Danny Boyle’s riveting film, Slumdog Millionaire, has been criticised precisely on this count, that the film showcases too much dirt: “nauseating” images of poverty, violence based on the poverty, faeces, smutty bodies, and well, just plain old dirt. More accusations follow: that the film undertakes a lot of India-baiting, providing tantalising and pornographic images of poverty of the “Other” world, and delivering shots that fascinate due to their grotesqueness.

But the “dirt” and the particular sweep of the film is its strength. Apart from being a simple story on the human spirit, the film also sticks true to the limited premise of the “slumdog”: Jamal, the protagonist never oversteps the blades of fortune. His rise is strictly due to a unique, though slummy, existence — one that packs punches but doesn’t incorporate the whole world in its sweep. So Jamal, for instance, who is in the business of making a buck through foreigners, may know the leader who’s printed on a $100 note, but not on a Rupees 1000 note. And the film has done something which we must thank it for: it has placed squarely, and compassionately, men, women and children who live in slums and landfills, back into our collective consciousnesses.

In one frame in the film, Jamal, and his older brother Salim, after being rendered homeless, go to a place not many would be chummy with: atop a plastic sheet in a crook of a mountain of garbage in a landfill. It’s only one stop in their dirty-faced misadventures, but it illustrates profoundly the “dirtiness” of the two boys.

It also shows us, briefly, the life that is lead by the lakhs of waste pickers who clean up our rubbish, living on the rubbish and next to our drains. In real life, it is the “dirtiness” of the men, women and children that adds, simply and profoundly, to the stigma that comes with them.

“Chhee, kitne gande bacche hain (Yuck, what dirty children)” is the caption for a drawing made by a waste picker, displaying how other children look at him, for Chintan, an environmental research group. It also demonstrates the urban gaze on urban garbage pickers: we think waste pickers take irreverent pride in being dirty, or do not care about being dirty. But a study done by Chintan on waste pickers in Delhi, shows that it is the “dirtiness” of the waste pickers which prevents them from finding a place in hospitals, toilets, public water points and society itself. Further, the study shows that the dirt is not just a consequence of work conditions, but also waste pickers’ living conditions, with most of them simply not having access to facilities for cleanliness. And finally: nearly hundred per cent of the waste pickers say they aspire to be clean.

But just like the dirty Jamal and Salim have to escape the censuring eyes of society, riding atop trains and living amongst rubbish, real life presents problems for waste pickers that cannot be ignored: a majority of waste pickers, as per the survey, do not wash clothes as: a) they cannot find a place to wash their clothes and, b) they cannot find a place to dry their clothes. Sixty per cent of the men said that the problem of washing clothes was one of the most severe ones in relation to staying clean. Almost 100 per cent of the men surveyed said they were not satisfied with their bathing facilities. The health ramifications are worse: only 43 per cent of the women have ever been hospitalised for medical care (mostly for reproduction), while 30 per cent of the men have been hospitalised (for accidents and burns). A common obstacle for availing good medical facilities was discrimination, say the waste pickers. The study indicates therefore that the perceived “dirtiness” of the waste pickers leads to discrimination, and then ironically, further “dirtiness”.

A range of advocacy suggests that waste pickers, who also recycle our waste, should be recognised and made a part of official waste management machinery, instead of putting in new systems or rendering waste pickers jobless. The December 2008 CAG Audit on Municipal Solid Waste for India suggests that legal recognition be given to rag-pickers and work conditions be improved. This is to sustain existing livelihoods and lives, make recycling more organised, and provide safety for those working with hazardous waste and filth.

Danny Boyle, while showing slumdogs, has not wiped their faces clean. Till better policy for waste pickers happens, Boyle’s film, with all its dirty faces, arms and legs, should continue to shock and move us.

neha.sinha@expressindia.com