[Reader-list] the Act of leisure

[taha at sarai.net]

Dear Aniruddha, Anand, Zainab and all,

Thankyou for taking this discussion through various trajectories and
giving some food for thought to us all. Hopefully!

Aniruddha, I do understand the need to have an eclectic approach to
leisure, to complicate it in order to unpack it.
 I am completely in agreement to the argument that leisure must be
contextual but I think that that there exist numerous other contexts
beside the corporate context, which I believe are as much important. So
how does then one negotiate with this? Does one completely ignore the
need to have leisure in the context of those who can’t ‘afford’ the
services of a resort in Rajasthan !. What does then constitute leisure?
Should leisure always mean images, which we see on the ‘Discovery’/
National Geographic/ NDTV [Night Out] channel? Where leisure is packaged
as a commodity, which can be bought at a price. Where it becomes an
object that can be fetishized. Where it induces a sense of anxiety in
those who can’t meet the expense of its rendering. What then becomes of
leisure and its meaning? What then constitutes leisure?
  Doesn’t it then embodies into a hotch- potch collages of largely two
dimensional images, of iconography, of depictions, of representations,
of portrayals, Of exotic locales, of beaches, of luxury cruises across
the Carabians, of foreign lands, of meeting different/ ‘unknown’ people,
of unheard of places, of exquisite dresses, of unique jewellery, of
dinning out, of trendy discotheques, of partying late, of unwinding [MTV
style]. Doesn’t then leisure become a cloistered sort of an experience
where ones sees and hears but doesn’t smell, taste, or feel? Doesn’t
leisure then transmogrify into a sort of a protestant ethic as argued by
Weber, where idleness is regarded as sin; so when viewed from the spirit
of capitalism, loitering/ chatting/ idling/ walking/ sleeping/sitting/
conversing/ faltugiri etc would then be not but regarded as a
sin/ violation/corruption/impetuous act/ breach/
contravention/infringement/ transgression? of law/society/ culture/
resident associations/ management committeess etc.

But this exactly is the point I am arguing against, that WHY should my act
of chatting or idling be regarded as a misdeed? Does there exist NO other
ethic except the Protestant ethic that drives the spirit of capitalism?
What nomenclatures must then [if it should be] be devised to address these
other existing forms of leisure/ non-formal activities? Will seclusion or
conversely inclusion with the right of entry reserved, be the only
justification to this dilemma?
Anand’s insightful account of the Humayum Tomb Complex and Isa Khan tomb’s
tell us that yes, it is but is it the only alternative? I don’t know. Will
Nariman point go the Isa Khan way in near/distant future?

Zainab’s argument of the necessity of street cultures to the city is, I
think,  critical because vibrant streets are an important site to
deconstruct the notion of leisure as a site of consumption and hence
control. For it represents a detour to approach the idea of leisure as
also a non- formal activity without the burden of a corporate context or
regimes of state regulation, surveillance or control.

