In the March issue of Forward (Birmingham City Council monthly paper) I was grabbed by the “Big City Plan Charter” and the ways the planners played with the notion of city, to the point of straining for connections. Birmingham City is sold as: Liveablecity; Familycity; Univercity; Authenticity; Audacity; Smartcity; Complexcity; Connectedcity; Diversecity and Centricity. While some of the ‘play’ on city appealed to me, others just fall flat. Subversive and cynical as I am, the thought of “centricity” and “smartcity” irritates me. I presume at the back of mind is the way our city is being boasted up – when those of us who live here are straining to figure out what part of the city these experts are thinking and talking about. Is it only about the city centre or that space from their office to their nice high rising apartment?
But there is another side to that boasting and talking up that became starker in a recent issue of Forward (May 14, 2008). Here the Deputy leader of the Birmingham City Council writes how the city has come a very long way, which is certainly true even in my short span of only nine years here. But what is interesting (which is not the first time I have noted this) is what he goes to note by comparison. He notes that Birmingham has more trees than Paris, more canals than Venice, more parks than any other European city and is the top four UK most popular destinations for international tourism – especially since we boast the best shopping centre in Europe!
These comparisons are interesting. To begin with, I am keen to know how these have been made in order to arrive at what seems to be sweeping conclusions. Perhaps the deputy leader and his team may have a special formula they wish to share with the citizens. In the meantime, the deputy leader may wish to compare the cleanliness of the city (not to mention the rats), the state of our roads, the hospitality/service of some folks working in shops and restaurants – as just a few more examples of comparing since he seems to be stuck in that mode.
Then there is the very idea of comparing that got me thinking overtime: is there something deeper at work here – like some unconscious mode or habit of only being able to describe and represent who we are in relation to and over and against the “other”, albeit in this case Europe. Thus, Birmingham’s identity is tied up to the identities of other cities and what they are not. For what they lack and what they are not is what makes Birmingham better and superior. Perhaps, at play here are the left-overs of a colon mentality, albeit in a different way. Try translating the logic at work here to the ethnicities that make up this Diversecity for a discourse around what constitutes a Birmingham identity.
I wonder at what point will our discourse shift so that we can construct identities (be it about a city or its inhabitants) without having to do so by playing the comparison game or any form of insider/elected and outsider/non-elected mindset. In any case why do we need to be the best? Why set up ourselves? We should be free to be ourselves – not someone else’s image or design of what we should be. Now that is what I call a liveablecity, authenticity, complextcity, and diversecity.
© copyright Jagessar May 26, 2008
image credit: www.michaelgray.org.uk/
