Page 12 - Teste nec

ment, the local business community, journalists, architects, envi-
ronmental advocates, university students and citizens with a general
curiosity in urbanism and urban politics. His talk was a dramatic nar-
rative of urban transformation; a powerful — yet simplistic — story
in which he claimed to have radically transformed Bogotá thanks to a
series of small urban interventions and policies focused on improving
public space, public transportation and bicycle infrastructure. While
anyone familiar with Bogotá and Colombian politics would know
that decentralization and democratization processes in Colombia as
well as the role of previous Bogotá mayors played a crucial role in the
37
[37] Martin; Ceballos, 2004; Gilbert, transformation of the city, Peñalosa’s talk was a story that put him
2006. and the policies he implemented at the center of Bogotá’s transfor-
mation. Similarly, the contradictions and exclusions behind Bogotá’s
new public spaces, such as the displacement of thousands of poor in-
38
[38] Galvis, 2014. habitants, homeless and street vendors, were also silenced under a
superficial layer of before and after photographs and narrative devices
that told a story of urban transformation from a dystopian dangerous
and disorganized city to one in which the middle classes were, finally,
able to walk and move through the city without having to rely on the
enclosed security of their cars. His was a story of heroes (his admin-
istration), villains (those that promoted car-oriented infrastructure)
and innocents (children that cannot play in the streets anymore and
households without cars). If Bogotá, this urban backwater in the Third
World has done it, why can’t Guadalajara do it? This was the powerful
moral of the Bogotá story told by Peñalosa. Images of the then new
and flashy TransMilenio brt as well as bicyclists taking over the city
during Ciclovía prominently featured in his PowerPoint presentation.
As a leader from gdl 2020 noted, when they brought experiences
from European and North American cities to Guadalajara, politicians
and other city leaders considered them “dreaming exercises”, but in
the case of Bogotá “this was a Latin American city, it was poorer and
had more violence problems than Guadalajara… and they were doing
it!” (gdl 2020 leader 2, personal interview, 2013). During his talk,
Peñalosa used different artifacts to shape the audience emotions and
capture their attention, particularly quotes that directed participants
to identify themselves with the victims of car-oriented urbanization:
the children and the poor. In his presentations throughout Latin
America and the global South, Peñalosa is not shy to talk about class
and how car-oriented urbanization benefits the rich, i.e., those capable
to owning a car. However, it is through the figure of the child that he at-
tempted to emotionally move his often car-owning middle and upper
class audiences. In his talk in Guadalajara, children and low-income
populations were often invoked: “The absence of low-cost and high-
frequency public transport and, in many places, the total absence of

NOVOS EStuD. ❙❙ CEBRAP ❙❙ SÃO PAuLO ❙❙ V36.01 ❙❙ 59-75 ❙❙ MARÇO 2017 69

03_montero_dossie_107_p58a75.indd 69 3/31/17 4:59 PM