Studio Co-ordinators:- Prasad Shetty
Gargi Somani
The course started with discussions revolving around social spaces, equity of those spaces and what social barriers exist in the physical environment that cause ‘spatial injustice’. To understand spatial injustice, it became important to know what spatial justice means on an urban and neighborhood level, that led us to reading essays from authors that have investigated space through the lens of equity and justice. Works by Edward W. Soja became a common reading to understand spatial justice.
When we talk about spatial injustice, it means injustice drawn through architectural form and configuration of space. Space is a socially produced entity hence the barriers that exist in the physical environment are also socially produced which come from a historic and social memory of the people and that place. We started identifying such instances in the case of our house or neighborhood to understand in depth how spatial injustice starts taking place.
Case 1: Gendered spaces in houses
Studied by: Nidhi Bhoir
There is a clear gender-based inequality in our household, deeply influenced by the spatial layout. The kitchen's isolated and enclosed space relegates women to performing household chores, reinforcing the notion that their place is in the kitchen. This physical separation strengthens traditional gender roles by limiting women’s presence in communal areas, such as the living room, where men typically gather. Devghar, a specific space designated for rituals and worship. This space is regarded by my father as a pure and sacred area that should only be entered in a state of ritual cleanliness. As part of this belief, during periods, my mother and I are not allowed to enter the devghar, creating a separation in the use of this space between men and women. This restriction is not only due to the physicality of the space but also stems from traditional practices associated with it.
Case 2: Exploitation through segregation
Studied by: Varun Shetty
Tailoring and garment workers have a class-based segregation in their workflow. Cutting masters are in much greater demand than stitching workers, as they have disappeared from the market and have exponentially higher pay. This forms a clear class hierarchy between the two sectors due to a lack of skill and economic factors.
The house's design allows for an intensive work cycle. The room is populated with six stitching machines and two ironing carpets, allowing eight people to work simultaneously. . The workers have an unsaid rule to enter the premises from the back gate only, when asked what is the problem with entering from the front one said, “Master does not open the door which connects the two rooms, to receive the cuttings we have to walk up to the front entrance and take it from him, he is not very friendly”. In terms of living conditions, the workers enter through the back gate, which is dark, stinky, and unclean. Because there is no door, the bathroom is covered by an abandoned cupboard, making the space feel more cramped and crowded. The proximity of the compound wall makes it difficult for light and air to enter. As a result, artificial lighting is used continuously throughout the day.
Comentarios