BLOM, Thomas.
BLOM, Thomas.
BLOM, Thomas.
Urban spaces have spirits, and cities have souls. Some are dangerous,
menacing, but also seductive; others are marked by beauty and excess;
others again by their dreariness or spookiness. These are contagious
qualities that are said to seep into the character of the people living in such
cities. People speak with pride about being Londoners, being from Jozie
( Johannesburg), or of being Bombaywallahs, Cairene, Madrilenos and so
on. By invoking the name of the city as their own they also incorporate, and
bring into existence, the myth of the city as something that lives within
themselves. It is an urban habitus they do not entirely own because it is
larger and more enduring than themselves, or any individual life.
Some urban spirits are global in reach, others mainly local or regional.
They are reproduced in everyday stereotypes and mythologies. None of
these are of course true in any sociological sense but the proliferating
fantasmic and mythical qualities of cities and urban spaces are effective
realities that shape the behaviour, cosmologies and desires of people in
cities, or of those who visit them, imagine them, or describe them in narra-
tive or imagery. The mythologies of cities, or single neighbourhoods, are
remarkably durable and seem impervious to falsification by events or experi-
ences that seem to contradict them. ‘It’ – the myth or the truth of the city
– always exists somewhere else, or remains true in a more general way.
In his famous essay on walking in the city, de Certeau argues that names
of cities and places never can hold their ‘proper’ meaning against the
actual practices of city-dwellers. They can only hint at certain meanings: ‘A
Vol 29(1) 5–26 [DOI:10.1177/0308275X08101029]
Copyright 2009 © SAGE Publications (London, Los Angeles, New Delhi,
Singapore and Washington DC) www.sagepublications.com
6
Critique of Anthropology 29(1)
strange toponymy that is detached from actual places flies high over the
city like a foggy geography of “meanings” held in suspension, directing the
physical deambulations below’ (de Certeau, 1984: 104). While we agree
that demotic practice and language always improvise and often subvert
official schemes of naming and function, we argue that the names and the
associated myths of the city and its places are always potentially imbricated
in the most mundane activities in the street. Some urban spaces are so
heavily mythologized and enframed through circulating images and narra-
tives that they suffuse, if not overdetermine, any empirical or sensory
experience. Anyone walking in New York, Venice, Rio or central London
on a summer’s day will become drawn into crowds of visitors who all walk
in the city, take pictures of its buildings, and the urban crowds – mainly
tourists – while they engage in a strangely circular and fantasmic gaze upon
themselves, and the gaze of other visitors doing the same thing. The city is
here a monument and a living prop. The act of walking in the city is a
collective, fantasmic re-enactment of a demotic, supposedly local every-
dayness that is only made possible by the presence of the tourists. Yet the
awareness of this fundamental in-authenticity takes nothing away from the
visitors’ experience because they do not walk in the actual city. They are
flâneurs du fantasme, walking in the fantasmic city whose symbolic weight
and presence imbues everything occurring in the actual urban space,
however banal and unexceptional, with a special significance.
This is one commonplace aspect of what we call urban charisma. By
this term we mean two things: on one hand the charisma of a city as in its
‘soul’ or mythology that is emitted from its buildings, infrastructure, the
historicity of its sites and its anonymous crowds. On the other hand, there
is also charisma to be found in the city – in its crowds, in the styles and
reputations of its people, their knowledge, and the special skills and extra-
ordinary acts the city enables and necessitates. Quintessential urban figures
– be they artists, taxi drivers, cops or those belonging to a more opaque
popular world – may be charismatic by virtue of their actions and the knowl-
edge and resources in the city they are rumoured to command. They, like
their gestures, are suffused with that elusive spirit of the city, or the neigh-
bourhood, itself.
