居住城市的權利: 台北市華光社區的都市民族誌研究

Abstract

今日的華光社區於大安區的整體意象，一方面，相較於周圍的中產階級居住環境，華光的殘破地景涉及地景汙名化、窳陋所譬喻的治安(火災)與犯罪(遊民)議題，給予國家收回與都市更新的正當性。另一方面的爭議在於，其於市中心的區位享受較多機能的都市服務，以上兩者的焦點回歸於鄰近的文化、教育資源，以及隨之伴生的縉紳化地景。早年為司法院、法務部眷屬宿舍區的華光，不同於違建戶自行搭蓋房屋，監獄、看守員與法官、司法官等眷戶，享有公有宿舍配給保障在都市的居住權利，與公務人員的福利補貼，儘管有些第二代眷戶如上一代般再生產成為公務員、法官、律師等，也有些第二代眷戶於空間界定落入違建戶的狀態。位於市中心的華光社區，學區鄰近文化、教育資源，加上早期的離開土地買賣常規的自行搭蓋，福利制度並不能確保階級再生產的優勢，最終回歸至個人努力的結果。金融旗艦計畫與居民安置，違建按照法令預計有安置或補償措施，而眷舍居民則按照借用宿舍法令，有借有還。兩者之間的社會地位的不平等、資源分配的過程差異與省籍衝突，使得眷舍與違建面對拆遷、安置時明顯對立。 族群與階級的面向相互地交纏，使得眷舍與違建之間難以認定究竟誰「優勢」、誰「弱勢」，從分類人群的想像，進一步地思索不平等位置與結構問題，納入華光社區周遭大安區、中正區的都市發展，蘊含著縉紳化、私有財產與居住權的土地買賣關係與分配正義議題。

The whole image of the Huaguang Community has brought two aspects of controversy to the Da-an District. On the one hand, compared to the surrounding living environment of middle class, the stigmatization of landscape that resulted from the broken landscape of Huaguang Community and the issues of security (fire) and crime (homeless) that arose from its rough and deprived state have given the government the legitimacy to recover this area and to implement the urban renewal programs. On the other hand, being located in the central district of the capital city, the Huaguang Community accesses more urban services with functions than other areas, and this has also created controversy. To start the discussion, the focus of both of these two aspects of controversy should be placed on the surrounding cultural and educational resources as well as the associated landscape of gentrification. The Huaguang Community used to be the dormitory housing for the dependents of the members of the Judicial Yuan and the Ministry of Justice. Unlike the illegal buildings that were built by the owners without permission, the dependents of prison staff, wardens, judges, and prosecutors in the Huaguang Community had enjoyed the right of dwelling in a public dormitory in the urban area and the welfare subsidies of public servants. Although some of the second generation had chosen to be a public servant, judge or lawyer as their parents, their houses have been identified as illegal buildings due to the definition of space. Being located in the central district of the capital city, the Huaguang Community has the school district that is close to the cultural and educational resources. Moreover, the early self-built buildings acquired through an irregular land transaction also lead to a welfare system that can not ensure the advantages of the reproduction of class, and thus the current situation ultimately is the result of personal efforts. In order to implement the Financial Flagship Project and the Resettlement Plan, the owners of illegally buildings are given a resettlement house or compensation measures according to the law, whereas the residents of the dependant households have to return their houses to the government according to the dormitory law. The inequality of social status between the two parties, the differences in the resource allocation process, and the ethnic conflict all have resulted in an apparent opposition between the residents of the illegal buildings and the dependant households during the demolition and relocation. The dimensions of ethnic and class have entangled with each other, leaving an undetermined issue of which one has the advantage and which one has the disadvantage between the residents of the illegal buildings and the dependant households. Thus, from thoughts on classification of the population, this study further explores the issues of unequal status and structure. Also, the urban development of the Da-an District and the Jhongjheng District surround the Huaguang Community has incorporated into the discussion, which contains the issues of gentrification, private property, land transaction of the right of inhabitation, and the distributive justice.