Slumdog Millionaire – Epilog
Slumdog Millionaire – EpilogFinally got to watch the movie - This is by no means a film critique. Nor I am writing for/against the merit of the movie or whether it is award worthy.
While I am not surprised at the reaction from some Indian filmmakers, couldnt let it go that easily. Again, this is not about the comments on the quality of the movie in a literary sense. But my reaction to the comments like ‘intentional exploitation of India’ by Priyadarshan.
Fact is Danny Boyle has shown the murky underbelly quite visibly. But then, we should be appreciating the fact that someone did it. Yes, the story itself may not be great; it feels like an old Hindi movie at times; but somewhere there is an element of reality which we’ve rarely seen in any Hindi movies.
Back to Priyan’s comment, he is equally free to make a movie that shows UK/US and its underbelly. No, Priyan is comfortable sitting back and remaking malayalam movies into Hindi with very minimal changes. Arent you exploiting the talented Mally writers & directors? So, I just dont think the comment about exploitation of India is appropriate.
(BTW, I do thoroughly enjoy & appreciate Priyan’s own original mallu movies..)
For once, cant we just appreciate something? Let us welcome the focus on India. Yes, I very much want it to be good PR and about the bright side, but then there is always two sides to the coin and lets not fool ourselves by covering it up or acting to be ignorant.
Secondly & More importantly, the slum scenes in the movie reminded me of my own experience when I had the chance to see dharavi closely. If the situation is the same today, whatever portrayed in the movie is very true. (Ever since those days, every time I land at the mumbai airport, my heart sinks for a moment. But it is quickly morphed into anger/hatred at the very sight of greedy police & security folks at the gates. )
Made me wonder about the level of charity in our country. In general, there seems to be very little Charity activity in India especially compared to US. And I am talking about relative comparison, not absolute comparison. The perception one builds if you’ve lived in both places is that there is a focused effort and recognition for Charitable causes and spending in US. Here is the list of most charitable countries as a % of GDP, India is no where in the list where as even South Africa has found a spot.
Why is there such low level of Charity activity in India? Of course, it can be just perception and a lot is ‘undocumented’ in India where as it is probably deliberately advertised in US. There was even a comparison somewhere on the charitable cotributions b/w the presidential candidates based on their public tax returns. I can only dream of a day when I can see this in India (both the transparency and the charity)
BigB, even you wrote about the murky underbelly. What have you/the bollywood industry done in all these years for the slum dwellers? Why isnt there a focused activity or campaign or organization after all these years to do something so that the infamous slum in mumbai is done with? Take US and even for the slightest cause, there seems to be a non-profit organization with necessary campaigns, events, activities and a celebrity to support the same.
Maybe I am wrong and there is a very healthy charitable contribution made by India’s rich.If anything, SD movie should make us think & act on these lines. Let us appreciate Danny Boyle & crew atleast for that.
Jai Ho!
Nice post Sibu. Welcome back. I must be the only one in the world that is yet to see this movie
From what i have heard it seems like a well made movie but has shown some of the stark realities of India.
Most people that i spoke to say that it is a realistic depiction. We have a deep poverty problem and everyone knows that. If we don’t want to make movies showing the reality, someone else will. This movie could easily have been made in Bollywood. But as you say, do they have the guts? Except for a few exceptions, everyone is making the same old same old movies to rake in the cash compromising on substance.
You are right about your observations with regard to charity. US Citizens without a doubt contribute an order of magnitude more to social causes/charity.
I think India has a long way to go in this department. However, the picture is not as bad. Contrary to the popular perception of young Indians wasting time in cafes and pubs, I find that youngsters of today are much more socially conscious, an order of magnitude more, than when my generation was their age. In fact, our company’s Outreach program is a great example. most key contributors are junior folks.
Things are changing. I think when this next young generation starts getting into politics, making movies etc, a different, more dynamic face of India will emerge. i am waiting with bated breath and unbridled optimism for this to happen in my life time.
Good one Sibu. I agree with you that BigB and Priyan are no good to comment about Slumdog Millionaire, neither of them did anything to India’s poverty. even a social related movie, all of them are malasas and funny comedies (those are really good for time pass purpose though). Movie making is an art, it is free speech hence anybody can take any subject for his/her movie. But this case Danny took something which west like to see India as is. If we take any movie that could release worldwide, might not expose this much raw about one country’s image. Danny is famous for this, he has a tendency to expose everything about east countries to west as is (The Beach is great example about Thailand’s corrupted cops and Thai’s low quality life style).
SDM is really a negative expose of India’s poverty and extreme living condition of some. The quality of Danny’s imagination was proved when Jamal’s adventure to see Amithab Bacchan, nobody in this world can image that kind of low/cheap scene sequence. Danny was very religious and his judgment mainly based on faith based not a creative/positive one. If we watch all of his movies, we can understand that. He was very desperate for an Oscar since he took this west’s likable subject India’s Poverty. Academy juries are LA rich/liberal people and they want to see Asia, Africa’s poverty in movies, they blindly will say yes to those movies.
