slumdog or hotdog?

Slumdog or Hotdog?

When the Slumdog ( my friend's 9 year old daughter chooses to call it hot dog...its hot news, afterall!!) controversy broke out with stalwarts writing about it, me, the ordinary Indian decided to pitch in too....perhaps someone somewhere is interested in the common man's views......

Lets start from the beginning, from the first reaction to the subsequent ones. To be very frank, my first reaction to comments on the film being a peddlar of ' glorification of poverty' was incredulity. Its just a film after all, its bound to be inspired by something or the other, in this case something being 'Slums of India and a novel set in the same', but subsequently over a period of time, I too could not help but be aggrieved by what I saw my friends from west conjuring about India through their impressions from the film. It hurt, for anybody who knows India knows that though slums are a reality, they are not the only reality. However the film is not just for people who already know India, its also for people who are getting to know India only through films like this or books like 'The White Tiger'. Their pathetic impressions of India hurt alright. There is a lot more to India and being Indian, I wanted to say but who cares to listen to me? Iam not an oscar winner after all !

So, well, am I to be blamed for being a split personality, of not being able to acknowledge the truth of poverty etc.etc in my land? The thought bothered me a lot, and I sat down to fathom it all out, in my mind of course...the safest place of all nowadays...

Poverty and its depiction are nothing new. International humanitarian organisations like UN etc. too talk of Indian poverty all the time, they showcase it all the time and nobody minds, why? The answer gets me to the core of the problem, at least in my eyes. The purpose of an act defines the merits or the demerits of that act, to a large extent. Nobody minds a UN depiction of poverty because its all for a good cause....... but when depiction of somebody else's poverty is for reasons other than humanitarian, the responses can be quite different depending upon the context.

' All in the name of creative freedom' too is also perfectly justifiable, and that, incidently may be all that Danny Boyle was doing when he set out to make the film- a good subject, good treatment and thus an extremely enjoyable film. Period. However, it didn't stop at that did it? When the same film starts being touted as a mirror of Indian society by the ignorant West or vested Indian interests, its time to speak up. There is a fine line between exploration and exploitation of sensitive issues like poverty, handicaps, cultural differences etc. and this line is often crossed by one and many in the name of politics, humor or even creative liberties. A bit more of sensitivity may go a long way in restoring dignities which sometimes get trampled upon during people's personal quests.

Also as I read blogs and comments in Indian media lameting the poor portrayal of India, I wondered where has our good old Indian tolerance gone? They said ''People living in ivory towers do not have a right to talk about poverty...'' Why may I ask? If people in ivory towers cannot critique or talk about issues regarding slums, then by that standard all our ministers, scribes and do-gooders who wish to talk about similar issues, should be living in slums, right? But they don't do they? People who have done well for themselves through hard work need to be appreciated and applauded for their efforts, not barred from commenting on issues which plague their society simply because they have managed to rise above it. India needs to remember and renew its heritage of tolerance, I feel.

Let us leave 'Slumdog millionaire' to be what it set out to be...an interesting film which deserves all the artistic accolades that it has received. Neither is it a mirror to Indian society nor a matter of national shame..sil vous plait.