Ethnography Report

Little bit more Loose, Little bit more Public.

P

S A

A

N S

Thein Manimekalai Sowrirajan

T

E

Little bit more Loose, Little bit more Public.

P

A

S

Thein Manimekalai Sowrirajan

INTRODUCTION: Belonging to the South Indian community, I come from one of the top six Metropolitans of India where public transportation has been generally stigmatized as being used only by the lower economic sections of the society. The trains do not regularly maintain on-time departures or arrivals. The stations and platforms are used to sleep rough during the nights by the homeless and is generally considered unsafe to visit during odd hours of the night. The coaches can be described as being overcrowded, unclean and undesirable It is estimated that in India approximately 88 million trips(70 million by buses, approximately 18 million by railways and 0.23 million by air) are made on public transport daily which translates to 6-9 percent of total trips (Source: KPMG in India’s research and analysis 2017 based on research on public transport share in total trips across countries )being catered to by public transport as against 30-35 percent in most countries across the world. Clearly, there is a need to provide more public transport in India. And for these reasons, despite its low costs, the majority of office goers and other lower middle class- upper-class members opt to use uber/ ola or other modes of transportation including carpooling, employersponsored buses, private vehicles, tuk-tuks, and bicycles.

The only commonalities I find here in Milan and Chennai are the large open standardized spaces available for the free flow of passengers and its varied uses: Both public infrastructural systems, as any other in the world have the elementary structural systems like rail, platforms and most importantly plazas that allow access and exit.

For the sake of this paper, I researched Stations Porta Venezia, Repubblica, and Porta Garibaldi with the addition of Lancetti for its large unused plaza and its added potential (an afterthought).

My research began when I heard about the possibility of fare evasion in stations Porta Venezia and Lancetti, Stations most frequented by the students of Politecnico di Milano between the Leonardo and Bovisa campus. However, after visiting these transition access zones, the pathways or platforms, usually one level higher, that guide the passengers to multiple points along 2

Little bit more loose, Little bit more Public

the railway line through escalators or stairs underground, the initial perceptions and understanding of the social dynamics were challenged. Despite the large incurring costs to the agencies that provide the transport, fare evasion is considered inherent to virtually any public transport system in the world.

(See Peter Kooreman). In the case of Milan, according to the ‘Mitre corporation’ that collected date on seven public transport systems in the European front (1993), declared that Milan has one of the highest fare evasion rates, second only to Hague with 8.0 and 9.9 respectively. This has been overlooked for efficiency reasons. In large metropolitan public transport systems with a high degree of utilization, a completely secure system would slow down the inflow of passengers and hence reduce the capacity of the system. (Source: Fare Evasion as a result of expected utility maximization, 1993).

In the case of Passante and especially in stations like Porta Venezia, Lancetti, Villapizzone, it is observed there are some permanent alterations, either by the users or by the official themselves, in the access points. These ‘barriers’ where one swipes the transport card are broken or permanently open, (Refer Image 6) for example, the gates that have wide thresholds particularly the access points for wheel-chair access. (a recurring condition in the observed stations).

This allows the passengers to freely move in and out of these stations with or without ever having a transport card or the necessity to use its primary function, mobility within the city. As elaborated later in the paper, these spaces are additionally used by people for

S A

N

small gatherings, dance practices, as points of relaxation during rain/ harsh winters. “It’s too cold upstairs, (The parks and open spaces) so we like to be here,” said one of the mothers who brought her 5 months old baby to Porta Venezia Station for a stroll.

“Do you live around here?” I asked.

She said, “Yes! I sometimes come here to take a walk, do some shopping in Corso Buenos Aires and then leave home” This opens up an interesting dimension to these paid ‘public’ infrastructure structures that allow either knowingly or unknowingly to more public activities in addition to paid mobility.

HYPOTHESIS: LITTLE BIT MORE LOOSE, LITTLE BIT MORE PUBLIC Public spaces are all places publicly owned or of public use, accessible and enjoyable by all for free and without a profit motive. Each public space has its own spatial, historic, environmental, social and economic features.

Public spaces consist of open environments (e.g. streets, sidewalks, squares, gardens, parks) and in sheltered spaces created without a profit motive and for everyone’s enjoyment... Conversely, public spaces which are not yet accessible and/or usable must be considered as “potential public spaces”, and therefore as a precious resource for the strengthening and renovation of the existing system of public space, and thus of urban quality as a whole. (Charter of Public Space, 2016). But what about public infrastructures like Networks of railway stations which are the physical web and support for the 3

T

E

P

A

S

#1 Platform layout interspesed with access points within each station

movement and the stationing of people and means of transport, from which the vitality of the city depends. In the case of Passante, a tunnel of 7.8 kilometers that diagonally cut the metropolitan of Milan from the North-Western side to SouthEastern side through the center connecting with 17 other Metro lines and providing access to numerous academic institutions, affluent neighborhoods and city’s important landmarks, the potential for additional activities are ample. Notwithstanding the opportunities, the question of ethics remains the same. Fare evasion is illegal and brings about huge economic losses to the agencies reliant on them. Consequently, the authorities are attempting to mitigate the losses through an increase in fines, new gates systems, etc. “In its efforts to reduce subway fare evasion, Milan Transit Authority (ATM) recently announced it will deploy a new improved access gate system and improvement of fines. Fare evasion fines have increased 33% in the past year” (Trainsfare, 2019).

