Rosie Joyce Dissertation

ARC3060 Dissertation in Architectural Studies

The Ethical Debate Behind Slum Tours as Managed Entertainment Dharavi, Mumbai How does tourist behaviour, sounds and imagery within YouTube vlogs facilitate slum tourism as ‘entertainment, something that can be momentarily experienced and then escaped from?’1

Adissertation submitted to the University of Newcastle for the degree of Bachelor of Arts in Architecture in the Faculty of Humanities

Newcastle University School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape January 2021 Rosemary Joyce Student Number: 180203710 Dissertation Elective 5: Colonial Exchanges Dissertation Tutor: Martin Beattie Wordcount excluding footnotes: 8786 Wordcount including footnotes: 9221 Covid-19 Research Adaptation Account: Page 4

1

Kennedy Odede, Slumdog Tourism The New York Times. (New York City: The New York Times, 2010)

1

Figure 1a Tourists in the late 1990’s photograph a slum resident

The Ethical Debate Behind Slum Tours as Managed Entertainment How does tourist behaviour, sounds and imagery within YouTube vlogs facilitate slum tourism as ‘entertainment, something that can be momentarily experienced and then escaped from?’2

ABSTRACT: I address the ethical criticism of slum tours as leisure activity, analysing three YouTube vlogs of tours to further existing debate. I present Dharavi as a cultural hotspot, but also a community disadvantaged by negligent politics. From here, I investigate the theoretical and research-based motivations of slum tourists, identifying

2

(Odede, 2010)

different tourist typologies. I review existing studies of online representation of slum tourism, understanding their fundamental conclusions and methods. These inform a thematic analysis of YouTube videos which is supplemented with key examples of tourist behaviour, language, sounds and imagery throughout.

2

CONTENTS Foreword - Acknowledgements - Covid-19 Research Adaptation Account

3

Dissertation Introduction

5

Chapter 1 Introduction to Dharavi - The modern-day conditions and lifestyle in Dharavi - The historical marginalisation of Dharavi

6

9

Chapter 2 The Leisure-Seeker, the Activist/Moralist and the Volunteer - The ethics of slum tourism in existing research

-

Categorising slum tourists

Chapter 3 Reviewof existing analyses - A summary of key analyses of digital representations of slum tourism - Reflection on these methods

13

Chapter 4 Analysis of three YouTube videos - Part 1 - Digitalising the slum - Part 2 - Authenticity and Representation - Part 3 - Power and Respect

15

Conclusion - What are the conclusions and limitations to my analysis?

- What we can learn about the ethics of slum tourism through shared media?

- Does vlogging further slum tours as temporary entertainment?

Appendix A Supplementary information - Introduction to YouTube videos 1, 2 and 3 with stills List of Figures Bibliography

3

23

23 34

FOREWORD

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my tutor, Martin Beattie, for his assistance during unprecedented and strange circumstances.

I would also like to thank essential workers who have tirelessly worked to provide some sense of normality during the difficult global pandemic, over the course of which this dissertation was written.

Research Adaptation due to Covid-19

arguments against slum tourism and the damaging impact of filming and misrepresenting a community online.

My research was impacted both positively and negatively by the restrictions associated with Covid-19. I originally wanted to visit Dharavi myself, but coronavirus-related travel restrictions made this impossible. I was intrigued by slum tours, and further researched to realise the negative impacts they present. YouTube videos were my only way to ‘experience’ slum tours virtually and I realised some elements of these videos, when grounded in criticism and postcolonial theory, were problematic.

Despite this, library closures made it significantly slower to research and find appropriate texts with full access.

Additionally, working from home presented many difficulties for me in terms of focus and loneliness which I feel clouded my research process. The multiple lockdowns and being unable to work with other people was slow, quite depressing and not how I imagined my final year at university would be.

Due to the altered nature of my dissertation topic I didn’t rely on collecting first-hand research, so I was not limited by this, except the time it took to switch ideas and research further. Working through a global emergency, however, offered a host of alternative issues

Despite the travel restriction originally making my dissertation topic of slum tours seem implausible, it allowed me to spread my research further afield and become significantly more critical. Previously, I had wanted to experience a slum tour myself, I now understand 4

INTRODUCTION Slum tourism is criticised by media as unethical. I will be analysing to what extent tourist representation in YouTube vlogs of Dharavi is consistent with Odede’s statement.

craft workshops, recycling centres, cramped alleyways, resident homes and viewing platforms which boast views across colourful tin rooftops. Some tours also focus on parts of the slum which feature in Slumdog Millionaire (2010). The buzz surrounding this film has generated an increase in tourists, also driven by intriguing urban photography and videos on social media. Major researcher in the field of slum tourism Frenzel states ‘Every mediated picture creates more desire to see for yourself',5 which implies online representation increases this damaging tourist boom further. This is why I believe it essential to scrutinise videos.

In The NewYork Times (2010), Kennedy Odede stated that slum tourism "turns poverty into entertainment, something that can be momentarily experienced and then escaped from". He criticises slum tours, which have gained popularity in the last twenty years in Dharavi, India’s largest slum. In addition to criticismfrommedia giants The New York Times and Life Magazine, scholarly debate across tourism research elects slum tourism as irresponsible, unethical and cruel, but analysis of the tourist further debates this. In this dissertation, I will be analysing YouTube tourist vlogs of slum tours to contribute to existing debate, providing new insight into the motivations or ‘gazes’3 behind slum tourism. My goal is not a determined answer on the extensive moral debate of slum tourism, but to observe whether slum tourist vlogs are damaging, further supporting Odede’s statement.

The key questions I will address to establish whether video representations of Dharavi are damaging are; Howdoes digitalising Dharavi raise newethical issues?

Is Dharavi represented authentically within the videos?

Howdo the vloggers present their power and respect within the videos?

Nowadays, vlogging is a popular choice for documenting, celebrating and sharing travel experiences. Vloggers can earn an income from advertising and merchandise. This is an uneasy dynamic, as tourists generate revenue from exploring an impoverished community, raising consequent moral questions beyond the original tour. The touristic attitudes, motivations and behaviour is of key concern, as their videos can underpin selfish, unaware and exploitative attitudes. However, there are progressions which can show the opposite; intelligent, understanding and inclusive tourists. I will be exploring these aspects further through a reading of the debate surrounding slum tourism, informing a theoretical framework and identified ‘gazes’ which I can apply to real-life examples of tourists on YouTube.

Since its formation in 1884, Dharavi has become a centre of independent trade in Mumbai, representing a resilient and skilled community of people. However, Dharavi also represents a disadvantaged and unsustainable image of poverty in the 21st century, where substandard living conditions are a reminder of Mumbai as a postcolonial world. As a result of the vibrant culture, local trade and an increase in digital representation in recent years, Dharavi is a popular tourist attraction, made possible through externally run slum tours.

Tours are targeted at tourists who crave an authentic and ‘off-the-beaten-track’4 experience, beyond conventional tourist hotspots. Slumtours typically involve a one-to-twohour trip on foot along a route designed to showshopfronts,

John Urry. Jonas Larsen. The Tourist Gaze 3.0. 1st edn (California: SAGE Publications, 2011)

3

5

Heather Mair. Meghan Muldoon. Blogging Slum Tourism: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Travel Blogs. TourismAnalysis. 21(5) (2016) p.

467 4

5

Fabian Frenzel. Slumming It : The Tourist Valorization of Urban Poverty. (London: Zed Books, 2016)

CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION TO DHARAVI Abackground on modern-day Dharavi and its historical growth In this chapter I introduce Dharavi, where the tourist vlogs I analyse in chapter 4 are based. Elements of Dharavi create a tourist hotspot, but this often disregards disadvantaged lifestyle caused by a historical marginalisation.

Modern-day Dharavi

there is no space for expansion, people now forced to inhabit the more dangerous industrial areas and pavements of the slum.

Situated in central Mumbai, India’s commercial capital, Dharavi is an area of low-rise vernacular dwellings spanning just 2.1 kilometres but hosting a population of over 1 million people. In Dharavi, community and industry thrives in a ‘self-sufficient, self-sustaining village’,6 where traditional crafts are celebrated, an informal economy inducing an estimated $1 billion annually. The slum constitutes a ‘multi-religious, multi-ethnic and diverse’7 community, 85% of whom work in traditional trades, such as pottery-making, embroidery and tanneries. Dharavi situates many labour-intensive production lines, for example producing steel-frames for suitcases. This vibrant display of cultural tradition, skill and productivity is a major attractor to tourists, hence the organisation of guided tours. However, some criticise the heavy working culture as a ‘sweatshop operating in oversight’8 where slum residents are taken advantage of for global commerce.

