Hidden but visible in the City!Questions of homelessness

By

Athi Nxusani1*

2014

Abstract

Today, one has to find his/her foot in order to live and survive inthe City clouded with anonymity and unfriendly human kind of classrelations ― who are human, but without humility in their deep sanity. Toconduct a groundwork research in urban milieu is frustrating ― but, aneducational and meaning-making activity. It is carrying complexitieswhich are derived within rural settings ― theorized within pretexts ofsociology and later anthropology (Simmel, 1903; Wirth, 1938; Gans, 1962;Fisher, 1995.) Although, not attempting to influence policy, this essaysought to pill out at least forgotten doctrine of social change inAfrica under the topic of the so-called theory of homelessness. Thisstudy employed mixed methods approach viz. first-hand observation and laterin-depth interview. I found that homelessness is the city is fuelled bystructural arrangements in urban milieu with are influenced byhistorical and political; thus making life unbearable in the city.

1 * Mr. Athi Nxusani is a Master of Social Science (Africa Studies) student at the FortHare Institute for Social and Economic Research: University of Fort Hare, Eastern Cape: South Africa.

1

I

Negotiating Life and Space in the City: On the Street without Home

The deepest problems of modern life flow from the attempt of the individual tomaintain the independence and individuality of his existence against thesovereign powers of society, against the weight of the historical heritage and theexternal culture and techniques of life.

― Georg Simmel ―

This scholarly vigor is remnants of a significant terrain ofsocial inquiry; especially in urban setting like Aliwal North. Itsought meaning-making of how homeless people struggle in this sense tomaintain their daily life experiences thus negotiating space forsurvival. This essay is interested in this inquiry with an energythat rather sought meanings on how past historical life encountersshape the manner in which we negotiate life and space today. I visitedand conversed with a stranger who is at his home country of birth buthomeless and at least hopeful in the city. My informant, living on thestreets of Aliwal North; a historical2 but small city in the EasternCape: South Africa. In first encounter with my informant; he wasdressed in shorts and t-shirt in cold winter day of the City. Heexplains, how he found himself homeless after he lost his father afterhe was farm killing and later his very low paying job and thrown outby family relatives. He expresses hardships he endorse in living onthe street and how he moved from his family in Bloemfontein and foundhimself ‘trapped’ (Gans, 1962) homeless in the city. He believes thatone day God will afford him an opportunity to reunite with his family,especially his mother in Free State. His current story ofhomelessness is part of a much broader social problem in the City astheorized by ample scholars in urban sociology and later in urbananthropology (Simmel, 1903; Wirth, 1938; Gans, 1962; Fisher, 1995) tomention but a few. 2 Also see: www.aliwalnorth.net/ or then: www.wkipedia.org.wiki/Aliwal_North .

2

Thus, my personal interest on research of this nature was atfirst fuelled by the fact that, I often at times wondered ― How peopleliving and occupying space on the street find comfort when the sungoes down indicating that each one of us in society have to find ournest to rest and reflect on the day that was and the following day?3

Let alone, my inevitable personal encounters and contacts with peopleliving on the street as the space in the city which I view as a deeprooted social problem. This has led me to these broader questions: howdo people who are homeless find comfort to rest on the street?4 But,beyond that, how does one sustains life and secure space on thestreet? But, most important this essay, are the impact of historicalexperiences which lead to the idea of being homeless which I have nopersonal experience of. Thus, inquiring how life and space on thestreet is negotiated then. Indeed, this is purely because I have neverexperienced at least African milieu ― a state of affair wherein onehas to spend the whole day and night on the street looking for food ofrubbish bins and thereafter end up sleeping on the street because theday has ended while he or she was in that course of activity. Theaforementioned, are supposedly two main questions of inquiry in thispilot research undertaking. Furthermore, my a priori point of departurewas that, the person may have had a permanent, but temporal place ofrest after a long day which in my view was the corner of the streetitself. This notion of course, is reinforced by what seemed to be thegeneral, but westernized populist theory of homelessness andintellectually justified discussions; if not a globalised discoursewithin the apolitical pretexts of urban and global theory of society. Inthat, people who live of the street made themselves to experiencethose conditions willingly or unwillingly ― either because theyabandoned or being abandoned by their families because of substanceabuse, kinship conflicts, dislocation in another place and mentalhealth. The list goes on, however who`s responsibility is that insociety? A good question; but, only people can answer such questions.The system, cannot answer such questions. Why? Because the system islogically and purposefully geared by people to perpetuate singularagendas. Though, most importantly I am aware of the political excuse3 This is of course, not suggest at this stage of my studies that I am fully versed indiscovering the deep rooted consequences of this phenomenon within the pretext ofAfrican and social change theory; especially within the urbanization scholarly debatewhich I recently found interest in. 4 These maybe broad questions ― however, for the purpose of completing this preliminaryinquiry. I am of the view, this activity have polish my research skills inidentifying, problematising and making sense of the largely neglected social problemsperpetuated by urbanization and social dynamics. Thus, setting the tone forpreparation for my mini-dissertation in this area.

