Raw Life, New Hope 

Life history research aims to provide the reader with an in-depth analysis of the life of the person in which the author of the book has interviewed. This is done through the process of conducting interviews, asking participants to keep record of their daily activities as well as spending some time with the individuals that are being interviewed (Tierney and Lanford 2019: 2).

Fiona Ross is an anthropologist who did her own life history research from the year 1991-2004 (Ross 2010: 3), she took her work and wrote a book called Raw Life, New Hope. In this book she mainly focuses on the lives of those who lived in an area known as ‘the park’. She writes about all the challenges residents faced with regards to proper housing conditions due to the laws passed down by apartheid government. When she first arrives, she notes that the residents were staying in squatter camps, it was almost impossible to believe that they would one day escape the terrifying realities these residents faced (Ross 2010: 20). The author focuses on the changes that occurred over the years. While she conducted her research, she was mostly concerned with the people and difficulties they faced before and after they were granted houses. This essay will critically discuss the government and the developer viewed households in ‘the park’, the realities of the residents and the reasons why residents felt disoriented when they moved to formal houses in ‘the village’.

Life before the park

The living conditions of the individuals who lived in the squatter camps, when Fiona Ross first started her research, were appalling. The basic needs of these individuals had not been met (Ross 2010: 20). When the author first started her research, she mentions how individuals were constantly facing the battle of one day being forcefully removed from the piece of land they called home. This was simply because people who lived in the bush (the name of the area that these individuals occupied before proper housing was built) owned no rights to the land they were occupying (Ross 2010: 20).

Residents often dreamt of one day owning a place they could call a house that was made out of concrete walls and would allow them to have family over without feeling a sense of shame because of the living conditions they were currently facing(Ross 2010: 21). A home that has basic electricity and water. After apartheid, plans were set in motion to have land bought and to build proper houses for people that resided in bush. This for some members was a dream come true, but for others it was the beginning of yet another battle of owning a house based on the laws passed down by the state.

How the developers viewed households in the park

Planners, developers as well as community leaders came together to try an establish a way forward as to how this new community that they are about to build will come about (Ross 2010: 77). A private property was secured, one that had high maintenance security. It was agreed upon that if houses were to be built on a part of the land, they had to fulfil the purpose of what this new community will be about. One that is safe and secure, one that will require a change in mindsets, which will therefore construct a new social environment.

Members of the bush community lacked resources and were therefore thought to not have any idea on how to operate a fully furnished household. It was decided that the only way individuals can survive and stick to the goals set out by those who negotiated funding to have houses built on this land, they would be a need to be educated on the basic ways of operating a fully furnished house, on the responsibilities needed when one owns a house. Developers idea of a proper household was one in which every person that occupied a shack in bushconsisted of a ‘single unit family’ (Ross 2010: 77). One house for every family member. There was an assumption that because of this simple definition of what defined family, the household structures will be built in a way that it occupies a single family unit however that view of a household ignored the realities the residents were currently facing.

The state view on households in the park

The state was aware of the challenge’s residents may have faced due to the laws that were passed down during apartheid years, how these laws may have shaped the social structures that existed in bush (Ross 2010: 77).

The state saw fit to establish new laws that would be fair and just to everyone who could claim a house. A household that has a husband and a wife, or a couple that lived together for long term or having children that were related to whomever wants to claim a house and will benefit the child in the long run (Ross 2010: 78). These laws aim to fit most of the categories that were evident in the community with regards to family relations and who could claim a house.

Realities of residents

Residents have long dreamt of living in a home that has concrete walls, one that is able to sustain a basic family structure (Ross 2010: 76). With electricity, water, and adequate sanitation. Some of these residents lived in shacks all their lives and have no knowledge on what it means to own a proper house. Some have lost connection with family members, due to the judgement they often received because of their living conditions. Other members faced jail time and found it difficult to go into the world and secure a job, to earn money to improve their living conditions (Ross 2010: 27). The laws passed down by the state, of who could rightfully claim and own a house stirred up the beginning of a decision-making process. Many families consisted of members who were not biologically related for example if a man and a woman stayed together and one of them had a child, the child would automatically form a parental relationship with their parents’ partner (Ross 2010: 77).  Bush was a community, moving to another area was a big step that some were willing to take because they have had enough of the challenges they faced in bush, of those challenges was privacy and space, something that residents could not escape from due to the way the shacks were closely built next to one another (Ross 2010: 25). Ironically, the lack of privacy the members experienced is the very thing that made the community what it was, they shared laughter, joy, and sadness, one member mentioned how everyone knew everyone’s business. The idea of what a community is, is different from the idea developers had in the community they wanted to reconstruct.

Moving was not the only factor that was making residents feel uneasy about leaving the place they called home for a lifetime. The laws passed down by the state, stirred up the process of decision making. Fiona Ross noted (2010: 82) how marriage had now become a priority to members, it was now viewed as something one could use to get a house rather than a lifelong commitment. Decisions on who really mattered in their lives had to be made, which was not easy. Some household consisted of children who were not even their own, legal battles would be a thing that residents needed to engage in to secure a house to the rightful dependent (Ross 2010: 78).

Why Residents felt disorientated

Noise, pollution, the deposing of waste on the sides of the railway which left a smell the was unique to that area, were many reasons stated that made individuals long for a proper house, one that will make it impossible to hear what goes on in their neighbours house however those were the memories that residents longed for once they moved to the village. Members felt a sense of community, a feeling of togetherness when they lived in shacks. Moving to the village left many members feeling confused, one described how the way the houses were built was a literal explanation of the confusion they experienced. The houses were too spaced out and looked the same, everything was suddenly big and felt apart, even friendships grew apart, everything seemed different (Ross 2010: 67). Everyone seemed to mind their own business, when conflict arose, members were not aware, it was kept within the walls of each family household.

There was no longer that feeling of oneness, a common feeling, there were new people who moved into the village, who had different circumstances, and often residents could not relate to one another. It was a new environment, a new beginning, members had to adapt and let go of what they used to know as they were transitioning to this new phase in their lives.

Conclusion

Adriansen (2010:2) states ‘that life history interviews give a broader perspective of the lives of those being interviewed’. Developers and the state had their own view of what makes a household and saw fit to construct laws that will help them decide who is able to claim a house. Residents were also faced with realities that made it slightly difficult to come to a proper decision of who they regard as dependants or close family relatives. The sense of community they once felt when residing in shacks, was now a thing of the past. Residents felt disorientated, things were now different for them, new members with different circumstances were now also part of this new community. Fiona Ross got a clear perspective of the challenges these residents encountered over the years, the housing that the residents were once dreaming of became a reality and they were given a chance to build their lives once again, however the realities these residents faced remain part of their lives.

 

Referencing:

 

Adriansen, HK. 2010. ‘Life – history interviews: on using timeline’. Accessed 27    2020, https://pure.au.dk/ws/files/45143513/Timeline_interviews_Qualitative_Studies.pdf.

Ross, F. 2010. Raw Life, New Hope. Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press.

Tierney, WG and Lanford, M. 2019. Life History Methods. London: SAGE  Publications Ltd.