When I saw the film...I left the theater wondering to myself about the way that international affairs are covered in the media or discussed in Washington. Most of the stories we write are about leaders, presidents and congresses, about policies and summits, about strategies and budgets. Every so often, in a war, we capture the shot of an injured child or weeping mother, but we miss the essence of it all, the stories of individual people.
Rothkopf is right that we should focus a little more on the people who need development assistance, not the elites tasked with its implementation. This isn't exactly new thinking, though. My favorite economist has been saying this for years; the "capabilities" of people are what matter in helping a country grow. But in trying to steer a policy community as disparate as development, we should be careful to avoid cliches and one-size-fits all prescriptions - the very aspect of established policy circles that got us to this tired method of international study in the first place.
The movie was fantastic; but take it for what it is - a great story. When pundits and critics start to heap praise like this on it (which everyone seems to be doing) we should be very wary. After all this is the most cliched understanding of modern India that there is:
Juxtaposing the brutal poverty of Mumbai's slums with the glitter and promise of a global television phenomenon like "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?"...[the spirit to overcome this gap] in particular animates all of India.
C'mon! This is straight out of a bad, cheesy travelogue that 20 pages later will tell you which ashram offers the best enlightenment. If you want to reform how people cover and think about policy, don't fall victim to the same generalizing (and frankly lazy) thought patterns. Still, you should go see the movie.
(Photo by Cine Fanatico)
No comments:
Post a Comment