Poverty as entertainment: Ending Kibera's slum tours

[Guest guest]

Poverty as entertainment: Ending Kibera's slum tours

Comment & analysis

Rasna Warah

2011-03-23, Issue 522

Kibera, Nairobi's most notorious slum, is now the subject of a reality TV show.

Rasna Warah slams the growing fashion of 'slum tourism'.

Apparently, a reality show-cum-documentary called `Famous, Rich and in the

Slums', which has been shot in Kibera, has been airing on British TV in the last

few days. The film is being promoted as a fund-raiser for the residents of

Nairobi's most notorious slum.

A British journalist, who told me about the film, and who has lived in Kenya for

several years, said that she was `shocked and appalled' at the way Kenya was

being portrayed to the British public, and wondered why `Kibera has become as

iconic as the leaping Maasai warrior used to be'.

The two-part documentary shows four British celebrities, including the actor and

stand-up comedian, Lenny Henry, leaving their privileged lives behind to spend a

week with residents of what the producers of the film describe as `one of the

most impoverished places on earth'.

The film by Red Nose Day, a charity whose slogan is `Do Something Funny for

Money', shows the celebrities mingling, sleeping, eating and defecating with the

locals. `It's like being in hell,' Henry is quoted as saying, minutes after

relieving himself at a pit latrine that he shared with hundreds of Kibera

residents.

For many Kenyans, the film is the worst form of slum tourism because it turns

poverty into entertainment in the name of charity.

Kennedy Odede, a former Kibera resident who is currently a student at Wesleyan

University in the United States, says that while he understands the need among

foreigners to witness poverty, he believes that slum tourism is largely a

one-way street: `They get the photos; we lose a piece of our dignity.'

Slum tourism is one of the fastest growing trends in Kenya, particularly since

the films `The Constant Gardener' (partially shot in Kibera), and `Slumdog

Millionaire' won s.

Odede says that, like the Hollywood films, slum tourism has become another

source of recreation for people who think they can understand poverty just by

hanging around poor people for a few hours.

In an opinion article titled `Slumdog Tourism' published in the New York Times

in August 2010, Odede recalls his first experience of a slum tour when he was

16.

`I was outside my 100-square-foot house washing dishes, looking at utensils with

longing because I hadn't eaten in two days. Suddenly, a white woman was taking

my picture. I felt like a tiger in a cage. Before I could say anything, she had

moved on.'

In another incident, a documentary film-maker who was interviewing him started

to video a man defecating. `For a moment,' he says, `I saw my home through her

eyes: faeces, rats, starvation, houses so close no one could breathe.'

What has this kind of tourism done to the residents of Kibera, except erode

their self-respect further and make them objects of foreigners' pity?

There are dozens, if not hundreds, of charities operating in Kibera and other

slums like it, with few significant results to show for their efforts.

There may be slightly more sanitation facilities in the slums now, but the

living conditions have become only slightly less appalling - they have not

improved dramatically. And the slum continues to grow.

What's worse, rather than addressing the bigger issues of social justice and

human rights (which slum residents are denied daily by virtue of their

dehumanising living conditions), charities and other do-gooders believe that

provision of toilets, water and other amenities is the solution to

slum-dwellers' problems.

For instance, a product called Peepoo is being promoted in Kibera as an

environmentally safer alternative to the notorious `flying toilet' plastic bags

used by slum residents. The product (which is patented by its Swedish inventor)

is a biodegradable bag that `sanitises the human excreta shortly after

defecation'.

Critics say that the bag may be environmentally friendly, but it is hardly a

sustainable or permanent solution to the lack of sanitation facilities in slums.

Its well-intentioned promoters also gloss over the fact that defecating in a bag

is hardly an edifying experience.

But then why blame foreigners when our own government, and the MP for Kibera,

Raila Odinga, don't give a s*** about where Kibera residents defecate?

They should be explaining to Kenyans why so many of the country's citizens have

no choice but to pee and poo in a bag.

BROUGHT TO YOU BY PAMBAZUKA NEWS

* Rasna Warah is a writer and journalist based in Nairobi. Her email is

rasna.warah@....

* Please send comments to editor@... or comment online at Pambazuka

News.

* This article first appeared in the Daily Nation.

* More information on this topic can be found by reading 'Mega-slumming: A

journey through sub-Saharan Africa's largest shanty-town' (2009) by Adam

Parsons.

