Via Albert Krishna Ali at The Other India, a Guardian article about a new tourism phenomenon in India: slum tours. It’s apparently a common enough practice in places like Soweto and Rio, but new to India. For 200 Rupees, tourists get a guided tour of the areas around Delhi’s railway station, where a few thousand homeless children live:
The tour guide instructs visitors not to take pictures (although he makes an exception for the newspaper photographer). ‘Sometimes the children don’t like having cameras pointed at them, but mostly they are glad that people are interested in them,’ Javed claims, adding that the friendly smiles of the tourists are more welcome than the railway policemen’s wooden sticks and the revulsion of the train travellers. He hopes the trip will get a listing in the Lonely Planet guides. Nevertheless there is something a little uncomfortable about the experience — cheerful visitors in bright holiday T-shirts gazing at profound misery. (link)
Really, what could possibly be uncomfortable about well-fed tourists paying to gawk at desperately poor children? The author of the Guardian article is definitely skeptical about the whole thing too:
By the end of the walk, the group is beginning to feel overwhelmed by the smells of hot tar, urine and train oil. Have they found it interesting, Javed asks? One person admits to feeling a little disappointed that they weren’t able to see more children in action — picking up bottles, moving around in gangs. ‘It’s not like we want to peer at them in the zoo, like animals, but the point of the tour is to experience their lives,’ she says. Javed says he will take the suggestion on board for future tours. . . . Babloo, who thinks he is 10, has been living here for maybe three years. His hands are splashed white from the correction fluid that he’s breathing in through his clenched left fist, and he pulls a dirty bag filled with bottles with his other hand. His life is unrelentingly bleak and he recognises this.’I don’t know why people come and look at us,’ he says. (link)
The tours are run by Salaam Baalak Trust, which is a small charity organization focused on caring for homeless children in Delhi. They administer first aid as well as more serious health care help for children who have AIDS or serious drug addiction problems. They also give them basic education and vocational training, and help their families where possible. In short, SBT is in general a good organization narrowly focused on helping a group of children living in desperate straits. This program makes money for them, but clearly the money and publicity come at the potential cost of the children’s dignity.
According to Give World, Salaam Baalak Trust was founded by Mira Nair in 1988 to rehabilitate the slum children she used as actors in Salaam Bombay (hence the name, “Salaam Baalak”). I haven’t quite been able to figure out how the organization got from Bombay to Delhi, but as far as I can tell they are now based entirely in Delhi. [CORRECTION: They are based in Delhi as well as Bombay.]
The story of the group’s founding provides a second layer of irony: this is an organization that was founded using funds generated by western voyeurism of Indian poverty (Nair’s film), which is now pioneering the effort to reproduce that voyeurism in a brand new format.
I wouldn’t go on the tour in its present form, but perhaps I would try and volunteer to help out with this organization in some way instead. And if tourists want to do more than just take pictures of the Taj Mahal or dance on the beach at Goa, I don’t see why that should be frowned upon (especially if the money is put to good use). Is there a way to do it that doesn’t involve mere voyeurism?
I thought she was an actor.
Oops.. an actress (correction).
Weird. It’s a valid point that it helps give money to charities, but I really hope the admissions fees for these “tours” as high as the sky, because that’s the only way it can be a millimeter closer to “justifiable.” I don’t really feel paying money (even a lot of it) to gawk and see how the other half lives will ever be fully justifiable. There is such a thing as human dignity, which has no price. Maybe next time the tourists should bring it upon themselves to pass out some food to children they see?
hammer sickel : No, you were right the first time.
I read an english translation.I do not know what to make of it, cause i dont know the real history. I am interested in learning more about that era, do tell me if you guys no more sources about chola dynasty?
There is a wiki page on chola history.. I have not read the translations, and don’t know how good they are.. But the “original” is too good, and it takes you to the dreamlands especially if you are a little kid/teen..
Until, you actually travel through it in time: Rarely in history has a city been so vilified by its famous visitors.
i kind of agree with Ponniyin about how Mira Nair and Satyajit ray exploited indian poverty in movies. In average indian school, 98% of students have never seen Ray or Nair film. Except maybe Monsoon Wedding. About movies like Citade de Deus, director Fernando Meirelles made this movie only for Rio. He didnt expect this movie to do so well. And in an interview, he said jokingly, “My ideal career would be to do what Pedro Almodovar does. I’d like to make Brazilian films for international audiences that are not big-budget.”
well, he sort of did and then he sort of didn’t. He directed The Constant Gardener which was not Brazilian, but Kenyan. And not exactly MI:III budget but still sizeable.
