From the Slums to the Red Carpet

I am very sure that everyone knows what country I am talking about. The "slums" part of the title, I am sure, gives it away. As most of you may know, I work as a waiter at my father's restaurant during the weekend. Every now and then there is a guest who feels that it is their job, or in some cases talent, to bring me to shame due to my nationality. Please do not get me wrong, Flesherton is a beautiful town with beautiful people and beautiful tourists. I am talking here of that one odd person. Anyways, coming to the point, the reason I felt compelled to write this note was a simple one, one of our ex-employee's ignorance about my nation. It all started at 2:00 pm today (Sunday August 9, 2009). She started with a simple question, "So Aakash, how bad was your English when you first came to Canada?" The problem was not her question. It was the fact that she asked it in a very insulting manner in front of company dining with her. It induced a giggle from all the other three of her companions. I gave her a wide smile and replied, "When I was offered the job, Ma'am, it was under the condition that I be polite to all the guests under all circumstances. I do not see any possible way to answer your question without violating that condition. So do wait back until 3:00 pm and I will answer it once I am off-duty." All this was said with a sense of humour, a feeling of hurt and a wide smile that let her know that it would take a lot more on her part to break me and get an insult out of me. She did, to my great pleasure, wait back for my reply. I assure you my friends, I said to her with all politeness I had in me, "When I first came here my English was better than yours will ever be. I had, and still do have, a better vocabulary. Just because I am from India is no reason for my English to be of a poor quality." The reason I was compelled to write this note is not the fact that I need to vent my anger, but rather the fact that I want to clear any illusions that people have about India.

We do have many slums. According to a 2007 estimate, about 25% of our population still does live under the poverty line (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/print/in.html). On the other hand, we are a rapidly developing nation. If you can name me one rapidly developing nation (non-communist) that does not have social stigmas to fight, I shall accept defeat. According to 2008 estimates, 12% and 11% of the population in the US and Canada, respectively, lives under the poverty line (http://www.indexmundi.com/). Coming back to the point of India being a rapidly developing economy, the evidence lies in the fact that 8 years ago, in 2000, 35% of the population lived below the poverty line. Yes we are still a nation that believes in superstitions. Allegedly, it is still a nation that believes in the repression of women. Yet, India recently elected Pratibha Patil (currently serving) to become the first woman to hold the office. India elected Indira Gandhi to two terms as the Prime Minister of the nation. The US has yet to have a woman elected to the presidential office or even the vice-presidential office. The president of the current ruling party (Indian National Congress) is Sonia Gandhi, a woman. In fact, she is the Italian widow of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi (assassinated May 21, 1991). How does this in anyway indicate that India is a nation that still believes in repressing its women? I agree that there are many families that believe in the orthodox methodologies, yet there are cities sprouting up all over India that are becoming important centres for World Trade. Every time I here someone say they want to go to India, I ask a simple question, "Why?" Surprisingly, 7 out of 10 times the answer is, "To see India as it is. To see the plight of the poor people and to see the copious amounts of corruption that goes on over there." Why not go there to see the Taj Mahal? Why not go there to see the beautiful temples? Why not the forts which carry a unique story? Why the poor? Why the corruption? Why has that become the stereotypical view of India? It really warms my heart when someone says to me, "We were in India and oh what a wonderful place it is. History and modern development walking side by side." That is not at all wrong; the Gateway of India still stands proud amongst the development of Mumbai. The Lal Quilla (Red Fort) still casts its wondrous presence over the development of Delhi. It is like this, Indians when visiting the US or Canada, say that they will see the big cities, the tall buildings, and the lifestyle of the people in developed nations. They do not say that they are visiting to see the homeless, the poor, the racists or the hypocrites.

People say that India is not a nation, but hundreds of nations put together by the British. Why do I feel that historical evidence proves this to be wrong? Asoka Maurya (born 304 BC) ruled almost all of the Indian sub-continent from 273 BC to 232 BC. H.G. Wells said of Asoka, "In the history of the world there have been thousands of kings and emperors who called themselves 'their highnesses,' 'their majesties,' and 'their exalted majesties' and so on. They shone for a brief moment, and as quickly disappeared. But Asoka shines and shines brightly like a bright star, even unto this day" (Wells, The Outline of History, 1920). After the Persian invasion the Mughals ruled over most parts of northern India until Akbar annexed most of the sub-continent to the Mughal Empire. The British succeeded due to their use of proper governing methods. Their ways of dividing the nation into states, states into districts and so on. The English, though, did teach us the meaning of "United we Stand, Divided we Fall". Which is why today when I walk out to play cricket in India, I do not care whether my captain's name is Ali or Shyam or Chris.

People in developed nations always think that India is still a land of snake-charmers, a land where the kings still rule. I really do not see the point in that. India has been to the moon and back, it has been to the Oscars (won 4 times and received an honorary award once and nominated once). I am not claiming Slumdog Millionaire to be an Indian film. It is not. It is a British film based on an Indian novel (Q & A, Vikas Swarup). The awards and nominations I speak of are Rahman for Best Music and Best Original Score, Gulzar for Best Lyrics, Bhanu Atthaiya for Best Costume Design, Russell Pookutty for Best Sound Mixing, Satyajit Ray received the honorary award in 1991 and Lagaan was nominated for Best Foreign Film. India has made huge leaps in the fields of medicine, science and technology, and yet we have to struggle to prove to the developed nations that we are worth an investment. What I find disturbing is how SOME Canadians blame Indians for the loss of jobs in Canada claiming that "we stole their call-centre jobs". No, we stole many other jobs as well due to the simple reason that we are willing to work without any "oohs" and "aahs" and without creating a fuss with the unions. I mean if I have to live in what is practically a garbage dump just because the union is on strike, how can I claim to be living in a developed nation (referring to the recent fiasco in Toronto)? If I fear that my sister will be insulted due to her race and colour of her skin at the bus stop, how can I claim that I live in a developed nation? If I fear that I will be stereotyped as a "slumdog" due to my skin colour how can I be living in a developed nation? If all this is common in developed nations, then I am regret I left India to come to such a nation. Well, I am obliged to say that I mean no offence, and I really don't, but I can not be expected to sit quiet while someone insults my pride, my love and my dignity.