3

that homelessness in South Africa is attributed to the ills of theapartment system of the past in South Africa. When, I met my respondent for the first time ― theaforementioned discourses received my full attention as terrains ofserious consideration to make-meaning of homelessness in the city thanin rural settings where I grow up and still living. Indeed, terrainswhich in my view receive limited attention in African studies theoryof social change compared with western theory of social change.Moreover, I acquainted myself with the theories of urban life andsocial change within western intellectual pretexts. At the beginningof my pre-field notes inquiry ― that is, a layman’s study ofhomelessness5 (My emphasis) in urban milieu6 in Africa. I must admit,homelessness is a discourse which is largely missing in intellectualmicroscopic lenses. That is of course, with the exception of sociologydiscipline which rather sought to explain the phenomenon as that whichis inevitable and fuelled by social construction and social stratification derivedmainly within functionalist, Marxist and Weberian perspectives. The lattermentioned, have stirred-up a rather interesting inquiry of societywithin the realms of urban sociology. Yet, homelessness, thereforehave somewhat had varying definitions. As a result, “[t]here is no‘correct’ definition of homelessness, and which one of the existingrange is chosen remains essentially a political decision”(Fitzpatrick, Kemp & Klinker, 2000:10). But, interestingly ― some‘action anthropologists’ in the UK see homelessness as:

Some people who are homeless live temporarily in squats, on thefloors or sofas of friends and families, or sleep rough in concealedlocations. These ‘hidden’ homeless people tend to be absent from bothofficial statistics and public perception, but without support they comprisesome of the most vulnerable members of society. (My emphasis).(HomelessWatch, 2014:7).

The so-called homeless people I suspect; are not absent in publicperception. They are part of society. This I would like to think: isa somewhat speculative reason and preconception of hidden lives insociety. Indeed, an outdated perspective ― if not currently ahegemonic diffusion of false consciousness (Mafeje, 1971). A long standingcognitive digestion in functionalist, Marxist (ibid: 1976) and even invarying stance within Weberian thinking of society. These cases of the

5 In recent literature there is no currently agreed or scholarly justified theory ofhomelessness. Indeed, there contending perspectives on this as this somewhat changesfrom one country to another. 6 Of course, this is as if this is a given practice in social theory of change.

4

‘taken for grantedness’ of life and space in society could be viewedas the same or even worse in other nations. Thus, it is important tonote that, the homelessness social discourse in South Africa hadenjoyed a somewhat dominant delusionist justification. That is, thatof, blacks being systematically disoriented because of Apartheid system ofthe past. Though, this notion has been taken as an accepted socialbelieve to justify homelessness in South Africa. Could this be true orcould it be one variable out of many which contribute to questions ofhomelessness in South Africa. In this essay, I sense that this is truebut I also discover that, our life and space is populated by modernistsocial conditions and pressures which somewhat in figurative termstake life of social organism. To my surprise though, the samemodernization theory is a Darwinian contribution to social life andchange. This indeed, is puzzling and problematic to me in differentthreads. But for now, important to note though is that:

The lot of street people, street children, collectively ‘the homeless’ is terrible and hard-to-face indictment of the caring, compassionate and human rights oriented ethos of thenew dispensation in South Africa.

―Paul Hoffman7 ―

Albeit, the fact that the country has in 1996 adopted theConstitution which is pillared on the notion of human rights viz.“Right to housing”8 (Constitution of the Republic of South Africa,1996) ― the phenomenon of homelessness in South African cities is mostevident even in laymen`s eyes and reckon. It widely impacted urbanareas of South Africa. What seem to be striking to me though is thatthe idea of street living, orphan and homelessness is a recent one inAfrica. Perhaps, literature and action anthropology could provide adifferent picture of this serious; but, I still maintain that this isa taken for granted social discourse as I have not come acrossscholarly justification of this phenomenon rather than that of broadertheories of society. In addition, being born and growing up in therural Eastern Cape, one`s alienation from community based on the ideathat they are have not’s, orphans or homeless is not a consensussocial practice. It is praxis, I couldn’t recall nor do I see it

7 Paul Hoffman is an author and activist for homeless people. Between 2007 and 2010 heproduced a documentary to raise money for homeless people. 8 Of course, this is not to suggest that this study is interested inquestioning the Constitution of South Africa. That is not my purpose here.However, my purpose is derived from social observation of a social phenomenonas it presents itself in social discourse.

5

happening even today in rural milieu9 of the province. I see it ratherin urban settings. However, it provokes my reckon to see thisphenomenon in urban cities of the Eastern Cape. Indeed, bewildermentas an American social activity for homeless people, Paul Hoffman alsoobserved this year. In addition, my interest in this in-depth research undertakingis therefore fuelled by on one hand, by the opportunity given bysenior researcher and academic adviser – promoter at Fort HareInstitute of Social and Economic Research, Dr. Teresa Conner for thepurpose of fulfilling completing my MA mini-dissertation in Africanstudies. On the other hand, by this most growing but taken for grantedphenomenon of homelessness in Africa, not mention across the world.Indeed, it is a reality most theoretically justified in passingbecause it is to a certain extent over shadowed by globalization as itis gate keeping progress. Conveniently, the capitalist hallucinationof urbanizing the world thus advancing a long standing idea that “…ordinary men and women are too small mined to govern their ownaffairs. An order and progress can only come if people surrender theirrights …” (Obama, 2014: online10) is at suspect here. Of course, asimilar notion that; David Rockefeller, Gorge Bush, ArthurSchlesinger, Adolph Hitler, and others who somewhat emerge to besupreme endorsed ― that of, primitivism on earth to produce worldorder which is in my view brutal to the peripheral life and space. But, its thanks, to insightful ideas of George Simmel (1858 ―1918), Ferdinand Tönnies (1855 ― 1936), and later, Louis Wirth (1897 ―1952), Herbert J. Gans (1927 - ), Claude Fisher (1948 - ) and, HenriLefebvre (1901 ― 1991) have set the tone for the study of this nature11

in their endeavor of searching for a rather meaning-making ofurbanization what could be taken to extremes today as globalization. Indeeda topic of discussion itself. Thus, taking the above into cognizance ―my assignment here is to: “Design, collect and implement an in-depthinterview of [my] choice. [Meaning,] … focusing on a specific topic,and interviewing a friend, associate or stranger.” (Conner, 2014:personal communication). My interest is homelessness and my interview wasconducted with the stranger on the street of Aliwal North in the EasternCape: South Africa. In the following sections of this essay, Ipresent my methodology in this inquiry and inductions derived from the

9 Unless, being a student my understanding of ‘rural’ is flawed like that of colonialanthropologists. 10 This was a social network video chipped from White House Social hub. Available: www.whitehouse.gov/engage/socail-hub. Retrieved: 1 September, 2014.11 Of course, this is not to suggest that this are the only scholars who probed urbanstudies whether in Sociology nor in anthropology.