BUT, he did an amazing job and captured Kenya, the slums and street kids, energy and misery, the point of the story far better than I would expect of a standard Hollywood thriller director.
Much like everyone else on this thread, I have mixed feelings about these tours. I think they are a good idea in the sense that, hopefully, people who want a sense of the whole country and not just the glossy tourist spots will come. And donate lots of money. Of course the jerks who whine about getting a bigger bang for their tourist buck will come too, but you can’t exactly make people fill out a questionnaire before hand…can you? (hmmm)
As part of a proposed article on Baile funk music I visited some favelas around Sao Paulo. The people who were showing us the place could not have been more dignified and took us to see all the great hopeful things being done… the radio station run and operated by the residents of the favela, day care centers so mothers could find work, the afterschool programs, the sports center where kids could play basketball instead of joining gangs.
Perhaps if that’s the tour itinerary – to show visitors what the money is being used for – this Delhi program would be less gawker-like? The poverty and misery is all around, no way to miss it. But if the focus is on the positive, the improvements, the results of the tourist dollars…it would be more respectful?
yeah, I know what you mean DD. My problem with gentrification isn’t that people move in, it’s what happens to the people who get evicted to make room for the second and third waves of newcomers when rents start rising. It’s also with the people who move in and snicker, like “gawd! Just check out those tacky jesus candles!” or look at me like I smell bad when I’m running errands my hair in a bandana.
The problem is that you can’t assume what motivates people until they’ve already made themselves unpleasant.
Sigh…. India and its poverty.
Interesting debate taking place here…. To be honest, I don’t know what position to take. Personally, I would recoil from such a “tour”. And if someone suggested that we go, I’d give that person a piece of my mind (and never travel with him/her again). I hate to say this, for fear of sounding racist, but it doesn’t suprise me that white tourists (who generally come from wealthy countries) would do such a thing. But I have to say that I’ve seen quite a few NRI’s who watch India’s poverty as “priveleged spectators” as well. One NRI, who was showing me pictures of her trip to Rajasthan was recounting how a single file line of poor Rajasthani women– walking barefoot under the scorching sun and on baked earth with water lotas on their heads– was passing by. NRI took a picture of them,and the women got offended and demanded a couple of rupees. I asked her, “Didn’t you feel bad taking pictures of them?” The NRI looked suprised and asked why should they. I said, “Well, it’s obvious you’re coming from abroad, and it’s kind of like you’re objectifying them”. She replied, “Oh, come on”. “Did you give them a couple of rupees?” She responded, “Oh nooo… are you kidding?” Affluent, upper middle class NRI wanted to take pictures of poor women who had walked miles in the sun to get water, but didn’t want to give any rupees because “It’s was the principle of it”.
Sorry, I am returning to say one last thing: I don’t think any of us can accurately judge this either way on the merit of one solitary article.
The debate about film directors like Ray (?!) exploiting poverty is another bizarre one, but for another day.
To second what BB said above, to say that Satyajit Ray “exploited” poverty is to completely miss the point of his movies-and I doubt people saying such things have watched many Ray movies- I mean how obtuse can one possibly be?!!! Now Mira nair, maybe…
He directed The Constant Gardener which was not Brazilian, but Kenyan. And not exactly MI:III budget but still sizeable. Here is what he said on why he directed this film. “First, when I started to work on the script, I just did not get much. John Le Carré was kind enough to teach me and to explain. But I still did not understand a lot and I was not very interested, neither. What made me decide to do this film was the possibility of shooting in Africa, especially in Kenya, so I just took all this out, in order that I could create more scenes in the streets.”
But, yea, even i am confused about this issue.
hmm..what gets me is they’re paying to just gawk at these people, and not do anything to truly help them? that what it sounds like…i duno…just kinda exploitation, like a freak show. hmm….
India is one place which does not hide its warts. Even outside the new airport in Bomaby you are most likely going to be approached by a beggar. Any visitor to India will encounter poverty and, if that moves them, let them donate to a charity of choice. How will going on a “tour” move them any different? By showing a more heightened poverty? In fact I think, given our innate Indian guile :-), i am sure there will be a surge in pretend beggars – to work on shifts.
BTW – I would love to hear more FOBs on this topic….