Cheers
Taha

> Dear Taha,
> I read Aniruddh's email. One experience which I very clearly remember had
> taken place with my sister, me and a friend. This was three years ago.
> After
> watching a movie in the Excelsior Theater at VT, three of us proceeded
> towards VT station. We stood by a corner of a shop in the subway and were
> chatting. The private security guard came up to us and said this is not a
> place to hang around, get out from here. My friend who was male, was
> irritated and said that since we were not creating any trouble and were
> neither in the way of the people or the shop, he had no right to shoo us
> off. We stood there for some more time and I think the guard kept watching
> over us. I agree with Aniruddh when he says that certain mindsets have to
> change. Normally, in Mumbai, I cannot imagine hanging around in a street
> which has private residences and which is quiet by itself. I imagine this
> is
> how NFC is having been there once. Also, NFC by itself is a very plush
> locality and it is not surprising that you would get shooed off just for
> hanging around there. If I have to wait for somebody outside Regal Cinema
> at
> Colaba, the guard of the cinema will keep a watch over me, wondering what
> I
> am doing - am I soliciting clients i.e. am I a prostitute? If I am dressed
> like a South Mumbai yuppie, then I am okay because it means that I am
> waiting for my bunch of friends to join me for a movie.
>
> When you speak about leisure, a trend which i have noticed in some of
> interviews with people who live around Marine Drive and Nariman Point,
> they
> tell that there is no place in Delhi to hang out for free. At Nariman
> Point,
> you can hang around for free because it is a vast public space. Do what
> you
> like, though of course there are some civil lines to this. Spaces like
> these
> are few in Mumbai, but critical because they provide breathers not just to
> the middle class and below, but also to the rich and famous who may be
> getting suffocated inside the confines of their home. This kind of free,
> levelling and open leisure is somehow coming under the eyes of the
> corporate
> entities. Thus, Nariman Point will now be revamped with an art deco
> precinct, portions of it will be adopted by corporates for maintenance,
> there will be brass street furniture and what not. The architect, Ratan
> Batliboy, who has conceived of these grand ideas says in the latest issue
> of
> Time Out that what was free will continue to remain free, only that the
> quality of people who come to Nariman point will now be improved. And this
> is what concerns me, as Ravi says, 'terms of entry'. 'Terms of entry' into
> particular spaces are being regulated. You have to dress in a certain kind
> of way, behave in a certain way, if you are to feel accepted in a space.
> This is societal norms and conventions and also trends as shaped by the
> media. It concerns me that in attempting to create a Shanghai or an
> aesthetic city, we want to do away with people who we think are rowdy,
> hooligans, etc. We want to clean out the anti-social elements, a recent
> drive against beggars, CSWs and drug peddalars in South Mumbai which is
> atrocious in some ways and very brutal too. All of this because we want to
> create an aesthetic city. What bullshit!
>
> Street culture is critical to the very safety of the city. As I read about
> crimes in the trains and at railway stations, I feel some of it emerges
> from
> the erosion of illegal entities who were always a part of the street - of
> course, this is just speculation and there could be more to this than what
> I
> am saying.
>
> Property by itself is exlcusionary - this belongs to me, you cannot
> tresspass. The inside nooks and corners of private residential roads are
> not
> meant for 'hanging around' as we have known them to be. If you are hanging
> around outside these, you are very likely to be seen as a troublemaker. I
> think this also has to do with the concepts and practices of time in a
> city
> - who has time for faaltugiri in a city? Only faltu people! And faltu
> people
> in our imagination are trouble makers or mischief mongers!
>
> Cheers,
> Zainab
>
>
>
> Zainab Bawa
> Mumbai
> www.xanga.com/CityBytes
>
>
>
>
> From: taha at sarai.net
> To: "Zainab Bawa" <coolzanny at hotmail.com>
> CC: reader-list at sarai.net
> Subject: RE: [Reader-list] the Act of leisure
> Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 10:59:13 +0100 (CET)
>
> Hi Zainab,
>
> I largely agree with your take on the street as a site of surveillance/
> contestation/control. But what amuses me the most is the way in which the
> state seeks to manage spaces like public parks/ community centers/ roads
> inside a residential colony etc. There seems to be a method behind
> innocuous measures to gently push the outsider out. The discourse of
> hygine/ crime/ cleanliness/ security is invoked on a routine basis  to
> secure land/ pavements/ municipal roads/ public parks and of course
> community centers.  Not that crime is mythical in this case but does
> securing public land in the name of crime prevention help??? I don't
> know?? or WHY the fencing of land appears to be the only creative solution
> to crime prevention ?
>
> The public-private partnership of Mumbai  is also mirriored here, but its
> more subtle. The chief minister's  motherly smile carefully hides the
> sneer as the Bhagidari between the government and the residents shifts
> into  higher gear. The Delhi Police accelerates its neighborhood watch
> campaign encouraging neighbors to spy on each other and report any
> 'suspicious' activity to the police.  The RWA's tighten the noose around
> the hawkers/ sales person/ vegetable vendors/ scavengers and pedestrians.