6

experience. Then, conclude as follows: first, while the question oflife and space in the city is a challenging point of inquiryirrespective of whether one has home or not. The urban environ bringsabout challenges of making sense of life and negotiating space in thecity. But, for the so-called homeless it is exacerbated by deep rootedproblems which could neither be attributed to flaws of the subjectexperiencing homelessness or and most importantly by externalstructural functionalist ills of society at large. Within the pretextsof social reconstruction, I think Social Anthropologists could yield abetter understanding of this phenomenon; especially in Africa.

IIMethodology:

On the field of Homelessness

7

The rise of globalization has seriously challenged the anthropological concepts of“locality”, and “self-contained society”.

― Wondwsosen Teshome-Bahiru & Jerusalem Negash-Wossene ―

This has stirred up profound methodological issues due tourbanization in many ways (Teshome-Bahiru & Negash-Wossene, 2007:8).However, “[t]here is no reason why ‘traditional anthropological’techniques cannot be used effectively in urban as in rural studiesobservational techniques …” (ibid: 8) ― though, participant observationmethod is widely challenged within urban setting as rural oriented inits conception (Ellen, 1984: 67 ― 69). The primary interest in studyof this nature emerged through just ordinary first-hand observation of thephenomenon of homelessness or life on the street. Thus, “… [entering]a world so different that [I somewhat came] to accept reality itselfas nothing but a social construct, with effects so devastating …” (cf.Ellen, 1984:90). A mere acceptance could not necessary be sufficient,an attempt to make sense of homelessness could at least provide first-hand field experience of the problem. However, keeping in mindcontending social constructionist dogmas. But, Archie Mafeje (2001:45)is adamant that; the social construction thesis is flawed in that: “[w]e hadalready referred to this total rejection/half-embrace mode ofconceptualization. However, there is another side to the storyfor to the question, ‘How, then, do we do an ethnography of thehistorical imagination?’” Indeed, it is impossible to be speculativetoday thus deriving inferences from literature which containspreoccupationalist vigor. Precisely said; these are “… processes thatreciprocally shape subjects and contexts, that allow certain things tobe said and done… [as if] … anthropology, historical or otherwise,could not be reconstructed, without being deconstructed first. ”(Mafeje, 2001: 31, 45). It is at this juncture, I find Archie’sthinking better suitable in this research. Therefore, inspired by thepretexts of Mafejerian insights; that which are rooted in the epistemology ofsocial reconstructionism (Mafeje, 2001:45 ― 48) through listening to whatdata says to one before allowing social theory; rather than that ofsocial constructionist (Mead, 1934; Blumber, 1969) standing and thetheoretical stance of urbanization or urbanism (Wirth, 1932). The pointis; dislocation, homelessness and poverty do not automatically makejust a subject of a mere social ignorance. It makes a rather uniquepersona in the city that is subject to everyone`s attention at leastfrom a humanistic eye. However, we don’t always plan to observesocial discourses ― it happens to everyone; everyone observes andtherefore; everyone questions every day. But, do social phenomena have

8

to receive theoretical validation to receive attention as a subject ofinterest in inquiry? Indeed, answers to this question may varydepending ones intellectual philosophical stance with the question ofspace and time in this world ― but, what remains central in this essayis how I make sense of hidden but visible experience of social life andspace. Whilst, it is far-sighted to note that, going to the field doesnot only “… involve the kind of education which is inevitable inhaving to adapt to new (and often exotic) social and physicalenvironment …; it also generally involves the development of a newsocial personality for the field situation, or a new self-image andsocial projection, and very often profoundly affects the fieldworker`sown values and worldview.” (Ellen, 1984:90). My point departure in theway of gaining access for this pilot research undertaking was throughmere first-hand observation ― I can note that this was my firstencounter with my later to be informant on the question ofhomelessness12. I met him standing next to a mini-supermarket nowowned by Indians in front ― and, in the freezing cold temperatures ofAliwal North13 in July 2012. I offered my Fort Hare merchandise, whichis a track-suit which I bought at DMC14 when I was doing my honoursdegree in 2011 at Alice campus to make him feel warm. The gesture wasa mere gesture of concern. Although, the question of homelessness insocial environ has drawn me to in part to the discourses of socialtheory and practice. That is, one of just problems of society that aregiven ― if not acceptable. Indeed, this gesture was not premised andshould not be seen as from a point of view that, I intentionally deedthe exercise for my own benefit because at the time I was not evenregistered at the University of Fort Hare: FHISER as an MA student.Nevertheless, my respondent invited me to his place after a long dayon the street bins - searching and going piece jobs for daily survivallike everyone does in the so-called normal societal environ to hisplace of resting after a long day and a somewhat me-time; if not in themean-time place of residing. It is here, where first-hand observation as amethod was used. In deed, for the first time I became a “CompleteObserver” (Ellen, 1984: 204), because I did not plan any meeting with12 Though, didn’t come to my reckon that he was homeless.13 In a mini suburb called, Springs is a semi- suburb residing place where most of thepeople working in government departments, majority of whites who owned propertiessince the time of Apartheid government and some residing properties are owned by theMunicipality in the area for rental and municipal employee accommodation with fewshops. It is about 4 kilometers at least from Aliwal North city central business area―at the right hand side when traveling through N6 National route to Johannesburg fromQueenstown via Jamestown.14 Department of Marketing and Communication: University of Fort Hare.

