Enough has been said and written (and probably continues to be said and written) about whether it unfairly ‘sells’ Indian slum-life; whether it’s Oscar-material, etc, but here’s another aspect to the raging debate.
This particularly concerns you if you’re a parent of a young child around 7-8 yrs. It struck me as odd when I discovered over the weekend that 2 of my friends had actually walked out of the film, midway. Why? Because they’d taken their little kids along (one a boy, and the other, a girl, in said age-group, to separate theatres, so it was 2 independent instances) and they thought the going was becoming too ‘graphic’ (not my choice of word, but theirs) for their little ones to be exposed to.
I must say that I was a little more than dumbfounded on this reaction. First I’m told the movie has an ‘Adult’ certificate, so what the hell were the parents thinking of before taking their kids to such a movie? I know, I know – no one bothers about an A certificate anymore. That’s fine, but then the risk is yours I suppose—it’s a bit like thinking of a quick answer when your kid catches you watching a porn film—you’ve got to be smart enough to figure out a way of explaining to the child.
Second, almost since then, I’ve been thinking whether they were justified in removing themselves from the scene so as not to expose their kids to such material. More so, I’ve been wondering if I might’ve had a similar reaction if I was in their place.
Though I must admit I’ve long forgotten what it’s like to have kids that young, I refuse to believe that I would’ve acted similarly. Here’s why.
To start with, what was offensive? The dirt and filth of a Mumbai slum? The abusive language? The violence? Now, though we might want to shield our slums from the rest of the world for pride and image reasons, can we really turn a blind eye to their existence back home? Anyone who ignores slums and the people living there is just deluding himself—we all know that they are a definite by-product of urbanization and migration that happen in any developing country. And because we’ve all heard real stories of prostitutes from red-light areas sending their children to schools and scooter-rickshaw-walas’ sons topping Board examinations, we equally understand that ‘rags-to-riches’ is a very plausible paradigm. In an era where we encourage our children to become more aware of the community and treat have-nots compassionately, are we going to cover their eyes when a street beggar walks upto the car window to ask for a couple of rupees? Or are we going to ask them to look the other way when they see very young children of construction-workers playing with pebbles and mud in their makeshift shanties? Hopefully not.
Abusive language? Which of our children has not heard the choicest of expletives in the public schools they attend, or often at home, from siblings and ourselves? Do they not watch violence being glorified in every second Hollywood or Bollywood movie as it is?
What then, could a more reasonable response be? In my case, I would’ve probably had a dialoge with my kids back home, after they’ve watched such ‘disturbing’ scenes in a movie. Then told them that apart from a bit of overdramatisation that is necessary in films, all that’s real. Maybe I would've even taken them to such a slum and made them experience it for real, because as we all know that is the only the real way to teach them. Surely that would've impressed upon them the fact they’ve been lucky to’ve been born here rather than there.
In any case, we all know deep inside, whether we admit it or not, that even very young children are capable of understanding and assimilating a lot more than adults like to believe. And here, we’re talking 7-8 year olds!
Of course, every parent has a right to bring up his child the way he wants, or knows best. But let’s face it, we all know that that children who face what we call ‘hardships’ actually perform much better in later life, irrespective of their formal ‘education’. And later in life, we often regret not putting our kids through the grind enough (‘Oh, how I wish you’d been to hostel—it would’ve made a man out of you!’).
So maybe, this is just one way that we can help our children get real, even though it costs them a temporary nightmare or so?
Posts
Its a natural instinct for parents to be protective perhaps. Oh and the "new" parents are even more protective. They want to medicate and medicated and medicate the pain away from their children's life. All parents do it in some way or the other. Sadly enough it doesn't really give the desired result. :|
ReplyDeleteWell, I never found anything over the board in the film. I read the book on which it is based some years ago, and that really was a hard hitting thing, but the film, well yes the story is bit crude but then reality is always crude.
ReplyDeleteFrankly speaking, my parents took me to a film called Bombay when i was a kid.I recall i ran out of the box, reserved for us in the cinema.But anyway saw the full movie. Parents here may be over reacting a bit.
Well, here's a defence from my friend - one of the parents involved. So this side should be read too. Here goes...