We use the term ‘charisma’ liberally here by extending it to larger, and
non-human, entities such as cities, sites, objects and collectivities. No longer
merely a sociological concept, charisma has today entered mainstream
popular and commercial culture. Charisma is no longer an inalienable
quality of a select few individuals. Neither an effect of proper initiation, nor
the property of an office, nor the ‘mystery of ministry’, as Bourdieu (1991)
puts it, charisma is today radically democratized, at least in principle, in the
marketplace, in the arts and in the world of everyday politics. Charisma,
understood as unique, or the vaguely magical power of presence, style,
seduction and performance is now a widely marketed and desired object of
self-making, within the reach of those with sufficient skill and purchasing
7
Hansen and Verkaaik: Introduction – Urban Charisma
pregnant and yet ‘empty signifier’ is the single most important element in
the political imagination of modern societies. Political power and legit-
imacy flows from the ability to act in the name of the people, and to name
oneself and one’s followers as instances of the ‘popular’, as the ordinary
people and so on (Laclau, 2005: 67–128). This structure of political desire
– to become and embody the impossible identity as ‘the people’ – is indeed
an essential condition of possibility for charisma, imputed, symbolic but
always efficacious, to become a powerful political force.
Yet none of these works explores how charisma is attributed and dis-
tributed as unique powers and potentials embedded in people, things,
places and situations. In its original Greek kharisma means a gift and thus
something unique, non-trivial and powerful. But a gift can also be shared,
transferred and exchanged. In the following, and in the contributions, we
will try to translate this understanding of charisma as both portable and
shareable, as a quality that can be conferred upon objects both material
and fantasmic – such as cities, crowds and physical sites. But we also want
to retain charisma as a name for specific registers of conduct, in this case
conduct by different ‘urban types’, i.e. people whose gift it is to know the
city and to act decisively, with style and without fear. These figures dis-
tribute certainty, they convince followers of their own special qualities and
self-sufficiency and demonstrate new potential and possibility.
The production of this form of charisma is, as Peter Worsley pointed
out many years ago (1968: 221–77), premised upon the ability to deal with
taboo and abjected matter, and the ability to incorporate these dangerous
situations or substances into one’s own body. This is akin to the traditional
healer or diviner who interprets a dangerous and powerful natural world
but violates taboos in order to do so. A powerful charismatic figure is also
allowed to break taboos as long as he/she can perform the key function of
interpreting the present and giving a direction amidst an unknowable and
ostensibly dangerous environment. Modern urban life is indeed character-
ized by a constitutive unknowability. No city can be fully known and inter-
preted because it, like its people, is one of modernity’s most powerful
‘empty signifiers’: too multi-layered and overflowing in both histories and
meanings to be fully captured by a single narrative or name, and yet an
object of irresistible desires and identifications.1 Historically, it was the
emergence of the modern city, its squares and its densities, that made it
possible for ‘the people’ to emerge as a concept, to name itself and thus be
made visible to itself and to those who wished to represent the people as
such.2 Those who claim to know the urban world, its significant sites and
physical layers, those who demonstrate abilities to manoeuvre and control
the urban environment, and those who are able to create narratives about
the city and its people, can thus draw on the latent charismatic potentials
of urban life itself. Or rather, they are able to convert the opacity, impen-
etrability, historicity and latent possibilities of urban life into a resource in
their own self-making.
9
Hansen and Verkaaik: Introduction – Urban Charisma
We can now see that the everyday mythologies of urban life can give
birth to our two forms of urban charisma. On the one hand, the charisma
of the city, in the sense of the myth of a city which imbues its physical sites
and objects, and thus the people who live in them, with unique capabilities
and even magical forms of agency. This charisma of the city can easily be
transferred, for instance through processes of naming, onto symbols and
material objects that stand in for the city: to invoke and to name its styles,
slang, music and ambience as they are reproduced in demotic discourses,
in advertising, and official celebrations of an urban space expressed in
endless series of commercial insignia and products. It also arises from
multiple forms of reproducible maps, guidebooks, urban magazines and
other tools that claim to capture and present the city to itself and its visitors.
At the heart of the formulaic global tourist economy, it also has deeper
effects on how the city becomes available for its own inhabitants as an
objectified horizon that can envelop and subsume their own identities.
Charisma in the city rests on special forms of knowledge, networks,
connectedness, courage and daring that enable some individuals – poli-
ticians, gangsters, business tycoons and the everyday hustler – to assume
leadership, or to claim hidden and dangerous abilities and powers. These
two forms of charisma, one mythical, the other performative, are mutually
dependent and live off one another. The former charisma of the city func-
tions as a reservoir of myth and narrative that can be re-interpreted, re-
invented and re-enacted by those who claim charisma in the city in a variety
of forms.
