Paper short abstract:

The pandemic had caused a reversal of the work-home separation so familiar to most urbanites. Using Lefebvre’s rhythmanalysis to theorise this reversal and the “new normal”, I explore the significance of rhythmanalysis in advancing anthropology “of”, and not just “in”, the city.

Paper long abstract:

Home was where the work was and still is when we think of farming and related types of work in rural life, with little separation between work and home. In recent years and particularly in urban society, the delineation between work and home had given rise to “take your son/daughter to work” week to introduce them to the world of “real work”. The pandemic caused a reversal and work had come home with parents working alongside their children once again, including that of academics teaching from home. This has led not only to a collective reflection on what is essential work but also on whether there is still the need to separate work from home given the fact that most (albeit not all) of what we do face-to-face can be done online over a strong and stable internet connection.

This paper presents some theoretical reflections on the work-home dichotomy (should there be one?) in an urban setting through the lens of Lefebvre’s rhythmanalysis, noting how the everyday life at isorhythmia (equilibrium) that we take for granted could be knocked out-of-sync causing arrythmia. What circumstances could return it to the former isorhythmia, or a new eurhythmia (“new normal”) and what might prevent its return? Most significantly, if rhythmanalysis is able to theorise the “everyday”, could it also become a critical concept in theorising anthropology “of” the city and not just anthropology “in” the city, thereby advancing urban anthropology as a whole?