Urban Kampong

Could We Reconcile this Duality?

Adinda Restu LARASATI. Institut Teknologi Bandung (ITB). adinda.restu@students.itb.ac.id

gemerlap toko-toko di kota dan kumuh kampungku dua dunia yang tak pernah bertemu. (the gleaming of urban stores and cruddiness of my kampung the two worlds would never meet) -Widji Thukul, Catatan, 1987

t has been three years that I have lived sideby-side with people of kampong Tamansari in Bandung, the city where I go to university. As

that kampung kota is appropriately the place where dualism between kampong and city reconcile. The vast development of cities creates an image of modernity amongst the city residents. Part of this society can adapt to the modern culture quite well, while the other cannot catch up with the fast changes (Danisworo, et al, 1996:102). Kampong is considered underdeveloped because of its limited ability in terms of economy and education. Murray (1991) argues that kampong is not an entity that is able to plan a strategy but it is a community of people who tries to adapt with the urban situation, and each day more and more people come to collaborate and live there. The inability to adapt with the quickly expanding city creates strong dualism between kampong and the city. Differences in imagery between kampong and city are summarized by Sihombing (2004:6) as the differences between qualitative values, such as nostalgia, humanity, community, and urbanity, with quantitative values, i.e. measurable progress of growth or development.
1

a kampung kota in Bandung, Indonesia, kampong Tamansari represents conditions of the informal sector in a city that is surrounded by formality of the emerging city of Bandung. I wake up every morning to the sound of chirping birds, crowing roosters, with honking horns and whirring cars as background noise. The view I am used to seeing are shanty houses with rusty iron sheeting, silhouetted by elegant buildings. The elders in this kampong are everywhere to be seen, giving smiles to the random person who passes by. Younger people in working age scatter to the corners of the city, whether working as parking attendants, street hawkers, or street singers. The city employs them so they can afford to live here, while the kampong gives identity to this city. As Sihombing (2004:9) states: Kampungs need something for their everyday life which kota provides; and kampungs provide something which kota needs. I believe

Kampung Tamansari, Bandung Photo by: Adinda Restu Larasati, 2013

During its development, the term kampung kota is used to describe any settlement that is similar with kampong in villages but exists in a city (Setiawan, 2010:5). The dwellers of urban kampong build their own homes in the city with the self-help system. Regrettably, their settlement still adopts the vernacular architecture of kampong that is designed without any planning and only pays little attention to urban context and regulations. They are also lowering their quality of life. Krauss (1994) defines urban kampong as settlement areas whose inhabitants hold lower social-economic status and lower standard of houses. Urban kampongs are often considered as the slum section of a city. Despite the far from ideal condition of urban kampong, its survival has made a unique identity to Indonesian cities. The organic development of urban kampong creates unpredictable patterns that enrich the spatial experience within a city. Each urban kampong will have different character from one another according to the background of its people and their ability to adapt. Nowadays, urban kampongs face serious problems that threaten its existence. Since World War II, there has been a spread of new paradigm of architecture
2

and urban planning, which is intended to raise the Modernist movement transformation to the design of cities. Mass industrialization led to city as a machine for living, to cite the term coined by Le Corbusier. With market-oriented development, cities tend to ignore urban kampongs that in fact have the potential as economic, social, and cultural assets for a city. The construction of commercial buildings erodes the existence of urban kampongs slowly. While it is gradually more suppressed, some people from the villages keep coming into the city and build their settlement in urban kampongs. Rahmat Djabaril, one of several urban kampong activists in Bandung, believes that these urbanized people are becoming more pragmatic in living (Djabaril, 2013). Their settlement area becomes an extension of the urban kampong area, which are mostly situated along river banks, railway tracks, or any illegal zone that is not intended to be settlement territory. Djabaril (2013) also argues that this situation uproots kampong culture more and more because the citizens of urban kampong are in the state of mental transition, between urban and kampong mentality. This condition should be saved through urban revitalization.

Kampung Kota: Another Duality

Concerning urban revitalization, there is dualism in the process of restoring the function of an urban area. Revitalization is a series of physical and nonphysical improvements (Soemardi, 2013). The physical improvement in urban kampong includes rearranging settlement zones, upgrading the quality of sub-standard dwellings, and other physical design interventions. Because the nature of its people who are accustomed to do self-help construction, the refinement of physical aspect should involve the citizens of an urban kampong. The Vice-Governor of Jakarta, Basuki Purnama or popularly called Ahok, argues that participation of the citizen themselves are important to build the concept that suites them (Purnama, 2013). This way, they are expected to have more of a sense of belonging to their living environment. Non-physical improvements cover the development of economy, cultural, and social aspects.Revitalization of non-physical aspects is a way to reinforce the identity of a kampong. Awaking the urban kampong peoples consciousness of their potential by doing creative actions or experiments is an important step to carry out (Djabaril, 2013). In one of his guest lectures, Professor Danisworo (2013) states that many urban people are not urbanized in mentality. They are not able to cope with the progressive city life and instead become kampungan (backward). It is important for urban kampong citizens to recognize the potential within them and map their position in the city. There have been several remarkable attempts in Bandung that have improved the older kampongs into new thematic kampongs, such as Kampung Kreatif (Creative Kampong) in Dago Pojok and Kampung Akustik (Acoustic Kampung) in Cicadas. Both physical and non-physical improvements are equally important. Similar to the dualism of body and soul, the physical and non-physical aspects of urban kampong support each other to form a powerful entity that can thrive and be in harmony with the citys emerging development. One of the successful examples of urban kampong revitalization in Indonesia is Kampong Code in Jogjakarta.