> The RWA fences the residential colony area and installs gates around them
> restricting the access and control of 'public' parks/ streets/ roads/ and
> shops. The DP also installs CCTV cameras around jantar mantar complex to
> monitor agitations and also ofcouse keeps a watch on every vehicle/
> pedestrian  that passes by its watchful gaze.
>
> The act of contestation in this haze of assumed/imagined  rights [of
> possession/ ownership of land/ area/ property] then becomes interesting.
> The missing iron bar on a road divider which is wide enough to let a
> person pass or a gap in the  wire meshing of a colony fence  becomes a
> site of relief.
>
> But the arbitrariness through which  this kind of  power operates makes it
>   more dangerous. The  question then becomes  how does one negotiate with
> a
> quasi legal approach of power. For example, during  Christmas last year,
> the Head constable of New Friends Colony thana with eight constables went
> around the community center evicting idlers, who were generally sitting
> and chatting around CC. I was one of them, when I questioned him, he
> waived his Danda angrily at me,saying, ' Agar Aapko Baat Karni Hai To Cafe
> Coffee Day Ya Barista Ja KE Baitho Par Yahan Aise Khali Nahi Baithna'.
>
> When I reiterated my 'right' to sit here and do whatever I so damn well
> please, he just stared at me and said with a heavy accent 'Suna Nahi Kya'.
> That was it. I couldn't do anything about it.
>
> This brings us again to the question of leisure. Why in a place like CC
> sitting idly and chatting around the campus invites  the state's wrath but
> Barista  and Cafe Coffee Day are a safeguard to its harassment. It isn't
> that CC is always like this, God forbid no,but what drives this manic sort
> of obsession of the state with the street, common grounds where people
> converge/meet/walk.
>
> cheers
>
> Taha
>
>
>
>
>  > Hi Iram,
>  > Thanks for the insightful email. I draw some analyses from your last
>  > email,
>  > very quick and brief ones for the time being:
>  >
>  > 1). Streets and side-ways are increasingly being seen as loose,
>  > uncontrolled
>  > spaces which need to be controlled. So, we have moves from the
> corporate
>  > sphere, the government sphere, to demolish, have private and public
>  > security
>  > around. At least that is what I see happening in Mumbai. In Delhi in
> any
>  > case, streets are largely vacant from whatever bit I have seen. In fact
> I
>  > feel unsafe walking on the streets in Delhi, except for Old Delhi.
>  >
>  > 2). Streets and side-ways are also being seen as spaces of illegality,
>  > again
>  > a Bombay perspective. Here is precisely one of the sites where the
>  > everyday
>  > battles between legality and illegality are being fought. And then
> again
>  > the
>  > issue of controlling loose space.
>  >
>  > 3). In this discussion on security, there is a very strong need to
> think
>  > in
>  > terms of the corporate-government perspective. I cannot think of one
>  > without
>  > the other in these times in Mumbai. Battles of competition, economy are
>  > being waged between the corporates and the loose urban spaces. For
>  > instance
>  > the four 7 star hotels at Nariman Point pooling money and hiring
> private
>  > security to evict hawkers. While the public is not involved in this
>  > tussle,
>  > we are talking of some kind of public when we refer to thge hawkers
> which
>  > is
>  > being seen as 'outsiders, encroachers'.
>  >
>  > 4). Then again, the media generates tremendous images of the terrorist,
>  > the
>  > encroacher, the illegal entity and these condition the public mind very
>  > strongly.
>  >
>  > In debates on security, these three angles are critical.
>  >
>  > When we talk of public spaces, one of the things I am wrestling with in
> my
>  > research on the seafronts and railway stations here is who is the
> public?
>  > And the public seems damn dead when you ask me. They are snoring,
> caught
>  > up
>  > in the humdrum of daily lives. I have often thought of public and
>  > community
>  > spaces in Mumbai city to be problematic because people tend to use less
> of
>  > these owing to tight notions and practices of time and these then
> become
>  > dangerous. For instance the Shivaji Park. Then you have surveillance,
>  > rules,
>  > regulations, laws, policing, etc. And the media contributes to this
> all.
>  >
>  > For now, I am saying this. But there are several thoughts. Particularly
>  > about institutionalizing entertainment and leisure which is what
> happens
>  > in
>  > malls and now with a spate of festivals in Mumbai City which aim to
>  > commecialize and brand street food. There are terms of entry into
> public
>  > spaces like malls and multiplexes and you were damn right when you said
>  > that
>  > if your scout around outside an upmarket place, you are seen
> suspiciously
>  > by
>  > the guards. What I am wary of is this increasing fuzziness between
> private
>  > and public security and the use of private security in public spaces.
>  >
>  > Cheers,
>  > Zainab
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > Zainab Bawa
>  > Mumbai
>  > www.xanga.com/CityBytes
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > From: iram at sarai.net
>  > To: reader-list at sarai.net
>  > CC: taha at sarai.net
>  > Subject: [Reader-list] the Act of leisure
>  > Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 16:44:47 +0100 (CET)
>  >
>  >
>  > Dear Zainab and all,
>  >
>  > Thanx for sharing your experiences/ observances of Delhi, Bangalore and
>  > Bombay.
>  > I guess as cities go, there are many similarities in all three except
> that
>  > Delhi being the national capital can always cite security as a
