I was born and raised in India and when I heard of Born into Brothels I was very curious to know what the film was all about. And my biggest criticism of the film is the film's gross misrepresentation of the situations and complete disregard for the local support systems.
There are a lot of local NGOs in Sonagachi and other red light areas in Kolkota who work for the betterment of living conditions there. They have been there for years and have done real grassroots work in India. Work which often goes unnoticed by the western media!
In fact Zana Briski received a lot of help from local NGOs. Local NGOs helped her with access, with the system and with some simple day to day jobs. But in her film she did not acknowledge a single local NGO. She portrayed herself as a Messiah on a mission to eradicate misery and hopelessness from these kids' lives. Her portrayal was absolute and self-propagandizing, not to mention contrived and cheesy. In her film she completely disregarded the social welfare system, although fractured but functioning, already in place.
Yes, the kids living Sonagachi don't have many opportunities, don't have a bright future and don't have the best living circumstances. But their lives are not as dark and hopeless as portrayed in the film. There are helping hands and there are people dedicated to the betterment of the living conditions. Indian government supports a lot of these local NGOs, India has free public education and health-care system. In Kolkota itself there are about 3000 registered NGOs supported both by Indian government and private funds. Yes there are rots in the system, but tell me one system that is really perfect.
But why would Zana Briski and Ross Kaufmann acknowledge these local efforts? They are filmmakers, they want drama, they want sensation. They want that classic underdog story. They want the story which the Western media would love, adore and accolade. They are not there to help the kids, but are there to help themselves.
Yes the film is beautifully made, but it is not really a documentary. It is not a fair and objective representation of the reality, which in mind ideally a documentary should be. But rather it is self-serving, westernized, and highly prejudiced manipulation of the reality.
There are a lot of local NGOs in Sonagachi and other red light areas in Kolkota who work for the betterment of living conditions there. They have been there for years and have done real grassroots work in India. Work which often goes unnoticed by the western media!
In fact Zana Briski received a lot of help from local NGOs. Local NGOs helped her with access, with the system and with some simple day to day jobs. But in her film she did not acknowledge a single local NGO. She portrayed herself as a Messiah on a mission to eradicate misery and hopelessness from these kids' lives. Her portrayal was absolute and self-propagandizing, not to mention contrived and cheesy. In her film she completely disregarded the social welfare system, although fractured but functioning, already in place.
Yes, the kids living Sonagachi don't have many opportunities, don't have a bright future and don't have the best living circumstances. But their lives are not as dark and hopeless as portrayed in the film. There are helping hands and there are people dedicated to the betterment of the living conditions. Indian government supports a lot of these local NGOs, India has free public education and health-care system. In Kolkota itself there are about 3000 registered NGOs supported both by Indian government and private funds. Yes there are rots in the system, but tell me one system that is really perfect.
But why would Zana Briski and Ross Kaufmann acknowledge these local efforts? They are filmmakers, they want drama, they want sensation. They want that classic underdog story. They want the story which the Western media would love, adore and accolade. They are not there to help the kids, but are there to help themselves.
Yes the film is beautifully made, but it is not really a documentary. It is not a fair and objective representation of the reality, which in mind ideally a documentary should be. But rather it is self-serving, westernized, and highly prejudiced manipulation of the reality.