Kampung Code, Jogjakarta Photo by: Khalilan Lambangsari, 2013

In the beginning, Kampong Code was a dirty slum situated along the riverbanks of Kali Code. People who lived there were mostly garbage scavengers, beggars, thieves, or street singers. In 1984, this settlement area was swept away by flash flood. A Catholic priest named Y.B. Mangunwijaya (referred to as Romo Mangun) came to assist. But the multitalented Romo Mangun (who was also an architect, a poet, and a writer) felt moved to redesign the settlement by building new dwellings made of wood and woven bamboo walls. Each house was painted with an ornament or scenery of Jogjakarta, according to the character of each dweller. Romo Mangun also improved the standards of infrastructure and designed public spaces, such as a citizen hall or house yards that face towards Kali Code. All of this revitalization effort was conducted together with the citizens of Kampong Code. Moreover, Romo Mangun improved the mentality of Kampong Code dwellers so they could get more decent jobs nearby, like traders or store employees. Romo Mangun taught the citizens to manage their financial income so that they can improve the quality of their own lives. As a result, Kampong Code revitalization,

along with Y.B. Mangunwijaya and the citizens received international recognition by attaining the Aga Khan Award for Architecture in 1992. In conclusion, I believe that reconciling kampung and kota is not a vain effort. The strong dualism between city and kampong in fact will create a harmonious symbiotic entity that completes each other. Setiawan (2010:8) states that a city can only live as long as kampongs exist, while a kampong exists because it lies within the city setting. Cities in Indonesia are cities of kampongs, its structure or body is in city form, but its substance or soul is kampong, with all its advantages and disadvantages. Surely the argument for reconciling dualism is easy to state. The realization of this statement needs serious efforts from all of stakeholders: the kampong citizens, other city citizens, the local government, as well as architects and urban designers. These stakeholders have to integrate their roles in order to synergize the collaborative effort. To answer the question raised in the title of this essay, I optimistically say: Yes. Yet another question arises. Would we do it?

...check mate?

The Chess Board of Kampung Kota Illustration by: Adinda Restu Larasati, 2013

References
Danisworo, Mohammad, Ahmad R. Soemardi, et al. Jakarta: Urban Transformation and Mutation. On Diseno.UIA Barcelona (1996): 98-105. Print. Danisworo, Muhammad. Peran Perencanaan dan Perancangan Kota dalam Meningkatkan Kualitas Ruang Hidup. Urban Architecture course. Institut Teknologi Bandung, Bandung. 22 April. 2013. Lecture. Djabaril, Ahmad. Interview. 17 May. 2013. Fauzanni, Muhammad Zamzam, et al. Kota Kampung Kita. Jogyakarta: Yayasan Pondok Rakyat, 2003: 57-87. Print. Pramono, Tri Adi. Kampung Code. jogjatrip. com. Jogjatrip, n.d. Web. 25 May. 2013. Setiawan, Bakti. Kampung Kota dan Kota Kampung: Tantangan Perencanaan Kota di Indonesia. Pidato Pengukuhan Jabatan Guru Besar dalam Ilmu Perencanaan Kota Universitas Gadjah Mada (2010). Web. 13 May. 2013. < http://mgb. ugm.ac.id/media/download/pidato-pengukuhan. html?download=304&start=215> Sihombing, Anthony. The Transformation of Kampungkota: Symbiosys between Kampung and Kota, A Case Study from Jakarta. Department of Architecture, University of Indonesia (2004). Web. 25 May. 2013. < http://www.housingauthority.gov. hk/hdw/ihc/pdf/phhkt.pdf> Soemardi, Ahmad R. Preservation and Conservation. Urban Architecture course. Institut Teknologi Bandung, Bandung. 8 April. 2013. Lecture. Thukul, Wiji. Catatan. Aku Ingin Jadi Peluru. crossfire-net.blogspot.com. Crossfire Netcafe, n.d. Web. 25 May. 2013. Ahok Beberkan Perbedaan Bedah Kampung dan Kampung Tematik. news.liputan6.com. Liputan 6, 19 March. 2013. Web. 25 May. 2013.