Kibera, Poverty, and the Subaltern
Nov 30th, 2009 by Wanyee Li
Summary
Michael Nyangi arrived in Nairobi, Kenya in 1999 as an 18 year old looking for work. Instead, he ended up living in Kibera, a nearby slum. In 2003, Michael started his own microfinancing business, called Lomoro. This video is about the message that Michael wants to bring to the UN conference that he was chosen to participate in. There, he would have the opportunity to voice his opinion about what needs to be done in Kibera to reduce poverty. Michael describes the people of Kibera as needing support, but not in the form of money or food. Instead, they want to be able to express themselves and bring about change by having their concerns heard. One such concern is the lack of affordable clean drinking water. Although the slum has access to clean water, it costs money, and many are not able to afford it. As a result, they take water from the sewage, which poses numerous health hazards. Another concern is the regular occurrence of rapes at night which go unsolved because, as Michael puts it, the victims are “overlooked”.
Commentary
One of the first things that came to mind when I saw this video, was the possible issue of tokenism in this situation. At the UN conference, Michael represents the people of Kibera, but can he tell all of their stories for them? Evidently, Michael is vastly more educated than the majority of people living in the slum, as he speaks English, and has a college degree in accounting. Perhaps it is for these reasons that he was given the chance to speak at the UN conference. Although one cannot claim Michael’s presence at the UN conference as a step in the wrong direction, his presence could also be a case of tokenism.
“Change cannot be realised if these people cannot be given time to express themselves and talk of the problems they are facing.” – Michael Nyangi
Michael describes poverty as not only lack of money or food, but also as the situation where women and children are unable to express themselves. Michael’s comment about how the people of Kibera do not simply want money or food, also demonstrates that traditional forms of aid is not enough to lift Kibera out of poverty. This is an interesting point, and relates to what we have talked in class about the subaltern’s voice being silenced. I agree with Michael, that not being heard and having your voice be oppressed is a form of poverty. Perhaps it is a form of poverty that is more complicated than that of the lack of food. If people lack food, food can be given to them, or loans given so that they can start a business in order to earn money to buy food. But how do you solve the problem of the subaltern’s voice being silenced? As mentioned in numerous class readings, simply “giving voice” to the subaltern is problematic. “Giving power” to the powerless only reinforces existing power structures and reaffirms the fact that we (the elite) have the power and they (the subaltern) don’t. Furthermore, even if Michael’s presentation at the UN constitutes the voice of the subaltern, will his message be lost in translation? The original stories might have been told to him in another language, and undoubtedly there will be situations in these stories that are difficult to explain to an outsider because of cultural differences.
This video also made me think about today’s class discussion about participatory development, and whether Michael’s trip to New York would be effective in making the subaltern’s voice be heard. In the Mohan reading, one of the critiques of mainstream participatory development practices is that often marginalised people in the community do not have the chance to participate. For example, in this video, no women spoke and all the men who were shown spoke English.
Although Michael’s trip to New York to speak at the UN conference is an opportunity for the subaltern to speak, we need to be critical about whether their voices will actually be heard. I wonder if Michael will be able to do the people of Kibera justice by accurately representing their concerns and speaking for them, or if he will become a token.
Here is the link to Michael’s microfinance business:
http://lomoromicrocredit.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=22&Itemid=34
5 Responses to “Kibera, Poverty, and the Subaltern”
This video was really eye-opening. I actually was able to visit this slum 2 years ago when I went to Nairobi. Although for me, being a woman, a tourist and Asian not only was I received really differently because of that I saw it in an entirely different perspective. This video is really great because it really compares to how a “Westerner” would view it and someone who may not be from Kibera but can understand the culture (to a degree).
I believe that’s the conflict to whether the sub-alterned can speak or not will always be in the gray area. Like you mentioned, Michael is representing the people of Kibera, however he is more education, fluent in English and has a college degree in accounting…but at the same time the way he physically looks – the people of Kibera may be more open to expressing themselves through him. They feel more comfortable and do not see him as just someone that’s sent from away to “help them speak.” But the question is, if Michael is able to translate what the people of Kibera intend to say for the world to hear?
I find it very interesting that, as you mentioned, Michael specifically emphasizes that not having a ‘voice’ is another critical dimension of poverty. Following mainstream definitions and interpretations, we automatically think of ‘poverty’ as the lack for food, shelter, education, and health. By challenging this very idea, we come to give a much needed emphasis on thinking of development in more unorthodox ways.
Also i want to point out that when we come to see Michael as a token, we are ruling out the possibility that what he is doing could also be looked at as ‘strategic essentialism’. We see that there is a very fine line between essentialism and strategic essentialism. In both cases the identities and complexities of the people are simplified but with very different intentions. I see Michael as an embodiment of a clear and generalized Kiberan community. However the intention and the purpose of Michael’s representation is to bring about immediate change and attention to slums of Kibera.
I also find this video very interesting and frankly speaking, I do think subaltern voices are often silenced by people who have Western knowledge and power. Looking at the slum reminds me that these conditions appear in a lot of underdeveloped countries. The scene where it talks about people getting water from the sewage strikes me as to how “unclean” of a situation they have to live in the year of 2009. The fact that they only make less then $1 a day with no hospital being able to offer medical services for them at a reasonable cost is totally ridiculous. I do hope Michael can speak for the people in Kibera, but really, I doubt he can. Given that he has some superior power in Kibera compared to other “normal” people, his thoughts towards the place will definitely be different compared to others. Even if he knows how other people feels living in the slum, the audience from Michael’s speech will not understand fully how miserable it is to live in the slum. Even though he tries to express the feeling of the people living in the slum, the power of those words will never be as powerful as words that are actually coming out from people living in that conditions. However, Michael’s move does show how uneven development is in the current settings, and maybe, just maybe, people will start to realize this problem and will therefore give some help to solve such unevenness.
I found this video to be very interesting as it highlights barriers that “the poor” face. Furthermore, it allows us as people living in the “global North” to see the effects of our current capitalist, neoliberal system which result in these subaltern not having a voice as it interferes with the way of doing business
It also says we need to rethink development in order to give these people a MEANINGFUL voice Although this video still reinforces the colonial discourse that development is focused around Women and Children. An interesting note to consider is what kind of changes are needed to pressure the government in Kibera to give these people a MEANINGFUL voice
Well, I know there are positive parts of this story like the emphasis on addressing the problem of representation and giving chance to people of Kibera to express themselves. However, I am critical about this story because most of what is said is just in words which are mostly said in front of cameras.
I still see a problem of representation in this video. I fact, my first impression of this video was the contradiction between Michael’s outfit and the environment he was at. A man in a suit walking like a king on the slums. Then I look back to the title and it says “Kibera, Michael’s story.” This strengthened the contradiction, that this man was in Kibera but was not telling Kibera’s story but his story. Well, one might argue that his story is Kibera’s story because he lives there. I have a few questions to that point. How can the story of an educated, successful man be compared to of those who were just “lucky” to get to grade three and are still under unspeakable poverty? And how unfamiliar are we with “accumulation by dispossession at small scales?” Yes, I am suggesting that Michael might be accumulating worth from the slum dwellers. Forgive me if I don’t know enough about Michael but I am really interested to learning more about his business.
I too like that Michael emphasises on giving the chance to the people to directly “express themselves” and how he goes around listening to their stories and suggestions. This somehow gives me a felling that he realises his inability to totally tell the story of an average Kibera slum dweller.