The spirits of cities have today moved to the centre stage of human life. In
the richer parts of the world the ‘souls of cities’ inform the making of
identities and the marketing of lifestyles – including design, art and music
– that are taken as quintessentially urban. These forms of invocation often
amount to a bourgeois celebration of the city as the quintessential space of
self-making ex nihilo, of the city as an open space of endless possibility,
driven by the desires and energies liberated by the intrinsic freedom and
anonymity of urban life. Yet, no city is ever one, and its public spaces are
neither fully public, nor equally inviting to everyone in the city. Neighbour-
hoods, central squares, thoroughfares and settlements of squatters all have
discrete rule and discrete publics, whether formal and visible, or mani-
fested through rumour and informal networks.
Across Africa, Latin America and Asia, cities are associated with
enormous possibility but also with moral crisis and death.3 Many of these
cities are postcolonial cities that began their existence as colonial centres
or trading entrepots. The cultural construction of life within these post-
colonial urban spaces is deeply marked by a colonial legacy. This continues
10
Critique of Anthropology 29(1)
Davis, 2006). Today, as explored by both Jensen and Worby in this collec-
tion, the South African city is transforming into something else – not a free-
flowing heterogeneity but a new and often creative way of using and
appropriating an erstwhile racially defined set of urban spaces (see
Mbembe and Nuttall, 2004).
Outside the offices of urban planners and strategists it is clear that
there is never just one but many competing and often antagonistic under-
standings of the city. The streets full of hawkers that may appear so
charming to the tourist and the middle-class shopper, appear to the hawker
himself as streets of danger and fear: fear of the police and immigration
authorities, or of the informal cartels and financers that regulate a great
many of these street economies. For the impoverished, the central parts
of cities are often seen as threatening and dangerous, not familiar or
navigable like the popular neighbourhoods in which they live – however
riddled by violent crime or insecurity such spaces may be.
The process of gentrification that takes place in many cities in the
Western world and elsewhere depends on the appropriation of erstwhile
industrial and popular neighbourhoods and buildings – now returned in a
purged and sentimentalized auratic form as funky entertainment and urban
charm. The charming diversity of cities is almost invariably highly produced,
sanitized, cleaned up, purged of its real heterogeneity and replaced with
gentrified and highly capitalized diversities of shops, cafes, renovated flats
and factories. Meanwhile, the actual popular neighbourhoods are
constantly being moved into the remnants of the 1960s cheap suburbs
and banlieus, spaces devoid of economic activity except consumption and
predatory economies of theft and drugs (see Wacquant, 2007).
Cities like Mumbai, Cairo or Nairobi are not completely governed by
such dynamics and are taking other routes, in spite of massive ongoing
attempts to reshape and reorganize their spaces along the lines of this
contemporary urban matrix. These intense and dense cities derive
enormous energy from a constant jockeying over space. This is an antag-
onistic battle between impoverished and respectable groups, between
newcomers and entitled, between city planners and those battling for liveli-
hoods, between cars, pavement-dwellers and pedestrians. The battle is
about how to handle the legacy of constitutive separation of life-worlds of
the city proper from that of the native quarters that was the main principle
of colonial city planning (see Pellow, 1991; Robins, 2005; Thompson, 2000:
171–224). The demographic and political pressure on these cities means
that these battles are antagonistic as the term is understood within medical
science – as substances or muscle energies that counteract, mitigate or
even neutralize each other’s effects in the same space. Many of the grand
urban plans will never materialize because of the popular forces that exist
in these city spaces. These forces inhabit what Partha Chatterjee (2004)
has called ‘political society’, that zone of negotiation and struggle between
the state and the popular world that happen along not very civil lines,
12
Critique of Anthropology 29(1)
often violent and almost invariably beyond a legal framework (see also
Bayat, 1997).5
When one sifts through the literature on cities, the preponderance of work
on planning and disciplining, and the physicality of space and architecture
is striking. Decades of urban anthropology on forms of life within cities
notwithstanding, relatively less attention has been paid to the urban as a
kind of sociality, a mental condition but also a way of being in the world.