This research, however, tries to focus on the current conditions and tries to amplify the ‘positives’ of the provisional physical elements that ‘also’ allow fare evasion: Free access.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY: PART 1 The methodology for this ethnographic research was predominantly qualitative with ample observations of the study areas. Site visits were conducted at different times of the day and different days of the week to explore the different activities or social dynamism prevalent in the open platforms above the tunnel, the railway lines. Some Stations were focused more in detail, for example in Porta Venezia, the environmental and physical conditions facilitated both quality and increased quantity of activities when compared with other study areas. For example, Porta garibaldi station which was strict in terms of its usage and layout.

As expressed in the topic the “Looseness” of the space was measured under these initial conditions. However, these conditions were altered post-research to create new amplified definitions. Additionally, all visible human activities that occurred in the study area (expect its primary use: mobility) were taken into account.

1. Free access to platforms (Ability to enter and exit the station without a Transport card) 2. Additional usable space (as against narrow 4

Little bit more Loose, Little bit more Public

linear trails that are mandatory in transport stations) Accessibility: (All of the study area) Under the 3+1(Lancetti) study areas, it was observed that the gate with wheel-chair accessibility was permanently damaged and thus allowing free access in three of the four areas: Porta Venezia; Repubblica and Lancetti. Porta Garibaldi, as an exception with its connectivity second only to Milano Centrale considering total passenger traffic, was ‘strict’ than the rest. All the gates, both exit, and entry were efficient and functional.

“They come always, check the tickets here too”, Said one of the passengers pointing at the Milan Transport Authority official checking everyone’s ATM cards.

Availability of Undefined Spaces: By undefined spaces, I mean spaces that are not allocated any actions either with a visible or a physical boundary. For example, stores or ‘teatros’ that demarcate specific actions, expect certain social interactions and attract specific crowds within the Passante.

They would be considered defined spaces.

On the contrary, and specifically in the case of the study areas, the platforms are large rectangular platforms spaces across the length of the station punctured only by stairs and escalators, conceived predominantly to provide free flow of passengers.

Despite having undefined spaces further analysis into the layout brought about specific features that challenged the hypothesis in the following ways.

Repubblica: Repubblica station is the station that provides the closest proximity to the center of the city. Here at Repubblica, the spaces can be defined as more ‘rigid’ than ‘loose’. There are small theatres, art shops, photo studios, costumes stores that come alive particularly during the holiday season around Halloween and Christmas (Period when the research was conducted). However, all the additional spaces, despite being accessible and usable were ‘defined’ and privatized in a way that allows the select public to approach the fenced areas for specific needs. In the charter of Public space, this is explained under ‘The commoditization of urban sociality’

S A

N

Thus, if spaces are accessible by all but dictate your behavior and alter your experience within the space, does it make it less loose? and as a result does it make it less public? was the question to be considered. For the sake of this research, the initial hypothesis was extended to further define loose spaces as spaces where social behavior is not pronounced or directed.

Porta Garibaldi: Porta Garibaldi station connects the Passante users from the peripheries and suburbs and directly into the financial sector of the city.

Like Porta Venezia and Repubblica station, Porta Garibaldi station is physically below the Porta Garibaldi M3 station with its multiple connections to other modes of transportation within the city.

The layout of the platform is straightforward.

The Access points to the tunnel are punctured right in the middle dividing the platform into two equal parts creating clear directions for passengers entering and exiting without any confusion. This with an additional lack of access to the platform without a travel card makes garibaldi a less favorable station for more public activities.

Lancetti: Lancetti is relatively most peripheral when compared to the other study areas. Having the largest of the platforms in its collective size width and area, it was punctured by stairs and escalators on either side of the platform. This particular layout broke the space into three small and linear pockets that facilitated all passengers to carry out their functions effectively and without confusion.

Under these combinations, Lancetti must be classified loose but when usage was concerned, there were no shops or floor demarcations that specified any activity.

Further visits also confirmed a lack of activity.

Thus, disproving the hypothesis. However, this could be explained by a combination of these reasons.

1. Peripheral station 2. Lack of agents like people who gathered here regularly (as in the case of porta Venezia M1) and/or lack of traffic.

