Slumdog Millionaire is for every insensitive Indianby Vinita DeshmukhIntelligent Pune weekly tabloid, Feb 27
Amitabh Bachchan thrashed Slumdog Millionaire saying it has “projected India as a third-world, dirty underbelly developing nation and causes pain and disgust among nationalists and patriots. Let it be known that a murky underbelly exists and thrives even in the most developed nations. It’s just that the Slumdog Millionaire idea, authored by an Indian and conceived and cinematically put together by a westerner, gets creative global recognition.’’
That’s no excuse to looking straight into the movie, introspecting even long after you have seen it and admitting that all of us `haves’ feel rich and prosperous in this country, by looking through the plight of `have-nots’ who are in equally large number in this country. In Mumbai itself, nearly 50 per cent of citizens live in slums but occupy barely 8 per cent of the living space. In Pune too, 40 per cent of the population are slum dwellers. However, due to our wrong interpretation of Karmic philosophy that the sinners are born `poor’, we can drive without apparent guilt in our high end cars through slums - at best sneer at this pathetic neighbourhood for the stench they emanate, feel disgusted for the congestion they create and paradoxically feel triumphant and lucky in our minds about our affluence and the comfortable/luxurious surroundings we live in.
`Slumdog Millionaire’ has awakened the truth of the real Urban India candidly, without any exaggeration. While Bollywood mostly portrays a dazzling picture of life in the name of entertainment and page 3 epitomises this pompous lifestyle, `Slumdog’ hits the very conscience of every educated and prosperous Indian – I, mean, it should. That, it is evoking disdain not only from Big B, whose millions of fans who consider him as God live in that squalour but also many better off citizens of this country, proves that, an insensitive and arrogant frame of mind is second nature to most educated and well-to-do Indians.
We think, living in affluent housing socieites and bungalows means rubbing shoulders with status and class. However, `Slumdog’ hits the bull’s eye and tells you who you are actually rubbing shoulders with. A few examples (some unrelated to the movie) could be – you see a blind or maimed child beggar – through your car window – ever thought how inhumanly he could have been de-capacitated? Your wallet is pick-pocketed at the railway station or your shoes disappear from a public place. Ever thought who these thieves could be? You see mounds of garbage and streets full of litter? Ever thought it comes from our better-off neighbourhoods which can afford to buy all that is wrapped in plastic? We only hold ivory tower discussions of religious intolerance – ever thought how vulnerable slum dwellers are to this and the emotional and traumatic scars those children undergo?
So much like in the movie, we do not want to admit that a slum dweller can have an intellect and would instead like to frame him as a `cheater’ (like in the movie). We love to sabotage the poor becoming rich – like Kapoor attempted in the movie, as the host of `Who wants to be a milliionaire.’ We want the poor to be poor so that we can feel and live rich. The most stark example I came across is this – many affluent neighbourhoods in Pune do not want rag pickers – they spoil the look of the areas through their collection of non-biodegrable garbage in sacks on roadsides, they say. Worse, some said that `with domestic scrap selling business to the tune of Rs.12 crore per year (in Pune), why should the rag picker get it all free?’’
The wall of separation begins from childhood. Rich schools do not want poor children – they are protesting against the new education bill which makes it mandatory to have 25 per cent poor children in every class. Rich children are told that only parents who cannot afford it, send their children to schools on cycles. Rich children are told that parents who cannot afford education abroad, have to toil for scholarship, thus demeaning merit. Servants in rich houses are asked to call even a toddler of the rich family as `didi’ `dada.’ Rich kids can be seen abusing their servants in public gardens. Rich and influential people get `VIP’ darshan in public temples, at the expense of enormous inconvenience to a common devotee, who too comes with all devotion and obeisance. Rich kids grow up with the right of feeling superior – drivers, newspaperwallas, maids, plumbers, electricians, dhoba, chowkidar, kachrewali – all of who are indispensable to portray their prosperity, are treated as non-entities. Rich kids are not given lessons in social equality – they are busy being pampered with materialistic values and pleasures. How can they grow up with sensitivity to every strata of society?
Thus, Big B’s argument that such squalour exists in western countries and is hidden from public eye, holds no water at all. Because the fact is, it exists here just next to you. Unless we (individuals and government authorities) look at every slumdog as a human being who needs a life of dignity just as we, do, we will continue to brush off movies like `Slumdog Millionaire’ as a mode of sadistic pleasure of the rich nations.
Thank you Danny Boyle (director) and Vikas Sapru (bureacrat and original author) for opening our eyes though many would prefer to further close them. Sadism alone cannot get you Oscars – surely the message of human survival and the triumph in inhuman surroundings has pierced every heart!
Vinita DeshmukhEditorIntelligent Pune
