I didn't read the article. I get what it might say.

But why fault someone for their honest observations? Isn't it true that Mumbai is polluted, dirty, crowded and with people relieving themselves? The person is missing the positives of Mumbai completely, of course. But the excerpts you've posted are nothing but the bare unvarnished truth. We should learn to face up to it, and fix it, not pillory someone who's using it to feel better about himself.

Have you read "Shantaram"? I've heard it's a very entertaining book, with some honest observations about India and Indians. This post reminded me I must borrow it from my cousin soon.. She loved the book.

As far as poor people are concerned, China has a fair amount of poverty too; but the international opinion on China is far different than that on India. It all depends on the way you market yourself. From the very beginning, our leaders from the Nehruvian era portrayed India's "holy poverty" while China promptly tried to put up a more polished look. Its the same with countries like Malaysia and Singapore which opted for westernization (and subsequently cities with pretty looking skylines) as opposed to India's idea of self-sufficiency (and hence slow progress and poverty).

But then again, India is not evil like China which promptly disposes off all its poor into the countryside to woo Westerners into making an impression on the country by just looking at Beijing and Shanghai. We don't hide our poverty or fail to acknowledge that there is a fait amount of it in our country.

I wonder of this writer was black or hispanic if you would have had the same outrage.

Nania after reading your post on this website, plus what you have on your personal blog, I have noticed that there seems to be double standard when it comes to whites and people of color. It just seems like you hold white people to much higher standard then when you do to some one of color.

If I have misread what you are trying to say in this and other posts, then I apologize in advance.

The person is missing the positives of Mumbai completely, of course. But the excerpts you've posted are nothing but the bare unvarnished truth.

Arjun, I don't think Naina is positing this as a true/false problem (and correct me if I'm wrong, Naina, I don't want to speak on your behalf). Yes, poverty, traffic, people relieving themselves, etc. all exist in Bombay and other parts of India. Yes, it's icky, to put it broadly. But what makes Parson's column dubious is his seemingly simplistic and judgmental world view. He could have written his column in a much more intelligble manner, but hey - the man LOVES binary oppositions. India: traffic, shit and train deaths. America: it takes a little longer to get the laundry done. India: bad. America: grrreat! That's wonderful that he loves America, and especially his little corner of the OC, but his world view just seems...limited! I mean, come on, how the hell are you going to compare LA TRAFFIC against anything else?! I've driven in LA plenty of times, and yes, it's taken me two hours to go 15 miles.

And the thing is, it'd be one thing if those reading his lovely OC column were all englightened, worldly people. I'm assuming they are not. It's from reading columns like his that people start saying, "Well, you know, in India everyone shits on the street and goes to work on the roof of a train." Somehow the "unvarnished truth" becomes...broad generalizations.

And don't get me wrong, it's not like these papers aren't publishing articles that do highlight the more "positive" aspects of life in India, whether it be about IT, BPO, education, or just everyday life. But those authors tend to be much more invested in their work and more knowledgeable about South Asia; this guy is relying on e-mails from a cousin on a business trip.

I don't know, it'd be interesting to see something similar in reverse. "You know, I was just about ready to leave Mumbai for good, but then I got an e-mail from a cousin living in LA. He said that it took him three hours to go 30 miles today, and on his way to work, cars violently zoomed in front of him, several men and women gave him the middle finger - the American symbol for the big F - and a couple of people even called him a 'camel jockey' because he was apparently driving too slow. On top of that, the city is too poor and careless to build a public train system that works. All hail, Indian Railways, jai jai Laloo Prasad Yadav! I love India!"

As for Clueless' anti-white insinuations...I'm not even going to go there...lest some older ladies want to throw the big R at me again :)

Dana's article is about perspectives. I guess that's valid, except that it's a pretty lame perspective about Bombay. Maybe his cousin lived in Singapore or Luxembourg; that might explain why they got so freaked out about stuff in Bombay.

The article itself is hardly original. We've heard it before.

But here's a REAL perspective on Bombay from a true Mumbaikar. It's sort of nostalgic and fantastic at the same time. The best part is where he says it will always be a poor man's city. That's the real message: Bombay is what a Mumbaikar makes of it. Check it out!

Busybee on Bombay
.