No one is saying that India has more poor people and we can’t change it overnight. We have so many programs to support poor people to come out of poverty. Dharvi and Mumbai slum cases are different, I don’t agree that they are poor but choose to live in extreme conditions. I wrote about this in my blog in detail.
Sibu: Neat take on the remarks around the movie particularly Priyan. On charity: can it only work through funding? The younger generation of India seems to be trying to do more “social work” than “social funding”. Why? Could it be that its because they grew up perceiving that majority of the “funded projects” eventually fund a few pockets? If so, this generation is solving 2 problems with this trend.
Whilst I agree with your observation about the limited amount of charitable activities in India, surely bona fide citizens of a country must not depend upon the charity of their fellow citizens so that they can live like humans, with dignity and access to basic things like clean water and a non-leaky roof. No?
Nice post Sibu. I am not a big fan of Priyan though I too like his movies. But I do agree to his comment about SD
I think he is right on the dot about those folks trying to do a ‘intentional exploitation’. Except for the music, I hated that film from the word go.
Our country has lots of positives & negatives. It’s not too great a thing for an outsider to come in and project our negatives at the world stage and get away with all of us ‘celebrating it’. If at all such a film had to be made someday, that should have been a bollywood movie. Somehow I can’t make myself to the fact of a passer-by on the road stepping it into my home one fine day , learning about troubles in my family & then publishing it in a global magazine next day to mint money (or be with the noble intention of solving my family’s issues). Never done.
And why blame Big B/Priyan with not doing anything for Slums. They are not social reformers by profession. They have their own jobs to do & I believe they are pretty good at it. In my country where my elected leaders don’t have time for poor ppl, why should I count on movie actors to repair stuff. Why them, most of us ourselves don’t do anything to help out. And I don’t think either that SD is going to project the troubles of Dharavi & bring in copious aid to solve the issue. And have the producers promised a percentage of earnings for rebuilding dharavi ? I don’t know about it.
There are hundreds of NGOs working in Mumbai for the sole cause of helping slumdwellers. Most of them totally dedicated to Dharavi.
Unlike in the US, very less percentage of ppl have a huge disposable income in India. Morever we are a saving economy, we can’t live our life spending day on day. Our social system is just not made for that.The only way out is to get ppl out of poverty by empowering them. I don’t think Individual charities can ever be a great source of finding projects in India (Big business tycoons excluded)
Yes, we have problems in our country. Painting a sorry image of it to the outside world & expecting it to solve issues is never going to work. What it might to the worst is to some ‘image damaging’ exercise. We don’t want that at least at this time when almost all cross sections of our society is trying to build a global image in their respective fields. We have troubles, everyone does…but we will solve them ourselves, one day.
All I can imagine when I think about SD is… A nation of a billion ppl trying to regain long lost glory by tirelessly rebuilding image and suddenly someone from our target audience comes in, looks underneath the belly & screams…Naah, that’s not the reality, this one is.
The good part of the movie is of course the larger message (as Rahman put it) . Hope , determination & optimism. Though I don’t know how many of those who watched it took that home. The best is how it teaches to continuously learn from life experiences ( the way he answers questions , that is).
The film may be potraying India in poor light but it definitely has put the spotlight on the Bollywood and has made the world turn back and look at it. Bollywood style dancing schools are picking trend all over US and Europe. India has also got its share of recognition in Oscar.
I agree that its really bad to have someone from outside come and expose our weaknesses, but then would we ever have listened to fate of slum dwellers.
There have been a lots of movies about slums and poverty in every language but none of them has ever made us think. It definitely takes an outsider to give us a new perspective about the downtrodden.
Rather than complaining for exposing this, we can do something towards changing this one step at a time atleast.
I have to caveat this post by saying I have not seen the movie. However, I have no issues with any foreign or Indian filmmaker showing the’stark’ realities of India. Looks like we are ashamed to show our ugly face. Great, if we are that ashamed or angry that some phirang is showing us in bad light, hopefully it will entice us to fix the problem. Either that or we become indifferent and apathetic. This stance of being angry seems silly and reeks of fake jingoism – IMO
I had gone through a lot of emotions about this movie. But finally what exists in my mind.
This has done the following.
1. 4 kids in a slum got to do LA
2. 4 kids will get 20 lacs when they turn 20
3. 4 kids get a house to live
Normally movies make money for the drictor/actor/producers. Whatever be the intention behind the movie, to me it has made a difference to 4 poor kid’s life. That’s it. Other movie have come and gone without much impact in that perspective.