ReplyDeleteSince i am one of the recipients of this outburst in one way or another,contrary to my normal instincts ,I choose to rise to defend myself this time as it involves my son.
Firstly the film according to the papers I read carried a U/A certificate which I thought meant that it could be seen by a child under adult supervision.Nobody at the theatre told me otherwise and some people i met before I saw the film did not warn me otherwise.Lastly i am not aware that an adult cert could only pertain to a porn film I thought adult content could comprise other subjects also i.e subjects that may be deemed unsuitable for younger minds.
Going forward we have had many a discussion with our child about the street children we encounter not in a one dimnensional way but in a multi faceted way.For instance he was aware even before seeing this film that children are maimed so that they can beg more effectively.He is also aware that the less priveleged lack access to sanitation facilities and the household help we employ at home most certainly have to encounter not only lack of such facilities but often face absolute hunger and impoverishment in their native villages.He has grown up with no blinders so to say. His last summer holidays were mostly spent with children of construction workers and he shared his resources with them quite freely in the course of his interaction with them.Some of his best toys happen to be with these friends now .These friends reciprocated equally and were not lacking in any way as I do believe each one of us can bring to the table what we happen to be enriched with and not have reason to feel slighted just because we lack financial resources.
Regarding language , our son is eight years old and abusive language was dealt with long ago.My reasoning with him has been that you are going to hear all kinds of usage of words during your interaction with the world and it is for the individual to decide whether he wants to make them a part of his vocabularly,infact use of such words certainly implies an inability to express yourself with equally potent words which do not belong to the domain of abusive words.When they are young they hear abusive language they dont even understand the meaning of and land up using these words in an inconsequential way.For instance I can call a person a 'bastard' when he has the attributes of one and not abuse him at all with such usage as I am just defining his being.But to call anybody and everybody a bastard or some other mother, father derivative senselessly does not appeal to me.I know he will have to work his waythrough these issues as he goes along as i still do but it also does not mean that I am wrong if i hold that abuses are not absolutely necessary for self expression.
As to walking out of the theatre bit,I do hold that my son is an individual in his own right .He expresed his wish that he did not want to witness it any more and i respected that wish .Just because Iam 49 and he is 8 does not give me the right to play God.I do follow the same principle in many other situations too and it is not merely an act of convenience.As we were walking out he was asking me as to why they made the film the way they did.My reply to him was that these are facts and the director chose to depict them in this way.My question to you is, does it mean that I have to force him to 'see' these facts right there and then , whether he is prepared or otherwise? In the aftermath you could say he had viewed what I term as graphic and please do look at the dictionary and see if I have used the word wrongly,for I was merely describing the way the director chose to depict some events;there was no value judgement implied in the use of the word it was merely used as an adjective .To carry this train of thought further as i have said before we have explained to him how children are exploited for purposes of begging and otherwise but that does not mean i have to locate a slumlord and actually make him witness a decapitation procedure.It has been documented countless number of times that such scenes of violence infact desensitises not only children but adults too.
So,we did not brush anything under the carpet but we had a discussion even before we sat in the car to go home to our 'secure' existance.Given my son's normal pattern reg his way of assimilation or recociliation with respect to uncomfortable/disturbing facts/events,I am already witnessing his need to keep discussing/revisiting such events until he can make sense given his age and stage in life.It is a pity we.adults want to sit in judgement on children when we still have our phobias/fears and points of denial which we may or may not resolve in the course of our lives.
Lastly if there was such a golden rule that hardship endurance gives you guaranteed success,every elite school or place of learning would have been fore runners in introducing hardship endurance in their curriculum!
Well, I loved the movie - the screenplay moved like a thriller!
ReplyDeleteAnd we never allowed the kids to watch, as the subject itself is not for them.
Movies, per say, for kids - should be for entertainment only. You don't expect kids to watch movies that don't entertain them; simple.
Amit
Amit, how can you say the movie did not concern children - it is full of them and about them. And since you say the pace moves like a thriller, it's pretty much what kids WOULD like (unless, of course your kids were too young to follow what was going on). So, by not letting them watch, didn't you pass a judgement straightaway? Also, if it wasnt meant for children, why would it be given a U/A certificate?
