Teresa Caldeira's pioneering study of fear, crime, and segregation in São Paulo poses essential questions about citizenship and urban change in contemporary democratic societies. Focusing on São Paulo, and using comparative data on Los Angeles, she identifies new patterns of segregation developing in these cities and suggests that these patterns are appearing in many metropolises.
It's not that I disagree with everything she says (I don't), it's just that I think her general approach is severely weakened by a lack of analysis. She presents a lot of people's opinions from interviews, and a lot of statistical data, but essentially just concludes that Brazil is messed up and segregated and their screwed up segregation and particular vision of justice (or vengeance, as she puts it) is at the root of their problems with crime. And I don't agree with that. And I think if she's going to argue that, she needs a hell of a lot more analysis to convince me. There is too much general disapproval and essentialist finger pointing (really? running red lights means a society has no respect for civil rights?) and not enough respect for the opinions she disagrees with.
It's a long book, but the writing is easy to read (perhaps partly because of the general lack of analysis) and not too tough to tackle.
I should mention that I do agree with one of her premises that the physical separation via walls of classes does make democracy, equal rights, etc. pretty damn difficult. If you're looking for a book to support that argument, she's got plenty of stuff you can use, I just wouldn't recommend it for anyone looking for a deeper explanation.
I'm reading this some time after it was published so the material might be a bit dated but the way the study was presented was still very valuable and the issues she brought up was still important to think about.
This is a great analysis of violence and crime, perceptions of security, inequality, and more. But the discussion of the role and place of domestic violence is wholly inadequate.
amazing, beautiful call for public anthropology i.e. the anthropologist as public scholar and change agent. it's long, but super accessible. sao paolo looks a lot like los angeles!!!