Rereading Diaspora and Cities

The concept of diaspora as an area of academic interest and analysis is of comparatively recent origin. The term was traditionally confined to designate involuntary exiles, explicitly the exile of the Jews. The phenomenal increase in international migration in recent times has to some extent compelled the use of the term to designate a more general dispersion of people around the world.

Increased globalisation and the emergent multiplicity/heterogeneity in societies have been equated and accompanied by swift urbanisation and urban transformation, consequently, encouraging and initiating studies regarding the linkages between urbanisation and migration as well as questioning the participation of migrants in urban changes. An important characteristic of modern migration is the emergence of diasporas, which have been defined as “migrant ‘communities’ who ‘sustain a national, cultural or religious identity through the sense of internal cohesion and sustained ties with a real or imagined homeland”. (i)

Specifically, diasporas are frequently reflected upon as the illusory clusters of migrants who share a common ‘origin’, actual or fictional, in a changed geographic milieu from the one they in habit. It is characteristics such as groups, shared ethnic characteristics, continuance, link with a distant native land and ‘hybridity’ that are often regarded to contribute towards constituting a migrant diasporic. As a result, migrants are not innately diasporic; instead, diaspora is a progression and is shaped by migrants, or the progenies of migrants, endorsing a diaspora stance.

Besides, diasporas may appear as homogeneous communities, but they consistently encompass substantial dissimilarities, in terms of ‘race’’, gender, sexuality and age’. Diaspora groups in reality comprise dissimilar people that possess certain common features, both tangible and illusory. At the core of the diaspora state is the localisation and relocation of people in ‘new’ expanses, and consequently involves practices and policies of place-making.

It is the city that is regarded as the focal point for the creation of diasporas resulting in the emergence of the term ‘diaspora cities’ to emphasise the accompanying connotation “to many people living in diaspora of the city as home rather than the nation as ‘homeland’”. (ii) As the city is the typical location of diaspora dwelling the metropolitan/city is a crucial lens to ascertain the criticality of ‘space, dwelling and place-making’ in the diasporic circumstance. By way of diasporic policies of place-construction, urban expanses can be transmuted and inculcated with new multiple connotations.

Then there is the concept of the global city, which according to Sassen (iii) functions as a partially denationalized forum for global capital and, simultaneously, is evolving into a critical space for the most remarkable mix of people from across the globe. The increasing degree of transactions among major cities has formed a strategic cross-border geography that partially avoids national states. The new network mechanisms further reinforce these transactions, whether they are ‘electronic transfers of specialized services among firms or Internet-based interactions’ among diasporic and pressure groups.

‘Transnationalism’ and ‘diaspora’ are crucial elements in comprehending concepts such as ‘nation,’ ‘identity’ and ‘globalization’ in present times. Moreover, these terms are often used reciprocally and at times intersect with theories of globalization in defining the circumstances that facilitate new types of migration, movement and intervention, thus there is the need to comprehend how these notions and categories interact with each other. The concepts of transnationalism and diaspora initiate a more inclusive analysis of the various categories and corollaries that originate from the massive flow of people, concepts, knowledge, metaphors and economic linkages that shape the world.

If the watchwords that have structured diasporic and international studies hitherto have included traditionally loaded expressions such as ‘nation, nationalism, ethnicity, culture, politics, economics, society, space, place, homeland, home, narrative, representation, alienation, nostalgia, belonging’ and all their equivalent, it is due to the fact that the circumstances they relate to are so multifaceted that their comprehension entails a variegated and essentially multidisciplinary methodology. The contemporary understanding of diaspora comprises an analysis of the shifting relations between ‘homelands’ and ‘host nations’ from the perception of both those who have relocated, whether willingly or unwillingly and of the ‘recipient’communities.

Thus, in the contemporary times of glocalization wherein the apparently paradoxical notions of globalization and localization exist concurrently, the world appears to contract as the local community assumes greater importance. In this milieu diasporas play a significant role as reiterated above, diasporas are in essence about place rather than nation and that place is generally a city. Keeping in mind the notion of “city as home in diaspora” where the city in effect embodies a “distinct site of diasporic dwelling, belonging and attachment”, Asia in Global Affairs (AGA) had recently convened a panel discussion on Revisiting Calcutta’s Diasporic Communities The objective of the discussion was to comprehend and elaborate upon the notion of “diaspora cities”, in the context of Calcutta.

By way of a conversation on specific diasporic communities such as the Chinese, Jews, Armenians, Anglo-Indians, Afghans and Parsis who constituted and contributed distinctively and substantively to Calcutta’s social, cultural, economic and political mosaic, the forum sought to delve into the perceptible and enduring impact of the communities on the city. By touching upon the stories of return visits and migrations the discussion attempted to initiate more inclusive debates on charting the linkages among cities, communities and diasporas; facilitate a greater understanding of the concept of migration and diaspora in the context of both cities of departure and relocation as well as analyse comparative urbanism from a diasporic perspective. The purpose of the discussion was to underline the continuities.

Notes &References
i. Adamson, F., & Demetriou, M. (2007). “Remapping the boundaries of `State’ and `National Identity’: Incorporating diasporas into IR theorizing.” European Journal of International Relations, 13,: 489–526 in Finlay Robin, (2017) “A diasporic right to the city: the production of a Moroccan diaspora space in Granada, Spain”, Social and Cultural Geography: 1-23
ii. Blunt, A., & Bonnerjee, J. (2013). Home, city and diaspora: Anglo-Indian and Chinese attachments to Calcutta. Global Networks, 13, 220–240in Finlay Robin, (2017) “A diasporic right to the city: the production of a Moroccan diaspora space in Granada, Spain”, Social and Cultural Geography: 1-23.
Awan Nishat,(2016) Diasporic Agencies: Mapping the City Otherwise, Farnham: Ashgate
Finlay Robin, (2017) “A diasporic right to the city: the production of a Moroccan diaspora space in Granada, Spain”, Social and Cultural Geography: 1-23.
iii. Sassen Saskia, “GLOBALCITIES ANDDIASPORIC NETWORKS: MICROSITES IN GLOBAL CIVIL SOCIETY”,

-Priya

26.12.2017