I first encountered Slum Tourism by coming across a picture of a slum resident being photographed. It was not so much the young man with the coat over his head, looking a bit malnourished that struck me, but rather the photographers. There was something beastly in the way they surrounded the young man. I dug further and discovered that there is a whole industry dedicated to this and that maybe it’s not as cold-hearted as it seems at first glance. In fact, in many ways slum tourism can be an empowering tool to the slum resident, allowing them to change their image not just locally but also allowing them to gain a mobility to change their image globally.
So what is a slum? There is no clear-cut and definitive definition for a typical slum, though there are a few similarities. Wide spread poverty is one of the most common traits shared among the slums referred to in this paper, and for better or worse the prevalent backdrop against which slum residents are fixedly framed. Poor access to basic needs, such as water and other infrastructure needs tend to be a common bond. Another important distinction that separates a slum from just a poor part of the world is its proximity to development. The slum exists as not an individual city but as part of a bigger metropolis, one of the ways in which slum tourism remains controversial is the way in which it highlights just a small part of large city, and the destitute nature of the resident’s there-in.
It is just as important to note the differences of these slums, and not just how they vary in different parts of the world, but sometimes even in the same city. Responsible tourism is explored through the viewpoint of different slum dwellers in four of Cairo’s Ashwa’iyyat in Moustafa Mekawy’s article. Through quantitative research Mekawy proposes sustainable modes of tourism that encourage growth in the Ashwa’ iyyat. While not taking into account unplanned areas of Cairo, Mekawy’s four slums depict different needs based on each slums haves and have-nots. Those who live in slum one own the land on which they live they still lack ready access to food and water, making rural food and drink celebration a fairly popular tourist activity that is generally well accepted among the community. Those who are involved in hand claims to their land seem more interested in “urban family visits” (2108) and those who live in the historic district prefer “market visits” (2108) which would directly benefit them economically. The last of the slums, those living in the cemetery district are interested in “volunteer tours” (2108) and may be the only ones who live with low self image due to these tours due to the stigma attached to touring a cemetery, or they may not be aware of the humiliation involved. Mekawy goes on to say, “Arguably, it is not the presence of tourism, but rather how it is developed, that is the central issue” (2110). The study suggests that the Egyptian government be involved in developing tourism in Cairo’s Ashwa’ iyyat population that encourages education and are inclusive to the residents so that they may effectively improve their living conditions.
Manfred Rolfes uses three case studies to expand upon how poverty tourism is similar and dissimilar depending upon where it is being conducted. First off, the need of the tourist to experience something they feel is real or authentic seems to be the driving force behind this form of tourism. To satisfy that need tour guides must structure the tours based on that desire while also maintaining a moral high ground by not exploiting the slum residents. It is interesting to note that while in addition to editorials and academic debate around the morality of slum tourism there is also a desire among the tour guides to paint other tours that may compete with theirs as immoral and voyeuristic. While Rolfes did not encounter any tours that he saw to be exploitive he did notice how the tour guides described the competition “While their own tours are emphasized and presented as unique, competitors tours are discredited as voyeuristic” (439). It seems the main drive of most of the tour guides that Rolfes encountered is to present a face of poverty that goes against the nominal stereotypes of the poor being lazy, uneducated, and crime ridden.
But how do two different geographically located slum tours differ and compare? By using comparative studies Evaline Durr and Rivke Jaffe seek to further the debate on slum tourism. For this comparative study Durr and Jaffe use the Tepito district in Mexico City, Mexico and the Trench Town district in Kingston, Jamaica. Highlighting individual slums for comparison reveals the complex nature of slum tourism in that not only is the tourist’s perspective essential for debate but also the power struggles/inequalities of the local and state actors. Both Tepito and Trench Town share a preconceived notion of being urban, poor, and violent that is reinforced by the media and other cultural outlets, which in turn make them ideal for slum tourists. Differences between the two can be seen in the relation between the state and the local residents. Tepito residents are struggling against the state’s wishes to gentrify and transform Tepito into a more traditional tourist district, which would effectively drive out the districts poorer residents. To fight this Tepito residents are taking tours into their own hands in order to showcase not just the historical but also the heterogeneous culture that make the district so unique. Trench Town, in Kingston, however has full support of the local government in its efforts to revitalize Trench Town, which works with local agents in an attempt to popularize the district. However, due to Trench Town’s high rates of violence the area is still seen as a slum destination. Durr and Jaffe invite further research by asking; who in these communities are controlling the image of these slums, for what purpose, and how are these images globally communicated.
