Slumdog Redux
By dcmediagirl on February 23, 2009 at 11:24 AM in Current Affairs
Last week I wrote a blog post comparing and contrasting the egregious Octomom with the charming protagonist of the much-beloved “Slumdog Millionaire”. Somehow the comments led the conversation into a deep and high patch of weeds.
Now that the hullabaloo has died down, why not stir it up again?
I want to clarify a couple of points:
I wrote that the term “walla” is a derogatory one, much like calling a black man “boy”. Someone posted a denial, saying that “walla” is not like calling someone a “n****r” . Well, I agree. I never suggested it was. What I wrote was that it’s a derogatory and demeaning term IN THE CONTEXT OF THE REGION. To call someone a “server” here is not considered insulting – when have you ever heard anyone speaking unkindly about a “barrista”? But in South Asia, where caste and social standing are all-important and your lot in life pretty much determined at birth, being referred to as a “walla” is most certainly an insult. And by the way, whoever it was who commented that discrimination against the servant/working class is a Western construct (implying that servants and working class people are somehow treated with respect in South Asia) is smoking crack.
Another commenter insisted on steering readers to a photo essay about the slum depicted in “Slumdog”, trying to advance the tired and dangerous cliche that there is some inherent nobility in poverty, that the slums have a vibrant entrepreneurial class and that slumdwellers don’t need no stinkin’ help from the West. Interesting. Considering the feeding frenzy that’s broken out over who is entitled to the money paid to the children in “Slumdog Millionaire” and whether or not those children were paid a living wage, and how the parents of the children burned through the money given to them by the filmmakers, it seems that slumdwellers aren’t self-contained to the point where they’ll turn down filthy Western lucre. How shocking that the Indian poor want money! This person was also quite adamant that I read the captions. Well, I did read the captions. The one that sticks with me was that there is one toilet for every 1,400 or so people. Now, maybe the poster thinks that there is something exciting and vibrant about that many people living in unsanitary conditions. Never mind that waterbourne diseases are exceptionally dangerous and rampant in developing nations.
As to the point about the “entrepreneurial” spirit of the slumdwellers, perhaps it’s worthwhile pointing out what that means. I happen to think that people deserve better than to make a living sorting through garbage to find a few discarded items to sell for pennies. But I guess that POV is symptomatic of my arrogant, elitist Western frame of mind.
So instead of steering you to a photo essay, I refer you to the following quote:
Slum life is a cage. It robs you of confidence in the face of the rich and the advantaged. It steals your pride, deadens your ambition, limits your imagination and psychologically cripples you whenever you step outside the comfort zone of your own neighborhood. Most people in the slums never achieve a fairy-tale ending.

















