CHANGING WORLD • • Method 2 - Commenting on a text & a cartoon

Docs

Stage 1 - Introduction: presenting the documents
Similarities:Both documents deal with the dynamism of Mumbai, so on a local scale, the largest city of India, an emerging country.
Differences: The 1st document is an article about Bombay’s boom by Alex Perry from Time magazine and published on 26th June 2016 whereas the 2nd document is a bar graph showing the slum population of Mumbai from 1981 to 2011 according to the census of India.
Announce structure: In a 1st part I’ll describe Mumbai’s diversity using the article and the graph and in a second part I’ll explain its global attractivity with the article.

Stage 2 - Analysing the documents

DESCRIBING - What you see (docs)
INTERPRETING - What you know (notions)
1. Local diversity (article §1 + bar graph)

Demographic growth:
Article P1: fast growing city from 20.7 to 22 million people
+ graph: 1981-2011: fast-growing city

Social inequality:
Article P1: inequality: slums / luxury flats, lofts
+ graph: slum population increased from nearly 1/4 of the population to approximately 1/2

Urban growth: megacity, rural-urban migration => densification & urban sprawl

A polarised city:
- urban decay, deprivation (low SoL & QoL) deprivation
+ urban renewal => gentrification or super-gentrification
=> a polarised, fragmentted city (not inclusive)

2. Global attractivity (article mostly §2)

Article P1 Cultural influence: cinema, music

Article P2 Economic power:
- world services: financial services, call centres, mediacl services
+ international tourism & transport

A world influence: world city, globalisation

An economic hub:
- production space, business services, IDL, outsourcing
- international connectivity & mobility

Stage 3 - Concluding
Assess docs (reliable/biased justified): To conclude, these documents are reliable as we have their full references ; the article is biased (shows admiration, positive aspects) while the graph gives figures, so unbiased.
Sum-up ideas These Both docs show that Mumbai is a thriving, active, dynamic city, fast growing but unequal due to globalisation.
+ Open
We may wonder if a developed global city like London is as unequal.