[Guest guest]

Poverty as entertainment: Ending Kibera's slum tours

Comment & analysis

Rasna Warah

2011-03-23, Issue 522

Kibera, Nairobi's most notorious slum, is now the subject of a reality TV show.

Rasna Warah slams the growing fashion of 'slum tourism'.

Apparently, a reality show-cum-documentary called `Famous, Rich and in the

Slums', which has been shot in Kibera, has been airing on British TV in the last

few days. The film is being promoted as a fund-raiser for the residents of

Nairobi's most notorious slum.

A British journalist, who told me about the film, and who has lived in Kenya for

several years, said that she was `shocked and appalled' at the way Kenya was

being portrayed to the British public, and wondered why `Kibera has become as

iconic as the leaping Maasai warrior used to be'.

The two-part documentary shows four British celebrities, including the actor and

stand-up comedian, Lenny Henry, leaving their privileged lives behind to spend a

week with residents of what the producers of the film describe as `one of the

most impoverished places on earth'.

The film by Red Nose Day, a charity whose slogan is `Do Something Funny for

Money', shows the celebrities mingling, sleeping, eating and defecating with the

locals. `It's like being in hell,' Henry is quoted as saying, minutes after

relieving himself at a pit latrine that he shared with hundreds of Kibera

residents.

For many Kenyans, the film is the worst form of slum tourism because it turns

poverty into entertainment in the name of charity.

Kennedy Odede, a former Kibera resident who is currently a student at Wesleyan

University in the United States, says that while he understands the need among

foreigners to witness poverty, he believes that slum tourism is largely a

one-way street: `They get the photos; we lose a piece of our dignity.'

Slum tourism is one of the fastest growing trends in Kenya, particularly since

the films `The Constant Gardener' (partially shot in Kibera), and `Slumdog

Millionaire' won s.

Odede says that, like the Hollywood films, slum tourism has become another

source of recreation for people who think they can understand poverty just by

hanging around poor people for a few hours.

In an opinion article titled `Slumdog Tourism' published in the New York Times

in August 2010, Odede recalls his first experience of a slum tour when he was

16.

`I was outside my 100-square-foot house washing dishes, looking at utensils with

longing because I hadn't eaten in two days. Suddenly, a white woman was taking

my picture. I felt like a tiger in a cage. Before I could say anything, she had

moved on.'

In another incident, a documentary film-maker who was interviewing him started

to video a man defecating. `For a moment,' he says, `I saw my home through her

eyes: faeces, rats, starvation, houses so close no one could breathe.'

What has this kind of tourism done to the residents of Kibera, except erode

their self-respect further and make them objects of foreigners' pity?

There are dozens, if not hundreds, of charities operating in Kibera and other

slums like it, with few significant results to show for their efforts.

There may be slightly more sanitation facilities in the slums now, but the

living conditions have become only slightly less appalling - they have not

improved dramatically. And the slum continues to grow.

What's worse, rather than addressing the bigger issues of social justice and

human rights (which slum residents are denied daily by virtue of their

dehumanising living conditions), charities and other do-gooders believe that

provision of toilets, water and other amenities is the solution to

slum-dwellers' problems.

For instance, a product called Peepoo is being promoted in Kibera as an

environmentally safer alternative to the notorious `flying toilet' plastic bags

used by slum residents. The product (which is patented by its Swedish inventor)

is a biodegradable bag that `sanitises the human excreta shortly after

defecation'.

Critics say that the bag may be environmentally friendly, but it is hardly a

sustainable or permanent solution to the lack of sanitation facilities in slums.

Its well-intentioned promoters also gloss over the fact that defecating in a bag

is hardly an edifying experience.

But then why blame foreigners when our own government, and the MP for Kibera,

Raila Odinga, don't give a s*** about where Kibera residents defecate?

They should be explaining to Kenyans why so many of the country's citizens have

no choice but to pee and poo in a bag.

BROUGHT TO YOU BY PAMBAZUKA NEWS

* Rasna Warah is a writer and journalist based in Nairobi. Her email is

rasna.warah@....

* Please send comments to editor@... or comment online at Pambazuka

News.

* This article first appeared in the Daily Nation.

* More information on this topic can be found by reading 'Mega-slumming: A

journey through sub-Saharan Africa's largest shanty-town' (2009) by Adam

Parsons.