Sibu, Nice epilog. IMO, this is a very sensitive issue. One hand most of Indians (including me) did not like India’s poverty exploited. (to the extent that I secretly wished that SDM did not win awards). But I also know it is silly. Why should we not let creative folks tell stories in a way they think is right. The underlying message is hope and love which the movie did a great job. I liked the screenplay, cinematography and editing.
Indian directors are also famous for portraying west, Indian diaspora in an absurd way. In most movies they have NRI either lose a girl or a drunkard or doesnt love parents or are money minded. So they have no moral right to say anything abt SDM.
But the drainage pool though gross is not unreal. I know in Nellore, AP, my hometown, municipal staff go under drainage and clear blocks walking through manholes in the streets. And they do it for their survival and daily bread.
Sibu,
Good post. Slumdog Millionaire definitely banks/shows the ugly side of India but why feel bad about realities? Only if we recognise our drawbacks will we be able to work to fix the problems.
I loved the movie. I watched it in a theatre full of Americans and I could see that everyone was laughing, crying and related so well to the movie.
I am not sure why % of charity is so less in India. However, I can see a great change in the present generation. A lot of people my age (20′s) are so socially conscious and want to do something to improve not just by giving funds but by giving their time and skills. There will much vaster change in the coming decade.
I do agree that it is a more realistic portrayal…ofcourse india has improve a lots in many spheres of life, but the fact remains that distribution of wealth and income is too unequal, compared to developed countries.. the ratio of rich to poor is too low in india.
I think the above will answer most of the questions, including less charitable activites in india, the pathetic scenes in mumbai or calcutta or any Indian metro slums etc. Danny Boyle has focussed on this poorer section, which constitutes the major percentage of India’s population.
On the contrary, many of the bollywood and other Indian movies focus on the super rich style of living with song and dance shots in foreign locations. Even the Hindi serials on most Indian TV channels are about the rich. So it is hard for most of our film makers and actors to appreciate the reality.
But at the same time, there are many young volunteers indulging in social welfare activities in india. This augurs well for India and if only the we make some improvement in distribution of wealth/income, india will surely be on the road to super power soon.
Thanks everyone for your comments.
Ganesh, you summed it up – thats pretty much what I wanted to convey apart from steering the conversation to the Charity activity levels in India.
Subba, please post the link to your blog entry (I do read yours, but seem to have missed this particular entry you’ve referenced)
Sukumar, Hariraj, Saraswati – You all seem to agree that social ‘work’ than funding is more in India and the new generation is really taking it seriously. Great and really glad things are changing. As Gandhi said, ‘Be the change you want to see in the world’ – If SDM provokes a few more youngsters to do something, awesome – which is exactly why I liked the SDM effort!
So that leaves Ranjit & Subba – sort of against SDM/Danny in exploiting India for his Oscar.. I also had a similar thinking initially, but wrote this post after some serious thought. Apart from our own ego/pride and the West’s exploitation mentality, can we think of any rational reason why Danny shouldn’t be doing such a movie?
Hariraj, About Priyan – You should see Billu especially if you’ve watched the original (that’ll be one brutal punishment:)
Shefaly,
While I personally think self-sufficiency is the way to go and the bonafide citizens should be able to get things for themselves – also believe the circumstances in India today is not that great for the bottom dwellers. We keep hearing about US as a land of opportunity – do hard work and you’ll surely succeed etc, we never hear about India in the same light. So for at least the most needy folks (which is quite large in India) I believe social work and funding is required. This is also a huge social issue impacting the lifes of well-to-do also, so as a society we need to rectify this – another reason I think social effort is required. This is probably true throughout the human society, not just India. Thoughts?
Sibu – Good post.
I didn’t find anyone objecting when Richard Attenborough made his movie on Gandhi. But, when Danny Boyle chooses to show the ugly under-belly of India & receives awards for doing that – criticisms fly. So, “Westerners” are free to heap praises on India. We’ll benevolently let them do that. But when they choose to highlight the negatives, there’ll be a hoopla about the “Damn Westerners” making money out of our misery.
“We don’t want foreigners to tell us what’s wrong” – Well, what about Deepa Mehta? Her movies “Water” & “Fire” were panned by many Indians, for “portraying India in a negative light”. It seems to me that Indians don’t want anyone pointing out their negatives. Desi, Videsi, ET – anyone.
I don’t find anyone objecting when Bill & Melinda Gates try to help the needy in India. Then, the lack of drinking water, insufficient supplies of vaccines, female infanticide, cleft lips, poor eye-care – are all “realities”. But, when someone points out these problems in an unflattering light, then reality restricts itself to the gleaming sky-scrapers, swank hotels, universities, our temples, IT & KPO companies. It seems to me that Indians willfully change their definition of “reality” to suit their needs. Abject poverty is as real as the hip youngsters in trendy clothes in Bangalore. We can’t wish poverty away, by pretending its not “reality”.
