O, sweet confusion

The past few days I have been doing a lot of interviews, with engineers, activists and average citizens, trying to get more of a feel for the issues surrounding the metro. Yesterday I was finally able to get into the Metro offices (after 3 failed attempts and a lot of waiting in the lobby) to speak with Vasanth Rao, the General Manager of the BMRCL. Half way through our meeting he called in about 5 other people for me to meet, which was cool but also kind of weird.

It was odd talking to all of them. Mr. Rao was very thoughtful in his speaking, very informative and professional. Occasionally he would take these very long pauses in the middle of a sentence, then continue on. When he called in his two colleagues, they spent the first 15 minutes complimenting each other (and themselves) and talking about how great the Metro was. In fact, Mr. Rao went on about this more than anyone else. He kept calling it “my train” and “my metro”, very possessive. And very proud, the “only solution for Bangalore.” He was so sincere and so convincing I kept thinking, ‘wow, this can’t be so bad after all’ which was very odd, considering I’ve spent the past (almost) 2 weeks only hearing about how bad it is and all the things wrong with it. But the way he talked about it made it seem like it really was the best solution. And he kept managing to address all of the things I was wondering about but didn't voice – about compensation and displacement and environmental degradation – he had an answer for everything. And he really had me convinced (minus the ‘take it with a grain of salt; skepticism that never seems to leave me) that it was the best choice and he made it seem like they really had considered everything. He talked about feeder systems and public transport connectivity and compensation for the poor – he even gave two “pulled up by their bootstraps (with the help of the BMRCL)” stories about 2 girls whose lives had been completely changed for the better because the metro displaced them (I do find this part hard to believe).

Between them, I really do (did?) believe that they had considered everything. Mr. Shivananda, one of the engineers of the project, kept saying, “you can create from destruction” or something like that and they all followed the mantra of “sacrifices must be made,” (in the name of progress, I assume). It is all very confusing – what was (is?) the right choice for this city? For the people in it? Who does this project actually benefit? Is ESG just exaggerating all the bad stuff (I find it hard to believe) or is the BMRCL just sugarcoating, or speaking from a place of privilege and selective story choosing (those girls being point and case)? What were the alternatives? Did the government really consider them? Why did they do what they’ve done, really? Do they really think they’re doing the right thing for the city? Are they? They seem to have all the answers, but when I think about it, I have counter answers and examples that I could have shot right back at them. This work makes me feel like an investigative journalist, like there’s more of a story here. But will it be the one I think it is? This issue is so nuanced and complex and there’s so much more to it and I’m afraid I won’t be able to get to all of it. Everyone has a perspective, there’s no such thing as an objective opinion. Dude.

I think it boils down to different people having different visions for the city – different ideas of how it should be, what it should look like, and who it should be for. ESG and friends want a green, eco-friendly, tree-lined, pedestrian and cycle-friendly place with fewer private vehicles, more buses and no metro (or at least one that has a better route and is more practical and affordable). BMRCL and friends want a city that is modern, fast, efficient, sleek and up to the standards of Singapore and Hong Kong in terms of saavy, sauve and aesthetics. They want modernization. They want a high-class structure that will cater to a high-class community (everyone should be ‘moving up’, as they say). Is there a way to merge them? Why don’t governments here (and everywhere for that matter) and the people they're supposed to represent communicate and cooperate more with each other? Is it all really just about competing interests (personal gain vs for the common good – which ironically line up in ways that benefit very few people anyways)? I feel like there has to be a better solution. A better way. But that it ultimately comes down to a ‘that’s just the way the world works’ sort of argument and I go to bed feeling very confused and frustrated and depressed. What is going to happen to this beautiful city? Will Metro really solve things? Will it really ruin them? What would be better? What can we (I? Anyone?) do now? I am so sad to meet people who have been pushed out of their homes with no say, who’ve lost business, who can barely navigate the roads, who were squatters who lost their homes, to see trees that will be cut and imagine the thousands that have already been ripped down, to see greenery and life and living beauty being replaced by cement right in front of my eyes – but people do seem to want this metro. They want their private cars and two wheelers and wider roads and a modern city. Except for the people who are suffering the consequences of these wants. It really is the whole “not if it’s in my backyard” syndrome that so many people have cited to me. So what is the alternative? Can anything (anyone) be saved or spared? Or does it really all have to be sacrificed “for the greater good,” so to speak? Would the alternatives ESG and other groups presented, really have been better? Is the government or the rich losing land instead of the poor really even possible?

I know that part of me is just a hopeless romantic when it comes to this stuff – a classic case. I hate seeing all of the pieces of india I love best going away and being replaced by imported, damaging and 'sleeker' alternatives. I hate seeing all of this beauty and authenticity and uniqueness and difference from US and other ‘developed countries’ going away so fast. The India my dad and his brothers and sisters knew, even the india I grew up coming to see, not 20 years ago, is disappearing before my eyes. I hate seeing cities destroyed one day and feel like really, it’s being re-created the next. What is right and wrong in this situation?! Is it even possible that it’s that simple? I know it’s not. But I’m still frustrated and I can’t make up my mind and I find myself asking what the good of this research I’m doing is anyways. What can come from it? What can I possibly even hope to do?

So that’s where I am now; wondering what good is it anyways but unable to stop because it’s just so freakin interesting. I tell you, who ever though mass transit could be so damn depressing?