The best depictions of the urban as a distinctive social and mental form of
life remain literary, fictional and, most powerfully, cinematic depictions of
the moral complexities and sensuous dimensions of urban life.
Why is urban life so difficult to capture? Why does ‘the urban’ itself
often elude us? Is the experience of the city so dependent on the tactile,
the senses and the visual that textualization itself appears hopelessly in-
adequate? Ranjani Mazumdar has recently argued that only the cinematic
form can capture the lived realities of the city in India. Through the
figure of the gangster, the tapori (vagabond/hustler), the marginalized but
righteous avenger and the dangerous femme fatale, a ‘disavowed vernacu-
lar archive of the urban in India’ has emerged in low-brow Bollywood
productions over the last two decades (Mazumdar, 2007). Only in the visual
and narrative form, can the body language, the colloquial street lingo, and
the moral complexities and dangers of the city emerge. The central figures
in many of these films are people who somehow navigate and manage the
city through networks and ways of knowing that are unavailable to the elite
and to the official gaze. They represent an otherwise disavowed perspective
on the city, the ‘real’ of the urban, a perspective that only with the greatest
difficulty can emerge in a sociological register through court transcripts,
police reports or the stories presented by social workers, and the odd
anthropologist. In her contribution in this issue, Vyjayanthi Rao develops
this point to show that in the world of fiction and cinematic narrative, the
gangster and the terrorist have become something like a ‘reading principle’
through which a chaotic urban space acquires a structure of intelligibility
and intentionality.
In the following, we reflect on how cities in both their fantasmic and
physical forms are interpreted and acted upon by the people living in their
midst. The issue we are concerned with is how one can produce a range of
what Benjamin called ‘profane illuminations’ of urban life. Let us try to
outline such illuminations along three axes. (1) Sensing the city, i.e.
reading, reproducing and domesticating the urban soundscapes, the visual
overflow, the styles, smells and a physical landscape that can be read
through everyday mythologies of past actions, heroes, martyrs, events,
danger. (2) Knowing the city in the sense of decoding it, managing its
13
Hansen and Verkaaik: Introduction – Urban Charisma
opaque and dangerous sides, controlling and governing the urban land-
scapes. (3) The capacity for ‘urban gestures’ and actions – acting, showing
oneself and performing within registers that are known to, and understood
by, people in specific neighbourhoods, whether as individuals or as crowds.
We are interested in exploring the styles, the references and the use of the
discursive and visceral archive of the city, or a neighbourhood, in such
urban gestures. This last register pre-supposes a knowledge and familiarity
with the two former and is at the heart of reproducing the charisma of the
city, and charisma in the city. It is also crucial in creating and maintaining
durable and informal networks of resources and connectivity which we
tentatively have called urban infra power.
If, however, cities can be imagined as bodies, they can also be depicted
as being ill, as being attacked by disease-bringing vermin or as being in
need of surgery. Stephen Graham (2004) and others have suggested that
the modern city is the product of an ongoing process of large-scale urban
destruction, carried out under the name of urban planning, and often justi-
fied by images of spontaneously grown city parts as unhygienic, disorderly
places that spoil the healthy nature and future of the city as a whole. Terror-
ism, they argue, has only revived an already existing fear of the unknown
and unruly neighbourhoods where state surveillance is incomplete or
absent (Graham, 2004). Bombs and bulldozers – sometimes acting in
concert – have been instrumental in these operations. Graham mentions
the destruction of the old city of Algiers by the French colonial army in
1847 as one of the first examples of modern ‘urban pacification’, a model
that continues to be followed in our days in places like Jenin and Baghdad.
A deep-running theme in these counter-insurgency measures is the fear of
disorder and rebellion, and disgust felt in relation to dirt, smell or noise.
Hygiene is often the deciding incentive behind large-scale urban inno-
vation projects.
Since the end of the 20th century, democratic processes generated by
ethnic, religious and populist politics has brought new social groups into the
political arena, into the heart of political power and into erstwhile bourgeois
urban spaces across the globe. The modernist utopia of ‘washing’ the masses
to make them civilized subjects is quickly giving way to an elitist dystopia that
combines a nostalgic longing for an imagined past of decreed order and
civility of the colonial city, with a growing fear of the poor and the associ-
ated smells and noises. In his discussion on taste, Pierre Bourdieu (1984: 2)
argued that the capacity to see (voir) is a function of knowledge (savoir). But
what about the capacity to hear (entendre) and smell (sentir)?