Parsons:

At the moment, though, I'm having some second thoughts. I'm feeling a weird wave of something that adults might call "perspective." In other circles, it's described as liberal guilt. I'm so guilty that when I tell people where I live, I quickly add that it's "in the poor part of Newport Beach." Which means the apartment complex was built in the '70s.

I think that says it all. The point of the article isn't to say that America is better than India; didn't you notice that tiny little nod to American poverty with the reference to child bathing in cooking water? The point is that Parsons is a liberal who realizes he consumes at a certain level, and this makes him feel bad. Boohoo. Except instead of delving further into his initial reflection on American poverty and his consumption in relation to it (because this might be something he can actually DO something about), he falls back on his cousin's e-mails about the difficulties of life in India, and his guilt takes on a new, easier-to-deal-with, global form. He compares each of his cousin's e-mails with some aspect of his life, and can easily bask in the guilt because there really isn't anything he can do about it.

But finally he does come around to America with this winner:

Here at home, I've been complaining lately to friends about the direction America is taking and why nothing — from institutions to the social order — seems to function as well as it once did. These complaints come as I'm sitting in my rocker, looking out over a tranquil grassy area in the complex and trying to decide whether to watch TV, listen to a CD or take a walk to the ocean.

He ends up reflecting on his own guilt and the way it manifests, and he feels even more guilty about this... SO WHERE'S THE ACTION?

So no, it's not about how America is better than India, although the liberal mush-mush sure makes it come off that way in parts - mainly due to the omission of the fact the same patterns of consumption exist in India as well.

And yes, one does need to own up to everything that's messed up about Bombay, India, South Asia, whatever.

But this article isn't about any of that. It's all about Parsons' guilt about his consumption, but how he's content to feel guilty about it, feel guilty about the fact that he feels guilty and does nothing, but still do nothing.

Vivek..well said!

I wonder of this writer was black or hispanic if you would have had the same outrage.

I haven't read naian's blog- but I have noted that you (& others) have made this claim before about the different standard that "monolithic hegemonic" group 'the white people' are held to on this blog. Fair enough- I am anti hypocrisy. However it's naive- fallacious even, to pretend that we don't carry conceptions about 'who' can say 'what' based on skin color.

It's all about Parsons' guilt about his consumption, but how he's content to feel guilty about it,

I think you hit the mark, Vivek.

It's not news, it's a think piece. Why does Dana Parsons need to be stopped? Unless you're arguing for a different perception of India (which you can find in almost any magazine these days too), nothing his cousin described is untrue. I think a more interesting question is why these facts of life in India exist at all and what iif anything is India going to do about it?

a certain college basketball team that’s going to rout Florida on Saturday

had to comment on this.. GO UCLA (yes, anything PAC-10).. naina, i'll be at all the final four .. don't you worry... brother bean and i have our gear, spirits, and cheering voices ready!!!

and about the article..
animals, human excrement, and nakedness is true india? right? (sarcastic tone of voice)...

i think parson's is either just extremely bitter that his dhobiwala washed his clothes wrong, or he just doesn't get india (traveling in general) and the overall 'true beauty' of the country and other 3rd world countries who have similar situations in some of their cities/towns...

mr. parsons is likley used to staying at the ritz, having a chauffer, and having a bell at his bedside to notify his butler...

I find nothing wrong with the article.

But I have a simple question for the blogger. What do you think about Deepa Metha or Satyajit Ray's movies (and people of their ilk). Even they make movies that helps the westerners feel better. :-) Afterall they are just writing or showing the true colors of India (or rather part of the truth)

sorry chick pea, UCLA is going to lose on saturday, should be a great game however, i'm a UConn fan, so i really can't say much seeing that they don't deserve their under-the-table range rovers; couldn't even make the tourney this year.

pertaining to the article, Vivek's assessment i feel is accurate.

spam alert in #10. plagiarism for profit - uncited internet articles, lots of google ads. click only if you want to earn dude some money.

haha, very true, altho after looking at his blog, i feel you might be a bit harsh, its blogging! YSS seems pretty cool, i may just have to check it out, thanks vivek

Why does Dana Parsons need to be stopped?

Because it's propaganda, because it's published and circulated, because he's paid to write this kind of stuff -- spin included-- and because he's not giving us the whole picture about his cousin's stay in India. Why doesn't his cousin just walk the short distances to his meetings? What deals is this cousin making, and will those business relationships he is building benefit or damage the people whose adverse living conditions he so nimbly descries?

a certain college basketball team that’s going to rout Florida on Saturday

Thats not going to happen. In fact it better not happen as I just took the lead in my work bracket :)

I am looking forward to the duel between the 7 footers.