There is no answer to the emergency in Dharavi, as redevelopment plans are either expensive or revoked by residents. Slum tours offer little solution, instead a momentary ‘romantisation of poverty for middle classes’, with little respect for the hardships both in present-day and historical Dharavi.

Dharavi’s Historical Marginalisation To understand the marginalization Dharavi residents face beyond their physical conditions, we briefly reflect on how cultures of political neglect caused the ‘mushrooming’12 of slums. This section briefly contextualises the postcolonial critique of tours which begins chapter 2.

The 19th century saw Mumbai (then Bombay) in an ‘arbitrary privileged position due to colonial intervention’.13 Rapid urbanisation was necessary to maintain industrial success of the opium and cotton trade, transforming the city from a place of localised indigenous trade to a centre of global commerce. Colonial powers became more spatially important than the livelihoods of the native class, and spatial boundaries formed.14

There are many disadvantages to living in Dharavi, often overlooked in slumtours. Dharavi’s rapid growth in the late 20th century and lack of infrastructure meant that streets are ill-formed and there is little space for modern ‘sanitation, drains, safe drinking water, roads or other basic services’.9 Some areas are at risk of demolition by land developers, others endangered due to their proximity to the sea, as global warming presents major flooding issues with no long-term solutions.10 Breathing the air in Dharavi is as health compromising as smoking 50 cigarettes per day due to toxic industry fumes, and the death rate is double that of suburban Mumbai. 11 Disease due to poor sanitation accounts for nearly 40% of this death rate. Housing is inadequate, an average of 12 square feet per dwelling, and

As the population increased due to migrating workers, highly-polluting tanneries and potteries, managed by people typically of lower classes, were relocated from central Mumbai to an isolated swampland.15 This area formed as Dharavi in 1884. Indian natives remained behind the ‘borders enforced by the British Raj’16 and relied on Sanyal, Gareth. A. Spectacle and Suffering: The Mumbai Slum as Worlded Space. Geoforum(2009) pp. 1-9

11

Tayyab Mahmud. Slums, Slumdogs, and Resistance. American Journal of Gender, Social Policy and Law(2010), pp. 685-170.

7 Maanas Taneja. Dharavi The Story of Asia's Second Largest Slum.

(2019) 6

Mahmud, 2010 Amar Farooqui. Urban Development in a Colonial Situation: Early Nineteenth Century Bombay. Economic and Political Weekly (1996) pp. 2746-2759.

12 13

8

Mahmud, 2010 Liza Weinstein. The Durable Slum: Dharavi and the Right to Stay Put in Globalizing Mumbai. (Minnesota: Minnesota Press, 2014)

9

10

Farooqui, 1996 Weinstein, 2014 16 Mahmud, 2010 14 15

Weinstein, 2014

6

substandard living conditions to keep trade profits high, while the urban sector flourished. The influx in population with limited a geography left workers who could not be ‘steadily employed or sufficiently utilised’17, relocated to slums-areas with no government-built infrastructure.

privatisation of essential services, causing further neglect of the working class. The informal shadow economy grew as the only source of livelihood for the poorer working class, increasing the army of labour residing in slums. The imbalance in wealth lead to the modern-day, where today Mumbai is a modern metropolis but 65% of its population occupy slums.18

India declared independence in 1947, but the impacts of rapid urbanisation were irreversible. Slum communities enlarged. Postcolonial governmental elites celebrated the remains of segregation in Mumbai and policies rendered the poor as impediments to progress, recognising issues but failing to deliver solutions. Significantly, the development of Mumbai into a commercial capital essentialised the unmonitored shadow economy in Dharavi, an ‘army of labour’ working in unprotected, and low-wage jobs as there lacked alternatives for survival.

The growth of Dharavi has seen it develop into an engaging tourist attraction, a community pushed to their physical limits by historically negligent politics, but succeeding nonetheless. However, this historical culture of ignorance denotes an ‘awkwardness’19 in slum tourism, as people finally pay attention to Dharavi, but often fail to see the larger historical or political picture past the tangible slum.

The privileged tourist experiences the far-reaching effects of postcolonial poverty as ‘entertainment’,20 condensed to a 2-hour-tour, at their convenience, almost a mockery of significant hardship.

In the 1970’s, Dharavi faced expansion again, essentialised further as a place of informal trade and free labour in the neo-liberal movement. Neo-liberalist policies reduced government spending on welfare services, whilst Mumbai expanded rapidly as a post-industrial financial centre. The lack lacking governmental funds caused an increase in

Farooqui, 1996 Christine Bernarz, Inside The Controversial World Of Slum Tourism, National Geographic, (National Geographic, 2018), pp. 1-4 17

19

18

20

7

Bernarz, 2018 Odede, 2010

Visual Study of Dharavi

8

CHAPTER 2 - SLUM TOURISM ACROSS LITERATURE The Leisure-Seeker, the Activist and the Volunteer This chapter aims to situate the issue of slum tourism in current literary debate and ongoing research, arriving at three tourist typologies to further explain the motivations behind slum tourism. tour does not benefit residents, but commodifies them, and the community is not only used as entertainment but disadvantaged further. This suggests that the slum tour becomes a ‘contact zone’28, as explained by Pratt, defined as spaces where ‘asymmetrical power relations’ cause a ‘grappling culture clash’.29 In summary, the context of Dharavi as a postcolonial side-effect means that many critics regard it highly problematic for tourists to visit with the main driver behind this being leisure.

To examine Odede’s statement of poverty becoming ‘entertainment’, which tourists ‘momentarily choose to experience’,21 we use both postcolonial theory and contemporary research to develop a theoretical framework for analysing tourist videos. Odede is a social entrepreneur who provides education within slums, recognised as a world-leading activist, so his claim is evidently founded in experience and should be taken seriously. His work draws media attention to slumtourismin major media outlets The New York Times and Life Magazine. However, media outlets can exaggerate for dramatic effect or controversy, so it is essential to read beyond his surface-level statement.

However, researchers attempt to understand the slum tourist motivations past leisure. Philosopher Foucault described the tourist ‘vulnerable to composite judgement’, and discussed how tourist power could be exchanged for knowledge, not limited to oppression.30 In the Tourist Gaze 3.0 sociologist Urry developed tourist ‘gazes’ which imply that motivations are informed by many external factors which change how individuals see certain situations and gauge how we respond.31 What tourists expect to see and what they share is linked to their political, economic and social background. Urry defined the main ‘gazes’ of British tourists as the ‘collective’ and the ‘romantic.’32 The collective is the typical beach holiday tourist and the ‘romantic’ outlines ‘a lonely traveller discovering the ‘other’ in search of the true and authentic’.33 We use this theory develop more specific slum tourist ‘gazes’ later in this chapter.

Recent literature describes slum tourism ‘anomic evildoing’22 and ‘exoticised poverty porn’.23 Here, slum tourism is voyeuristic and slum residents are compared to zoo animals, but there are theoretical reasons behind this.

Theorist Bhabha presents the binaries of us/them, strong/weak, rich/poor, North/South,24 applying them in postcolonial situation. The innate desire to see what society regards the ‘other’ exists within slum tourism due to Dharavi being a postcolonial locality. Witnessing poverty for leisure transforms a dynamic of ‘self/other’ into ‘tourist/slum resident’, where there are ‘unequal relations of power are based on binary opposition’.25In this case, the ‘other’ does become alikened to zoo animal. In prevalent researcher Frenzel’s case study; Beyond Othering, he suggests ‘tourismis embedded into a post-colonial context’ in which ‘othering’ is combined with ‘radical differences in income, power and mobility between the visitors and the visited’.26 He notes that ‘‘otherness’ is consumed with little or no advantage for the ‘othered’ people’ 27. Here, the slum

The Tourist Gaze 3.0 presents a well-balanced and diplomatic analysis of tourists. Unlike previous versions, the 3.0 edition also discusses photography in tourismwhich was essential for my later analysis. Whilst Frenzel explains postcolonial critique, Urry assigns a system to further

Odede, 2010 Cristina, A. Mendes. 'Showcasing India Unshining: Film Tourism in Danny Boyle's Slumdog Millionaire. Taylor and Francis Online, 24(4) (2010) pp. 471-479 23 Mendes, 2010. p. 472

Frenzel, 1996, p. 16 Mary. L. Pratt. Arts of the Contact Zone. Profession, (Modern Language Association, 1991) p. 34

21

27

22

28

Pratt, 1991, p. 34 Mi So-Min Cheong. POWER AND TOURISM: A foucauldian observation. Annals of TourismResearch, 27(2), (2000) Pp. 371- 390.