If SDM bothers people so much, they should demand better movies from Indian film-makers. About India’s glories. Instead of making more tear-jerkers, movies that celebrate violence, objectify women & poke fun at those with disabilities. And market them well.
Sibu,
Thanks, here is link.
http://ibloggergeek.blogspot.com/2009/01/slumdog-millionaire.html
Priya/Sibu
All the think-tank in India is disappointed with Indian movie makers about poor quality movies. But we need to understand who is watching the Indian movies, the Indian audience wanted masala movies with cheap comedy, fight, and love scene. I don’t want to touch some sensitive about exploiting Indian poverty but i think now it is required. In our side ( Southern tip of India ), there are so called “fake missions” are there, they took photograph of slums in our area and send it to foreign countries by exploit our poverty to get money. But at end of day money was spent to the own interest of the “mission”. I don’t want to blame real missions who invite foreigners to India and let them make assessment about how they want to help slum people. Based on Danny’s history and his previous movies, i had to compare him with our fake mission, he did it all for money and fame.
1. Did he provide any solutions to resolve the issue?
2. Did he announce any thing to help Indian slum rehabilitation work?
3. Did he spent enough time to understand in and out of Indian people and their culture and how we got into this much poverty?
4. Did he know how many people in India how moving from bottom to up per year?
5. Did he showed anything positive about India’s growth? Even he ridiculed call center and BPO/outsource business??
I and some of disappointed people with SDM really appreciate his work if he satisfied any 3 out of 5 above questions. But here you and all others bring other perspective also, which is great and enlightening.
Subba
Hi Sibu,
You are right in saying that there is no rational reason in opposing SDM. I do agree to that. But the issue here is that it involves people’s sentiments, nationalistic feelings, pride, ego etc.. and so I feel rationality/logical deductions have to naturally take a backseat . The topic clearly involves lot of emotions.
It might be my nationalistic pride that prompts me to criticize the makers square. The Chinese would walk off the table if we criticize their country, American might go to war but we Indians might in all possibility sit on the table and clap. It’s time we take enough pride in our accomplishments and work in the background to root out the evils.
If we are so ‘honest’ & ‘great’ a society that we write off the smallest of protests as jingoism, then why not for a change go ahead and make a dedicated effort to brand India as a ‘Slumdog country’. Let’s for once pull down all our branding efforts and correct the perception of the world to ‘reality’. let’s put slum pictures instead of ‘Incredible India’ on New york buses, hire space in museums across the world and have permanent poverty exhibitions running. Let’s put poverty posters in Davos & ask for Investments to our country to uplift us. Let’s not at least confuse the rest of the world, let’s sit and decide first what ‘is’ our country’s reality & then go full throttle at branding it.
There is always scope for words like empathy & discretion when we use art/movies or any other media to portray others woes & miseries. None of these seemed to have been exercised here. I have myself approached business houses with brochures containing pictures of kids in Indian villages for Aid to our Non-profit. Interestingly, my American teamie had in the first place opposed to portrayal of poverty & wanted pics of smiling kids in village schools to be put in the brochure.
Priya, I can see answers in your questions itself. Yes, we want foundations like B&M to come and help us out. We definitely need major help. But that in no way means we should forgo our pride & not question any of others actions. I feel it’s like with our neighbours.., we help them in need & we also have every right to heap praises about them wherever we go, but we don’t have to right to talk about what’s wrong in their household to one and all just because we came to know about it.
Subba – Yes, I’m aware of these fake missions & their poverty parade. A Mission gets money from donors to help people (& to spread their religion). That’s their job. So, if they pocket all the money, that’s wrong.
Connecting fake missions with Danny Boyle doesn’t seem meaningful. What is Danny Boyle’s job? To make movies. Why do you expect him to change the world & help the poor? Is that what he set out to do? So, if someone points out problems, they have to try to fix them too?
Director Shankar’s movies are about corrupt politicians. Do you set high standards for him & ask him to work towards eliminating corruption in high offices?
Ranjit – India & UK are a free countries. Danny Boyle has every right to make movies & exercise his freedom of speech, as long as no laws are broken.
Which is why people berate China. It has tons of problems (& no doubt, praise-worthy things), but not freedom of speech.
And my questions about Deepa Mehta remains. So, can Indians talk about what’s wrong with their country? Apparently not, considering the violent reaction to her movies.
I think we have to put things in perspective. All the heart-burn about SDM – Its not because Danny Boyle is a foreigner. Its because he made an unflattering movie that became popular.
Good discussion folks. Priya is right. Danny Boyle is a movie maker and he seems to have done a good job of that per the Academy. That is that.
I am quite proud to be an Indian. At the same time i don’t think our pride should be so fragile to be punctured by a popular movie.
India has a lot of good things going for it and a lot of bad things as well.
Ranjit says America will goto war if someone insulted their pride. I don’t think so. Just recently someone threw a shoe at their President. Did they goto war?