One way in which the slum is marketed is through the media. Rijuta Mehta gives a very unique spin on the idea of slum tourism by the very voyeuristic practice of reality television. Mehta stresses the hegemonic nature of reality television and the way in which it brands the slum resident and then reinforces that brand through the slum resident watching the reality show, creating a cycle of hegemonic control by the media. For example she uses shows based in India, one of which puts famous people in slum residents shoes in order to see how the other side lives, as well as movies such as Slumdog Millionaire, a popular movie in the United States. Mehta stresses how even in these representations the real slum is not represented, such as the not so photogenic aspects such as beggar children, the destitute, or maimed and otherwise disabled, as they do not fit into the hegemonic picture that the media wishes to present. Mehta argues that these views of the slum, which inspire slum tourism, are hurtful and exploitive and work to “write ethnicity out of the heterotopic slum” (57).
So how can the slum resident take active control of their global image? Frenzel, Steinbrink and Koens devote a chapter in their book Slum Tourism: Poverty, Power and Ethics to the idea of objects, or more specifically souvenirs, as a crucial tool for the slum residents to transform their image globally. Using the favela tours in Rocinha, a slum in Rio De Janeiro, Brazil as a case study, Frenzel et al. state how the residents of Rocinha use the sale of souvenirs as one of the main sources of income from the tours and also a chance for a real face-to-face interaction between the tourists and the residents. It is noticed that some of the souvenirs do not depict actual scenes from the favela but are idealized representations, which showcase historical or cultural significance. It is curious to note how, according to the authors, that none of the artists use the sale of souvenirs to promote political messages such as ending poverty within the slum or denouncing mistreatment by the government. Preferred are idyllic images of the favela, which, also curiously enough, are not the most popular among tourists (the most popular being images that depict a criminal element), but the most produced among local artists. The images generated put forth a positive image of the favela.
Julia Meschkank sets aside much of her paper to talk about how poverty tourism is effective in changing tourists views of a slum. The one constant that does not change however is poverty itself, which will always be a backdrop of the slum experience, whether explicitly stated or not. What can be changed are the usual stereotypes associated with a slum such as apathy, crime, bad education and stagnation. Through the use of slum tours it is possible to change these negative views and instead showcase how these poor areas embrace community, activity, and development (educationally and otherwise). It is important to note however that there are still harmful effects that come from poverty, such as crime, apathy and etc. though it is through slum tourism that slum residents can become active participants in shaping their global image for the better.
In another paper from Evaline Durr she focuses on how the idea of mobility is key in understanding the relationship between the slum tourist and the slum dweller. For this particular case study Durr uses a garbage dump tour in Mazatlan, Mexico, which is organized by a church group for the purpose of feeding the poor while exposing tourists to the poor’s living and work conditions. There is an interesting juxtaposition made by Durr in describing how the affluent tourist, almost always international, can move between rich and poor neighborhoods uncontested while the poor are usually immobile due to lack of resources to move residence as well as being unwanted in the richer areas of the city. This privilege afforded to white tourists is part of an unspoken sign as well as a source of power exerted unknowingly perhaps by the tourists. This is a dichotomy played out on a global stage where the mobile tourist is able to define the image of the slum dweller and runs a risk of perpetuating stereotypes, but through one on one encounters shaped by the slum resident these encounters can work to undermine the negative image put forth by the media and the state.