ReplyDeleteImperfect, Tushar, I agree with you - there's far too much censorship and moral policing happening these days. I remember it being much less in our days as kids. Is this a case of over-anxiety caused by guilt or the pressures of a fast life?
ReplyDelete@toooldtoboogietooyoungtodie
ReplyDeletefirstly, your plome de nume is too large. Cant you shorten it up a bit? I am going to call you just plain, Sir.
So sir, i feel, you are right. It is guilt and pressure of fast lives parents lead. They are too much immersed in their own lives (as I see it), that children are being neglected. They don't even know about their children. How many parents would, for example have the perfect knowledge of what their children are doing in the virtual world???
Parents in your time perhaps, and in my times for sure, have always been immensely busy.But they always maintain a tab on what we are really up to.
Parenting skills going down the hill these days.
Tushar,
ReplyDeleteI agree that there are 2 kinds of parents these days - the first who don't have a clue about what's happening in their children's lives. But there is the other type who believe in being friends rather than parents. The first kind doesn't really concern me. The second kind is not just interested, but goes way beyond, to understand their kids. And this includes 'joining them if you can't beat them' - hence they too, lead virtual lives, just like their kids!
As for my name, it's derived from the lyrics of a Jethro Tull song, and describes my state of mind very well I think! But u can shorten it to whatever u like!
When I say this movie is not meant for children, I mean till, say, 15 yrs or so. When a movie is full of kids, it doesn't mean its for them. Kids perceive movies with the real world directly - when they come out a movie, they should have an overall nice feeling, and not confused. Charlie Chaplin's 'The Kid' was full of poverty, with a toddler in the main lead - but even today kids would enjoy it.
ReplyDeleteKids do not understand the underlying moral questions or messages in the movies, nor do they understand what direction, screenplay, cinematography, etc is!
As far as the Censorship ratings are concerned, we all know they are baseless!
And by not letting them watch a movie, is not passing a judgment - its like, we decide to which school our children should go to. And when they 'grow' up, they decide which college to go to.
To keep a tab on your kids virtual world, the only way to do, is to hack into it - now do you think thats moral?
-- Amit
Yes. Its past trauma/etc/etc that parents want to be "protective" . They think their child will get hurt otherwise. They fail to realize that this protection doesn't last long enough and the child eventually will get hurt and always does, the protected ones more than the rest. Unless of course their lives have been structured in a way that those roses are thorn less, or worst - they are the plastic ones.
ReplyDeleteMovies are a very small example in fact, I have friends whose parents do not let them travel by say DTC or auto in a place like delhi, not just girls ; even boys. And the same kids are allowed for all night parties at pubs, not very understandable for me. I still strongly believe that this movie was completely ok to be seen by children, yes an 8 year old 'might' not be old enough to view a few scenes, but for that there is always one thing which my parents did, put your hand infront of their eyes. :P
Again, I can count on my fingers the number of movies I went for.
a.)This movie isn't really a children's movie.
b.) a U/A certificate clearly means the parents are taking the risk to take their children for a movie which already says that it is an adult movie,
Well said, imperfect. I tend to agree with you! As a parent of what you might call fairly grownups (23 and 18), I'm trying to think whether I've created barriers in the way of their growing up, and the only point I'm been paranoid about is when they have to drive home late nights after parties - I'm scared of road mishaps, esp post drinking.
ReplyDeleteIts a universal concern. More cause even if you can trust your own you cant trust the typical Delhi rash drivers, so says my mummy :)
ReplyDeleteInteresting! I read (pg 10 of HT Delhi today) that a correspondent had actually shown Slumdog Millionaire to a group of slum children, 8-14 yrs to get their reactions. As expected, they identified COMPLETELY with the film, said it captured their life and surroundings faithfully, and (here's my point) it gave them a message of HOPE. They believe they too can lift themselves out of their misery and become successful! NO ONE SEEMS TO"VE BEEN BOTHERED/SCARED BY THE FILM.
ReplyDeleteLeads me to assert that it's parents among us who pass value judgments on what their children should be allowed to see!