29 30

Bhabha, Homi. K. The Location of Culture. 1st edn (London, New York: Routledge, 1994) 25 Ahmed, Afaf. Post-colonialism Literature the Concept of self and the other. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, (2014) pp. 99-105 24

Tzanelli, 2018 Urry, 2011, p. 3 33 John Urry, 2011, p. 5 31 32

26 Fabian Frenzel. Beyond ‘Othering’: The Political Roots Of Slum Tourism. Poverty, Power and Ethics in Global SlumTourism(1996) pp. 1-14

9

categorise tourists to avoid completely demonising them.

Notably, whilst Beyond Othering is critical of slum tourism, his recent book Slumming It divulges more positive aspects of slum tourism, but still maintains that slum tourism aims to fix single communities and their specific needs, rather than the larger problems of national and global inequalities.34 Both researchers have informed a basis of knowledge of tourist theory and postcolonial discussion, which I found useful. Frenzel appears bettervoiced acutely in slum tourism research, whereas Urry gives a broader view of tourism, occasionally referencing the slum tourist.

Dharavi satisfies Urry’s romantic tourist gaze as a ‘expectation of authenticity’39, which often the communities exude for financial gain.40 The factor which least motivated tourists to partake in a tour was interacting with residents. Additional research by sociologist Aquino in the South American favelas explains mutually beneficial interaction is the only way to stop residents feeling like ‘zoo animals’.41 Conversely, Ma’s resident interviews expose that the main improvement residents would make would be more interaction, allowing sale and cooperation. This suggests there is a discrepancy between the tourist interest and the residents’ desire, fulfilling Frenzel’s claim there is ‘little or no advantage for the ‘othered’ people’.

Positive discussion of slum tours in literature is limited, instead focused on separating tourist mindsets to justify areas of slum tourism. Nonetheless, some state that the tours are essential as a booster to the local economy.35 Tour companies reinvest in communities, benefitting Mumbai tourism sector and Dharavi through projects. However, sociologist Hall counters this, suggesting people presenting these viewpoints benefit financially fromthe tours or fail to understand long-term negative impacts of tourism.36 Similarly, the adaptancy theory implies that locations adapt beneficially to tourism, an example the increasing sales in Dharavi. It is argued that tours encourage local pride and a sense of community, allowing real ‘culture’ to be celebrated.

In Ma’s survey, the positive responses about tours from residents were non-conclusive and vague, whereas the negative results were specific. A key complaint was the lack of improvement for residents, despite the charity programmes set up by the tour company Reality Travel Tours, which suggests that programmes were not successful. This counters tours as economic ‘boosters’, at least if the ‘boosting’ is considered within Dharavi, rather than the tourism sector. Charity also became a concern, as tourists who reported their visit was under charitable motivations answered subsequent questions which revealed that the tourist did not donate on the tour and many would not donate to homeless communities at home.42 This implies a lack of moral clarity, suggesting that the slumtour is realistically ‘entertainment’.43

Survey Research Whilst the literary criticism on slum tourism is extensive, to validate theoretical ethical concern, survey data is important to consider.

Ma’s study is critical of slum tourism, and the conclusions suggest that tourists prioritise leisure over charity, give little back to the community, and residents feel apathetic or negative towards the tours.

Bob Ma’s study Trip into the Controversy (2009) involved questionnaires with slum residents and tourists aimed to dissect travel motivations. The key driver for slum tourists was cultural curiosity and authenticity, and 48% saw the tour as a positive experience.37 Tourists separate ‘curiosity’ from ‘fun or escape’, and most said they wanted to experience ‘reality’. Ma is critical of this response, as he argues that because slum tours follow a strict path with no deviance, they offer a ‘staged authenticity’,38 which is not representative of the whole slum. The search for a ‘real’

To counter this, a 2017 survey reaches different conclusions. Rudra Rhodes worked with Reality Tours on a survey of the resident attitudes within Dharavi. 79% of residents were content with the tours, stating they enjoy having guests. The survey highlights the benefits to community entrepreneurship and the sense of pride

34

Fabian Frenzel, 2012. Slumming It : The Tourist Valorization of Urban Poverty. (New York: Zed Books, 2012)

37 Bob Ma. Trip into the Controversy: A Study of Slum Tourism Travel Motivations. Penn Humanities forumon Connections. (2009-2010)

Freya Higgins-Desbiolles. In the Eye of the Beholder? Tourism and the Activist Academic. Tourismand Visual Culture, Volume 1 Theories and Concepts 1 . (2010). Pp. 98-105.

38

Ma, 2009-2010 Urry, 2011 40 Urry, 1996 41 Jessica Aquino The psychosocial impact of volunteer tourismin the favelas of Rio de Janeiro. (LSE Publishing: 2014) 42 Ma, 2009-2010 43 Aquino, 2014

35

39

36 Stuart Hall, Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices, 1997)

10

associated with the tours, with reference to literary criticisms44. However, the study admits that residents rarely saw improvements developed by the agency, again countering the economic ‘booster’ theory. This report was produced with Reality Tours, so could be biased and created a source of advertisement, as it is provided on the tour agency website. Additionally, surveys of slums often encounter false positive results, as residents may fear a negative reaction from an interviewer when questioned, so the positive statistic of the residents may be misrepresented.

44 Rudra Rhodes. Reality Tours and Travel: ACommunity Perception of Tourismin Dhavari. Mumbai, India: Reality Tours and Travel.

(Mumbai: 2017)

11

Categorising Slum Tourists into Gazes

The Activist

To explore whether slum tours present only entertainment, the different motivations behind tourists should be explained, developing Urry’s theory of gazes. Critics have previously presented slum tourists as one greater evil, alongside postcolonial theory. Higgins-Desbiolles raises the issue of generalisation in slum tourism research ‘the tourism industry overshadows the more public-minded, multicultural and equitable forms of tourism’45. This suggests slum tourist present complex mindsets past leisure, defining gazes; volunteers, activists and leisureseekers,46who all experience Dharavi differently based on their political stance, economic standpoint and moral compass.

The activist visits disadvantaged communities to represent socio-political change. Activist tourism is largely debated, as it is reliant on a tourist being up to date on current issues as well as having a deep historical understanding to justify their visit, perhaps to enrich a campaign. Tzanelli discusses how the emergence of activist tourism is essential for protection of slum communities in place of lacking state welfare, which currently disempower poor and ethically different communities. The people who ‘politics placed on the right side of the fence’49 feel a moral obligation to enact social change, and tourism is a way to access this responsibility. Activists manage their guilt as ‘the lucky ones’, entertaining a lifestyle free from squalor and poverty, by going on a slum tour as an accessible method to exercise their activism.

The Leisure-Seeker The leisure-seeker shows a deep interest in the craft, trade and industry in Dharavi, or visits to experience the extremes of poverty. Leisure-seekers are targeted with criticism and exposed via social studies as unethical, reinforcing ‘self/other’ constructs. Tour companies take advantage of leisure-seekers, insisting they are helping the community or being ‘authentically’ educated in their romanticised tourist gaze, but this is not often accurate.

These motivations are evident within the videos I will be analysing and are key to interpreting tourist behaviour online. These categories can overlap. For example, activists are aware that the situation in Dharavi needs urgent attention but are unaware that a slum tour may not be the best way to do this. Slum tours are advertised as ‘educational’ and ‘eye-opening’50 to appeal to a socially aware audience but operate solely as money-makers.

Agencies capitalise on activists, selling an experience which avoids the stigma attached to viewing marginalised community for leisure, but in reality, doing precisely that.51 Inherently here, any activist becomes a leisure-seeker.

The Volunteer Volunteers visit for an extended period and are documented as the least harmful form of slum tourism.47 The extended time allows volunteer/resident relationships to develop, in a valuable cultural exchange, wherein the tourist sacrifices more than a few hours of their time to fully engage.

According to Aquino’s research, this allows meaningful and responsible tourism, and is regarded separately from organised slum tours.48 However, the volunteer is not strongly represented within slumtourismresearch, perhaps due to it being less popular or problematic than tours, so it is not as well researched.

In conclusion, the activist and volunteer counter Odede’s claim that slum tours turn poverty into purely ‘entertainment’. The establishment of these roles is an important development within literature, allowing deeper understanding of complex tourist mindsets. My video analysis will investigate ways tourists enact these typologies further, using knowledge of the criticisms of slum tourism as a guide.

Tzanelli, 2018 Rolfes, 2009 51 Ma, 2009-2010 49

Higgins-Desbiolles, 2010 p. 102 Tzanelli, 2018 47 Sanyal, 2015 48 Aquino, 2014 45

50

46

12

CHAPTER 3 – REVIEWOF EXISTING ANALYSES Summarising existing research studies in digital representation of slumtours This chapter outlines key findings in two studies of digital representations of slum tourism. I aim to summarise their analytical methods and conclusions, creating a baseline to guide my own analysis. minor differences between the sites, for example one appeals more to the female safety on the tours, and the other uses oriental colours and typefaces to enhance its apparent authenticity, but in general they have similar outputs.