As Martijn Oosterbaan (2006) argues in this issue, sound – like smell,
and more than the visual – has a profoundly trans-local character. Sound
in many ways dominates city life in Rio. This includes amplified sermons by
Pentecostal pastors as well as the loud music of baile funk parties – often
accompanied by the sound of gunshots and fireworks. Oosterbaan shows
how the private or semi-private constantly intrudes upon the public space
of the city. Religiously, ethnically or racially organized groups, as well as
the urban poor, make their entrance into the public sphere of the city
through sound. We find similar arguments in Hansen’s work on taxis and
kwaito music in South Africa (2005), in Charles Hirschkind’s work on the
Islamization of the public space in Cairo through dawa cassettes (2006) and
– for smell – in Arvind Rajagopal’s discussion on how the slum, through the
stink of faeces and dead bodies, penetrates the public spaces of Bombay
(Rajagopal, n.d.). In a sense, this jumble of noises, smells and signs only
confirms the cosmopolitan and metropolitan ideal of speed, squalor and
synthesis immortalized by great 1920s novels like John Dos Passos’ Man-
hattan Transfer and Alfred Döblin’s Berlin Alexanderplatz. Yet today, fusion
15
Hansen and Verkaaik: Introduction – Urban Charisma
The tree and the rhizome – the cultural economy of urban gestures
‘Thought lags behind nature’, Deleuze and Guattari state in the intro-
duction to their irreverent, meandering, indulgent and highly suggestive
work A Thousand Plateaus from 1980. By this phrase, the authors meant that
natural forms are much richer and more diverse than our ability to use
them as metaphors and figures of thought. Their most compelling sugges-
tion is to distinguish between the tree, with roots and a centre and an
origin, as the dominant figure of social organization and thought, and the
rhizome as the meandering, spontaneous, de-centred, creative as well as
parasitical forms of ‘wild’ thought and ‘wild social forms’. This is a
compelling distinction that condenses an enormous range of similar oppo-
sitions from biology to linguistics – the molar vs. the molecular, the vertical
vs. the horizontal, the metaphor vs. metonym, langue vs. parole, the proper
name vs. the yet-to-be-named, and so on. These oppositions were developed
in an even clearer form by de Certeau both in the realm of language
(high/low, formal/demotic, etc.) and in terms of urban life – the irrever-
ence of everyday practices and low-brow flânerie as opposed to the planned
layout of the city, and the disciplines of work and government. In sub-
sequent scholarship, the opposition often becomes both epic and moral, a
perennial struggle between the spontaneous fullness and anarchy of life,
19
Hansen and Verkaaik: Introduction – Urban Charisma
versus the impoverished, grey and disciplining forces of society, city and
state. This is, however, a flawed reading of Deleuze and Guattari, who state
that ‘The rhizome is an anti genealogy. It is short term memory, or anti-
memory’, thus reiterating that the rhizome as a social form has no stability,
no historicity, no independent life of its own. It is inconceivable without the
arboreal form (1988: 21). The rhizome is not an essential property of the
popular or even the urban, it is the inevitable and often highly unwelcome
double of any form of regular or formalized organization of any stability
and duration.
. . . there is no ontological dualism between here and there, no axiological
dualism between good and bad, no blend or American synthesis. There are
knots of arborescence in rhizomes, and rhizomatic offshoots in roots. Moreover,
there are despotic formations of immanence and channelization specific to
rhizomes, just as there are anarchic deformations in the transcendent system
of trees, aerial roots and subterranean stems. The important point is that the
root tree and the canal rhizome are not two opposed models. (1988: 20)
The authors go on to explain that the two always coexist: the arboreal is
always an inherent potential within any rhizomatic form, just as rhizomatic
forms inevitably shoot off from, penetrate and envelop arboreal systems
with formal and historical properties. The two forms are not complemen-
tary but antagonistic in the medical sense we mentioned above – working
against and neutralizing each other’s effects – never producing a new
balance or a higher synthesis, just frustrating, impairing and wearing down
the other principle. Where there is a tree, there will always be rhizomatic
organization. Formal organizations, in other words, are full of rhizomatic
logics, networks of affect, conspiracy, evasions and informal help.