9

him. Thus, the communiqué and literature on methodology first from Dr.Luvuyo Ntombana, Maneoeli Sebabatso and coupled with this assignmentfor Dr. Teresa Conner left me with no choice but to consider two hourlong in-depth interview (also see interview guide attached) with mynow informant. Indeed, (….) is correct to suggest that:

Interviews and observations are part of a trek along the river. [So] …theory and methodology of social anthropology must place certainrequirements on our ethnonography” (ibid. 1982:224)

Although, I did not envisaged; a rather mixed methodological stancein this assignment ― that of, first-hand observation and in-depth interviews.Ellen, (1984: 204) writes: “[a] mixed methods approach might be a goodstarting point for beginning our inquiry” (ibid.). Thus, it is safe tosay then that, I first collected data through observation15 when I firstvisited site of resident of my informant which I refer here as homebut without home ― but, later triggered by the requirements of thisessay; I conducted in-depth interview (also see interview guide attachedhere). The first method though, inevitably made the sampling convenient,though with somewhat theoretical frames of reference in my mind on thequestion of urban life and space; thus the episteme of homelessness isstill a philosophical contestation to me rather than that ofstructural contestation. Hence, in-depth interviews; as “… aparticular kind conversations between the researcher and the interviewthat requires active asking and listening. The process is meaning –making endeavor as a partnership between his or her respondent.” Ofcourse, these may vary in structure (ibid.), but important to note isthat; subsequent to my first-hand observation I conducted my firstconversational in-depth interview based on his life and past space ingeneral. The aim was not to pill out or understand themes in theory,rather to understand life before street and leading to street. WhatEllen (1984: 70) calls a theory and description methodological approach inanthropology. As a student, who somewhat found it difficult to reasonon the questions of homelessness without consulting theory, in mypreparations I leaned heavily on theory. I am aware that, a study ofthis nature could suggest this is mere descriptive anthropologicalstance. However, seen as a mere learning experience this study couldbe better understood. Henceforth then, I planned and organizedanother last session for one hour to understand: life and spacequestion on the street home but without home. Of course, there were

15 Though, only recorded in pictures (Also see pictures attached in AppendixB) at the site and two pages of my reflections of the experience

10

ethical concerns on all of these exercises. Indeed, Ellen (1984) isright to contend that:

If the anthropologist`s laboratory is “the field”, then the subjects ofresearch are real people who act and interact in relation both to eachother and with the ethnographer. Handling them requires such a wide rangeof social skills (i.e. understanding, patience, intuition, subtlety,perceptiveness etc.) … (ibid: 100).

It is therefore, important to “… make the right impression …”(ibid.). This is quite problematic hence to “live as a human beingamong other human beings yet also having to act as an objectiveobserver” (Middleton, 1970: 9 cited in Ellen, 1984 : 100). Theexperience of this nature also thought me that. Thus, this shows theseriousness of ethics in research for both the researcher and that ofthe researched. While, “[i]t has been said many times before thatresearch in social sciences differs radically from that in naturalsciences in that it involves an intimate and special interactionbetween investigator and object of study.” (Ellen, 1984: 87). Whatmatters is the question of lucidly distinguishing oneself between thequestion of insider and outsider field practice in anthropology (ibid.: 87).If viewed in contemporary terms, I was not an insider in this study ― away of exercising social reconstruction. But, because I have noexperience of being homeless. I thus imaged myself as an outsider in thisfield research activity. However, let me note: going to the fielddoes not only “… involve the kind of education which is inevitable inhaving to adapt to new (and often exotic) social and physicalenvironment …; it also generally involves the development of a newsocial personality for the field situation, or a new self-image andsocial projection, and very often profoundly affects the fieldworker`sown values and worldview.” (Ellen, 1984:90). In addition these “… [s]ometimes these effects may be extreme.” (ibid.). The effects offieldwork “… are less speculative but subjectively less important.”(ibid: pg. 90) In my field case ― it’s a shock of life and space neverexperienced ― that of being in your own country but with a home notinhabitable (Also see Appendix B for visual evidence). But beyondthat, its frustrations that one go through when on the field;especially studying a topic of this nature. However, in Joshi`s(1979:78 citied in Ellen, 1984) epistemic experience: “fieldwork wasa period of intellectual and emotional self-examination … [in that] …a fieldworker [had] to ‘suspend his meaning system for the time beingand to understand the people`s meaning system’ (Joshi, 1979: 73 in