Online representation of slum tours furthers the existing criticism. Videos, blogs and websites allow tours to become accessible entertainment comparable to TV shows.

Digital formats enlarge the available audience of slums, amplifying Odede’s comparison of the slum tour to ‘entertainment’.

Overall, Laigsingh’s study is thorough, but limited by extensive detail on typefaces and website button functions which detracted from the overall clarity of the analysis, without contributing substantially to the thesis. It is limited by no data on the websites’ usages, and whether they are successful. However, there is little research completed on digital presentation of the slumand it becomes important to question how the slum is arranged for digital consumption, which is why I feel there is space for my analysis within the discussion. This research is useful; key issues within digital representation emerging which may be similarly present in YouTube videos.

In Representation, sociologist Hall states media is manipulated to make us think a certain way. The producer creates ‘preferred meaning’ which is more widely accepted and entertaining.52 Digital media channels represent information in receivable ways, but this representation may lose authenticity, which is damaging to those misrepresented.

Existing Analysis of Slum Tour Agency Websites Websites are a major source of advertising for slum tour companies in Dharavi. A Multimodal Analysis on The Online Representation of SlumTours in Dharavi is a paper

by PHD student Sita Laigsingh. She selects two slum tour agency websites and categorises her analysis based on the imagery, language, sounds and graphic display the websites employ to sell slum tours. She uses a systematic system of analysis, creating an ordered approach in explaining every detail of the sites.

Existing Analysis of Online Tourist Blogs Blogging Slum Tourism - A Critical Discourse of Travel Blogs by tourism researchers Mair and Muldoon dissects the linguistic traits slum tourists present in blogs. They selected 36 reviews of slumtours (non-specific to Dharavi) and upon first reading, established key codes and themes present to structure the analysis. They selected textual examples which illustrate their key themes and analysed these to reinforce their original observations.

Laigsingh concludes that both agencies represent Dharavi strategically, not authentically. Both present Dharavi positively; images of industrious workers, independent trade, smiling children. However, they keep enough of the poverty in to maintain an emotional interest in a viewer, commodifying the slum resident by using any hardships as guilt-trips.53 Both websites illustrate Ma’s ‘staged authenticity’54 and Hall’s ‘preferred meaning.’55 The primary ‘preferred meaning’ is Dharavi as a place of essential cultural education and productivity, creating an attractive, trustworthy and professional web-environment for a user, so they are more likely to book a tour. There are 52 Hall, Stuart. Encoding and decoding in television discourse. (Leicester: University of Birmingham Press, 1973) Pp. 1-12 53Laigsingh, Sita. Slum Tourism In Dharavi A Multimodal Analysis On The Online Representation Of Slum Tours In Dharavi’. (Nijmegen: Radboud University Press, 2019) Pp.138.

The key themes they established were; creating permission(s), reimagining/re-presentation of self, essentializing and victimizing, privileging experience, and hierarchy of experience.56 Their study concludes that tourists avoid the guilt of seeking leisure on the tours, describing experiences as “‘life-changing’ and ‘eyeopening’”,57 essentialising the slum tour. Semantically similar words such as ‘true’, ‘authentic’ and ‘off-thebeaten-track'58 present the slum as the ultimate must-see

Ma, 2009-2010 Hall, 1973. p. 2 56 Heather Mair. Meghan Muldoon. Blogging Slum Tourism: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Travel Blogs. Tourism Analysis.

21(5) (2016) p. 467 57 Mair and Muldoon, 2016. p 467 58 Mair and Muldoon, 2016. p 471 54 55

13

under Urry’s romantic gaze to find the true India, while doing so ‘finding themselves.’59

acute and thorough analysis. Mair and Muldoon use their subject to develop a thematic framework, whereas Laigsingh used a general pre-existing ‘multimodal’ framework to analyse websites.

Similar to Laigsingh’s study, they found tourists present the slum residents as “‘always smiling’” and “‘thriving’”60, which may be influenced by how the slum is presented to them by tour agencies, but also how tourists perceive it to avoid ethical guilt. Importantly, the researchers note that some of the blogs contained affiliate links to tour agencies, meaning that both the creator and the agency generate profit from these reviews.61

Mair and Muldoon’s approach is more similar to the approach I will take with my analysis, employing a thematic framework justified by key examples which I can extract from the YouTube videos and analyse further. My analysis will differ in its themes, as these emerge from primary observations in tourist YouTube vlogs, but there will be overlaps due to their focus on digital representations of the slum. These studies were very useful, as blogs are the predecessor of YouTube videos, and YouTube is a place of advertisement much like tour agency websites, meaning there are strong overlapping tendencies.

Reflection Mair and Muldoon’s research is useful in its approach of making primary observations, and then analysing further to reinforce these areas. They are thematic with the topics they engage with, whereas Laigsingh presents more technical,

59 60

Urry, 2011 Mair and Muldoon, 2016. p 470

61

14

Mair and Muldoon, 2016. p 473

CHAPTER 4 - ANALYSIS Thematic observations of three YouTube videos; analysing imagery, sound and tourist behaviour In this chapter I analyse three YouTube videos. This reveals more about digital representation of slum tourism and whether the use of media channels furthers Odede’s claim that slum tourism is entertainment which commodifies a community.

In this analysis I observe whether tourist vlogs continue to demonstrate harmful purely leisure-seeking touristic attitudes, or whether the forward-thinking activist or volunteer are prevalent. Upon watching three videos, I generated themes where the videos share similar moments; digitalising slum tourism, authenticity and representation, and power and respect. The videos will

be analysed through observations of sound, imagery and tourist behaviour, in reference to the themes.

The three videos encompass different tourist mindsets but under analysis present issues. Stills, titles, plot summaries and information about the three videos is in Appendix A, and this information should be read through before and continually referred to throughout this section.

ANALYSIS PART 1 Digitalising slum tourism – Advertising, Monetisation and Clickbait

Figure 2a shows that in September 2020, all three videos were monetized with AdSense. The creators earn revenue depending on their viewcounts. Therefore, attracting and maintaining a viewer is important. The advertisements are unrelated to the video topic and their heavy presence shows that within shared media, the priority is revenue and influencing. The videos have been uploaded for similar periods, but have obtained very different viewcounts, 1 having the least and 2 having significantly more. This can be explained in part by the content of the videos, which we look at further on in this chapter. From factors including viewcount across channels and amount of advertising, we assume that the vlogger in video 2 benefits the most financially from their content.

Mair and Muldoon’s study revealed that 18% of the tourist blogs were financially affiliated with tour agencies.62 This suggests that financial benefit may cause biased presentation of experience. Similarly, video creators rely on monetization through advert placement to earn revenue.

Creators also earn from affiliate links, subsidization, contribution sites or merchandise sales. Where previously only the tour companies benefitted from the tours, the tourist nowfinancially benefits too. This introduces a moral concern of tourists generating income from videos of extreme poverty, whilst often actively contributing little to the community.

Video No.

Viewcounts

Time Online (weeks)

Video adverts

Banner adverts

In video advertisements

Affiliate Links

1

9,690

118

Yes, 2

Yes, 3

2

5,613,444

144

Yes, 5

None

Yes, to tour company No

3

49,032

145

Yes, 1

Yes, 2

Yes, potentially to tour company Yes, but not to tour company No

Yes, to tour company

Est. annual channel revenue (SocialBlade)* £1.1K - £17.8K £1.8K - £29.5K £16 - £256

*These revenues are not accurate due to other methods of earning from YouTube, i.e. merchandising, affiliation and subsidisation which are not public domain. Also, SocialBlade uses an algorithmic method to gauge revenue which may differ per vlogger.63 Figure 1a A table which shows the reception and advertising of videos 1, 2 and 3 62

(Mair, 2016)

Information sourced from YouTube.com, links to videos available in list of figures

63

15

Video 2 attracts the most viewers, which is interesting as it is perhaps the most authentic. This reinforces that tourists and viewers alike crave authenticity to be entertained.

Video 1 is not as popular, but the vlogger has a large subscriber count, which implies this sort of video is not popular on her channel. This may be due to the lack of slum footage in this video, which people are keen to see to satisfy their curiosities. Conversely, video 3 has a large viewcount when compared with a small channel size, suggesting that the slum scenes presented attract significant attention.

Based on viewcounts alone, videos containing ‘real’ slum footage are profitable and supply major traffic to YouTube channels.

relations between the tourist and slum resident in video 2 which counter this, which is covered in Power and Respect.

Figure 2c Video 3. The caption reads ‘the tour will redefine what a slumis and open your eyes to the reality’

In addition to the obvious visual advertising, informal advertising of the slum tour companies can be seen across videos 1 and 3. This demonstrates the influential power the vlogger upholds. The tourist in video 1 shares the tour agency name and recommends them strongly as safe and enjoyable.

