ABSTRACT
Chittagong is the second largest city in Bangladesh, after the capital, Dhaka, and has a population of several million. As a port city, Chittagong has vast numbers of lower-strata labourers. They and their families support the city from below, and in this sense they are among the most typical city dwellers.1 This chapter deals with cases of people who live and work in this city. All the interviewees are migrants from rural villages, and have thus experienced both rural and urban life. Therefore, images of the city and urban life can be expected to emerge from such narratives, particularly from those who have experienced life in the city.2 Further, their views reflect the comparative perspective that contrasts the urban (life) against the rural (life). The urban ‘lower strata’ in this chapter is generally composed of people living in a Bangladeshi city – in this case Chittagong – and working in jobs typically belonging to the informal sector. The author conducted interviews with many people, but this chapter presents mainly excerpts from the narratives of three individuals. They are Haydar, Hakim and Khokon, all of whom are Muslim men. Haydar (aged about 50) is a riksa (rickshaw) painter, and Hakim (aged about 60) is the owner of a riksa garage – he owns many riksas and a private riksa company. Hakim was originally a riksa painter, and Haydar was his apprentice. By contrast, Khokon (in his mid-forties) is a cook who prepares dishes ordered by his clients for parties. He has no relationship to the other two men.3 Complimenting these accounts, some narratives from other interviewees will also be presented. The ‘oral history’ method is employed in this chapter in order to allow the voice of the person concerned to be heard.4 Broadly speaking, many urban studies tend to pay attention to those people whose voices are loudest, and to ignore or under-estimate the voices, feelings or thoughts of the people who belong to what might be called the lower strata of society, or to the silent majority. For various reasons, their voices struggle to reach the ear of the hearer. By contrast, those studies that use the oral history method are exemplary in setting out to hear the voices of the people and to correct the bias of previous studies.5