11

Ellen, 1984:90). Indeed, a discourse fuelled by the idea that ― ananthropologist should bring theoretical eloquence in the field isadjusted to the notion of listening to data and modifying the thematicschemes. (ibid: 90). This is a similar point that, Professor MonwabisiArchibald Mafeje digested well in his combating of alterity (Mafeje, 2000)field practice in African social discourse. It looks like Mafeje(2000) was right as Raman Unni (1979:70 cited Ellen, 1984:90) recountsthat: “… personal rewards [in fieldwork methodology] are moregeneral.” ― that of, being able to see cultural phenomenon in theirtotal context with excitement. (ibid.). However, “[r]etrospectively, most anthropologists see fieldwork,and particularly their first period of fieldwork, as in theirpsychological and intellectual development.” (Ellen, 1984:90). Thecurrent reason, I saw the first hand orbavation practice as a uniqueexperience in trying to make sense of life and homelessness. But, Ihad to cope. Similarly, the experience in Gullick (1970:124) terms of: “… having to cope withone`s familiar emotions ― boredom, elation, embarrassment,contentment, anger, anxiety and so forth ― in the field, it is alsonecessary to be continually alert , learning new routines and cueswhich highlight previously hidden aspect of a personality. ” (Cited inEllen, 1984:90). Of course, “[t]he discovery of these can beemotionally devastating …” (ibid.). For example, Read (1965: 8) “… wasnot the gorgeous kind and found it difficult to interact in ‘politeand superficial fashion generally expected […]’ of field undertakingwhich is “… preventing […] from having large number of friends”(Ellen, 1984:90). In addition, the fear of “… uncertainty of notknowing what would be expected of him and how he should treat hisinformants.” (pg 90). Thus, this would be view as a “handicap” of theresearcher in the field depending on the notion of building up ‘…personal rapport’ (Ellen, 1984: 90). However, for Read (1965: 8)according to “…. deep and lasting friendships in the field, [―]friendships which had profound effects on his inner development,affecting him the more deeply, … because there seemed to be suchlittle common ground on which to base a personal relationship.”(ibid.90). His immediate social milieu considered, this for Read (1965), issomewhat “… personal inadequacy [which] prevent[ed ...] him frommaking the right response [, thus] experiencing the usual enthusiasmsof most of his acquaintances, [which] was a personal strength thanweakness” (Ellen, 1984:91). Although, in a somewhat different sense,the same could be said about my field experience. In fact, Oberg (1972) is right to contend that, most ethnographersexperience some degree of ‘culture shock’. In that, they must come to

12

terms emotionally with living under quite new conditions, where manyof the things they will have previously taken for granted are missing”(Ellen, 1984:104). Although, I did not spent ample time living withthe informant, this proved to be true in my case. I have to make somekind of adjustments when I first visited the informant in his residingplace (Also see Appendix b). First, although I have seen previous theconditions under which people that are homeless live before, but Inever physically been exposed and experience the situation. Second, Ifound the experience as that which emotionally disturbing due to thesight of inhabitable situation which no human could occupy. In my mindthinking, how my informant is coping which the experience of having tosleep on the ground everyday in an apartment without door and widows.Thirdly, this experience have had some psychological effect, in that Idid not; as I are still struggle to understand a situation wherein aperson goes to sleep without food on the street and with no of hopegetting one in the morning. But, the person lives on. I wandered!Could there be a divine intervention her? As my responded would oftennote: “My god is living with me here” (interview, 2014: 15/09/2014).Understanding the sensitive on matters of faith and religion I decidednot to ask about this divine matter. However, given sufficient periodof conducting this study I could willingly explore the matter. However, this case of coping on the field, another is that of mystatus and negotiating of new value system. Ellen, (1984) says:

Informants, […] will always try to place the fieldworker within theirown framework of social status and values, perhaps even conferring akinship title. Once labeled and located the ethnographers lessthreatening and more human (Ellen, 1984:112).

Whilst, Ellen (1984) warms that, this may in certain instances beproblematic. My case was rather different. In that, by the mere fact,that I have a job and a place to stay. Unlike, my informant who isstruggling to make a living and without home — threaten the ‘status’relationships between myself and informant. As a result, even in myfirst meeting with him, I felt the need16 to give him something warm towear and food to eat for that evening. Ellen, (1984:109) contends:“[g]ift-giving, as a means of creating and cementing relationships

16 I felt psychological guilt. I guess that could be also as a limitation to this study.

13

with informants, is only of benefit if it is done with discretion”. Iwould like to believe that, this field practice in my case was donewith caution ― that is, a genuine giving something to someone who wasin need of it at the time; not for purposes of manipulating databecause I took this experience as a learning activity to betterunderstand a widely neglected question of homelessness. This, I thinkalthough not done consciously, helped to build rapport and relationshipwith the informant. This is evident, as he in return, he offered meApples and banana`s which he collected in his food search dailyactivities. For this reason, I can safely say I have ‘… established asatisfactory status among my informant’ (ibid.113). Needless to say, myinitial role in this research was that of a ‘student’ as Diamond(1970) argued: “[t]he anthropologist cannot always get away with being“a student” (in Ellen, 1984: 113). However, Ellen (1984:113) furthernoted that the roles of the researcher “… emerge from the interplaybetween stranger and host, but although informants are bound to definean ethnographer in terms which are familiar to them [―] theethnographer may also attempt to project a particular image [orpersona] to assist the conduct of research” (ibid.113). I did not bringabout a new image of myself in this research. Although, in my firstencounter I merely presented myself as was just interested personbecause of the interest I recently developed from the reading Iacquitted myself to on street children which the hope of finding anarea of inquiry for my forthcoming MA project. To reiterate, my methodological approach in this study is rootedon the episteme of social reconstruction (Mafeje, 2001). But, at myintellectual level this is impossible without theoretical acquaintancewhich sought to make sense of the phenomenon of homelessness. I drawform the basis assumptions of urban theories (Simmel, 1903; Wirth,1938; Gans, 1962; Fisher, 1995 and Mafeje, 2001 for methodolical andepistemological guide) Thus, in the following section I endeavor topresent my analogy of the study within the pretexts of theory anddescriptive field research paradigm of anthropology (Ellen, 1984: 70).