Figure 2d Video 3. The tour guide advertises the company for 40 seconds and the website is provided

Clickbait is a modern representational issue within YouTube. Video 1 is titled INDIA’S BIGGEST SLUM – Mumbai Vlog. The uppercase text creates urgency and priority when viewing the title, drawing attention from the viewer. The superlative ‘biggest’ connotes an impressiveness to Dharavi before even clicking. Despite the title including the word ‘slum tour’, the word ‘slum’ was not used until minute four of eight minutes. Phrases such as ‘laundromat’, ‘somewhere else’ and ‘fishing village’66 are used alternatively, which avoids connotations with squalor, dirt and poverty, instead connoting productivity and tradition. There is little footage of Dharavi within the video due to rules within the specific tour agency. The title of the video can be considered clickbait, a technique in which attention is attracted through the use of shocking words of imagery in a thumbnail or title of a video which is then not followed up upon watching the video. This shows that extreme poverty is glorified momentarily to attract viewers, much like the slum tour websites use extreme imagery to manipulate a viewer, but

Figure 2b Video 1. The tourist mentions the agency she travelled with

This is a minor advertisement compared to video 3, in which the tour guide speaks to the camera for 40 seconds.

His statements are imperative and direct such as ‘this tour will redefine what a slum is’ and ‘open your eyes’ which are commanding in nature, nurturing values of selfdiscovery and education. Tourists and viewers trust what is educational and self-enlightening, and this is marketed on.

This display raises questions about levels of authority within the tours, as the guide is permitted to speak to the camera and advertise, but there is no opportunity for residents to advertise their trade, which fromsurveys is the main positive factor to tourism for residents. This supports that slums become ‘contact zones’64, where asymmetrical power relations cannot be ignored.65 There are power

64

(Pratt, 1992)

65 66

16

(Cejas, 2006) (Quinn, 2018)

transition into positive imagery to avoid guilt or ethical doubt.67

suggest videos spread awareness, inspiring educated attitudes towards political change. However, although creators can manipulate their information to enforce a general ‘preferred meaning’69, they cannot control how a viewer may interpret or use the video. Additionally, critic Frenzel states ‘Activism must consider strategies beyond simply increasing visibility’.70 Therefore, the accessible nature of videos means that slum tours become ‘entertainment’ to a large proportion of viewers, a digital tool for an audience to ‘momentarily experience’ poverty then ‘escape’71 from it.

Figure 2e Semantic language pathways from the word ‘slum’, ‘laundromat’ and ‘fishing village’, suggesting how viewers respond

In conclusion, the digitalization of slum tours on YouTube presents new moral conundrums for creators and viewers alike. Making profit from footage of poverty agrees with literature which identifies slum tourism as an ‘anomic evil’68 and the use of YouTube to advertise slum tour agencies furthers the issue. In general, the creation and viewing of YouTube content satisfies Odede’s claim that slums are viewed as ‘entertainment’. An activist may

67 68

Hall, 1997 Frenzel, 2016, p. 192 71 Odede, 2010 69

Laigsingh, 2019 Mendes, 2010, p. 462

70

17

ANALYSIS PART 2 Authenticity and Representation This section questions how tourists represent Dharavi, and whether what they show is authentic. Authenticity questions the experience the tourist has, and representation questions the digital portrayal of this experience.

Mair and Muldoon establish that tourists who are ‘off-thebeaten-track’ feel more ‘worldly’72, paying attention to a lesser-known issue. Dharavi becomes essentialised as a ‘real’ tourist experience of India. In an age of competitive social media, leisure-seekers want to share their individual ‘eye-opening’ experience. The activist is contented that they have educated themselves further on real-life issues and are empowered by knowledge, ready to share it online.

Figure Video 2g. Overhead panning shots from a viewing station

Despite video 1 only including one shot of the tour, the tourist lengthily discusses her tour thoughts at the video’s end. She demonstrates a positive mindset when speaking in selfie-mode (Fig. 2h), explaining that her tour group were not ‘just looking at poverty’ but glancing into the ‘daily routines of a community’, describing Dharavi as ‘good life for locals’ and hoping ‘they (residents) don’t mind’ the tours. The selfie-mode implies authenticity and trust between the vlogger and viewer. The phrase not ‘just looking at poverty’ shows a recognition of the ethical debate surround slum tourism which instills a trusting relationship, suggesting that the vlogger has clear moral awareness. However, within this vlogger we can also see a leisure-seeker distracting the ethically controversial reality of the tours with positive language in authentic sounding and personal discussion. She mentions the slum tourism debate to demonstrate moral awareness, but no stronger message past hoping that the residents tolerate the tours, which does not absolve the concerns.

In this section I analyse whether tourists are representing slum tours in ways which avoid ethical dilemma, negative audience reactions or social stigma, and whether what they have experienced can be truly authentic, which Ma suggests it cannot.

In video 1, the tourist shows one shot of the tour, due to filming limitations of the agency. This is an overhead panning shot. This view is commonplace in videos and communicates a generalised Dharavi to viewers. From the perspective, we can tell the image is taken from a viewing station (Fig. 2f), and this communicates that organized tours are managed to show scenic or impressive locations in Dharavi. A version of Dharavi is presented in a way which makes it accessible to tourists and viewers; local craft, trade, colourful tin rooves and happy residents.

Figure 2f Video 1. Overhead panning shots from a viewing station

72

Figure 2h Video 1. The vlogger has a 'discussion time' element to her video at the end

Mair, 2016

18

In video 2, the vlogger also employs a ‘selfie-mode’ discussion, but this time at the beginning. He discusses the history and hardships of life in Dharavi in a factual way with historic images overlaid (Appendix A for more details). This shows a researched approach to a more activist-lead visit to the slum, and the tourist describes a personal journey to his interest in Dharavi, stating he has visited previously and wishes to return to gauge it properly.

His discussion feels far more authentic, showing awareness of the hardships continually faced by slum residents over decades of negligence, which is far more advanced than the comparatively weak statements presented in video 1 which do not go beyond hoping they withstand the tours.

Additionally, the placement of this personal moment at the beginning sets up a reliable tone throughout the video. The discussion in video 1 feels more like a vague afterthought in comparison. A criticism of video 2’s discussion is that it provides an educational backdrop to earn initial credibility, a purposeful attempt to distract from any glorification of Dharavi.

experience is more authentic as they do not follow a particular route around the slum, but sees many different areas (more details in Appendix A) for a longer time, suggesting that this perspective of Dharavi cannot be staged and is more comprehensive.

Video 3 shows an extreme positive portrayal of the slum, similar to video 2, but shows footage of an organised tour.

It is titled ‘Dharavi slum tour, Mumbai. Slumdog Millionaire is a little different in reality’. Using the popular film Slumdog Millionaire to draw viewers in, the video claims to subvert what viewers believe about Dharavi, promising a real-life perspective. The vlogger shows similar imagery; children playing, local crafts, recycling centres (See Appendix A). These connote positivity and culture, a community thriving despite facing hardships, a similar message to the discussion section in video 1. If Dharavi was dangerous to live in and the community were suffering and unhappy, the vlogger would be morally in the wrong to capitalise from it, so they present Dharavi in a way which avoids the blame.

Figure 2i Video 2. The vlogger begins with a personal introduction

Video 2 shows a non-organised slumtour, and the residents are content, engaging with the tourist with pride and enthusiasm. Hardships of slum-life are highlighted, as well as positives, which creates reason to believe that the content the vlogger presents as authentic and balanced, especially as the tourist is not on an organized tour. Phrases such as ‘the way you have to see India’ do not seem as unrealistic, and there is reason to trust the independent vlogger in comparison to commercial tourism companies who use similar language such as ‘the REAL Dharavi’ to advertise for profit. Despite this, the language shows that it is essential for a tourist to have an individual and authentic experience. The vlogger visually shows content residents, rather than expecting it as in video 1, which is more reliable. He isn’t hesitant to show the hardships of Dharavi for fear of moral judgement fromthe audience. The vlogger

Figure 2k, l Video 3. Imagery of craft, with annotations. Find more in Appendix A

Video 3 aims to be educational, therefore fact-based and trustworthy, using frequent textual screens to contribute facts about the crafts and trades, appealing to an audience who feel they are learning something, not gazing onto poverty mindlessly. (Fig. 2j). Ma’s research contends this, as he suggests slum tours portray one route focused on the 19

positive and productive aspects of life, such as crafts and entrepreneurship73. This version of Dharavi is presented in video 3. This leads us to question the authenticity of the scenes within video 3 as a rounded representation of Dharavi. The representation of slum tours as ‘educational’ is damaging, because it gives the viewer and tourist an empowered rite of passage to the slum, commodifying the imagery, culture and lifestyle even further for selfimprovement.

a clumsy generalisation, as this music is non-specific to Dharavi and provides a flowery, glossy and auto-generated image of Indian culture. The use of it makes the video feel more authentic, showing that modern-day media channels are following Hall’s representation theory, thematic signifiers such as music creating a ‘preferred image’ which the creator wants the viewer to enjoy without questioning.74 In conclusion, the videos strive to show an authentic experience of Dharavi, but the research suggesting that slum tours are not authentic themselves unhinges this.