It is through working with the slum tourist that the slum resident are able to do something that they typically can not do, and that is to achieve global mobility. Though the mobility is not physical the ideas and representations have a momentum all their own. Through the use of souvenirs that portray positive, multi-cultural backgrounds and direct encounters such as food celebrations or historic tours the tourist, though still being sold an image that may not be entirely true, is able to at least give a voice to a class that could previously not achieve the global mobility to speak for itself.
Works Cited
Chandra. Rocinha Favela Artwork. 2013. Photograph. Web. Style Hi Club. Wordpress, 14
Mar. 2013. Web. 8 Nov. 2013. <http://www.stylehiclub.com/americas/brazil/visiting-the-favelas-rio-de-janeiro/attachment/rocinha-favela-artwork/>.
Durr, Eveline. "Urban Poverty, Spatial Representation And Mobility: Touring A Slum In
Mexico." International Journal Of Urban & Regional Research 36.4 (2012): 706-724.
Academic Search Complete. Web. 22 Oct. 2013.
Dürr, Eveline and Rivke Jaffe. "Theorizing Slum Tourism: Performing, Negotiating and
Transforming Inequality." Revista Europea de Estudios Latinoamericanos y del
Caribe / European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies no. 93
(2012), 113-123.
Frenzel, Fabian, Malte Steinbrink, and Ko Koens. Slum Tourism: Poverty, Power and Ethics.
New York: Routledge, 2012. Print.
Mehta, Rijuta. "Living For The Other Half: Slum Specials On Reality TV." Studies In South
Asian Film & Media 4.1 (2013): 39-59. Film & Television Literature Index with Full Text. Web. 22 Oct. 2013.
Mekawy, Moustafa A. "Responsible slum tourism: Egyptian experience." Annals of
Tourism Research 39.4 (2012), 2092-2113.
Meschkank, Julia. "Investigations Into Slum Tourism In Mumbai: Poverty Tourism And The
Tensions Between Different Constructions Of Reality." Geojournal 76.1 (2011): 47-62.
Environment Complete. Web. 22 Oct. 2013.
Rolfes, Manfred. "Poverty tourism: theoretical reflections and empirical findings regarding an
extraordinary form of tourism." GeoJournal 75.5 (2010), 421 - 442.
So what is a slum? There is no clear-cut and definitive definition for a typical slum, though there are a few similarities. Wide spread poverty is one of the most common traits shared among the slums referred to in this paper, and for better or worse the prevalent backdrop against which slum residents are fixedly framed. Poor access to basic needs, such as water and other infrastructure needs tend to be a common bond. Another important distinction that separates a slum from just a poor part of the world is its proximity to development. The slum exists as not an individual city but as part of a bigger metropolis, one of the ways in which slum tourism remains controversial is the way in which it highlights just a small part of large city, and the destitute nature of the resident’s there-in.
It is just as important to note the differences of these slums, and not just how they vary in different parts of the world, but sometimes even in the same city. Responsible tourism is explored through the viewpoint of different slum dwellers in four of Cairo’s Ashwa’iyyat in Moustafa Mekawy’s article. Through quantitative research Mekawy proposes sustainable modes of tourism that encourage growth in the Ashwa’ iyyat. While not taking into account unplanned areas of Cairo, Mekawy’s four slums depict different needs based on each slums haves and have-nots. Those who live in slum one own the land on which they live they still lack ready access to food and water, making rural food and drink celebration a fairly popular tourist activity that is generally well accepted among the community. Those who are involved in hand claims to their land seem more interested in “urban family visits” (2108) and those who live in the historic district prefer “market visits” (2108) which would directly benefit them economically. The last of the slums, those living in the cemetery district are interested in “volunteer tours” (2108) and may be the only ones who live with low self image due to these tours due to the stigma attached to touring a cemetery, or they may not be aware of the humiliation involved. Mekawy goes on to say, “Arguably, it is not the presence of tourism, but rather how it is developed, that is the central issue” (2110). The study suggests that the Egyptian government be involved in developing tourism in Cairo’s Ashwa’ iyyat population that encourages education and are inclusive to the residents so that they may effectively improve their living conditions.
