This blog is in response to the documentary BABIES. (http://www.focusfeatures.com/babies, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vupEpNjCuY).
For those who haven't seen it, I guess it's worth seeing... if only so that you can make your own judgments and see whether or not you agree with my perspective. And to be fair, there were some interesting moments, and hilarious clips... yet...
The problem with pictures of Africa is that they show a 1 dimensional image of the poor, rural, hopeless African.
This image is often disempowering, if not outright offensive and inaccurate. This documentary unfortunately is no exception. Through my time in Ghana, I have come to realize, time and again, that there is no one- type of Ghanaian, or African for that matter. There is no one generalization or stereotype that can apply to all. Just as in Canada, you have people who are shy and loud, fair and dark, rude and compassionate, I have seen the same spectrum of diversity in Ghana.
I have experienced first-hand that many Ghanaians are poor. Many live in mud huts, without electricity, without cars or even bicycles, without running water or even accessible clean water, without sanitary latrines, toilets, or any bathroom facility at all. This is probably the image of Ghana that you already had in your mind as soon as you learned that it was in fact a country in Africa.
But what many do not know, and what this documentary didn't show, was that there are also Ghanaians who are educated, and some who are quite wealthy. They live in houses, some even in mansions. Send their children to private schools. Eat icecream, burgers, fries. Dress in suits and high heels. Not only have televisions, but iphones, and blackberries, and SUVs and personal drivers and househelps.
Not to mention the vast number of Ghanaians who live in between these two extremes I've mentioned.
[This is a hot topic for me (quite obviously) and one I may have to beat like a dead horse before I feel I've expressed myself. Earlier you may have seen I posted several pictures showing these different sides of Ghana, the people and places I interact with here. Those pictures were trying to capture my rant above. ]
Watching Babies, a so called documentary about babies all around the world, was supposed to be a nice afternoon. Take my mind off work and stress and enjoy a movie about babies. Who doesn't like babies? I love cross-cultural documentaries! Well.. It wasn't long before I realized that, in my view, the thesis of the movie was actually more about wealth and poverty than anything else and incredibly biased (pro-rich white America). Not a bad idea entirely. More people will probably go to the theatre to watch babies, than if you called the movie POVERTY. But I wish, oh how I wish, that they used this opportunity to reach the general public and show them a different side of Africa, even a different side of America.
Throughout the movie, they go back and forth between 4 families from America to Namibia. But the essence of the documentary was showing how the rich, white, American family cares so attentively for the child, reading from her bookshelf with countless books.. All the while, showing the poor African baby who rolls around in the dirt, mother walking around half naked, smearing his dirty bum on her leg and using a piece of maize to wipe it clean.
I do not purport that some Africans do live in such conditions- incredibly remote, illiterate, impoverished.
I also do not purport that we should show rich, potentially corrupt and selfish, Africans so that viewers walk away thinking that Africa is just fine and we can all rest comfortably at night because poverty is gone.
What I would have loved to see would be a documentary that flips our presumptions about poverty on our heads, while still highlighting the commonalities of childhood worldwide. Instead of showing the wealthy, white American family, show the impoverished, underprivileged Mexican or African American family living in the slums of New York. Show Natives living on reserves in Canada. And show a Ghanaian family that has two working parents, 2 cars, children that go to school, come home and do their homework with the assistance of their attentive mother by the laptop with wireless internet, eat nutritious food, cry for more candy, and sleep in a comfortable bed at night. The same message of the universality of babies could have been portrayed, but without reinforcing cultural stereotypes.
My guess is that people went away from watching BABIES feeling grateful for their upbringing, because it was likely on the wealthy end of the scale. This is not a bad thing. Let people be grateful, see that things are quite different around the world, that materialism has become excessive in the West. But my guess is that people may also have went away thinking that "Africans are backwards" and that there is no hope investing in them, at best-give them aid.
Until Westerners see pictures of Africa that exemplify potential, not hopeless tragedy, Africa will always be seen as a patient not a partner, weak not strong, backwards not advanced. My prayer is that more and more, people will have exposure- either through personal travel experience, family or friends' experiences, or authentic media- to an Africa that makes them think twice about what social change needs to take place so that deserving Africans can fulfill the vast potential available inside themselves, and be respected and given the dignity they deserve. Then maybe the bridge of compassion and commitment will be formed across the Atlantic and we can intelligently work at solving world problems of inequality and injustice.
http://www.seeafricadifferently.com/
Saw the movie, and I loved it.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I don't agree with your views at all. The conclusions I came away with was that no matter where you grow up, or how different your customs are, you can still grow up into being a fantastic human being.
The fact that it was a tribal person from Africa seems moot. You're right on that point, that way of life could have some from anywhere. In South America, for example, where you can still find tribes people. I didn't see them as poor, I saw it as a different way of life.
It also threw into sharp relief the craziness that babies grow up in in modern, industrialized countries. So much over stimulation, ugly plastic toys, and silly group parenting classes. It honestly looked a little ridiculous to me.
All the babies pooped, peed, and cried, regardless of where they lived. They all experienced joy when they started walking on their own, in bare feet or $100 baby shoes.
I my opinion, you completely missed the point of the movie and only saw what you wanted to see.
I just want to point out that the 'African' baby is actually Namibian, not Ghanaian, as you keep infering... just saying that the differences between Ghana and Namibia are as vast as between Namibia and America.
ReplyDeleteOh dear... you totalllly missed the point of the film.
ReplyDeleteAs a mother (who has also been to Africa), I was made aware of some beautiful things by watching this film – that ALL BABIES, regardless of where they live, ARE THE SAME! They all have the inherent need to play and occupy their curious minds with whatever they find in their vicinity; they will cry when they are sad; they will laugh when they are happy; they will get themselves into trouble with their overabundance of inquisitiveness ... they are babies!!! I really felt that it was a neat way to show the viewer the underlying similarities we all share which ultimately unite us as a global community!
Your blog suggests that the vicious motive propelling the entire film was to denigrate “Africans” in general. It's so sad that that's what you took away from such a beautiful film. This movie is not about Africa. Or America. Or poverty/wealth. It's about HUMAN NAUTE. I'm actually insulted that you seem to think that the viewer is generally too stupid to realize that one tiny baby from Namibia (not Ghana) doesn't actually represent every single person on the continent of Africa. Give us some credit. The juxtaposition of American and rural Namibian lifestyle was interesting and not deceptive or fraudulent; they just chose real families to follow. And they had to use families that were outwardly different to more effectively demonstrate and emphasize how all humans are actually so similar underneath it all!
Reading your 'review,' one would never know that there were actually FOUR babies in the film. The other two were from Japan and Mongolia. Yes, two of the four children were more financially 'privileged' but who's to say that that makes their lives better?! I never thought of the Namibian as a “poor, rural, hopeless African.” I don't see how anything was disempowering. If anything, I came away from the film feeling that our North American lifestyle is gluttonous and superficial since the babies in Namibia and Mongolia were JUST as happy (if not happier since they weren't over-parented to the point that a peanut will eventually be able to kill them!) This movie instead highlights how few worldly goods one actually needs in order to thrive as a child. It speaks more to our excess than it does to any insufficiencies we perceive others to have.
The film was not to show that there are people in Africa with iPhones. The similarities highlighted between all of our cultures lie MUCH deeper than the frivolous 'toys' we have in our societies; the similarities lie in our human nature. THAT was what the film was about.
By the way, your so-called 'rich white American family' were technically middle-class hippies from San Francisco; if the documentary wanted to focus on real wealth, the film would have taken a very different direction.