Videos 1 and 2 allow greater vlogger/viewer relationships, which makes them more trustworthy and personable to watch. This allows greater freedom to explain their thoughts and experiences, whether they are truly authentic or not. Video 3 is lacking in this area, and the highly curated shots which glorify the craft and trade in Dharavi present a ‘preferred meaning’ or ‘staged authenticity’. It can be argued that video 2 does this to a lesser extent, by showing a positive and excited portrayal of the Dharavi, but the context of non-organised tourism and self-lead discovery detracts from this, implying that the vlogger here engages with more volunteer traits.

Figure 2j Video 3 Textual messages on screen to educate the viewer.

Video 3 uses sitar and oriental drum music, which a Western tourist would generally consider ‘Indian’ music in

73

Ma, 2009-2010

74

20

Hall, 1973

ANALYSIS PART 3 Power and Respect

Tourists living in a slum is a new form of slum tourism which we can potentially separate from the staged 2-hour guided tour. This agrees with Higgins-Desbiolles’ article presenting new ‘equitable forms of tourism’78. Tourist attitudes in video 2 counter Odede’s claim that the slum is just entertainment, as the vlogger presents himself as more of a volunteer, not primarily seeking leisure but aiming to establish relationships so slum dwellers are not alienated.

However, it can be argued that by uploading videos to YouTube, the slum becomes entertainment for thousands

There are two layers of power and respect visible within tourist videos, the first initial actions, reactions and attitudes of the tourist, the second their creative choices in editing or filming. This is telling of a tourist’s respect level.

In The Tourist Gaze 3.0, Urry presents photography as ‘blocks of space-time’75, the composition, framing, inclusion and exclusion of certain elements as representative of a tourist’s mindset. Cameras offer the power to manipulate environments fromafar, Urry defining a new ‘self/other’, instead suggesting ‘master/other’76. The tourist portrays the ‘other’ how they desire, often innocently, but tourist motivations are revealed through what they present. The vlogger becomes the ‘master’ of shared media and can film, edit, reorganise footage, hiding elements which may reflect on them negatively.

Videos 1 demonstrates tourist power through not presenting footage of the slumat all. This shows respect for the slum residents, however titling the video a ‘slum tour’ is troublesome, as discussed earlier. The video does demonstrate power tourists have to freely explore and include a slum tour as part of a checklist of things to do in Mumbai. This privilege to travel, relocate and explore is inaccessible to many slum residents, and the tourist demonstrating this power highlights this. Overall, there is not substantial footage to further comment on in video 1 for this section.

Similarly, the title of video 2 My Daily Life in the Slum highlights that while residents of Dharavi are financially limited to the slum due to the cost of living in Mumbai, tourists can choose to momentarily experience this lifestyle and freely leave. This shows Frenzel’s discussion of ‘mobility’77 as a discrepancy between self/other.

Figure 2m, n Video 2. Images showing high levels of tourist involvement.

of people regardless, thus defeating activism purposes.

In video 2, the vlogger repeatedly exchanges conversation, shakes hands, high-fives with the residents. This shows a personal connection and equality, also implying that the resident is aware of their inclusion in a video, an element which video 3 ignores. This counteracts Ma’s analysis of tourists, as his research concluded that tourists did not interact with residents, and residents were most unhappy with this lack of interaction. Additionally, it contrasts the idea of slums as Pratt’s ‘contact zones’79, as here cultures appear to mix freely, and asymmetrical power relations do

Despite this, video 2 presents a mutually beneficial experience for the resident and tourist, and it is suggested that a friendship is formed. There are more voluntarist traits within the tourist, as the connection which is formed seems helpful and respectful. It is evidently a leisure trip which the tourist makes no attempt to hide, but he seems culturally aware and fully immersed in the lifestyle and the routines of slum living, partaking in a festival and being invited on stage by the residents (refer to Appendix A for details).

Urry, 2011 Urry, 2011 77 Frenzel, 2012 75

78

76

79

21

Higgins-Desbiolles, 2010 Pratt, 1992

not strongly infringe on this.80 Interaction can be unwanted and invasive, which can be seen across many videos where contact seems undesirable or staged, but there are occasions where this is not the case and these occasions work well to dispel the stigma surrounding slum residents.

confused resident facial expressions may lead us to agree with Ma’s line of research. The children look confused, a man in the background is visually concerned and other tourists within the group photograph the children keenly regardless (see figure). The music, overall, makes the video marketable as ‘authentically’ Indian ad easier to watch without concern for the emotional impact these tours may have on residents.

Many videos do not have this balance. The creative choices in video 3 establish a clear power dynamic between the vlogger and the resident using music. The music is loud and lasts for the whole first three minutes of the video, at times playing over the few close exchanges we see the tourist have with residents. This sets a hierarchy of importance, as the cultural exchange is evidently not of concern to the vlogger. As a viewer, we cannot hear what the exchange of conversation entailed or whether it was positive or negative, but the omission of the original sound and

In conclusion, the tourists enabled to choose a life in Dharavi momentarily demonstrates a huge power imbalance. The way tourists enact this power through cultural exchanges in the slum determines their apparent respect for Dharavi as more than an ‘entertaining’ tourist destination.

Figure 2o Video 3. The tourist group film children in Dharavi

80

Cejas, 2006

22

CONCLUSION Discussion of analysis

Some of these may have been ‘better’ or ‘worse’ examples of tourist behaviour, so we cannot assign YouTube videos as ‘damaging’ representations or not based on a small sample selection. Future research may survey a larger portion of these videos, reaching a more decided outcome.

However, there are common trends and observations in the videos, which provide new discussion within the slum tourism debate. It is also clear that tourists cannot be defined to a particular set ‘gaze’ in representation as Urry theoretically suggests, as these videos portray multi-faceted tourists who have to be read individually.

In conclusion, YouTube tourist vlogs enrich the existing slum tourism debate, and my analysis exposes tourist ‘gazes’ which both satisfy and dissatisfy Odede’s claim that slum tourism presents poverty as ‘entertainment’ which can be ‘escaped from’.81 The consumption of Dharavi travel videos by audiences inherently markets slum tourism as entertainment, no matter the motivation of the tourist, so at face value, the digitalisation of slum tourism proves thinkers such as Odede, Frenzel, Urry and Pratt were correct in their stance of observing tourists critically. The use of these videos used to generate an income or viewcount actively commodifies residents, also developing videos into a source of advertising for slumtour agencies, perpetuating the issue further.

Are there ways to visit/represent Dharavi online which do not cause damage?

The comparison of YouTube videos concludes that there is not a way to represent slum dwellers without some cause for concern, but hour-long organised tours show more damaging tropes than a self-guided exploration over several days. This agrees with suggestions in Chapter 2 that the volunteer is the least problematic. This presents more issues than solutions to the future of slum tourism, because not every tourist entertains the unique possibility of staying at a host house safely. However, there are many ways to volunteer with disadvantaged communities across the world with programmes that can make a difference. These may be more viable opportunities for tourists with a romantic gaze seeking authenticity or education, so they do not risk perceiving poverty as entertainment or leisure short-term, as Odede suggests, something to ‘momentarily experience, then escape from’.

Most of the issues within slum tourist videos exist within the organised walking tour videos (video 1 and 3), which are not an accurate or thorough representation of the slum.

They lack authenticity, clarity and display uneven power relations. The tourists appear out of place and entitled within Dharavi, unaware that the tour companies they advertise rarely benefit the slum at all. Video 1 showed a leisure-seeker grappling with the moral dilemma of a tour, suggesting mild activist undertones, whereas video 3 showed a leisure-seeking tourist comfortable in an uneven power dynamic.

However, elements of videography within Dharavi can be forward-thinking and destigmatise the slum for viewers.

Video 2 does this most, where the tourist is not with an organised tour. Exploration is less ‘entertainment’, and more about community support, collaboration and cultural celebration, whilst recognising fundamental issues within the physical environment and history of Dharavi. These imply a volunteer ‘gaze’, with less damaging leisureseeking aspects. Personally, I found Video 2 diplomatic and thorough in representing Dharavi respectfully, and quite a useful representation. However, there are still issues within video 2, such as the high monetisation through adverts and the representation of Dharavi as ‘educational’, which is a rising issue within representation.

