly discovered the camera and am
>> making pictures everywhere
>> > >> I
>> > >> go (these days).
>> > >>
>> > >> Yesterday afternoon, I was walking past the
>> Grant Road Bridge, making my
>> > >> way to Lamington Road. Grant Road Bridge is the
>> home to many pavement
>> > >> dwellers and drug addicts. At one point, I saw
>> a child screaming and
>> > >> crying, drawing everyone's attention. The legs
>> of this little boy were
>> > >> tied. He may have been about three years old.
>> Next to him was his little
>> > >> sibling. She was a new born infant, deep in
>> slumber, inside a pen. For a
>> > >> moment, I was shaken by the wailing of the
>> little boy. For a moment, I
>> > >> was
>> > >> moved by the cruelty of the act of tying his
>> feet. But when I brought
>> > >> out
>> > >> my camera, I decided not to moralize the
>> picture, but to show one more
>> > >> aspect of street life in one part of the city.
>> I did not have the
>> > >> courage
>> > >> to make the picture from forward. So I decided
>> to go back and make the
>> > >> picture. I photographed. A little commotion
>> ensued. A woman came running
>> > >> and she came up close to me saying, 'No
>> photos', 'No pictures'. I was
>> > >> frightened. I decided to show her the picture I
>> had made and delete it
>> > >> in
>> > >> front of her eyes to reassure her. She grabbed
>> me by my arm and pushed
>> > >> me
>> > >> away, 'go away from here'.
>> > >> My guess was that the woman was mildly mentally
>> deranged. She was very
>> > >> aggressive when she pushed me. I began to
>> wonder why the child's legs
>> > >> were
>> > >>
>> > >> tied. My only guess is that maybe its mother
>> did not want it to wander
>> > >> around the road in her absence; so this was a
>> good way to keep the child
>> > >> put ? basically safety of the child.
>> > >> The lady who pushed me may have been the
>> mother. And again I guessed ?
>> > >> perhaps she did not want me to make the
>> picture, thinking that if I were
>> > >> a
>> > >> social worker type, I would take away her
>> children thinking that she is
>> > >> a
>> > >> cruel mother and put them in foster care ? I am
>> only guessing here!
>> > >> What interested me about the experience was the
>> definition of rights ?
>> > >> are
>> > >> rights truly universal? In the context of
>> lifestyles and cultures, do
>> > >> rights take on relative meanings? For instance,
>> in the case of this
>> > >> child,
>> > >>
>> > >> there may have been perfectly legitimate
>> reasons for tying his legs in
>> > >> the
>> > >> context of their lifestyle and culture ? does
>> the rights' framework then
>> > >> do unintended violence to such people and
>> cultures? Does it give power
>> > >> of
>> > >> definitions (in the Foucaultian sense) to
>> certain groups to intervene on
>> > >> behalf of the greater good (greater good
>> questionable
> === message truncated ===>
> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new
> Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com
>


Zainab Bawa
Bombay
www.xanga.com/CityBytes
http://crimsonfeet.recut.org/rubrique53.html