In fact, it is fairly common across the world to be derisive of America and Americans.
I am sure all of you have seen Fahrenheit 911 and Sicko and Bowling for Columbine (this one got an oscar as well like SDM). I never saw even one call in the USA to ban these movies (ok documentaries).
Freedom of speech is nonexistent in India – let us face it.
In my experience it seems that the moment you express something a wee bit controversial movie halls will be burnt, govts enact bans etc. No wonder film makers cling to the song-dance sequences. Atleast it makes them money. Why stir a controversy.
In India, only a truly bold (read superhuman) soul can speak the real truth.
Wonder who that is?
I agree that Danny Boyle’s job is to make movies but not home movies, when he choose high social responsibility movie and touching so many people’s emotion and taking a country’s image to all over world, he has to provide some positive solutions or at least some positive about India towards end of movie. For example, Spike Lee’s emotional social movies, our own Mani Retham’s movies etc…If he want to really help to the clause, he can but not necessary.Everybody can complain but providing some solutions requires special skills and that makes an artist/human fullest.
Subba – I’m glad you agree that Danny Boyle need not provide a solution to highlight a problem. He’s certainly better than many Indian film-makers, since he chose to talk about poverty, instead of shooting some absurd dance sequences in the rain.
Any human being should try to help others (I don’t know about solving systemic & endemic problems, that’s not easy). Not just Danny Boyle. Everyone.
Sukumar – Brilliant comment. I particularly liked these points:
“i don’t think our pride should be so fragile to be punctured by a popular movie”
“Ranjit says America will goto war if someone insulted their pride. I don’t think so. Just recently someone threw a shoe at their President. Did they goto war? In fact, it is fairly common across the world to be derisive of America and Americans”
I think you’ve hit it. Most developed nations have a healthy sense of pride & patriotism – and they are secure enough not to be offended by someone pointing out their failings. We are proud of our achievements. But, we are also ashamed of our problems & hence we are thin-skinned. We can’t expect the whole world to walk on egg-shells & avoid upsetting us.
Sukumar, you got me wrong there. I was not derisive of Americans/Chinese when I said that. I was actually proud of the fact that they did something like that. I would love Indians too to do something on those lines.
And yes, on a lighter note, the shoe example is a googly. They can’t go to war with that country cos they are already ‘at war’ with it.
Priya, I think you are right on the idea of developing vs developed countries. It might be actually more difficult for ppl in developing nations to accept criticism than their counterparts in developed nations.
Looks like we can agree on ‘sense of pride’ in developing vs developed nations — Theme for another post for sure!
Sukumar, so do you have some examples of an Indian who is superhuman/bold & truthful?
Ranjit – I think we should accept that when developing nations have trouble handling criticism, they can’t blame the critics. Instead, the nations should realize that they are touchy. I understand that this stems from a strong love for the country, out of patriotism.
A lot of good things are said about India & some bad things will be said too. 2 sides of the same coin. Let’s take the good with the bad, that’s what I think.
Sibu,
I wish i had an example to point to. I will think about it.
Ranjit,
thanks. you got me with the “shoe”. However, the point i made is still valid. America doesn’t go to war for perceived insults. They know better than that. I don’t think any country can do that regardless of how much power they have.
As Priya said this could be a “developing” nation’s insecurity and also shows lack of confidence on the part of India. If SDM is that impactful (i am yet to see it) wonder why SDM doesn’t galvanize/rally our people into solving some of our problems, but instead energized us to condemn the movie? I know the answer – the latter is easy. So we take the easy way out.
As simple as that.
Sibu,
Examples of superhuman/bold/truth Indians I can think of under following categories
1. Started as above and got entangled in popularism and faded away or got corrupted
a. T.N.Seshan ( still don’t why he had to get into contest an election that on a party’s ticket)
b. Subramaniam Swamy
2. Started as above and got sidelined and silenced
a. Abdul Kalam ( to an extent not many presidents had the guts to send back bills. He paid for it by not getting nominated again – Sad )
3. 1 person alive and doing it
a. Medha Patekar
Thanks Kumaran. Let’s hope there are more such bold in the newer generations.
BTW, Here is a link on the impact of SDM.
I totally agree with subba’s following comment..
http://www.sastwingees.org/2009/02/26/slumdog-millionaire-epilog/#comment-9328
The problem here is NOT about danny as movie maker or social worker.. but in the way the slumdog millionare is being advertised, as a noble effort to highlight india’s problem..
many people are of the opinion that SD is nothing but poverty pornography.. probably more worse than that..
Everyone is excited about how the film makes us understand the hard realities of india.. but, no one is ever ready to discuss how these slums came, and how and because of whom.. is the film analysing that?
In the case of the tamil film “Mudhalvan”, shankar had given a superb theme and solution for rooting our corruption.. eventhough, he projects ugliness of the politician, the second half is all about, how good and efficient a learned and committed politician can transform our country..