Neale
Isn’t it also disrespectful to ignore the poverty in a country, looking only at the most glamorous aspects of a country while averting your gaze from anything that makes you uncomfortable? I find that sort of willful blindness just as distasteful.
it de-humanizes people. my experience has been that a fair number of tourists do it because it is, “wow! that’s so different”. It just brings me back to the reaction of most people I’ve met here who’ve read mistry’s ‘A fine balance’ – “Makes me realize how lucky we are to live here”. That’s voyeurism to me – cheap thrills at somebody else’s agony – anyone who says “wow! when taking the photo of a cripple or a leper” needs to be thrashed within an inch of his/her life – but on the other hand, i fit ennis’ profile – the easy-life PIO sitting here and wringing his hands in mock anger.
But doesn’t it also dehumanize people to ignore them and pretend that they’re not there? People who fly to Africa for Safari but who never once go to see the people who also live there? People who go to lavish resorts that are bordered by slums, but who don’t want to disturb their fantasy of island paradise? Look – I don’t want to harsh on people on vacation. At the same time, I don’t want to harsh on those who want to take a day and see a bit of the other part of the picture. I guess I respect that impulse. Isn’t there a respectful way it can be done? Yes, tourists are gawkers, but they’re gawkers at the Taj too – more interested in snapping their own picture than looking at the monument. Why can’t there be a form of cultural tourism that shows the lives of everyday people from all walks of lives?
Deepa Mehta? Mira Nair? Satyajit Ray? Exploiting poverty?
That’s just nuts, Ponniyin Selvan. Between them, those three have done more for the dignity of the poor in India than many dozens of internet pundits (and commenters) ever will. Not to mention their unforgetable contributions to human creativity (Ray incontestably of the first rank, and the other also two doing very fine work). What on earth are you talking about?
But as the Breaker says, that’s a shitstorm for another day.
to answer your question – no. i dont think it is wrong to be self-serving and honestly so. if i am out to have a good time, i would like to have a good time and would not want to bleed my heart out on other people’s misery. i can do nothing to alleviate their pain, and i’m going to mess up my head. harder said than done, but on a personal level i cherish my holidays – and i go into the woods as deep as i can – if i dont see a soul for the next six days that’s just fine with me – the point being that i bring more value to society by cleansing my mind than by carrying emotional baggage around – so by extension to the general public if anyone wants to go to a cuban resort paradise and never step away from the casino and the buffet table – that’s super fine – and if the intent is to assimilate into the population and see things from a different perspective, the way to do it is different than go on a guided tour (btw i am extremely good at blending in – i’ll tell you about my line dancing in a quebecois country inn some day) – there’s much to be said – but i got to go heads down. long night ahead old chap – maybe i’ll see you again maybe at 1, na?
Ennis, I feel exactly the same when I visit back to India – most people dont care about people who lack even basic human rights to food, clothing and shelter. Moreover, they add disrepect by ignoring them – especially India’s upper middle and rich class.
But I dont think everyone’s inactive. There are tons and tons of NGO’s doing excellent social services. Of course, a sustainable model is still a challenge and the problem at hand is enormous.
I dont agree with how some approach it (flamboyant, superficial & for profit movies) but never the less, there are hopes for good intention. To me, anyone who is as driven to address the problems caused by poverty, as to make movies about it, should take it to the extent of Mahatma Gandhi. He didnt go yelling around the world about problems in India – he took self corrective actions. He didnt indulge in a lavish lifestyle (like many so-called activists today do) while fighting for rights for his fellow citizens – he became one of them. Until these gaps are filled, it is hard to believe people who brag about their concerns and egotistically broadcast the actions taken.
Papal Mehta
Wow, I didn’t know that. Can you let us poor folks know how they were able to contribute to the dignity of the poor in India?
No.
we may be poor monetarily, but not in dignity and pride – dont need some babus contibuting to our ‘dignity’ coffers also; thanks but no thanks.
Reminds me of a scene in MunnaBhai MBBS. A foreign visitor started taking picture of the poor people bathing instead of good buildings and other such tourist stuff. When asked why, he said, why, this is the real India. I clapped at the priceless expression the protogonist friend had at that comment. I love Munna Bhai.
Somehow the idea of charging visitors for these tours is a bit disturbing to me. I’d rather the tours be free and tour operators ask vistors for donaticns etc after the tours.
I’d rather that these “tourists” actually live in the slums for a period of 2 weeks. Just to see how “slum life” really is. It’s too easy to keep your distance by “just looking”. They should call the tour “Slum Life Immersion: The Intensive Tour”.
Incidentaly thats what the original slumming meant. If Amardeep names the author some folks here will again get their katchas in a gaanth.
Oh, ok. Thanks for the clarification, Guru Gulab Khatri.
