Edited by Malavika Suresh
The catering industry in India’s metropolitan cities gets more creative by the minute.
Cafes and restaurants explore multitudes of themes, settling on one that will best capture the eyes of those searching for something fun and fresh, something instagrammable or something ‘aesthetic’. I recently came across one such space. Walls carefully curated to look shoddy and unkempt, with dark paint peeling away, revealing bare bricks. A clothesline ‘cleverly’ stretched across the wall facing a rickety balcony, featuring ratty t-shirts and gaudy salwar kameez. So on and so forth, the attention to detail was admirable. However, something about this ‘aesthetic’ didn’t sit right with me, for reasons I will now attempt to unpack.
The internet has seen a recent hyperactivity with respect to cultural appropriation. From Kim Kardashian’s maang tikka and Gucci’s turbans as part of a runway show, to general tone-deaf terms like turmeric latte, chai tea latte, etc. The internet has been quick to call them out – giving way to heavily worded apologies and comment section debates on the fairness of such an accusation. It is commonly argued that appreciation and inspiration has been misconstrued for the purpose of unnecessary targeting. However, markers of culture are undeniably rooted in a historical context of systematic oppression. Supporters of colonialism often argue that racial supremacy was imperative for ‘development’, and that it helped other countries ‘civilise’. Thus, the colonised community’s clothing, accessories, and mannerisms were viewed as ‘savage’ and ‘uncouth.’In order to be accepted into elite society (made up by the oppressors), one was compelled to adopt the markers of the coloniser. Keeping this in mind, if one actively chooses to incorporate items from a culture with such historical background as an exotic, cool, quirky, item without acknowledging its history, it is an act of dismissal. The restaurant followed in these footsteps. There is immense significance to profiting off of the lives of those within a system that makes it enormously difficult for them to succeed, for reasons I have explained below.
The catering industry in India operates within an unforgiving economic system. It is no secret that the industry is replete with people both overworked and underpaid, having barely enough to save. Food tends to go waste because restaurants don’t want to run the risk of donating it and having someone fall ill, thus tarnishing their unmarred reputation. Additionally, travel expenses, along with healthcare and other provisions are often not taken care of. This is important because it strongly dictates how one continues to fall down the income ladder, something that can be explained via the concept of ‘Poverty Trap’. Simply put, a poverty trap is a mechanism that does not allow people to improve their lifestyle due to an insufficient income. That, combined with a growing population and lack of accessible and competent common public goods, may lead their lifestyle to diminish in quality.
This raises a pertinent question. How does the poverty trap work? For instance, let us assume you are part of a music club. The club fund has a total of 5 rupees, which goes towards the maintenance of each instrument. Your income is 4 rupees, from which you need to manage your personal expenses and contribute to the club fund. You are able to contribute 1 rupee. However, another person that has an income of 12 rupees can contribute 3 rupees, which is two more than yours. As a result, their guitar is well maintained. They get a chance to play more often, get better opportunities and can constantly improve their earning, consequently improving their contribution. Additionally, if the other person has a stable support system, more resources, and better living conditions, it exponentially increases their chances of succeeding. Your value within the club diminishes (both socially and economically) , and you find it increasingly difficult to improve your music performance. Understanding this trap forces us to not turn a blind eye to those struggling to survive, because their choices are shaped by circumstances, much like the circumstances outlined above. Keeping this in mind, it is undeniably inappropriate to pick up bits and pieces of their lifestyle in order to be ‘quirky’, all the while contributing to their struggle.
The lifestyle of those whose oppression we are complicit in, is not ours to appropriate for kicks. It is a glaring reminder of how easy it is to be removed from the lives of others not as well-off as you. If you hold the system responsible, make sure to acknowledge how you partake in it too, no matter how compelling that contribution may seem.