Manfred Rolfes uses three case studies to expand upon how poverty tourism is similar and dissimilar depending upon where it is being conducted. First off, the need of the tourist to experience something they feel is real or authentic seems to be the driving force behind this form of tourism. To satisfy that need tour guides must structure the tours based on that desire while also maintaining a moral high ground by not exploiting the slum residents. It is interesting to note that while in addition to editorials and academic debate around the morality of slum tourism there is also a desire among the tour guides to paint other tours that may compete with theirs as immoral and voyeuristic. While Rolfes did not encounter any tours that he saw to be exploitive he did notice how the tour guides described the competition “While their own tours are emphasized and presented as unique, competitors tours are discredited as voyeuristic” (439). It seems the main drive of most of the tour guides that Rolfes encountered is to present a face of poverty that goes against the nominal stereotypes of the poor being lazy, uneducated, and crime ridden.
But how do two different geographically located slum tours differ and compare? By using comparative studies Evaline Durr and Rivke Jaffe seek to further the debate on slum tourism. For this comparative study Durr and Jaffe use the Tepito district in Mexico City, Mexico and the Trench Town district in Kingston, Jamaica. Highlighting individual slums for comparison reveals the complex nature of slum tourism in that not only is the tourist’s perspective essential for debate but also the power struggles/inequalities of the local and state actors. Both Tepito and Trench Town share a preconceived notion of being urban, poor, and violent that is reinforced by the media and other cultural outlets, which in turn make them ideal for slum tourists. Differences between the two can be seen in the relation between the state and the local residents. Tepito residents are struggling against the state’s wishes to gentrify and transform Tepito into a more traditional tourist district, which would effectively drive out the districts poorer residents. To fight this Tepito residents are taking tours into their own hands in order to showcase not just the historical but also the heterogeneous culture that make the district so unique. Trench Town, in Kingston, however has full support of the local government in its efforts to revitalize Trench Town, which works with local agents in an attempt to popularize the district. However, due to Trench Town’s high rates of violence the area is still seen as a slum destination. Durr and Jaffe invite further research by asking; who in these communities are controlling the image of these slums, for what purpose, and how are these images globally communicated.
One way in which the slum is marketed is through the media. Rijuta Mehta gives a very unique spin on the idea of slum tourism by the very voyeuristic practice of reality television. Mehta stresses the hegemonic nature of reality television and the way in which it brands the slum resident and then reinforces that brand through the slum resident watching the reality show, creating a cycle of hegemonic control by the media. For example she uses shows based in India, one of which puts famous people in slum residents shoes in order to see how the other side lives, as well as movies such as Slumdog Millionaire, a popular movie in the United States. Mehta stresses how even in these representations the real slum is not represented, such as the not so photogenic aspects such as beggar children, the destitute, or maimed and otherwise disabled, as they do not fit into the hegemonic picture that the media wishes to present. Mehta argues that these views of the slum, which inspire slum tourism, are hurtful and exploitive and work to “write ethnicity out of the heterotopic slum” (57).
So how can the slum resident take active control of their global image? Frenzel, Steinbrink and Koens devote a chapter in their book Slum Tourism: Poverty, Power and Ethics to the idea of objects, or more specifically souvenirs, as a crucial tool for the slum residents to transform their image globally. Using the favela tours in Rocinha, a slum in Rio De Janeiro, Brazil as a case study, Frenzel et al. state how the residents of Rocinha use the sale of souvenirs as one of the main sources of income from the tours and also a chance for a real face-to-face interaction between the tourists and the residents. It is noticed that some of the souvenirs do not depict actual scenes from the favela but are idealized representations, which showcase historical or cultural significance. It is curious to note how, according to the authors, that none of the artists use the sale of souvenirs to promote political messages such as ending poverty within the slum or denouncing mistreatment by the government. Preferred are idyllic images of the favela, which, also curiously enough, are not the most popular among tourists (the most popular being images that depict a criminal element), but the most produced among local artists. The images generated put forth a positive image of the favela.