I am most curious about the name “Albert Krishna Ali”. It seems like a pseudonym made up by a “progressive” who either does not realize or maybe secretly hopes that the Ali and the Albert part would love to kill the Krishna part. Or am I wrong?
JM:
I am most curious about the name “Albert Krishna Ali”. It seems like a pseudonym made up by a “progressive” who either does not realize or maybe secretly hopes that the Ali and the Albert part would love to kill the Krishna part. Or am I wrong?
Yes, that name caught my eye too. I think he is trying to be eclectic in the true Gandhian fashion. He is hoping, I am assuming, to mesh some of India’s glories into one. He should go even further and incorporate Sikhism, though. Like: “Guru Albert Krishna Ali Singh”. He’s going to have one pretty long ass name if he adds on a Jain name, Buddhist name, Parsi name and Jewish name in an attempt comprehensively cover all of India.
I hear you, Cheap Ass Desi. This reminds me of a family trip we had taken to Kenya in the mid nineties. There was a man selling those stylised, elongated ebony statuettes that are so popular with tourists in East Africa. My mother was looking at them and asked if they were supposed to represent the much-discussed tallness of Masai – one of those “facts” that got exploited to the max by Tourism Kenya at any given chance. The man didn’t blink. “No,” he said “it’s showing very thin people in Ethiopia – you know, because they are always starving.” That moment ruined the rest of our trip. Man, were we ever total jerks. Even though the artwork probably had nothing to do with famine in Ethiopia, the man was a total charmer and clearly knew how to cater to the desires of the hordes of non-African tourists that came streaming through his country. It was awful to think that this was a marketable strategy and that the added misery to the narrative only helped sell more statues to the tourists. “Africa” and India are supposed to be full of poor people right? Show us some really skinny poor people!
As sympathetic as I am to organisations trying to come up with immediate sources of funding to benefit the desperately poor, I think this kind of voyerism/tourism is totally misguided. As Taz mentioned, if people truly want to help, there are plenty of less disgusting ways to do so.
And a shout-out to Bihari Babu. It’s true. The rural poor truly do get the brunt of it. And there is a clear lack of affluent kurta-wearing foreigners to travel all the way out there to throw some rupees at them for the pleasure of gawking at their incredible survival skills.
Ennis, I think that if people want to really spend the time to expose themselves to more of a place than just its fun safaris and national monuments, that’s a really great thing. The more respectful way of doing it, I think, is, as a tourist, to stick your neck out a bit. Go visit slums – but don’t do it through a touring agency. Take a trip out to a village – with an NGO that’s not making a profit off of your presence, even if it is to give back to the inhabitants of the village. Donate your time or money outside of organised gawking. And if a place is too dangerous or inaccessible for a tourist to get to – well… maybe tourists need to learn to respect that. Sign up with an organisation that will give you more legitimacy to be in those places/situations as support (i.e. work/volunteering), not as a consumer who wants more “experiences”.
So yeah… maybe bottom line is… if you’re going to just be a tourist – show some ‘nads or… don’t.
Alomodovar doesn’t make Brazilian films and neither did he direct The Constant Gardener. Perhaps you are thinkin of Meirelles who also directed City of God.
OK, I got the thread. Previous post retracted
brownfrown #81: Yes, your episode sounds awful.
My story had to do with an NRI. A person who is going to India and is simultaneously connected and disconnected from India and Indians. Isn’t that mean– you are a wealthy expatriate and now you are looking at your own people as inferior objects that came be photographed as a “tourist photo-op”? Maybe I am too sensitive, but I definately have never done that in all of my travels.
Shama #83
Look for post #57
My desi prof said next time I go to India, first go to the slums. See how the 2/3 live and figure out why.
if you’e interested about urban poverty this New Left Review article is good.
Capitalism and Good Taste don’t always go hand in hand. At the end of the day, however, Good Taste doesn’t feed as many folks as Capitalism does.
i have been fascinated by this post. i work in delhi for an ngo and am very familiar with salaam balak trust, they do excellent work with streetchildren all over the capital.