Although these networks are what help make formal organizations work,
they are not complementary, but invariably disavowed and parasitical,
principles that are at war with each other, and yet reproduced in ever
new forms.
To Deleuze and Guattari, the rhizomatic form is always tactical and
mobile, a war-machine – a gang, a parasite, a dissenting band of lay-
preachers moving in and out and through more crystallized institutions
and practices, and so on. They draw heavily on Pierre Clastres’ historical
understanding of mobile societies in Paraguay as organized around a
perpetual state of war and violence. War, Clastres argued, may justify the
election of a war chief, but he would be deposed as soon as the battle was
over and a state of acephelous normalcy would re-appear. The purpose of
this permanent state of war, according to Clastres, was to remain an inde-
pendent community, to live in permanent upheaval in order to prevent
hierarchical, ‘molar’ and fixed forms of organization from appearing.
These forms of organization, devoted to maintaining autonomy, small scale
and equality of condition, reproduced themselves as a constant counter-
points to the more stable and hierarchical communities that appeared in
and around Amazonia at regular intervals (Clastres, 1989).
20
Critique of Anthropology 29(1)
The city, and especially the postcolonial city with its enormously dis-
connected and discrepant worlds, is a massive theatre of charismatic poten-
tiality and its opposite, the non-realization and destruction of capacities
and talent. Infra-power, we submit, is a powerful symbolic enactment of
human potentiality, a display of how one can read, master and ‘work’ the
city to make it yield benefits, magical power and eros if one runs the risks
and has the courage to ‘play’ – the central trope in urban politics, exchange
and pleasure. The obverse is the possibility of non-action, the danger,
predicament and shamefulness of impotentiality, of not realizing a capacity,
of not ‘playing’ and sensing possibilities, of not performing as a hustler and
not aspiring to become a big man.
How do we then know what infra-power is? By what marks can it be
known – this informal connectivity and assemblage of potentialities that has
neither formal structure nor predictable form? We can find it embodied in
the figure of hustler or the big man, but also in others who are able to
‘work’ the city through playful and wild connections. Yet it is a form of
power that can only be known in action, as an emergent form. By this we
mean emergence as the complex realization of properties or potentialities
of people and their environment through actions and events. None of these
qualities exist prior to the action itself. The potential of the network, the
connections and the capacities of the people involved, only show them-
selves in actions and outcomes. Instability and unpredictability are the
heart of urban charisma, a property that cannot be permanently owned by
anyone but is only made visible through performative action and exchange.
Infra-power as described by the contributions in this issue seems indeed
to be rhizomatic but it also has a measure of historicity (as myths and narra-
tives of famous big men/hustlers/tricksters) and a certain spatiality. Infra-
power often originates in the popular neighbourhoods that defy legibility
and an ordering gaze while spreading their logic of wild connectivity
throughout the city. Yet these forms of power have no predictable form and
no shared archive. Burton’s sweeping and suggestive history of martyrdom,
blood-letting and violence in Paris since 1789 suggests that stories and auras
of violent deeds and misdeeds, conspiracies, sites of martyrdom (such as
Père Lachaise) circulate throughout the city as symbolic archives of how
street wars are fought and how the spilling of blood has created physical
sites of great charismatic power (Burton, 2001: 265–346). These traces, sites
23
Hansen and Verkaaik: Introduction – Urban Charisma
Notes
1 This latter dimension is most powerfully captured in Berman (1982).
2 The theme of visibility as a precondition of the ‘people’ and a modern demo-
cratic imaginary is explored by Claude Lefort (1988), while the theme of the
city as a site of public life is most powerfully explored by Richard Sennett in
several works (e.g. Sennett, 1974, 1990).
3 This theme has been powerfully explored in recent work on African cities (see
for instance de Boeck and Plissart, 2004; Simone, 2004; see also Christiansen
et al., 2006).