Julia Meschkank sets aside much of her paper to talk about how poverty tourism is effective in changing tourists views of a slum. The one constant that does not change however is poverty itself, which will always be a backdrop of the slum experience, whether explicitly stated or not. What can be changed are the usual stereotypes associated with a slum such as apathy, crime, bad education and stagnation. Through the use of slum tours it is possible to change these negative views and instead showcase how these poor areas embrace community, activity, and development (educationally and otherwise). It is important to note however that there are still harmful effects that come from poverty, such as crime, apathy and etc. though it is through slum tourism that slum residents can become active participants in shaping their global image for the better.
In another paper from Evaline Durr she focuses on how the idea of mobility is key in understanding the relationship between the slum tourist and the slum dweller. For this particular case study Durr uses a garbage dump tour in Mazatlan, Mexico, which is organized by a church group for the purpose of feeding the poor while exposing tourists to the poor’s living and work conditions. There is an interesting juxtaposition made by Durr in describing how the affluent tourist, almost always international, can move between rich and poor neighborhoods uncontested while the poor are usually immobile due to lack of resources to move residence as well as being unwanted in the richer areas of the city. This privilege afforded to white tourists is part of an unspoken sign as well as a source of power exerted unknowingly perhaps by the tourists. This is a dichotomy played out on a global stage where the mobile tourist is able to define the image of the slum dweller and runs a risk of perpetuating stereotypes, but through one on one encounters shaped by the slum resident these encounters can work to undermine the negative image put forth by the media and the state.
It is through working with the slum tourist that the slum resident are able to do something that they typically can not do, and that is to achieve global mobility. Though the mobility is not physical the ideas and representations have a momentum all their own. Through the use of souvenirs that portray positive, multi-cultural backgrounds and direct encounters such as food celebrations or historic tours the tourist, though still being sold an image that may not be entirely true, is able to at least give a voice to a class that could previously not achieve the global mobility to speak for itself.
Works Cited
Chandra. Rocinha Favela Artwork. 2013. Photograph. Web. Style Hi Club. Wordpress, 14
Mar. 2013. Web. 8 Nov. 2013. <http://www.stylehiclub.com/americas/brazil/visiting-the-favelas-rio-de-janeiro/attachment/rocinha-favela-artwork/>.
Durr, Eveline. "Urban Poverty, Spatial Representation And Mobility: Touring A Slum In
Mexico." International Journal Of Urban & Regional Research 36.4 (2012): 706-724.
Academic Search Complete. Web. 22 Oct. 2013.
Dürr, Eveline and Rivke Jaffe. "Theorizing Slum Tourism: Performing, Negotiating and
Transforming Inequality." Revista Europea de Estudios Latinoamericanos y del
Caribe / European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies no. 93
(2012), 113-123.
Frenzel, Fabian, Malte Steinbrink, and Ko Koens. Slum Tourism: Poverty, Power and Ethics.
New York: Routledge, 2012. Print.
Mehta, Rijuta. "Living For The Other Half: Slum Specials On Reality TV." Studies In South
Asian Film & Media 4.1 (2013): 39-59. Film & Television Literature Index with Full Text. Web. 22 Oct. 2013.
Mekawy, Moustafa A. "Responsible slum tourism: Egyptian experience." Annals of
Tourism Research 39.4 (2012), 2092-2113.
Meschkank, Julia. "Investigations Into Slum Tourism In Mumbai: Poverty Tourism And The
Tensions Between Different Constructions Of Reality." Geojournal 76.1 (2011): 47-62.
Environment Complete. Web. 22 Oct. 2013.
Rolfes, Manfred. "Poverty tourism: theoretical reflections and empirical findings regarding an
extraordinary form of tourism." GeoJournal 75.5 (2010), 421 - 442.