However, even if there are more ethically sound options, it is debatable whether they should be filmed for commercial use. Media criticism from Urry cannot be ignored even if the content is thorough or educational, as the tourist becomes the ‘master’, in control of their camera, and therefore what they present. This satisfies Frenzel’s claims from chapter 2 that slum tours present ‘self/other’ constructs.82 This perspective would suggest that video 1 was the least problematic as the tour was not filmed, rather than the thorough filming approach in video 2. Ultimately, this depends on personal opinion.

Final conclusions

There were limitations of my analysis. Despite aiming to select three videos which were representative of different traits within tourists, there were many to choose from.

81

To finalise, the YouTube video format inherently presents poverty as a form of ‘entertainment’ which can easily be

Odede, 2010

82

23

Frenzel, 2012

escaped from, for a viewer by simply clicking off it. This fulfils Odede’s claim. However, issues within videosauthenticity, power, respect, monetisation- lie at the heart of a larger problem. This problem is the existence of slum tours in the first place, the filming of these tours only spotlighting existing ethical issues with widespread leisure slum tourism. On YouTube, we occasionally see tourist gazes which are ethically more viable, such as volunteers on self-guided tours, but the capitalisation and manipulation of important cultural exchanges for views or money detracts from ethical clarity vloggers strive for.

Perhaps the postcolonial lens shows a deep fascination with the slums, but it is up to individuals with self-minded tourist ‘gazes’ to act with moral and political awareness, not choosing the cheap fix of a slumtour for entertainment, moral consolation and self-discovery, but investing time and effort into a community which has been failed and alienated so many times before.

24

APPENDIX A Supplementary Information on YouTube videos

25

VIDEO 1 Details, Plot and Video Stills TITLE: INDIA’S BIGGEST SLUM– Mumbai Vlog and SlumTour Thoughts VIEWS: 9022 views YEAR PUBLISHED: 2018 CREATOR HANDLE: The Wandering Quinn PLOT SUMMARY: The first video follows female tourist The Wandering Quinn on a day out around Mumbai. The video starts with footage filmed in central Mumbai city, which includes clips of travelling on public transport around the city and seeing city life, visiting locations such as the Ghobi Dhat and Dadar Flower Market. The video is lively, and the creator frequently speaks directly to the camera, describing the places she stays and visits in detail alongside fast-paced shots of travel and vibrant images.

The mention and discussion of a slumtour starts approximately halfway through the video, and the actual slumtour is not filmed due to slum tour rules. The video finishes with the vlogger discussing her partaking in a slum tour directly to the camera, and she also advertises the agency in which she partook the experience through, but explains she is not affiliated with them directly.

The tourist seems aware of the moral debate into slumtourism, but continues nonetheless, which is almost worse on the spectrum of debating slum tourism. This could be perceived by some as using awareness to avoid the guilt and backlash. This video presents leisure tourism with a low-level activist mindset.

Figure 3a A timeline to illustrate the content of video 1

Figure 3b The video title and thumbnail as they appear on YouTube search

26

Figure 3c The vlogger shows a crowded street in Mumbai (0.24)

Figure 3d The vlogger travels on trains around the city, showing these journeys to upbeat music to separate her footage (1.35)

5,613,444

Figure 3e The vlogger shows busy stations, Dadar Flower market and Dhobi Ghat (3.03)

Figure 3f The vlogger speaks to the camera before the slum tour, advertising the travel agency she used with speech onscreen text (4.00)

Figure 3g This is the only shot of the tour in the video. It is an overhead shot of the semi-permanent housing in Dharavi from an elevated position (5.14)

Figure 3h The vlogger ends the video by speaking directly to the camera about her reasons for completing a slum tour and advertises the individual tour directly (6.56)

27

VIDEO 2 Details, Plot and Video Stills TITLE: My Daily Life in the SLUMS OF MUMBAI (Life-Changing 5 days) VIEWS: 5,613,444 views YEAR PUBLISHED: 2018 CREATOR HANDLE: Jacob Laukaitus PLOT SUMMARY: The second video follows tourist Jacob Laukaitus living in the slum for 5 days with a host family. This is not an organised slum tour but follows his exploration of different parts Dharavi, and different slums in Mumbai, mainly remaining in Dharavi. He stays with a friend and cooks, cleans, works and lives as though he lives in the slum. His friend in the slumis named throughout and is key in the video. He explores the swamplands, homes, streets, trade centres, and recycling areas of Dharavi. Throughout the video there are segments which focus on presenting the history, social development and modern context in a receivable format alongside accompanying images and voiceover.

Figure 4a A timeline to illustrate the content of video 2

Figure 4b The video title and thumbnail as they appear on YouTube search

28

Figure 4c The vlogger gives a personal introduction to the video explaining his reasons for visiting Dharavi (0.00)

Figure 4d A montage of shots of Dharavi illustrates the introduction (0.26)

Figure 4e He then explains the history and development of the slym, alongside a slideshow of images (1.24)

Figure 4f The vlogger points out the toilet block for an entire apartment block to use (3.11)

Figure 4g The vlogger eats food at a festival in Dharavi, engaging with and invited to enjoy the cultural celebration (3.51)

Figure 4h The vlogger partakes with a festival performance on stage (4.20)

Figure 4i The vlogger eats food at a festival in Dharavi, engaging with and invited to enjoy the cultural celebration (5.26)

Figure 4j The vlogger is staying in a host’s home in Dharavi, and gets ready for bed (5.36)

29

Figure 4k The vlogger spends a lot of time with his friend, Praveen, and explores the swampland of Dharavi (6.57)

Figure 4l Footage of the swampland against the backdrop of urban Mumbai (9.20)

Figure 4m The vlogger and Praveen dance to music (13.01)

Figure 4n The vlogger gets a clean shave for 30 US cents on the outskirts of Dharavi (12.54)

Figure 4o The vlogger and one of his friends, in a montage of his experience at the end of the video (14.32)

Figure 4p The vlogger shows footage of him high-fiving and shaking hands with residents (14.38)

Figure 4q He mentions that hard work still has to be done to reduce disease, highlighting livestock in the streets (14.54)

Figure 4r The last few minutes of the video features a personal reflection and continues the montage of people who have been important along his stay in Dharavi (13.02)

30

VIDEO 3 Details, Plot and Video Stills TITLE: Dharavi slumtour, Mumbai. Slumdog Millionaire is a little different in reality VIEWS: 49,032 views, YEAR PUBLISHED: 2018 CREATOR HANDLE: Frederik Claessens PLOT SUMMARY: Video 3 follows tourist Frederik Claessens on a guided tour through Dharavi. There are mainly traditional leisure touristic traits within this video, and centres completely around the events of a slum tour. The video begins with a shot of a tour guide with music overlaid, and follows the traditional route which has become familiar in slum tourist videos. Text appears on screen to describe the lifestyle and culture of residents alongside artistic shots of these elements in practise. The video is aesthetically interesting to watch, and the inclusion of the text could persuade a viewer that it is educational. The video ends with the tour guide speaking directly to the camera. The sound here is cut, but text on screen captions the guide providing links to tour guide company.

Figure 5a A timeline to illustrate the content of video 3

Figure 5b The video title and thumbnail as they appear on YouTube search

31

Figure 5c The vlogger begins the video with a panning show including the tour guide (0.26)

Figure 5d This is a more general panning shot taken from a viewing station (0.36)

Figure 5e Footage of the main street in Dharavi (1.05)

Figure 5f Footage of cramped alleyways, showing one of the other members of the tour entering a building (1.07)

Figure 5g A textual signifier sharing information about Dharavi (1.17)

Figure 5h A textual signifier sharing information about Dharavi (1.18)

Figure 5i The Vlogger shows a stray cat (1.48)

Figure 5j Local craft and trade within Dharavi (2.00)

32

Figure 5l A artful shot of a pottery factory and a stray dog (5.30)

Figure 5k The vlogger films residents of the slum in a street on their way around (3.03)

Figure 5m Annotated shot of a recycling shop (5.59)

Figure 5n Annotated shot of the tour guide presenting the pottery industry (5.24)

Figure 5o Closing scene – The tour guide advertises his tour agency for 40 seconds (6.19)

Figure 5p Closing scene – The tour guide advertises his tour agency for 40 seconds (6.23)

33

LIST OF FIGURES Chapter 1 Figure 1a Pottery In The Dharavi Slum In Mumbai, India, 2010 <https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-pottery-in-the-dharavislum-in-mumbai-india-51959034.html> [Accessed 15 January 2021]

Figure 1f Author’s own, traced from: The political map of Mumbai city shows it as a whole. https://sites.google.com/a/kubickova.net/mumbaidharavi/mumbai---gallery [Accessed on 12/12/2020]