And is SD created in that way? ofcourse, both shankar and danny are movie producers and their business is to make movies.. its their duty to make moves as they wish.. but what is our duty? when some one exploits our problems, should we oppose that or should be praise that?
Also, why is that movies mostly directed by white men gets oscar? (pls dont cite A.R Rahman) Isnt there any other movies better than SD taken in bollywood or any other indian film industry in the past? And why isnt there so much hype around oscar? Films are made for the society they are part of.. and we cannot set western benchmark for indian films..
In short, all the fuss about SD is a classical example of intellectual subversion going on for years..
/** Why is there such low level of Charity activity in India? Of course, it can be just perception and a lot is ‘undocumented’ in India where as it is probably deliberately advertised in US.
**/
I dont agree that there is low level of charity in india.. there are lot of charity / helpings happening at every part of the society.. only thing is that its not visible and also do not conform to the modern view of charity that we hold..
Most of the america is corporatised, and hence most of the charity is also corporatised.. and hence most of the surveys and compilations are visible in the western world..
On the other hand, in india, unorganised sector is where people employed mostly.. and hence just like income tax is not accounted by these people (
), charity is also not accounted..
charity in indian concept differs vastly from charity in western concept.. in india, people help others without any expectation.. whereas in western societies, charity is mostly driven by the urge for religious conversion..
Also, in indian concept, charity is about empowering people and helping in needy times.. ie based on needs.. whereas charity in western nations is motivated in bringing about change in others life.. a help, that’s dictated by the charitable organisations..
thirdly, in india, due to family system, the social link was very strong, and hence people get help and support in various unexpected quarters.. in our family based society, a bread earning person looks after atleast 4 other persons in the family.. and in some cases, even the relatives are also taken care of..
Whereas in western society, due to fragmentation of the society and collapse of family system, there were lot of orphans, and persons without relations, persons without moral support etc.. for example, in italy, the catholic institution opened lot of orphanages for children born to unmarried women..
So, we need to consider the broader picture when we compare ourselves against the western nation.. but most of the times, we always see ourselves through the prism of west, which will definitely wont give us anything good..
Senthil, Respect your opinion. You sort of hit my point yourself when you said “why isnt anyone analyzing how the slums came & how”. SD atleast covered the reality honestly to an extend where as hardly any Indian film makers have even done that. And as I mentioned, am not to judge the ‘literary’ quality of the movie or compare it with other Oscar contenders..
/** SD atleast covered the reality honestly to an extend **/
Perception differs here.. i view this as unjust exploitation.. i hope, no family will allow a third person to exploit their problems.. if we treat india as our home and our family, the reaction about SD would have been different….
The ability of an artist ( painter, director etc ) is to give a totally new perception of a common problem which the general population never saw. The success of art is to present this perception to the people and make them look through the artist’s glasses and get the same sensation. The perception may be good or bad and may or may not be useful for the society.
An artist can never give you solution only show you the world through his glasses. His job is to leave his impressions on the people for fame, popularity, for a social cause and also sometimes for money. It is neither his job to provide solution nor for us to expect it out of him. He is good as an artist. Why do we need to make artists as politicians or social reformers ?
Rajesh.. dont the artists have ethics and morality?
And as i had already said, “if its the job of the artists to make movies, what should be our job?”
Sibu,
Please read the following article, that was written in oct-1908 in the american magazine …
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/190810/nationalist-india
Please note that this article was written in oct-1908, before gandhism (and hindutva organisations) came in to existence..
As per the above article, there were more than 25 famines in around 17th and 18th century.. and even as per the english men record, during those famines, even the new born were left to the streets by the mother unable to feed.. india at that time was as worst as the somalia of today..
Since you have stated that there is not much charity in india, i would like to know from you, on how can indians do charity, when they themselves were sucked out, and dying out of poverty?
A nation cannot be created instantly.. its a continuation of history.. and it is a miracle that india again prospered after 200 years of looting by britishers and also from more than 25 famines for the past 200 years..
I request you to go through the above article, and would like to know your views after reading that..
Journalists around the world have reported about the poverty in India and in a sense they do it for their livelihood bluntly to say money.Bloggers, debaters, politicians etc talk about poverty in other countries sometimes give a very bad picture too. Can we say all of us are without ethics and morality?
No one person can change poverty, we can contribute only what we can. The SDM director has done something for his part, brought the actual situation of the slums to the eyes of everyone around world. We can also do our part depending on our situation.
Hi Sukumar & Priya,
In my opinion the movie is really good. Even though it portrays India’s darker side, it is for good.
I was asked about India’s slums & quality of living by many Australians and I can’t explain them Melbourne’s lifestyle with Mumbai Slums !!
This movie also throws limelight on how people live in such a adverse conditions. IT happens only in INDIA…very sad.!!
I really wondering how Politicians rule our Country !!