> justified/
>  > valid/ legal reason for many things.
>  >
>  > Taha and I should have been more clear on what we mean when we use
>  > categories such as private/ public and non formal spaces. I will take
>  > recourse to the space of the New Friends Colony community center to
> clear
>  > my understanding of public/private space.
>  >
>  > Can one really define public and private as clear-cut categories of
> space
>  > and behaviour? How does one categorize private or deemed private
> behaviour
>  > in public spaces? For example, kissing ones boyfriend in the parking
> lot
>  > at CC or for that matter, public or deemed public behaviour in ones
>  > private space. For example, a film star giving an interview to a news
>  > channel while sitting in her drawing room would elicit a more formal
>  > performance of behaviour.
>  > I don’t think that I am in a position to give conclusive definitions of
>  > what is private and public.
>  >
>  > However, when I talk of public space with reference to the NFC
> Community
>  > Centre, I mean the sidewalks, pavements, verandas, parking lots,
> streets,
>  > subways, and squares etc. The inside of the shops, restaurants, bars,
>  > cinema halls are private spaces because the right of admission is
> reserved
>  > by the owner of the property or one is deterred by the presence of a
>  > security guard. The public space of the verandas are taken over by the
>  > restaurants and shops, the parking lot is leased out to private
>  > contractors and all other spaces are meant to be used, to quote Richard
>  > Sennet as `  areas to move through and not be in.’ So, one  will use
> the
>  > pavement, sidewalk, veranda, square to move  from the  general store to
>  > the  chemist to pizza hut to the cinema hall to the parking lot and
> vise-
>  > versa.
>  >
>  > The idea of sitting in front of Ego Thai [an upmarket restaurant] makes
> a
>  > particular kind of individual, a nuisance, a vagabond, a potential
>  > terrorist or an anti-social being.
>  > To get back to the question of private and public space, I don’t know
> what
>  > to call the space of the fountain in a small open area in the shape of
> a
>  > square typical to many Community Centres in Delhi. It is owned by DDA.
> It
>  > is not a private space owned by any of the surrounding shops and
>  > restaurants. It is not a public space because a private security guard
>  > controls movement of people. He will not allow certain kind of
> individual
>  > to sit around and that includes anyone who is not a patron/potential
>  > patron of the shop/ restaurant.  Public spaces, according to my
>  > understanding were supposed to be spaces, that were open to all across
>  > class, caste, race, religion and gender, hence the use of the term non-
>  > formal space.
>  >
>  > I agree that a public space such as a restaurant, cinema hall, etc
> needs
>  > economic transaction to survive. But, are spaces where one need not
> have
>  > coffee and sit or watch a film for free, totally out of `public’
>  > imagination?  I’m still grappling with this one though. Besides, there
> is
>  > Manisha.  She is eight years old and lives under the Okhla railway
> station
>  > flyover. The NFC Community Centre is work and play space for her. She
>  > collects garbage, begs and is a regular sight at CC.
>  >
>  > Will Mc Donald’s- the family restaurant allow her to enter their
>  > restaurant space if she wants to buy a seven-rupee ice cream cone? Does
>  > the security guard, who I see as a non- State player in this game of
> `cops
>  > and robbers’, not allow her to play in the veranda?
>  >
>  > However, this discussion was initiated not because I wanted to solve
>  > Manisha’s problem but because I was not allowed to sit in certain
>  > `sacrosanct’ spaces in CC on many occasions.
>  >
>  > Coming back to the idea of leisure and control, the popularity of games
>  > like football, rugby etc in Europe after the passing of the Bank
> Holiday
>  > Act 1871 indicates at the institutionalisation of certain kind of
> leisure
>  > acts. `Publics’ would go out in large numbers, congregate at a space
> full
>  > of `strangers’, watch/participate in `fun’ activities, eat, drink and
> head
>  > home. But through all of this entry/exit would be restricted/monitored
> and
>  > so would behaviour and announcements/advertisements would ask people to
> be
>  > wary of strangers.
>  >
>  > Appu Ghar, trade fairs, zoological gardens, resorts, parks, stadiums,
>  > cinema halls etc. become such public spaces and the spaces of the
> streets,
>  > roads, pavements, subways, and railway stations become carriers of
> people
>  > though not all publics to these public spaces.
>  >
>  > Some ideas that we are thinking about- Do we take leisure and the idea
> of
>  > leisure as given? What are the normal/ accepted forms of leisure and
> who
>  > defines them? Is leisure a performance of sorts?
>  >
>  > looking forward to more views,
>  >
>  > Cheers,
>  > Iram
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > _________________________________________
>  > reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
>  > Critiques & Collaborations
>  > To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
>  > subscribe
>  > in the subject header.
>  > List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>  >
>  > _________________________________________________________________
>  > Protect your PC! Call in the experts! http://www.msn.co.in/security/
> Click
>  > here now!
>  >
>  >
>
>
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe
> in the subject header.
> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Protect your PC! Call in the experts! http://www.msn.co.in/security/ Click
> here now!
>
>