“Take a trip out to a village – with an NGO that’s not making a profit off of your presence, even if it is to give back to the inhabitants of the village.”
actually, that is a worse idea. if you want an ngo to take you on a tour the least you can do is pay them to offset the cost and time of your visit. everytime we entertain a foreign visitor at our agency and give them a tour, allow them to interact with the children we have living on-site, etc. it is not easy.
i think it’s rude to want a “free” trip, i find it quite honorable that people are paying to take such trips, these agencies get by on meager donations and grants, and to take a few hours to show you around their work means less time with their clients, use of their limited resources, etc. not to mention that whenever we have visitors we do hope that they will be inspired by our work to help us in a way that they can.
believe me, salaam balak trust is not making a “profit” off of these trips, i don’t think that trust, or any other agency working with orphaned and vulnerable children in delhi even knows what a profit looks like. we are all too busy trying to make the money stretch another day.
there are so many good-hearted people in the world who do not always know the best way to express that, i give anyone credit for being willing to do any small action that leads to a better life for others.
supply and demand. they wouldn’t be doing this if people didn’t want an experience of the slum to take back with them and were willing to pay for them. i’m sure there are ways to do this without exploitation and so far we don’t have any proof that salaam balaak is doing any. not even hearsay. only speculation on the motives of the tourists.
my real problem with this comes from my indian nationalism, which wants to show firangis the things in india we’re proud of, and not drag them through our country’s suffering. I don’t want the image they take back of India to be one of kids sniffing glue and public latrines. We’ve had the stereotype of third world india propagated long enough. I suppose I’m sensitive because that gets so much coverage.
Forget tours, how about working with a real social worker – who tries to make a difference. “It is not the way I intended to live my life…but someone’s got to do it. It’d be nice if society did not need people like me but while it does… I will be right there.” And this is what Manoj Night Shyamalan – he too makes movies right? – did when he saw deprivation
It’s a bit inconsistent – it’s OK for tourists to turn a blind eye, but if they’re going to be interested in poverty then they have to live in the slums for weeks and work as a social worker? If it’s OK to turn a blind eye, then why isn’t it OK to pay an NGO for a tour? The money all goes back into the community, and the tourists are being educated.
I think sometimes we’re more comfortable with offenses of ommission than those of commission, but every action has its costs. I’d rather some tourist money found its way to the people who needed it most.
I’m not worried about preserving India’s “reputation” nor do I feel that the only face of India that should be shown is the teched up luxe side. Many more people live in the slums than live the IT life, so why do we object when people say this is the “Real India”? It’s certainly more statistically representative of the average Indian.
One of my favorite comments evah! And you can freely replace ‘Good Taste’ with a lot of other ideals.
As for all the discussions regarding filmmakers’ intentions: Intentions mean NOTHING, efforts mean something, and results mean everything. Yeah, I intend to remove world hunger etc etc, but I’m just spending my life doing my job etc. And that’s supposed to make me feel good? If someone makes money/fame whatever by making movies which have the unintended consequence of helping a few underprivileged people, more power to them! A much more valuable contribution to the world than all my ‘good intentions’.
Ignorance also means nothing and success means something as here Wonder why film-makers (Shyamalan apart) never make movies about these people. Won’t draw the intentioned crowd maybe?
And when are this man and his colleagues going to be awarded the Nobel?
my real problem with this comes from my indian nationalism, which wants to show firangis the things in india we’re proud of, and not drag them through our country’s suffering.
Yeah, its the debate between the privileged defenders of Brand India and the equally privileged who believe economic and social good can come from this. Whats missing from the debate is the subaltern herself. What are her thoughts about being gazed at? Can we quantify the rewards she will receive for being the tantalizing subject of a largely Western gaze? Have the slum leaders been consulted? Slums have a somewhat stable -though contested – social order, with their own interlocking support networks. Some, like Dharavi are remarkably productive and may have per capita GDPs higher than most of the rest of India. There is plenty of wealth and talent lurking in the favellas and shantytowns of the world. Perhaps white tourism isn’t necessarily what the subaltern wants, nor is it necessarily the best way forward. Let her speak.
Heres the link on Dharavi. Sorry for the bad link above.
http://economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=3599622
C.K. Prahalad is already working at it.
Being a scholar he steers clear of psycho/socio-babble such as this.
Subalterns don’t have time for this nonsense and are not misty eyed either about the glorious struggle of the proletariat, and hate to be patronised. And they see nothing wrong about Brand India and would love to get a piece of it, and detest being used to run down “Brand India”.
And as Vidyakar says in a different context, It’d be nice if society did not need people like me…
Where’s Vinod(-at-large) when you need him?
Subalterns don’t have time for this nonsense and are not misty eyed either about the glorious struggle of the proletariat, and hate to be patronised. And they see nothing wrong about Brand India and would love to get a piece of it, and detest being used to run down “Brand India”.
Yeah right bubba, speaking for the subaltern yet again. 🙂
Shabbash, so you too can smirk! Same old empowerers! What’s new?