Child Labour and the Empty Nest Syndrome
If you are an avid TV watcher you will know that one of the Indian channels is airing a serial called 'Balika Vadhu'. This serial is ostensibly about child marriage and focuses on evils of society in the rural pockets of India. A couple of days back, the child star protagonist of this serial was being interviewed by a news channel(obviously they have no valuable news to air). The child star answered questions like a pro. To a point where her age and her 'maturity' was irritating.
There is a lot of valid debate about child stars being likened to child labour. Just like a family of six with an alcoholic father and a maid for a mother sends their eldest son to work as a waiter, a child star with a cute face and passable acting skills gets a chance at 'exposure' and a life filled with comfort.
There are a lot of problems inherent here. Can parents who live a comfortable life give their child the TV exposure for an extra buck? How different is the parent that sends their child to work in a dinghy restaurant versus a parent who gets a child on TV just to make them a star? Who draws a line? Is a line required?
(I don't want to belong to the school of thought that says a child that works early loses on maturity or the innocence of childhood. But is there a need for awareness here? )
My problem with this entire debate is slightly different. Traditionally as a society have been of the assumption that kids should study and then be employed. Post employment they MUST live with their parents. Which means, unlike the parents of the West that send their kids to college at the age of 16 and expect them to fend for themselves, our parents keep us in the nest till we are 25 years old. So we might scoff at the thought that our child will be 'working' (Why should you work at 16? your dad is still earning!) at 16. We are also appalled at the 'western' concept of leaving the house and living on your own after a certain age. Now compare the situation of earning at 16 with that of being a child star at 8. My question is : You wont allow you child to earn money to fend for themselves at the age of 16, but you will let them take a go at stardom and a large pot of money at the age of 8? Is this about age, freedom or compensation?
Are we all about ' show me the moolah' all the time?
Posts
7 comments:
Hello!
Apart from the issues you've pointed out, I feel one another problem is that these kids right from their formative years start believing that their worth equals their popularity. And that if they go off the public recognition radar, their lives would become wretched.
Plus, the unfortunate part is, especially, reality TV shows send this signal that success could be achieved at any cost, including manipulating people's emotions through emotional blackmail, and that the quality of original skill they had stood for (say, singing or dancing) does not matter. All this might become the way of life for them ahead. Needless to say, not a good start to 'character-building'.
It was very good of you to cover this relatively neglected issue, and especially from a different angle.
The following is a link from another blog-post (now largely defunct, and not mine) related to a similar issue.
The Trust that bought
the Monk's Ferrari..... (click)
TC.
Mostly agree with your views. A child actor here and there is fine. But these days it seems that these kids are full-time into TV. That is problem. Without the social environment of school...the parents are killing the child's rightful ecosystem
@ketan-- I agree with the thought about the removal of popularity. Plus its a domain that we cannot talk about. Since the most logical counter argument is ' they arent your kids, how would you know?' But yes, years spent playing and learning new things, shouldnt be spent making money!
@siddharth-- they are nauseating. All the awards and the recognition make them believe that they are great actors. I felt Kunal Khemu was a better child actor than what he is now!
Its really unfair that some children are forced to grow up too soon even in what we claim to be our enlightened, we-treat-kids-like-delicate-flowers society..
On the other hand, we have the spoilt rich brats who dont seem to have an ounce of maturity at the ripe old age of 42 and insist on showing off their brattiness by randomly mowing down unsuspecting pavement dwellers in their Range Rovers when they're drunk on expensive booze..
I cant see which is the bigger tragedy really..
And yay! i can comment on ur blog now! :)
Micheal Jackson, Lindsey Lohan and Britney Spears are all results of child labor as child artists.
@NN-- I like that you brought up those examples. Would the world have changed had they started off later in life? I think for their sake the world would have been spared the trauma of growing up coupled with fame.
@TangledUpinBlue-- Yes you can comment all you like! :)
Post a Comment