My prediction: Florida versus Ohio State in the finals.

Winners: Florida.

The fact is that most, if not all, westerners who travel to India are going to be struck with the poverty thing being in your face. That's understandable --- even I on my first visits to India was upset by it.

But I managed to see beyond it too.

Recently a journalist for The Times, a very right wing, conservative British newspaper, visited India for a business conference and wrote about his week long visit. He didnt write about the emerging economy in his piece -- he wrote about the pity and horror he felt at the poverty he saw, with an undertone of chastisement for Indians for being oblivious to this.

I had a few emotional responses to his piece --- but just to summarise a couple of them. First of all, to live amidst all that kind of thing you have to steel yourself against it to a certain extent, otherwise how could you function if you broke down at every girl in a ragged dress who tugged your trouser for a few annas?

Secondly, I thought, welcome to the real world baby! You sit in London and pontificate on the rest of the world, living in a city that functions smoothly, one of the richest and most priveliged and prosperous classes of people in existence, in a nation that has statues and memorials to colonialists and built its wealth on the exploitation and theft of resources from India and Africa, you don't have to deal with and relieve every day layers of backwardness and cruelty and poverty, you live a cocooned life where poverty (true poverty) is an abstract, and when you finally see all that, your response is to displace your pity onto the easily essentialised 'indifferent' Indian masses, whom you can chastise for their obliviousness to what surrounds them, whilst you get to fly back to Heathrow first class and take a taxi back to Kensington, safe in the knowledge of your ability to judge those who live with it every day, who have to think of strategies to alleviate it every day, who have to deal with hundreds of years of entrenched social mentalities --- all the while as making money and bread to feed their own children and prevent them falling downwards in a society without a fat welfare system whilst you have the luxury of smugness and disassociation and even your pity and sympathy (but certainly not any displaced guilt, right?) is of a higher type. And ultimately, his article was about him, the higher minded Englishman, and his shock and distress.

But it put a thought in my mind. Some right wingers in Britain and I suppose America too, are suffering from a collapse of self esteem, and are a little insecure in their skins, what with multiculturalism and immigration destroying western society and all that. Let's start a poverty safari for them to India where they can have a look around, become revified in their racial and cultural superiority at the sight of even educated Indians 'indifference' of the poverty they are uniquely sensitive and acute to, before sending them back emboldenced in the knowledge of the wily orientals innate fatalism and indifference to the poor and their innate superiority, where they can then shut their eyes and because it's not in their face feel safe and secure again.

Red Snapper,

Tell all of your disaffected friends to read all about it here and here.

Wow vivek! Who needs satire when the truth is already beyond satire.

Could be lucrative to target the right wingers whose self esteem is very low and are feeling insecure though --- special tours especially for them --- a trip to Lagos or somehwere in the 'dark' continent would do crisk trade.

The name of the company? 'Hearts of Darkness'

We'll make a million, I'm telling you.

Because it's damaging propaganda, because it's published and circulated, because he's paid to write this kind of stuff -- spin included-- and because he's not giving us the whole picture about his cousin's stay in India.

So the article is propaganda? Which cause would Parsons be promoting? And who decides when to stop publishing and circulating whatever we don't like?

Good luck getting the "whole picture" about India in any one article (or novel, or essay, or film, or play, or painting, or song). Thousands have tried for years and never done it -- that's part of the beauty of the place.

Self-criticism is the anti-dote to judgmentalism. It is embarrassing that these countries can't take better care of their poor. Yes, I understand that the west has reaped massive monetary rewards from the east. It's certainly not black and white, but it is reminder that while these orientalist fantasies of western writers are sometimes painful, they are not necessarily inaccurate and ultimately some of the old traditions (a la Water) need to be left in the past, and the current governments of the east must continue to build their economies, not at the expense of, but for the benefit of the poor as well.

It's funny how some Westerners complain about immigrants not adapting/attempting to integrate to Western society, but when they go visit "third world countries" they find it acceptable to judge the countries from a Western perspective, instead of trying to understand that it's just cultural. It should work both ways: every country has its own identity in terms of values and such. Don't judge, but try and understand/accept to a certain degree.