About charities: Most of the People give money to charity only to get tax benefits and to get their photo published in national Newspapers !! he he he
Some people wholeheartedly give money to charity but how well it is used for that purpose really matters !!
When corruption falls, India will rise.
One more question to think : All our politicians sons/daughters’ get their degree from foreign universities. How would they afford such a money. They believe education in India is a joke ?
/** No one person can change poverty, we can contribute only what we can. The SDM director has done something for his part… */
I could not agree.. but even if accepting your argument, that SDM director has done his part in exposing slums, how is the discussion so far going? Are we striving to find the pragmatic and root cause of such slums?
Not just poverty.. any problem a country faces cannot be solved, without understanding it in its totality.. emotionalising and sensationalising will not help..
I wish, there comes another post tracing the roots of slums in india in this blog..
Sukumar,
There is no real sense of altruism behind the magnanimity of US citizens by way of personal charity …. IMO, most contributions are purely self-aggrandizing or towards a cause that has directly/indirectly impacted the donor.
Most of the US foreign aid is tied in one way or another to the recipient countries forced to purchasing US products/services thereby crippling free trade & harming their own economy ….. It is no wonder there are selfish & conceited reasons behind most personal contributions ….. Do we really want to look up to US when there are certainly better countries?
Having said that, it is truly encouraging to see the current crop of Indian youngsters possess a healthy dose of social awareness, communal belonging and the willingness to give something back to their society.
I have not had the chance to read through all the comments. But glad to see that SDM generates serious discussion.
Here is an interview link of real person (I have not verified its authenticity using additional search etc) with some serious selling skills (similar to the character in SDM).
http://www.currybear.com/wordpress/?p=2316#comments*
Looking at the comments there, the post has caught good amount of attention.
Kannan,
Not sure i agree with you. Would you say 80% of charitable work in America is due to altruism or 20% of it is due to altruism? I think it is the former. 20% may be doing it for other reasons and i don’t think that matters. What matters is that a substantial percentage of the American population is engaged in social causes in one way or the other and i think that is phenomenal. I also think that the current set of youth in India are also contributing heavily to social causes. As i said already, i wait with bated breath when that generation will take over the leadership of this country.
Sukumar,
My observations are purely based on personal interactions.
A few years back around Christmas time, it all started with an innocuous chat about the ‘season of giving’ and the charitable causes ….. When I noticed a trend with the first few unwitting respondents, I decided to include more colleagues ….. The causes were indeed varied – breast cancer, homelessness, veterans affairs, alzheimer’s to name a few.
By the time I felt I had lingered on a rather sensitive subject too long, only 4 out of 17 respondents (2 for Katrina-relief, 1 for a homeless shelter, 1 for United Way) were supporting a cause that had not impacted a family member or a friend ….. Needless to say, I could come across as opinionated.
It was no less an American than the former president Jimmy Carter himself, who commented thus in an interview with David Brancaccio, the host of the long-running PBS newsmagazine NOW
http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcriptNOW144_full.html
“It’s very difficult for the American people to believe that our government, one of the richest on Earth, is also one of the stingiest on Earth.”
One could argue it was directed towards the American government & the foreign aid ….. But he may as well be commenting about the general populace & personal charity.
Kannan,
I cannot agree with this that all or even Most of the Americans do it just for selling their product or for personal reasons.
US imports most of its daily consumption products from third countries(Food, clothes even electronics and car). They are good in advanced heavy machinery in industries and military. But ordinary people who receive their charity do not buy those definitely. Can you quote a few products which are bought by our people from America ?
Ofcourse there are some people who contribute for fame like industrialist, club going ladies, politicians, tax savers but these people are everywhere in the world. You cannot generalize based on your personal experience.
Rajesh
I have to agree with you there, people who do charity for personal reasons are everywhere in the world …. Regrettably I used to be one myself.
I just used American government to illustrate a point I am making about its citizens ….. This discussion is not about ordinary people buying products or services.
It’s about personal charitable causes & the underlying reasons ….. It’s a good bet a person contributing towards Alzheimer’s research does so mainly because there is a family member or a friend who has Alzheimer’s. ….. It is more likely someone who supports veterans affairs has a family member or a friend who is a war veteran.
Indians are nowhere close to being trend-setters when it comes to personal charity ….. But what is wrong in trying to envision an India where the younger generation support a charitable cause, not because some family member or a friend could benefit from it, but because it’s the right thing to do? ….. I am not letting the people of my generation go scot-free, I am hoping that they have already mended their ways.
My beef is, why glorify personal charity for personal causes? ….. Why not we advocate personal charity for impersonal causes?
Kannan,
Does contrubuting to Alzheimer’s means that the affected family member will get the benefits ? In that case he can give the money straight to that affected person. Why Charity ?