5

T

E

P

A

6

S

# 2A Limitations of Before

Little bit more loose, Little bit more Public

S A

N

7

T

# 2B Possibilities of After

E

P Porta Venezia: Porta Venezia station falls on the southern sector of the Passante physically below the Porta Venezia M1 station. Here, Porta Venezia M1 is already a bustling space with art stores, dance stages, meat shops, and multiple other public provisions. Also, the composition of visitors includes frequent shoppers at Corso Buenos Aires, One of the popular shopping streets in Milan.

However, most of the public spaces, for example, the platforms that are occupied by gymnasts and dancers at M1 get fenced at 8 PM. The users are seen to leave the M1 station and directly enter the Passante platform.

The Passante Platform, despite providing the free access as mentioned above, is designed strategically that the punctures (stairs and escalators) are built around the perimeter of the platform providing maximum possible space in the center. This is favorable for two reasons.

1. Maximum utilization of space 2. Possibility to create micro-locales (Refer to orange bubbles in Figure 1): A contingent layout where people can gather without hindering the natural flow of passengers.

A

S

Escalators) When comparing these the initial and added conditions, Porta Venezia station can be evaluated to be relatively more loose, more public and more active. Additionally, stations like Repubblica and Lancetti provide the expansive potential to create new contexts.

Due to the location argument, more research can be conducted to identify new sets of conditions for the peripheral districts to be more active. In the case of Repubblica, the alternate is true. The spaces seem to be less loose, more defined and privatized.

But what about the activities themselves?

Where can one draw the line between public infrastructure and public space? This brings us to the second part of the research where attempts have been made to elaborate more on the kind of activities that are carried out within these identified more loose and more public space: Porta Venezia.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY: PART 2

Thus, a combination of agents like 1. Fencing the dance and exercise platform at 8 PM. (Adequate agency) 2. Stairs and Escalators in the edges creating Micro-locales (Contingent Layout) 3. Free Access, Additional usable space

Looseness, in this context, is seen as a double-edged sword. In terms of the area, they cover, (in our case, the platforms) constitute the portion of the urban space used primarily by the passengers and as is their right. It is therefore important for their use to be unhindered. Such priorities need to be understood by all and further activities must be aligned to provide that best use. As a result, all other different functions must be reconciled granting priority to passengers.

captures the ‘looseness’ of Porta Venezia and thus making it more Public than bureaucratically conceived.

Stating that as a priority, the looseness is finecombed and graded within the rules of civic coexistence.

To summarize, The conditions for ‘looseness’ directed the research to identify two pre-conditions or necessities that make space not just loose and more public but active.

They are: 1. Agents (People, Weather, Relationship with the city, location and surrounding environment, etc.)

2. A contingent layout that allows multiple functions to be carried out creating new social dynamism and practices within the same area, (Here, Placement of Stairs and

Some of the commonly observed activities are, Dancing; Preparing food; Dog walking; Taking stroll/walk; Beatboxing; Smoking; Drinking; Conducting group Meetings ( Specifically by different ethnic groups that use this space for dance practices); Urinating in niches below escalators beside the railway lines; Sitting on escalator ledges instead the assigned seating area; Using the banners, walls, escalator rails and other frames for personal and commercial advertisements; Trashing; Using 8

Little bit more loose, Little bit more Public

#3 Moving to the ‘Rhythm’(Left) -Low Hindrance

S A

N

9

T

E

P

A

10

S

#4 Repetitive Nuisance

Little bit more loose, Little bit more Public

S A

N

11

T

#5 “To be or not to be somewhere�-

E

P

A

the stairs to access Lintel ledges that are used for lighting, displaying street titles and landmarks for navigation purposes; These Lintel ledges are also used to consume food as observed from leftover food and beverages ( See Figure 3) From the above list of activities, an attempt has been made to classify them based on three gradients encompassing different spaces of possibilities and the and levels of hindrance delivered to the passengers. The observations were made unbiasedly and purely on the opinions gathered during the numerous site visits and by interactions with the commuters.

S

said a man who caught me observing him smoking in a pit supporting the escalator punctures and thus out of the way for the passengers. Additionally, smoking on the main pathway was not observed.

3. Using the banners, walls, escalator rails and other frames for personal and commercial advertisements: They gather attention and the consensus seems to be accepted as they like to read while taking the escalators. In one case, someone has pasted a QR code for his personalized Spotify playlist that he would like others to enjoy.

Furthermore, they were also classified based on the kind of activity to explain the observed nuances of such activities and to mitigate the shortcomings of this exploratory research.

They are, 1. Organized and repetitive actions 2. Based on isolated Anomalies

Medium Hindrance Activities: 4.Dancing: Observations and photos were collected where the commuters are visibly seen watching the performances amusedly.