#2, Sourav said:

From the very beginning, our leaders from the Nehruvian era portrayed India's "holy poverty" while China promptly tried to put up a more polished look.

The who with the what now? China in the 1960s was not exactly trying to present a "polished" image to the West, what with the Cultural Revolution, Great Leap Forward, and the rest. India, meanwhile, was trying to build a socialist economy and doing pretty badly at it. India's current progress came when it renounced its Nehruvian economc policies, not because of them.

Speedy

sorry chick pea, UCLA is going to lose on saturday

My prediction: Florida versus Ohio State in the finals.

Winners: Florida.

DAMMIT.. is it just me, or do others want to also cut the ponytail off of noah's head? (maybe it can be like the sampson effect)
;)

it better be ucla.. i'm winning my office pool at the moment...and want to take home the $$$$

the beauty of the final four.. is the unpredictability..
i have hope...

in then end: 3 great games... fun atmosphere..and good times.

Hey man, Mumbai's cleaned up. Some. Enough that condescending articles like this should be outdated. Has anyone walked around the non-political side of the DC area recently? Ask me who HASN'T pissed on the side of a car. Or tried to sell me a VCR. Eff this, I should write a startling political commentary on the "horrible living conditions" in this savage American wasteland.

"There are animals everywhere. Common to see congressmen lying in areas by the road. I don’t know how they survive, but I’m told politicians are sacred and you watch out for them. There are lobbyists wandering through the streets. We saw several naked people. Not always children. Several relieving themselves. Our driver pulled over near 7-11 area that I took to be a crack den. I got the camera out and was ready to shoot when we saw that the driver was holding it up...."

Mwahahahaha. Watch yourself, Parsons, I installed MS Office on this muthafucka and I'm not afraid to use it!

Naina is right. This personal makes-me-feel-so-better drivel doesn't belong in a reputable newspaper. Gross overgeneralization. There's a blog called www.subcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com written by an American woman diplomat living who similarly with a magnifying glass looks for anything bad to say about Mumbai. Borderline racist too - " Indians eat where they shit ", " My pregnant 14 year old Indian secretary ", " India hasn't seen feminism ". Such people are nothing but making themselves feel better. Sometimes I wonder if they are living in and reporting from the same city as Manish. Another thing I have observed is that these people are usually so called progressives or liberal Whites. What an irony? Someone pointed out rightly in India we don't hide our poverty like in America's inner cities, where I bet Dana Parsons and the woman diplomat blogger has never set foot in and which they have to shamefully confront only when something like Katrina flushes it out. Still do read the blog I mention - pure hatred and racism disguised as personal experience.

Some right wingers in Britain and I suppose America too, are suffering from a collapse of self esteem, and are a little insecure in their skins, what with multiculturalism and immigration destroying western society and all that. Let's start a poverty safari for them to India where they can have a look around, become revified in their racial and cultural superiority at the sight of even educated Indians 'indifference' of the poverty they are uniquely sensitive and acute to, before sending them back emboldenced in the knowledge of the wily orientals innate fatalism and indifference to the poor and their innate superiority, where they can then shut their eyes and because it's not in their face feel safe and secure again.

Vivek, I agree and disagree with your assessment. You're right -- there's nothing constructive, no call to action here. But I still think that the article is really about asserting Parsons' racial, cultural, and economic superiority, as red snapper suggested. I think Nagasai also observed it nicely:

He could have written his column in a much more intelligble manner, but hey - the man LOVES binary oppositions. India: traffic, shit and train deaths. America: it takes a little longer to get the laundry done. India: bad. America: grrreat!

And chickpea, I'm jealous! I was actually routing for you and the Trojans last weekend against North Carolina -- they almost had it, but then they had to choke at the end and Tim Floyd drew that technical foul --- grrr.

To the naysayers: Mark my words, Joakim Noah will be crying on Saturday.

And chickpea, I'm jealous! I was actually routing for you and the Trojans last weekend against North Carolina -- they almost had it, but then they had to choke at the end and Tim Floyd drew that technical foul --- grrr.

To the naysayers: Mark my words, Joakim Noah will be crying on Saturday.

i was so sad... but we gave unc a run for their NC arse.. at least the hoyas showed them..
and i was happy to take texas out...

down with the gators..
go BRUINS..