Figure 1b Manalam, Shekar, Bird's-Eye View Of Dharavi, Mumbai, 2015 <http://www.tcj.com/dharavi-comics-epidemican-interview-with-chaitanya-modak/> [Accessed 15 January 2021]

Figure 1g Author’s own, traced from: The close map of Dharavi city. https://sites.google.com/a/kubickova.net/mumbaidharavi/mumbai---gallery [Accessed on 12/12/2020] Figure 1h Mukheerjeee, Indranil, Residents Wade In AFlooded Street After Heavy Monsoon Rains In Mumbai On August 4, 2019., 2015 <https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/06/21/88080 2514/covid-19-is-mucking-up-mumbais-plans-to-prepare-formonsoon-season?t=1611712673133> [Accessed 14 January 2021]

Figure 1c Smith, Keith J, One Million People Live In The 240 Hectare Dharavi Slum, Mumbai India, 2014 <https://www.alamy.com/one-million-people-live-in-the-240hectare-dharavi-slum-mumbai-india-image69413601.html?pv [Accessed 14 January 2021] 1d Dahla, Hasiru, Waiting To Go For Recycling, 2012 <https://wastenarratives.com/2015/10/27/glance-of-recyclingin-dharavi/> [Accessed 17 January 2021]

Figures I, j, k, l, m Bendiksen, Jonas, Dharavi Dreams Mumbai's Shadow City, 2018 <https://www.visapourlimage.com/en/festival/exhibitions/ les-reves-de-dharavi-dans-l-ombre-de-mumbai> [Accessed 16 January 2021]

Figure 1e India Part 2<https://thevilemint.com/2014/01/31/india-part-2-themountains/_mg_7908-copy/> [Accessed on 18/12/2020]

Chapter 4 Figure’s 2a, e Author’s Own

Figures 2 c, d, k, l, o

Figures 2b, f, h.

F, Claessens. (2018) Dharavi slumtour, Mumbai.

Slumdog Millionaire is a little different in reality Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jr6GTBXeZz8 Accessed on: 29/11/2020

E, Quinn. (2018) INDIA’S BIGGEST SLUM- Mumbai City Tour Vlog Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tz6rGPteqy4 Accessed on: 23/10/2020

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fU8AnqSOih0&t =44s Accessed on: 21/12/2020

Figures g, i, j, m, , Laukaitus. (2018) My Daily Life in the SLUMS OF MUMBAI (Life-Changing 5 days) Available at: Appendix A Figure 3a Author’s own.

J, Laukaitus. (2018) My Daily Life in the SLUMS OF MUMBAI (Life-Changing 5 days) Available at:

Figures 3c-j

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fU8AnqSOih0&t =44s Accessed on: 21/12/2020

E, Quinn. (2018) INDIA’S BIGGEST SLUM- Mumbai City Tour Vlog Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tz6rGPteqy4 Accessed on: 23/10/2020

Figure 5a Author’s own.

Figures 5b-p

Figure 4a Author’s own.

F, Claessens. (2018) Dharavi slumtour, Mumbai.

Slumdog Millionaire is a little different in reality

Figures 4b-r 34

Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jr6GTBXeZz8 Accessed on: 29/11/2020

35

Bibliography

Concerns among Brazilian and Foreign Potential Tourists. In Ethnic and Minority Cultures as Tourist Attractions (pp. 137-147).

Channel View Publications.

Ahmed, Afaf. Post-colonialism Literature the Concept of self and the other. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, (2014) pp. 99-105

Hall, Stuart. Encoding and decoding in television discourse. (Leicester: University of Birmingham Press, 1973) Pp. 1-12.

Aquino, Jessica. The psychosocial impact of volunteer tourismin the favelas of Rio de Janeiro. (LSE Publishing: 2014)

Hall, Stuart. Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices. (London: SAGE Publications, 1997)

Aspengren, Henrik. C. Sociological knowledge and colonial power in Bombay around the First World War. The British Journal for the History of Science, 44(4). (2011). Pp. 543-548

Higgins-Desbiolles, Freya. In the Eye of the Beholder?

Tourism and the Activist Academic. Tourism and Visual Culture, Volume 1 - Theories and Concepts 1 . (2010). Pp. 98-105.

Bernarz, Christine, Inside The Controversial World Of Slum Tourism, National Geographic, (National Geographic, 2018), pp.

1-4 <https://www.nationalgeographic.com/travel/fe atures/photography/history-controversy-debateslum-tourism/> [Accessed 18 January 2021]

Urry, John. Editor Jonas Larsen. The Tourist Gaze 3.0.

(New York: SAGE Publications, 2011) Ch 1 and 7 (page no. unknown) Laigsingh, Sita. Slum Tourism In Dharavi AMultimodal Analysis On The Online Representation Of Slum Tours In Dharavi’. (Nijmegen: Radboud University Press, 2019) Pp.1-38.

Bhabha, Homi. K. (1994). The Location of Culture. (New York and London: Routledge, 1994)

Laukaitus, Jacob. (Video Source) My Daily Life in the SLUMS OF MUMBAI (Life-Changing 5 days).

(Mumbai: J Laukaitus. 2018, April 23)

Cejas, Monica. Tourism in Shantytowns and Slums: A New "Contact Zone" in the Era of Globalization. (2006) Pp. 224-227.

Ma, Bob. Trip into the Controversy: A Study of Slum Tourism Travel Motivations. Penn Humanities forumon Connections. (2009-2010)

Claessens, Frederick. (Video source) Dharavi slumtour, Mumbai, Slumdog Millionaire is a little different in reality. (Mumbai: F Claessens, 2018, April 22.)

Mahmud, Tayyab. Slums, Slumdogs, and Resistance.

American Journal of Gender, Social Policy and Law(2010),

Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jr6GTBXeZ z8 Accessed on: 29/11/2020

Heather Mair. Meghan Muldoon. Blogging Slum Tourism: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Travel Blogs. TourismAnalysis. 21(5) (2016) Pp. 462-479

Farooqui, Afar. Urban Development in a Colonial Situation: Early Nineteenth Century Bombay.

Economic and Political Weekly, (1996) pp.

2746-2759.

Mendes, A. Cristina. 'Showcasing India Unshining: Film Tourism in Danny Boyle's Slumdog Millionaire. Taylor and Francis Online, 24(4) (2010) pp. 471-479

Frenze, Fabian. Beyond ‘Othering’: The Political Roots Of Slum Tourism. Poverty, Power and Ethics in Global SlumTourism(1996) pp. 1-14

Odede, Kennedy. Slumdog Tourism The NewYork Times.

(New York City: The New York Times, 2010).

Frenzel, Fabian. Slumming It : The Tourist Valorization of Urban Poverty. (New York: Zed Books, 2014) Friere-Medeiros, B. (2015). Would You Be a Favela Tourist? Confronting Expectations and Moral 36

Prakash, Gyan. After Colonialism: Imperial Histories and Postcolonial Displacements. (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1995)

Urry, John. Tourism, culture and social inequality. In The Sociology of Tourism: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. (New York: Routledge, 1996) Pp. 115-133

Pratt, Mary. L. Arts of the Contact Zone. Profession, 3340. (New York: 1991)

Weinstein, Liza. The Durable Slum: Dharavi and the Right to Stay Put in Globalizing Mumbai.

(Minnesota: Minnesota University Press, 2014)

Pratt, Mary. L. Imperial Eyes: Travel Writing and Transculturation. 2nd edn (New York: Routledge.1992) Quinn, Ellie. (Video source). India's Biggest SlumMumbai City Tour Vlog and SlumTour Thoughts. (Mumbai: E Quinn, 2018, October 8) Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tz6rGPteqy 4 Accessed on: 23/10/2020 Rhodes, Rudra. Reality Tours and Travel: ACommunity Perception of Tourismin Dhavari. Mumbai, India: Reality Tours and Travel. (Mumbai: 2017) Rolfes, Manfred. Poverty Tourism: Theoretical Reflections and Empirical Findings Regarding an Extraordinary Form of Tourism. GeoJournal, 75(5), (2009) Pp. 421-22.

Sanyal, Gareth. A. Spectacle and Suffering: The Mumbai Slum as Worlded Space. Geoforum(2018) Pp. 1-9.

So-Min Cheong, Mi. POWER AND TOURISM: A foucauldian observation. Annals of Tourism Research, 27(2), (2000) Pp. 371- 390.

Taneja, Maanas. Dharavi The Story of Asia's Second Largest Slum. (2019) Retrieved from https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/49fa85743 7a9411a98e38e1c24f27352 Accessed on 05/01/2021 Tzanelli, Rodanthi. Slum tourism: A review of State-ofthe-Art Scholarship’ TourismCulture & Communication. 18(2) . (2018) Pp. 149-145.

37

38