Opinions were even gathered where people have expressed that they like to visit the platform for the varied music that the people of different ethnicities gather here to dance.

However, it seems to be the case where the passengers accommodate the dancers and often go around the spheres used by them in select parts of the platform. The dancers even explained situations where they hear racist slurs and anti-immigrant sentiments like “Go back to where you come from”.

Low Hindrance Activities: 1.Taking stroll/walk 2. Smoking, Drinking- While these are legally prohibited in some countries, especially in India where smoking/ drinking in public areas is extremely frowned upon.“ This is Italy”

5.Sitting on escalator ledges instead the assigned seating area: while it is general practice to either wait by the seating area or stand by the railway line until the moment of embarkation, this could be viewed more cultural gap rather than an oddity. However,

The three levels are as follows, 1. Low Hindrance 2. Medium Hindrance 3. Nuisance

“The created order is everywhere punched and torn open by ellipses, drifts, and leaks of meaning: it is a sieve-order”- Michel de Certeau 12

Little bit more loose, LIttle bit more Public

Nuisances: 6.Trashing; 7. Use of Lintel ledges: Using the stairs to access Lintel ledges that are used for lighting, displaying street titles and landmarks for navigation purposes; These Lintel ledges are also used to consume food as observed from leftover food and beverages; 8. Urinating in niches below escalators beside the railway lines. (Refer Figures 4) Organized and repetitive actions: Dancing: The Dancers prefer the Passante for the following reasons, 1.Relatively inconspicuous and loose compared to timed dancing platforms that are available in Porta Venezia M1 2.The only usable space post- office hours 3.Easy accessibility, they come here with their babies, friends, mothers who are seen to prepare sandwiches, beverages etc. while their sons/daughters’ practice.

4.Less patrolling and free access.

They also follow regular patterns on how they use the space. They are seen almost every Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday between the hours 7-10 PM. In some cases, the dancers are even seen to organize dance classes, community meetings and leisure time with friends and family within the same space which qualify this particular use as organized and repetitive.

Urinating in niches below escalators beside the railway line: Based on the image above, one can notice the signage on the floor that reads Ascensore (Meaning: Lift, Elevator). When enquired about the causes for such an action, the responsed were multifarious. Some racist, some mentioning lack of restrooms, lack of human ability to control their bladder, state of inebriation, use of the area at odd hours which encourages behavior as such, etc.

Based on such reactions, it is observed that the activity occurs repeatedly and in select

S A

N

identifiable spaces: Usually the pits/ niches under escalators that serve no public use but rather a structural necessity. Surely, this issue can be mitigated with better design and considerations.

Based on isolated Anomalies: Use of Lintel ledges: Using the stairs to access Lintel ledges that are used for lighting, displaying street titles and landmarks for navigation purposes; These Lintel ledges are also used to consume food as observed from leftover food and beverages- This is a highly unlikely scenario. However, due to visual evidences and more than one sighting during the many visits, this particular activity was added to the list.

CONCLUSION: The enjoyment of public space involves rights and duties. The right to enjoy adequate public spaces involves the duty to contribute to this goal through freely chosen modalities that can vary from the mere adoption of responsible individual or collective behaviors to involvement in initiatives of active citizenry.

Incidentally, People also like to feel autonomous. User autonomy is essential for circulatory convenience. It is that which leads to convergence of diverse people, proprietors of different ethnicities create a crossover of expression and exchange. Even Anthropologically speaking, it is understood that people flock to whether others are- The human act of crowding, sense of belonging freedom and safety, all of that which affects the density of gathering. Conversely, it is the very same act that segregates actions that can create a sense of indifference, adaptability and counter order that gives rise to pragmatic information of how any spaces can be used. Here at passante, seeing beyond legal issues like fare evasion and ethical issues like passive smoking, listening to loud music at a place where public gather, freeloading on a space that others have paid to enter, public spaces can, is and will be made more ‘multifunctional’ more ‘loose’ and more ‘Public’ to suit citizen’s needs. Thus I conclude by quoting C.Chang. “Our public spaces are as profound as we allow them to be”.

13

T

I. Notes on the text (if present)

it is perceived with certain reservations. For instance, Passengers invariably removing their hands from the escalator railing to prevent themselves from touching the heads of the people sitting on the ledge. (See Image on the right).

E

P

A

14

S

#6 Semantic Rarefaction

Little bit more loose, Little bit more Public

S A

N

15

T

E

“They become liberated spaces that can be occupied.

A rich in-determination gives them, by means of a semantic rarefaction, the function of articulating a second, poetic geography on top of the geography of the literal, forbidden or permitted meaning. They insinuate other routes into the functionalist and historical order of movement. Walking follows them: ‘I fill this great empty space with a beautiful name.”

S A

N

17

T

# T

Quote by Michel de Certeau

E

P

A

18

S