There's something very revealing in this thread: Vivek's point of departure is the wealthy liberal and Red Snapper's point of departure is a right winger and yet, both Vivek and Red Snapper arrive at the same place. The poles, as reflected by the dominant parties in the UK and US, are much closer than the noise suggests. Ascetic hippies and right wingers as bedfellows, what a strange world.

That's considered a newspaper column? It reads like someone's stream of consciousness blog post or whinging email to a friend, without the benefit of either thoughtfulness or substance. I can't believe the LAT printed such execrable writing, period. The parts about Bombay are incidental.

#27 was me, my bad.

Naina, Why don't you write a letter to the editor of LAT(if you haven't already). Not that it would result in anything.

She forgot to mention in India we also hang Hindus from hooks for Holi.

Naina, Why don't you write a letter to the editor of LAT(if you haven't already). Not that it would result in anything.

i beg to differ on the 'not that it would result in anything'

write.. see what happens.. you may be in for a surprise...
naina: you should write... you never know.. (my theory on life in general).

That's considered a newspaper column?

Seriously. I don't read the LA Times but I've heard about the Tribune Co. and Dean Baquet fallout. Is this what readers can expect under the Tribune?

"One other thing," my cousin writes to conclude one e-mail, "When the trains are full, it's OK to sit on the roof. I asked our host if people ever fall off. They said deaths from this are reported daily."

So the article is propaganda? Which cause would Parsons be promoting? And who decides when to stop publishing and circulating whatever we don't like?

Good luck getting the "whole picture" about India in any one article (or novel, or essay, or film, or play, or painting, or song). Thousands have tried for years and never done it -- that's part of the beauty of the place.

Not the whole picture about India, you silly fsowallah, I'm talking about the whole picture about Parsons'eff-ing smug cousin's own condition, treatment and purpose in India. The article Naina linked to is definitely propaganda because it is one-sided, intended to harm, designed to damage and otherwise interfere with the growing public perception in America of India's new position as an emerging economy engaged in a powerful post-colonial recovery. We can certainly voice objections by traditional means, i.e., with letters to the Editor. If this fails, and this sort of thing continues, we should bring this journalistic mischief to the attention of Desi groups that are already suitably positioned to sue, as additional provocations worth suing about for sizeable damages.

The article Naina linked to is definitely propaganda because it is one-sided, intended to harm, designed to damage

That overstates the case. It doesn't have to be "designed to harm." Many people confuse the facts with the truth. And there's a human habit of selecting the facts to suit our prejudices.

The truth might contain those same facts, but you know the difference when you see it. It's not really about showing both sides of the argument or anything so direct (the argument might have a dozen sides). The facts, after all, can also be balanced, but that doesn't make them the truth. And its not about showing the totality, which is impossible.

But you know the difference when you see it. But its useless trying to argue someone into seeing that difference.

There's a blog called www.subcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com written by an American woman diplomat living who similarly with a magnifying glass looks for anything bad to say about Mumbai. Borderline racist too - " Indians eat where they shit ", " My pregnant 14 year old Indian secretary ", " India hasn't seen feminism ". Such people are nothing but making themselves feel better. Sometimes I wonder if they are living in and reporting from the same city as Manish.

Damn straight, chowkutta, she's not living in the same Mumbai (formerly Prince of Wales Museum Bombay)as Manish, who. e.g., knows people. Ms. Esquivalence obviously doesn't. AKAIK, desi people generally invite fancy foreigners to parties etc., excluding many diplomats, so probably leave Ms. Equivalence off their lists as well. I've a feeling she positions herself far above people who don't throw parties.

Naina, Why don't you write a letter to the editor of LAT(if you haven't already). Not that it would result in anything.

Naina, you said this is not a call to action, but why not? Numbers count. Those of us who object could post our objections to the LAT-- just give us the word.

as others have pointed out, there's a way to write about a country's faults/flaws and there's a way not to. two articles can contain the same facts but be received differently - tone, choice of words etc. i'm not surprised this is the la times. their previous india correspondent paul somebody used to write articles that sometimes somehow felt a bit dubious and slanted in their tone. it was hard to pin down at times, but there were definite trends in types of sources he used (who he quoted) within india etc.

and i agree that you run into this attitude of "boy, i'm so grateful i was born where i was" more often from liberals than not. it's a sort of lazy "get out of jail free" explanation for their more privileged lives. "yes. it is terrible that people live like that, but what can I do, i just happened to be born here not there. i care about them, of course, but there's not much i can do about it." this pretence at caring is worse than just not caring at all.

when are these closed-minded people going to realize that it's not a life of lower standards people are living in in different country. it's a totally diffrent culture.