14

III

Hidden:But not in hiding

I grow up in a structuralized rural setting of uMngomazi sub-district ― next to Ndabakazi located in Nqhamake district few distanceaway from the Butterworth mission station in the Transkei ― theabaNtuland17. My informant, grow up in a farm next to Queenstown18 becausehis father was working there before he secured a house in Burdersdorpand lent it for rental in the 1980s until such a time where thefamily19 had to permanently move to the house in the city. At the time,my informant was 8 years old. The house in the city though was to bepaid up with the money which was to be generated from the cattle20 thathis father left back in the farm. However, my informant recalls: “myfather went back to the farm to collect his cattle so that he can sellthem in order to pay up the house. He was seen as an intruder and gotshot and died. That was, the last time I had a talk with my father whowas God fearing and known as a prophet in the church of Zion” (interview,2014: 15/09/2014). This paved way for the dawn of hardship for afamily which was indeed a small group of strangers in town at thetime. ― a hardship characterized by the lost of the house andstruggle which forced the widow mother with her four children21 toseek greener pastures in the city of Bloemfontein where her familystayed. My respondent is the last born; whom according to him, lifewas not full of “ubunzima”22 (ibid.). According to him, growing up therecould mean he had to live school to look for piece jobs such as thatof gardening, cleaning, plumbing etc. With some of his mother`srelatives being in Aliwal North, he thought of “ukutshaka”23 (ibid.) forthe weekend. Of course, this was possible as he was managing to get17 This is not to suggest that here is belunguland as popularly known. Ofcourse, there is plentiful historiography have proof. 18 A mission site also. This is explained, for insider or outsider methodologicaljustification reasons.19 A Xhosa family which clanship I would not mention for ethical reasons. 20 Cattle, of course being the economic commodity amongst the Xhosa tribe in theEastern Cape. 21 Two daughters and two sons22 Meaning, hardship. 23 Meaning to pay a visit for the weekend and reunite with his mother`s folks.

15

such job in Bloemfontein caring with him money to return back; but,the money was spent24. However, what my informant notes as thefollowing questions where asked:

R: Do you think this town you live is friendly or?I : “I am not welcomed, I don’t know why? They love money!R: Do they love money or if they love money, does that mean you don’t love money?I: “I saw that they want to use me so that I can get money forthem nge fosti”R: By that you mean, your mother’s family relatives you visited for a weekend?I: “Eeeh, bhuti!”R: What do you think about them?I: “Mna! I am thinking about my father only”

In the latter response, a lot of inferences could be deduced.Perhaps first, the notion that, city life creates anonymity andunfriendliness (Wirth, 1938). Thus, fuelling a “… serious negativeconsequences …” (Chirot,1999: 451) due to what my informant wouldconsiders as is lack of ubuntu. But, what is striking me mostly is thefact that it could happen at family level. Second, I am torn apart bythe effects social geography within the spiral expression of social processesthesis. That is, a pre-conceived social construction of socialproblems through space and distance within the pretexts in this caseof Apartment inherited from the system of the past. Thus, fuellingthe inevitable shift in home political- economic affairs of the familyof my respondent. Unless, I have a rather different view of beingunknown and unfriendliness; my view of the place is that of, instructural and the so-called organized manner one have a ratherdifferent way of life which could not all in all necessarily beattributed to the rest of Aliwal North. This is irrespective of othersocial ties viz. kinship, social groupings and status apparatus etc.Loosely, I have somewhat convinced myself that, the place could be aninhabitant of warmth and accommodative people by virtue of structuralsetting and its revamped 25status. However, Springs in Aliwal North Isuspect it is better to think of it within the Wirthian perspective ofurbanization and the city (my observation). Not surprising though, myinformant in our talk would rather have a unique experience.

R: Do you have friends here (in Aliwal North)?24 Reasons withheld.25 The somewhat but not in its full frustration “urban renewal” projecttriggered by the then premier: Development plan linked to the RDP. But,interestingly the IDP is in place but does not first get to be digested at thelevel of the latter citizen.

16

I: “Plenty! But family I don’t want, zinyoka”R: Why?I: “If they don’t like me and I don’t like them too. Plus, theysay I have information and even my mother they don’t want”R: Now that you are no longer living with your family, is there something that you usedto do that you loved?I: “Yes! Its church. It says nhlamezela”R: What do you think that means to you?I: [silence]

Wirth (1938) theorized that: “[t]he lack of primary grouprelations results in anomie, or normlessness.” (Cited in Chirot,1999:451). The case of my respondent is not an exception here.However, important to note though is the fact that what seems to bepuzzlement to me here is the fact urbanization also has serious anddevastation effects of family fabric. As a student of sociology, Iacquitted myself with the idea that family is the first and the mostimportant institution in society. In addition, my informant points outanother significant unit of analysis in urban milieu ― that of,formation of “impersonal secondary group” when conflicts arises in thefamily. This is the area which Fischer (1975) theorized as thepossibilities for people to find others who share the same interestsand life-styles. Thus, this leads to the development of many differentsubcultures within which close ties and kinship many form (i.e. streetdwellers). This is not to suggest that, being on the street andhomeless automatically qualifies one to these secondary groups ― ofcourse, this is heavily dependent on the persona of the person athand. Having said that, often at times these secondary street groupsare stigmatized in many ways viz. glue sniffers, gangs, criminals etc.Here, my interest is where or not this is also evident in the eyes ofmy informant.

