Conviviality Is Not Enough: A Communication Perspective to the City of Difference

Abstract

This article interrogates the ways in which urban communication enables or prevents politics of conviviality in the multicultural city. A multimethod, primarily qualitative study in a London neighborhood exposed extensive communicative fragmentation along ethnic and class lines. Does such communicative separation lead to segregation? Is togetherness ever possible? Rather than a togetherness/separation binary, our study revealed a dialectic that rests upon diverging distribution of modes of communication in the city: Media often separate urban dwellers and face‐to‐face communication brings them together in momentary but important association. This dialectic and its various incarnations give rise to a spectrum of politics of conviviality: civility through Othering; civility through negotiation of We‐ness and Otherness; and politics of civic engagement and solidarity.

European Metropolis In Context Of Globalization And Localization Of Modern Political Processes

“…Preserving their particularity, the cultures of different ethnic groups do not disappear, do not assimilate, but they have the opportunity to develop and survive. (Georgiou, 2017) https: //dx.doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2019.03.02.50 Corresponding Author: A. B. Egoreichenko Selection and peer-review under…”

Conviviality as a politics of endurance: the refugee emergency and the consolations of artistic intervention

“…We see his performances as precisely enacting reflexive conviviality-that is, provoking self-reflection about the limitations and unintended hidden injuries inflicted by relationships of togetherness-in-difference especially when they are emptied out of any political commitment. In this light, Torres Tama's position on conviviality shares similarities with Georgiou's (2016) position that "conviviality is not enough," and it is merely a precondition to the higher value of political engagement. As such, his performances evoke the political critique of the politics of endurance (Feldman 2015).…”

“…whether they manifest through social bonding in rituals of sharing vulnerabilities (Puar, 2009), the empathetic perspective-taking they invite from people (Gilroy, 2006;Papastergiadis, 2007), or the civic connections that form a basis for political solidarity (Georgiou, 2016).…”

Conviviality and parallax in David Olusoga’sBlack and British: A Forgotten History

“…Viewed through Žižek's (2006) parallax view, examples of cultural inclusion and exclusion can be read in such a way that 'It is not that one disproves the other, but that their mutually contradictory character precedes and makes possible their materialization and meaning' (Elerick, 2014: 209 [italics added]). In this sense, there is a cultural acceptance of the contradictions with identity (Žižek, 1989) and an agreement with the asymmetry that belies cultural inclusion, exclusion and difference (Georgiou, 2017;Noop, 2017). By viewing cultural difference through a parallax view, the 'gap' -which sustains such inclusion/exclusion, conceived as 'antagonistic struggle' (Žižek, 2011: 53) -is neither relativized nor sublated in the vein of postmodern cultural relativism or liberal tolerance; but instead, is transited via the crossing of the gap itself.…”