-By Karishma Huda
I call Bangladesh a woman. Media perceptions, which often shape our own perceptions and realities, call Bangladesh a tragic woman. As a child she was violently raped by colonization, and as an adult brutally battered through war. She was able to secure her own independence and freedom, only to be subjected to one violent relationship after another - one with hunger, one with famine, one with natural disasters, one with political corruptness, and the list goes on and on. One might even consider her to be a bit of a whore. As a result, she has millions of children living in poverty. Bangladesh needs to be rescued. Like a child, she needs to be cuddled, fed, clothed, have her hair stroked. She is too feeble to stand on her own two feet, and if the West does not save her, she will most definitely be left to die.
But there is a fundamental problem with the way Western media perceive, and therefore depict, Bangladesh. I mean, really, which woman is this one-dimensional and can be defined so simplistically? Have Western newspapers, magazines, documentaries, television, etc. only gotten to know one side of Bangladesh’s personality? Perhaps, or maybe this is the only side of her that they wish to portray. Perhaps this is the image of Bangladesh that they consciously would like to paint in the minds of their audience. Why? If Bangladesh is a basket case that is in dire need of help, this opens up doors of opportunities for Western countries to exploit.
Researchers and academics get funded to ‘learn and explain’ Bangladesh’s problems, development consultants get paid attractive salaries to go fix Bangladesh’s problems, journalists and filmmakers’ careers are thriving on showing the world Bangladesh’s problems, NGOs and international aid agencies have turned into a very lucrative business that is sustaining on Bangladesh’s problems. As long as Western countries are ‘helping’ Bangladesh, their governments and corporations have their foot firmly embedded on her. They hold the whip, and have a strong influence on her economy, politics, and resources.
Interestingly enough, it is the same pictures of Bangladesh that you see over and over – the one on the World Vision commercials, most Americans know exactly what I’m referring to. With all of the thousands of media sources there are, is it not strange that the same images and stories are constantly recycled? Floods and poverty – really, can no one find something else to write about or show? From what I understand (based on conversations I’ve had with reputable journalists), this is because only a handful of media professionals have personally gone to visit her and gather her story. All the others pick up these stories, make two phone calls to people who can confirm them and throw in some statistics (probably a big shot academic or executive of an international aid agency), and voila, a new story is born. I’m no expert, but I get the impression that the objective is to maintain the status quo by putting in the least amount of effort. So there you have it – you are getting to know Bangladesh through the eyes of people who have never even met her themselves.
But this is not the worst of the problems. After all, who really cares what Americans and the British think of Bangladesh anyway? And in all fairness, Western countries have contributed to the steady poverty reduction in Bangladesh. More of her children are being fed. The conundrum lies in the way that Western media perceptions have drastically affected the way that Bangladesh views herself. She has learned to believe that she is weak. She has grown dependant on foreign aid, and she has taken on the identity of a pauper. She plays on her image as a tragic woman to pull at the heartstrings of Westerners as she holds out her palm. And it works.
But she and her children know well that her identity is much more complex than that. Bangladesh is not tragic and one-dimensional. She is as much about poverty and floods as America is about freedom fries and baseball. Reducing her identity to that is a disgrace, and the media’s ability to do so in the minds of millions of individuals is dreadfully frightening. Her reality is multi-faceted, and the various intricacies weaved through her make her fascinating. Her children are not dying, they are surviving. Among the constraints that they face they laugh, they play, they are creative beyond imagination, they live, they thrive. She has so many wonderful stories. Perhaps the current generation of Bangladeshis living in the West, such as myself, should take the responsibility of sharing them with you, so you can get a glimpse at who she really is: a beautiful, enduring, loving, passionate woman who will leave you inspired.
*This short essay was inspired by a fantastic talk given at the Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex by BBC journalist/filmmaker Esther Armah about her upcoming book “Can I Be Me?” regarding media perceptions of Africa.
August 18th, 2007 at 6:54 am
This authors perception is shared by most of us Bengali Americans, it appears that it is mandatory for western media to use the word “impoverished” in every article linked to Bangladesh. I am well aware that “she” is poor, but many of the statistics used in the media is outdated, since the journalists don’t do their homework. Bangladesh may be poor, but she is a proud mother of millions who are proud to call her Bangladesh.
August 19th, 2007 at 11:39 pm
May be she is poor but she is my mother.As her son it’s my responsibility to make her rich and give her respect and emphathy for being my mother being so poor she did raise me to the world as a strong person like hercules.
I love my mother. I respect my mother and I would always protect my mother. May be she is poor but she is an angle and she is the truth and she is the strength that I cherished everyday and I am the first class citizen of my mother.She doesn’t differ me by rich or poor, she embaraces the 150 million people the same way as she does herself.
I love my mother.
thanks
Kawser Jamal
http://www.changeBangladesh.com
Son of Bangladesh.
August 20th, 2007 at 11:54 am
As a media semi-professional working and living in your motherland, I often wonder why it is the goal of so many Bangladeshis to leave the country at their earliest opportunity.
If Bangladesh were to find the will to change herself, why do the best and the brightest minds clamour to leave the country at every turn?
My question is mostly rhetorical. My Chinese countrymen did the same during the terrible days of China’s cultural revolution and its socialist misadventures. My parents left Hong Kong at a young age to attend university abroad: as a result I was born in Canada, and do feel very fortunate to have had a Canadian education and a Western upbringing.
But, that doesn’t stop me from being here, digging at the true stories, seeing poverty from many different angles and realizing it is not the fault of the people here. Poverty is a cycle that is difficult to break, yes, but for me it is far from the only thing that defines this nation.
And as for what I’d like to cover, I’d rather write or tell stories that show change: stories that demonstrate the good will of people helping others. And to write about poverty is to create the impetus for change and the hunger for justice. Without these ingredients, we will never rid the world of the blight that is poverty.
August 20th, 2007 at 12:22 pm
Well said, mike. But for people who has just seen the poverty, it is particularly difficult to imagine that Bangladesh has other dimensions as well. The whole Bangladeshi cultural side is completely something most are unexposed to. We are also partly responsible as never try to reach out beyond our ghetto either. In Britain, the Baishakhi mela is a wonderful example of displaying the other dimensions of Bangladesh.
August 24th, 2007 at 3:39 am
Responding to Mike’s question on “why do so many Bangladeshi’s are leaving the country,” also applies to millions of others all aroung the world, including China and India, the two most populous and fastest growing economies. The answer is simple, better quality of life largely due to better opportunities and better pay. The Irish, Italians and the Jews did the same thing during 19th and 20th century, when their economy was sub par, same is happening today with all third world citizens in general.
The point that the Bengali Americans are trying to make is that Bangladesh is more than just POVERTY.