4 It is striking, for instance, that even James Holston’s brilliant work on urban
planning in Brazil maintains a distinction between a pre-industrial/pre-modern
city and a modern and modernist city like Brasilia. The question of the
specificity of the colonial cities under discussion (Rio, Salvador) and the
specific economies of racial and ethnic exclusion they were founded on is never
raised (see Holston, 1989).
5 The continuities in the imagination of dangers arising from popular neigh-
bourhoods are striking. Burton (2001) shows in compelling detail how notions
of the bestial and animalistic recur in descriptions of the insubordinate Parisian
poor from the sans culottes, through the Communards, the ‘reds’ of the Resist-
ance, and now the youth of the banlieus.
6 Other examples of these popular local big men include the badmash/dada in
Bombay (Chandavarkar, 1998; Hansen, 2001, 2005) and the jawanmardi in
Teheran (Adelkhah, 2000).
7 The anthropologist often come to depend on such figures who are locally
known to be ‘in the know’, and well-connected. The similarities are striking:
the imputed command of the local nuances and stories, the supposedly effort-
less understanding of local inflections and connotations of words and events,
and the possession of special and unfathomable powers by virtue of being
connected to outside forces and specialized knowledge, and powers of ‘seeing’
24
Critique of Anthropology 29(1)
References
Adelkhah, Fariba (2000) Being Modern in Iran. New York: Columbia University Press.
Agamben, Giorgio (1999) Potentialities: Collected Essays in Philosophy. Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press.
Alberoni, Francesco (1984) Movement and Institution. New York: Columbia University
Press.
Bayat, Asif (1997) Street Politics. New York: Columbia University Press.
Berman, Marshall (1982) All that is Solid Melts into Air. London: Verso.
De Boeck, Filip and Marie-Françoise Plissart (2004) Kinshasa: Tales of the Invisible City.
Tervuren: Royal Museum for Tropical Africa.
Bourdieu, Pierre (1984) Distinctions: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
Bourdieu, Pierre (1991) Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Burton, Richard D.E. (2001) Blood in the City: Violence and Revelation in Paris,
1789–1945. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press
Caldeira, Teresa (2001) City of Walls: Crime, Segregation and Citizenship in Sao Paolo.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Canetti, Elias (1960) Crowds and Power. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Chandavarkar, Rajnarayan (1998) Imperial Power and Popular Politics. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Chatterjee, Partha (2004) Politics of the Governed: Reflections on Popular Politics in Most
of the World. New York: Columbia University Press.
Christiansen, Catrine, Mats Utas and Henrik E. Vigh (eds) (2006) Navigating Youth,
Generating Adulthood: Social Becoming in an African Context. Uppsala: Nordic
Africa Institute.
Clastres, Pierre (1989) Society Against the State. New York: Zone Books.
Davis, Mike (2006) City of Quartz: Excavating the Future in Los Angeles, new edn.
London: Verso.
De Certeau, Michel (1984) The Practice of Everyday Life. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Deleuze, Gilles and Félix Guattari (1988) A Thousand Plateaus. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
Feld, Steven (1996) ‘Waterfall of Song: An Acoustemology of Place Resounding in
Bosavi, Papua New Guinea’, in Steven Feld and Keith H. Basso, Senses of Place.
Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.
Ferguson, James (1999) Expectations of Modernity: Myths and Meanings of Urban Life on
the Zambian Copperbelt. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Freud, Sigmund (1959) Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego. Standard Edition
of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, trans. James Strachey. New
York: W.W. Norton.
Gellner, Ernest (1977) ‘Patrons and Clients’, in Ernest Gellner and John Waterbury
(eds) Patrons and Clients in Mediterranean Societies. London: Duckworth.
Graham, Steven (ed.) (2004) Cities, Wars and Terrorism: Towards an Urban Geopolitics.
London: Blackwell.
25
Hansen and Verkaaik: Introduction – Urban Charisma
■ Oskar Verkaaik is affiliated with the Research Group for Religion and Society at
the University of Amsterdam. His work is concerned with questions of nationalism,
religion, ethnicity, and the city in both South Asia and Western Europe. His
publications include A People of Migrants: Ethnicity, State and Religion in Karachi
(Amsterdam: Free University Press, 1994) and Migrants and Militants: Fun and
Urban Violence in Pakistan (Princteon, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004). [email:
[email protected]]