My cousin wrote later that a traveling companion says Mumbai has made tremendous strides in recent years. Like the country as a whole, it is striving to redefine itself.

ugh. what a punk.

amrita, you and anyone else are free to write to the LAT. :) I'm thinking about writing a letter to Dana Parsons myself.

"a country's faults/flaws"

just to clarify, i don't think everything qualifies as negative. i have no problem with people mentioning snake charmers or colour or spices or animals in the road - all true of india - if they are handled adroitly and well written about.

Yeah, it's a silly article.

I don't care for primitivism, whether it's white on brown or brown on white*.

*Oh, look Americans put their parents in nursing homes when they are old. We don't do that. We are a more spiritual and enlightened culture, we watch Cricket, we don't eat McDonalds.... (oh, wait, Siddhartha already went over this in his little Tharoor New York Times critique.

**Right-wingers are averse to some types of immigration because they are culturally insecure? Good grief. Some are, some aren't. Quite a nice broad brush there. Musn't do nuance.

***Can't say SM's not equal opportunity anti-silliness :)

****Newspapers, in general, are very poor these days. Why such poor writing, and complete dullness? Thoughts from Siddhartha and Saheli if they happen to be reading? Like, that Walter Reed story is years old. I mean, every doc has a VA/gov hospital story. It's as old as the hills. Is it all just social advocacy and re-typing press releases and 'here are my poor delicate feelings poured out in a column, read my beautiful prose you stupid proles' these days in journalism?

Yeah.. I took the time to read this article and it really doesn't say much about India.. It is more about the writers guilt for his lifestyle, so it is more about environmentalism than it is about India.. Within the whole article there is only two or three sentences describing India, and it doesn't seem "sensationalist" it seems pretty accurate of what India can be like..

I see absolutely nothing wrong with this article at all. I think the article really sheds light on perspective that we often lose in this country. How many times have we complained about a 30 minute commute...think of those in Bombay who have an hour and a half commute.

Every time I go to India I'm left with a newfound appreciation of the way of life here in America. I'm not saying that life in India is horrible--but the comforts we take for granted are brought to light when compared with life there..

How about this - http://www.slate.com/id/2107063/entry/2107071/ ? stole this from Sepia.

Right-wingers are averse to some types of immigration because they are culturally insecure? Good grief. Some are, some aren't. Quite a nice broad brush there. Musn't do nuance.

Yes some of them are suffering from insecurity and project 'multiculturalism' and immigration as a cause of the coming downfall of western civilisation --- SOME of them being the operative word. That's the nuance if you can't see it.

73-57. Sound familiar? That is a rout. Whatever the outcome of Saturday's game, I assure you it will not involve UCLA "routing" Florida. I might also venture to point out that while you lost one of your key players last year (who, by the way was rendered completely ineffective versus Florida), we are returning our entire starting line up. The same starting line up that spanked ucla in the final. So GO GATORS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In way of other comments, while I disliked the "nose stuck up" tone of the article, I can't help but say that some of those observations are the same ones playing over and over in my mind every time I visit India. Only rather than a non-desi disdain for it, I feel overwhelming sadness. On my last visit in November, on the 15 minute car ride from my Uncle's home to the New Delhi airport, I witnessed 4 different people relieving themselves in public. I want to be clear that I am not picking on homeless people that may not have any other options. The thing that really bothered me was that these individuals were well dressed young college students and/or business people. They were clearly not "slum dwellers" or "street people". The saddest sight of all was the last person I saw: an elementary school aged boy all dressed in his private school uniform. I thought to myself that if all this kid sees everyday is reinforcement that such behavior is acceptable, then the cycle continues. I get tired of seeing people with not enough pride in their country or environment or themselves, to take such business to an appropriate venue. On another trip, I was at a university campus in Jodhpur and witnessed this behavior from a college kid with books in one hand, backpack slung over his shoulders --- in the middle of a freaking tennis court. Please don't tell me that the nearest restroom was too far....ugh.

on the whole though, even if the article is a little clunky and awkward and forcefitting in structure, i think the author is well-meaning in that he's saying there's a lot more to really complain about in this world and many people have it much rougher. ( i don't always buy into this argument because human nature is human nature). but i sometimes wish they would write articles from the other way around - people who have it much tougher in countries like india sometimes react much better (some because they just have to and some because they just do) to situations than people who are have it easier (as in Katrina). that could have been another lesson learned from his cousin's observations.

