But while this mandate of equity is yet to be executed, in‘London Letter’ V and VI, the
western capitalist basis on which the structures of globalization rest is exposed as the
migrants, despite their repetition of “ so so enjoyment /, pay as we pee or peel” (18-19).
This is the case whether at the parks by London seashore, or any other place where public
infrastructures in spite of their dilapidated condition, are viable sources of income to the
British establishment, especially when patronized by migrants. But whatever blame is
implied in this observation, the oeuvre of self-criticism is also articulated in the remark
that the nostalgia that the littoral sites in London inspires about Lagos, chides the home
government for not taking advantage of the economic values of the leisure that Lagos
lagoon provides. At this point, in casting their minds on home, the migrants can only
remember the “absent parks by the lagoon” (18). To that extent, the exploitation of these
migrants in London may be evident, it however does not exonerate the home government
for refusing to take advantage of the tourist attraction of Lagos lagoon to boost its
economy, a situation that might have reprieved some from migrating to London in the
first place.
The consumerist bias of globalization underscores this fact. Further, there is a revelation
that in this “tale of two cities” (19), there is a rhythm between the levels of decadence
that pervades infrastructural systems in London and Lagos. For instance, London “broken
lifts in undergrounds [and] clockwork trains”, according to the poet, “emulate the dry
taps and blackouts of my city by lagoon”. (19) It is at this point one begins to take as
instructive the levelling paradigm of Jennifer Robinson (2006: 109) who contends that
the polarization between cities especially in the present age deserves revision, after all.
For beyond the smokescreen of the sophistication/mundaness of certain cities as against
the peripheral insignificance of others particularly in the permutation of global and non-
global cities, what we are likely to find in the end is the bracing commonality of both
utopian and dystopian elements in the definition of all cities. Therefore, rather than
maintain these hierarchical, artificial categories, it may just be as well to level all
permutations by developing a paradigm of “ordinary cities” where all cities are treated as
the same.