R: How you say people see in this community?I: “If you want me to take your belongings I will take them, butif you don’t I will not take them “How you say people see in thiscommunity?R: I see what you mean!R: How the people are treating you here?I: “They are treating me well big time, because it’s been longsince I have been here since 2013 May.”

17

R: Do they often share with you things like food or clothes?I: “Not at all! They say I have to work first then I getsomething to eat and sometimes but not always to wear. They takeas a criminal”R: Do you think you are a criminal?I: “I am not! I wake up every day and find cleaning jobs ateMakuleni and get R10 and sometimes R20. I am not a criminal. Ialso go around a look for old things to sell”R: Don’t you think maybe they see you as a stranger?I: “Hayi tu! Because we are all blacks’ mos!”R: But, do you see them as strangers?I: “I don’t see them as strangers and I don’t know what theythink of me”

Indeed, there is truth in Wirthian though that, often citydwellers take on an unfriendly, impersonal attitude towards fellowhumans (Wirth, 1932). This is an attitude that even my informant hadsomewhat presented based on his experience in coping with thisenviron. In fact, socialized in this setting, my respondent adapted byforce to this situation because he had to live with it anyway. Thus,ensuring the sense of economic self-dependence. But, what make me feelgreat anxiety of compression though, is notion that even that as asomewhat consensual issues my informant has to negotiate everythingincluding space in this communal living. Questions of class relationshave been a long standing debate in society since the advent ofcapitalism as a hegemonic system of life and living experiences. Idoubt if it could be awkward to question questions of class evenwithin the study of homelessness. In other words, every human beingbelongs to a certain class ― that indeed, is a determinant on socialstanding. I therefore felt necessary to reason with my informant onthe questions of class within a perspective of being homeless. Iasked:

R: Do you ever compare yourself with anyone?I: “No!”R: This is not to say you don’t have any class or don’t not belong to any. But, do youthink you belong to any class in this community?I: “No! I don’t belong to any class. I speak to everyone nowmatter how they are.”R: How is life here in Aliwal North?I: “My life generally is not nice here. I struggle so I won`t saybut my life is not nice here. My life is ugly in a big way. I

18

struggle; I ask for food eMakuleni26, I sleep with an emptystomach. Black people are like white people”R: But, I have noticed there are some piece jobs you do. Is that correct?I: “Yes! Njalo bhuti”R: Tell me more.I: “Cleaning, gardening and plumbing.”R: If you don’t mind my question. I see you going to town everyday. What is happeningin town?I: [silence]R: I can sense that, I offended you with that question. I am Sorry. But, do yousometimes feel like you are lost here in Aliwal North?I: “No! my God is within me”R: Are you ok within life here?I: “No! I love a black person. But, the Xhosas are fools all ofthem. They sold us to the abelungu27.R: Mnn! How?I: “Today, I am asking for jobs you see. I ask for jobs everywhere”

The above narrative, bring out about quit complex discourses ashave been theorized in that past and are still matters of scholarlyinterest. First, questions of class relations modern environ, butcould these be uniquely understood within African lenses? Perhaps,that might be a good question but whom other day. I sense though myinformant view of class goes along racial lines as well. This in myopinion would suggest he seemed to be having a problem which both theelite black and the white race at least in the city. Due to time conthe study was limited to explore this notion. Second, there is adominant idea amongst black race ― that of, being mislead by Xhosas tosurrender everything to whites. While the maybe truth or not here;there are contending ideas in historiography about events that shiftedand leapfrogged the AmaXhosa endogenous discourse of life and space tomodern living (Also see Peires, 1987; Mphande, 1991; Ashford, 1991;Guy, 1991; Crais, 1991; Davies, 2007; Stapleton, 1993; Bradford,2008). However, this idea has not found evidence ofjustification. Significantly, my informant here in this essay noted that hislife became deformed by the event of his father being killed becauseof cattle in a farm; and wanted to reclaim them. It can be said that,Georg Simmel (1903) has the point to contend that; serious social and

26 Ibid.27 Meaning white people.

19

communal problems of city life are that of trying to negotiate andmaintaining existence in the social milieu of contesting ideologicalstances of historical through conquest and through hegemonicacculturation of ‘the way of life in urban’ (Wirth 1938) situationwith serious consequences at varying class levels (ibid.). Thus, givingothers social class and status of being; viz. cosmopolites, unmarriedand childless, ethnic villagers, deprived and trapped (Gans, 1962). Myinformant is trapped in the city. Having said that, he was and is ableto be part of at least identifiable ‘subculture’ (Fischer, 1962) whichis continually fuelling is existence in the city: that of, beinghomeless. Though not necessary living with but identified with peoplewho are homeless in the city of Aliwal North. His case; is a casewhich I took serious interested in. But, like any other study I drawup certain conclusions for the preliminary investigation for purposesof my MA studies. Of course, this mini project brought withlimitations also. In fact, the nature of study itself.

IV

Understanding homeless in the cityConclusions and limitations

To understand the so-called homeless is an activity left out inthe cold ― I understand, it may be indeed viewed as a difficult andfrustrating research endeavour. But, my experience here tells me that,this could have been better if it wasn’t for deadlines. To reiterate,my first in this study started when I first registered at Fort HareInstitute for Social and Economic Research. As I acquainted myselfwith theoretical and later methodological stance of the institute ― Ifound something unique that can best assist me in understanding socialmilieu than that which I got from other departments I have studiedthrough and their academic mentorship in the University of Fort Hare.