Naina (or others upset with Parsons):

Just out of curiosity, what is your take on the India Shining articles, like say this Time piece?

dipti wrote:

It's funny how some Westerners complain about immigrants not adapting/attempting to integrate to Western society, but when they go visit "third world countries" they find it acceptable to judge the countries from a Western perspective, instead of trying to understand that it's just cultural. It should work both ways: every country has its own identity in terms of values and such. Don't judge, but try and understand/accept to a certain degree.

So it's a 'cultural' thing to have animals walking the street, naked poor people, and civilians urinating on the side of the road? I don't understand your argument at all. They weren't judging it from a western perspective...if anything, it was from a valid public health perspective.

The notion that this reporter should have to accommodate hurt feelings in the Indian diaspora by modifying or ignoring the truth is at once scary and funny.

I like how one commentator contrasted western expectations of assimilation to cultural norms to westerner's revulsion at the lack of basic hygiene in third world countries. Yes all cultures may have equal value in the sense of their moral teachings, but no they are not all equal in the level of practical development i.e. lifespan, quality of life etc.

If the part of Indian society which is living at near first world levels is given a free pass by the rest of the world, they will have one less incentive to help their less fortunately compatriots rise out of poverty.

Gazsi

Well, to be fair to the author and the LA Times, this piece really isn't offered as journalism but as column subtitled "One man's reality check." The Mumbai descriptions barely occupy three short paragraphs and aren't really the point of the whole piece. Yes, the take on Mumbai is silly and unsophisticated, but this column is just a little column. Who cares? And the description of Mumbai cannot be said to be inaccurate . . .

Mr. K. how can you know for sure that it's useless if nobody says anything? This is not about seeking truth, it's about deliberate imbalance.

Within the whole article there is only two or three sentences describing India, and it doesn't seem "sensationalist" it seems pretty accurate of what India can be like.

People dying everyday sitting on top of trains is accurate? This was the image from Gandhi. And he hasn't seen anything else about India after that. The image of India is from the 40s. He needs to wake up.

Re: #47. i've seen well-dressed young men in the. u.s. relieving themselves in public, (not drunk), even though there must have been a public bathroom somewhere nearby and the subway had a urine smell (and i don't think it was all homeless people). i'm also surprised by how much people spit while walking here. in india of course, there's paan spittle and other spittle, but i was really surprised by how many well-dressed people, usually men, i see spitting openly in public here.

If the part of Indian society which is living at near first world levels is given a free pass by the rest of the world, they will have one less incentive to help their less fortunately compatriots rise out of poverty.

The Indian bourgeoisie can be motivated into alleviating poverty because they will be shamed by foreign journalists writing about mangy dogs and beggar children --- good idea!

Hey Chowkutta #24,
That blog IS pretty bad. I wonder why must she endure such horrors! Biting on every level.

Alas her effort to 'share' her world will likely be irrelevant - Mumbai will be what it wishes to be - great and crap at the same time. Easy to trash it, and India, and easy to forget that a subcontinent (not just India, but Pak, Bangladesh), strip-mined of its wealth, confidence, and assurance over long 250 yrs will take time to recover.

Preston, he could do his reality check right in LA. Otherwise, the inconveniences he puts up with in his middle class life in LA might properly be compared to inconveniences that middle class Mumbaikers cope with. This is just an update of "eat you vegetables for the starving poor children in India," which was a colonial fairy tale. Somewhere in all of this there is an inherent denial of other underlying truths alrwady cited above-- that people are that grindingly poor in India because the British worked long and hard to suck the place dry and that recovery is hard too, plus the United States we are all living on land and resources seized from indigenous peoples, etc., etc....

Yeah also what is up with this being Indian culture thing ? Like someone said before, animals walking on the streets, long commutes, nudity and poverty are now considered Indian culture ? Being poor and dirty is Indian culture ?

The Indian bourgeoisie can be motivated into alleviating poverty because they will be shamed by foreign journalists writing about mangy dogs and beggar children --- good idea!