We have seen the slums , the orphanages and hence we know that they need our attention first as they are in more pain but when you have never seen those suffering ever, you will also contribute to the persons who are in front of your eyes rather than some unknown person.
When people contribute to something which they have seen personally it gives them more involvement and he may contribute even more.
We should try to address the problems which are local to us as first priority.I would rather help a person who is suffering right in front of my eyes first. I guess there is nothing wrong in this priority as long as you have the willingness to contribute towards the society.
Good discussion. Kannan, I agree with Rajesh. Where is the problem, if one is impacted by a family member’s terminal illness and decides to contribute to that cause. As Rajesh says, wouldn’t they be more passionate about helping that cause. In my personal experience, i have seen Americans donate time/money/effort to causes that don’t have any direct connection as well. I have not done a formal study on it, but i am sure a significant percentage contribute because it is the right thing.
Sukumar/Rajesh
I do understand your argument about the plight of someone suffering right in front of you & being more passionate about that specific cause ….. But that point does not hold water for supporting a cause that fights for the physiological needs ….. One need not have been directly or indirectly impacted by hunger or homelessness to passionately support such a cause, it is basic human decency.
Most Americans are blissfully unaware of the hunger, malnutrition, lack of clean drinking water, sustenance on less than $1 a day, deplorable living conditions and the likes that plague the poorest countries of the world ….. This is the underlying basis for my argument that you don’t see many Americans contributing towards such impersonal causes ….. But it does not mean such sufferings don’t exist.
My personal conviction is putting food on a plate or a roof over one’s head TODAY is paramount than finding a cure that MAY BE YEARS AWAY ….. Of course, it may have stemmed from having seen the slums first-hand (was a Mumbai-wasi for a considerable time) or visited some orphanages myself ….. But over the years I have realized it’s the right thing to do.
Be it an Indian or an American, the urgency of a cause needs to determine the priority, not the proximity or exposure to it
I personally know people who would not hesitate to plunk down a sizable sum towards a temple’s golden roof, but would balk at donating to an orphanage or an old-age home or an hospice ….. They all forget one thing ….. ‘Makkal Thondey Mahesan Thondu’ (for the Tamil-challenged, Service to Humanity is Service to God) ….. Maybe, that’s the reason behind all this festering bitterness at this sordid affair that has now come to be called charity.
Thanks for letting me use this forum as a soapbox for getting something off my chest that’s been bothering me for quite sometime now.
Kannan,
Thanks for explaining. I see your point now. I think USA has a lot of concerned citizens who donate money/time to solve problems that matter to their society. I think that is a powerful thing. Yes, they may need to do more for world poverty/hunger.
Before we point fingers, let us look at India. India has at least 200million people who are well off. What would the percentage out of that 200 million contributing to charity? Indians have the additional benefit, if i can call it that, of seeing abject poverty/hunger everywhere they go.
Which is better? you make the call.
Sukumar,
Thanks for the kind words.
I am not pointing fingers at anyone, at least not yet ….. But if I have to, I will point it at Indians (self included) ….. As you rightly pointed out, we have the added advantage of seeing abject poverty/hunger at close quarters ….. You would think a nation of 200M upwardly-mobile middle-class households can demonstrate their charitable instincts as well as they have come to flex their buying power ….. Regrettably that hasn’t happened yet.
I don’t have any illusions where we as Indians stand ….. But if we are going to change ourselves, I’d rather we not try to emulate any particular nation …. We can become trendsetters in our own right if only we can be more empathetic towards global causes.
If the recent global economic events have strengthened one particular conviction, it is that incidents (good or bad) happening in one part of the world have a way of manifesting themselves, sooner or later, on the rest of the world ….. How long do you think it will be before the situations in the third world countries leave their lingering mark on the rest of the world?
If my incoherent ramblings (???) have resulted in at least one convert to my cause, maybe there is hope yet for us to leave a better legacy for the generations to come
Sure. You are right, the extreme poverty in the third world will absolutely affect the rest of the world. How it will impact is not clear to me. But i am sure it will.
Today i happened to read the below news..
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090321/ap_on_re_af/af_pope_africa
I already commented that the charity of the west is driven by their zeal to convert.. the above link is a best latest example to prove my point..
We cannot compare such charity with our indian way of charity.. both are poles apart..
Thanks for all the comments. Senthil, As Sukumar stated before – think US has more concerned citizens (relatively) compared to India. Not to say it doesnt exist there…
Anyways, on a side note on SDM -> Happened to catch few minutes of an interview with Rasool Pookutty. Was amazed by this guy, maybe because I was totally ignorant about him pre the Oscars. Can see that the guys is an encyclopedia on movies and much more. As mentioned in an earlier post by Sukumar about ‘Expert’, Rasool’s advice to some yougsters was ‘concentrate and work hard on the subject for at least 10 years and only then you’ll gain expertise’. Very humble guy too — Got a feeling he truly deserved the award!