20

This preliminary field study in urban setting sought to sharpen mymethodological skills in investigating social problems in Africa.However, in the process I have experience some limits. First, livingwithout knowledge of where one is not sleep and gets the next meal isa challenge. I encountered this challenge with my informant which thenfor research purposes can generally be viewed as bribing informants togive the researcher data so that he or she can just complete his worka make theoretical correlations. This was not my intention, but I hadto do it for the purposes of understanding the phenomenon of livinglife without home and family. Second, to gaining access on randomly onpeople with worries of just finding the next meal is not easyactivity, one have to negotiate through. Though, I have argued abovethat; I conducted first-hand observation even before I was assignedthis task, the question of informed consent (Also see it attached) camelater in my mind when I had to conduct in-depth interviews on thesite. Thirdly, by the very nature of building trust and friendshipwith informant in the field, my informant at first visited myapartment occasionally but late frequently for breakfast and supperbefore departing for his apartment. This I think was useful inbuilding rapport with my informant. Although, sometimes during eveningmy respondent would could under the influence. Thus, this delayed thisfield inquiry. Nevertheless, willing to participate the following daybecause his deeply keen to reunite with his mother in Free Sate. I didnot reject that feeling at it is against African ethos but mostimportantly against research ethics. However, the conclusion that could be drawn this is on one handthat; questions of homeless in the city on the street are deeplyembedded at least in this study on social structural disorientation ofthe past and present. The experiences of the past human movementcontributing to homelessness. These experiences are largely politicalin most cases. Unaware, my informant and his family also went throughsuch experiences. These, in my view would suggested that he is not theonly one who went through such; but many who are living in povertythrough may not be homeless like him went through such experiences.For now, it may be safe to say that, life and space in the city isshaped by past experiences of political significance thus having anyimpact on individual livelihood of people on varying level ofexistence and of making sense of life in society. Thus, factored bythe past, in the present thereof by day to day social politics ofnegotiating life and space with fellow communal members of thecommunity. In that, one has to find foot in order to live and survivein the city that is clouded with anonymity and unfriendly human kindof class relations who are human but without humanity in their sanity.

21

BibliographyAshforth, A. (1991). ‘The Xhosa Cattle Killing and the Politics ofMemory’.

Sociological Forum, 6 (3):581-592.Bradford, H. (2008). Akukho Ntaka Inokubhbha Ngephiko Elinye (No Bird

Can Fly on One wing): The ‘Cattle-Killing Delusion’ and BlackIntellectuals, c1840-1910, African Studies, 67:2, 209—232.

Blumber, H. (1969). Symbolic Interactionism: Perspectives and Methods. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall.

Chirot, D. (1999) ‘The Changing Social world’ in W. LaVerne Thomas, (4th Eds).

Sociology: The study of human relationships. Holt, Rinehart & Winston-Harcourt Brace & Company:London.

Crais, C. (1991). ‘Peires and the Past’. South African Historical Journal. 25(0):236 — 240.

Diamond, Norma. 1970. “Fieldwork in a Complex Society: Taiwan”. Being anAnthropologist: Fieldwork in Eleven Cultures, Edited by George D. Spindler. New York: Holt.

Davies, S. B. (2007). ‘Raising the Dead: The Xhosa Cattle-Killing andthe

Mhlakaza-Goliat Delusion’. Journal of Southern African Studies. 33(1):19-41.Ellen, R. F. (1984). Ethnographic Research: A Guide to General Conduct. London and

New York: Academic Press.Fisher, C. S. (1995). The Subcultural Theory of urbanism: A Twentieth –year

Assessment. American Journal of Sociology. 101(3):543 577.− Fitzpatrick, S. , Kemp, P. and Klinker, S. (2000). Single homelessness: An overview

of research in Britain. Bristol: The Policy Press.Gans, H. (1962). The urban villagers: Group and class in the life of Italian –

Americans. Gloncoe, NY:Free Press.Guy, J. (1991). ‘A Landmark, Not a Breakthrough’. South African Historical

Journal. 25 (0):227—231.HomelessWatch, (2014). Support for Single homles people in England. Annual

Review:Homeless Link: England. Mafeje, A. (1971). The Ideology of ‘Tribalism’. The Journal of Modern African Studies .

9(02):253-261Mafeje, A. (2001). Anthropology in post-independent Africa: End of an era and the

problems of self-redefinition. Heirich BÖll Foundation: Nairobi: Kenya.

22

Middleton, J., 1970, The Study of the Lugbora: Expectation and Paradox in Anthro-pological Research. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston

Mead, G. (1934). Mind, self and society. Chichago, IL:Chicago University ofPress. Mphande, L. (1991). ‘Review Essay: Cattle-Killing asResistance: The Dead

Will Arise’ Reconsidered’. Research in African Literatures. 22(3):171—181.Peires, J. G. (1989). The Dead Will Arise: Nongqawuse and the Great Xhosa

Cattle-Killing Movement of 1856-7.Johannesburg: Ravan Press.Stapleton, T. J. (1993). ‘Reluctant Slaughter: Rethinking Maqoma'sRole in

The Xhosa Cattle-Killing (1853-1857)’. The International Journal of AfricanHistorical Studies. 26 (2):345-369.

Simmel, G. (1903). “Metropolis and Mental Life”. In Bridge and Watson,S. (eds).

The Blackwell City Reader. Oxford and Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Teshome-Bahiru, W & Negash-Wossene, J. (2007). ‘Anthropological Field Researches

in the 21st Century: Scope, Challenges and Ethics.’ Kamla-Raj: Anthropologist Special. (3). 7 ― 18.

The Bill of Rights of the Republic of South Africa. (1996). Government Gazette (No. 17678). Wirth, L. (1938). Urbanism as a Way of Life. The American Journal of Sociology,

44(1): 1 24.−

− Ends -

23