This paper permeates the dichotomous boundaries of Firstworld -
Thirdworld, Tradition-Modern by delving into the making and meaning of these
terms. Abu-Lughod argues that tradition is not a product but a process, and
this process is the same in different parts of the world. She calls for a
distinction in understanding 'traditional' and something newly created that is
yet to be named.
Abu-Lughod identifies three ways in which the dichotomies of
Firstworld - Thirdworld narratives are breaking down in the social and economic
spheres: First, with more 'developing' countries being classified as
'developed' (most famously Japan); Second, as the congruence between geographic
location and the social formation fades, dichotomous terms like colonizers -
colonized, east- west, north- south are rapidly becoming obsolete (Is Australia
South and East?); Third, with the changing International Labor laws it is hard
to classify a country let alone a region or a continent into one particular
group. Lughod argues that these changes in the economic sphere are reflected in
the built environment thus problematizing our understanding of what is
'traditional' and 'modern' architecture.
It was proposed in the early 20th century that the processes
of urbanization, industrialization, and modernization could be the determining
factors to divide the world two distinct groups. But these lines are
increasingly getting blurred. New meanings are created for 'traditional' as the
third world id adapting the practices of the first world. Traditional rugs made
by an African tribe that depicts war tanks and bombs, Bedouin music tapes that
bring together traditional Egyptian horse dance music with European pop tunes,
and vernacular self-built houses around the world that are built using ubiquitous
cement blocks are but a few examples. Abu-Lughod asks two questions to
understand the agencies involved in preserving traditions: whose tradition do
we preserve, and why are certain traditions favored over others. She contends
that the criteria used to determine whose tradition has to be upheld can only
be indeterminate because it eventually obtains a political narrative (ex: which
layer of history should archeologists blast, and at which layer do they stop).
Also, certain traditions or vernacular practices are favored by modern states
simply because they can control and impose ways of life that fits with their
ideology (ex: traditional Islamic quarters that segregates the sexes)
By calling upon John Turner's concept of 'traditioning' (verb as
opposed to a noun) which says that attention has to be paid to the process
through which 'tradition' is created and not the product (traditional) itself,
Abu-Lughod proposes three identifying criteria to understand 'traditional’.
One, in a traditional product there is a link between the maker and consumer,
in that somebody unrelated to and with little empathy to the consumer does not
produce the product for profit. Two, traditional things have symbolic meaning
and emotional content which is shared by both makers and consumers. And three,
traditioning is a collective process where houses/objects are collectively
built, collectively interpreted and collectively consumed.
With changing definitions of 'tradition' and the disappearing
boundaries between first and third worlds, Abu-Lughod argues that there are
commonalities in the ways 'traditioning' happens at both places. She takes
examples from both first world (Harlem, NewYork) and third word (Cairo) where
there was a need to creatively re-use old buildings that had symbolic and
emotional value to the society. Both in Harlem and Cairo, she writes, the
solution to renewing historic buildings that were abandoned in the city center
was similar. Thus showing the disappearing dichotomies between the worlds.