Sadaiyappan if it takes 'shame' in front of foreigners to do something about poverty then nothing will ever be done about poverty -- it's naive to think that that could be an incentive, (and kind of funny in an old school way like how the family patriarch warns disobedient children that if they don't listen to him he'll tell everyone about their misbehaviour and bring 'shame' to the family!)

Amrita, I can't agree that people are grindingly poor in India because the British worked long and hard to suck the place dry, that's too reductionist. There are so many factors that contribute to poverty. And the British colonizing India doesn't excuse or explain people urinating on walls. From what I see in Kolkata every day, some of it is lack of available facilities, much of it is plain laziness, and yes, it's culturally acceptable. Does that mean I don't notice it or excuse it as acceptable behavior? Of course not. I think it's deplorable. The government has set up public toilets in the city, but near where I live there's basically a piss wall that most men from all walks of life in the area know about and use(it's also where a garbage truck dumps trash to be picked over by 4-5 ragpickers every day.) I see that you think Parsons is intentionally damaging, but like Mr. Kobayashi, I think that's going too far.

Focusing on one aspect of a country doesn't automatically mean deliberate imbalance. The truth has many faces.

I would be interested to see what Parsons says if you write him asking for a more balanced (and positive?) piece on India.

I am an immigrant in America. I really love this country and its people and I can be very critical of India and Indians. I don't shy away from faultfinding among my own but please be objective. Preston, reducing Bombay to what this writer has, is in fact inaccurate, more pointedly it's a lie. It's like saying New York City is all about in-your-face homeless people, muggings and people's pets' urine steaking all of its sidewalks. I am an Indian trying to get ahead in an industry where there are hardly any other Indians or people of color. Lately I have begun to do quite well but anytime an article like this appears, I get defensive and also a false sense of inferiority complex overcomes me. I start thinking what the people around me are thinking about me, once they have read such an article - " he comes from India where people live like animals." I don't even come from a wealthy family in India but I haven't ever felt a sense of " material culture shock " in America. When I read such crap I want to give everything up and go back to India to be with friends and family I left behind and maybe live in a city that I always wanted to - Bombay - a city that pulses with life like no other city in the US except for maybe New York. That will be a slap in the face of people who think like this writer. But I am caught in a vicious circle of my own making - going back without having made it big here will have such a sense of self-failure, specially when I am so close. I am not here because I coudn't bear India's stench.

I always though the british helped India to modernize.. Look at what they did to Honk Kong.. Maybe if we had not declared Independance India would be a much nicer place right now..

Just out of curiosity, what is your take on the India Shining articles, like say this Time piece?

Manju ol' pal!!!! How the hell are ya!??

I'm skeptical of the India Shining series of articles that came out last year. I feel like both strains of contemporary journalism on India - both of the poverty voyeur / horrified white person genre as well as the India Is On The Rise variety - are fundamentally dishonest, exaggerating and sensationalizing one or another aspect of what's happening in a tremendously complex part of the world. Two sides of the same coin, in a lot of ways.

I may not agree with all that the article says but in most part I find it an accurate representation of the facts. Mumbai is a filthy, stinking, hell-hole.

To all the high-brow intellectuals on this board who are spewing pages defending Mumbai's unique charm, I ask you to take a trip to Andheri east. There, nestled among back-office sweat shops are entire fields of human excrement. From my hotel room window at 6 am I had a ringside view of humans lined up 100 deep shitting straight into the mouths of pigs who were eating the shit as it came out. Needless to say I lost my appetite for the entire week.

London was a slum until the 19th century. Have they forgotten that England was largely wretched when they were busy colonizing the rest of the world? Charles Dickens? William Blake? Economic growth is occuring in Asia alongside poverty. Poverty will persist, and that wont make the very real growth a failure as some are alleging now.

I have no problem with journalists writing about the poverty in India. But I do have a problem with Parsons' relying on a cousin's email to paint the picture. How accurate is it to say "There are animals everywhere"? What impression does that create? Why not say "Stray dogs and cows are a common sight." And what about this:

We saw several naked people. Not always children. Several relieving themselves.

Why not just tell us that a large percentage of India's population does not have access to toilets?

And this:

When the trains are full, it's OK to sit on the roof. I asked our host if people ever fall off. They said deaths from this are reported daily

Is it really OK? It sounds like the people on the roof are sold tickets too. And are deaths reported daily?

I went to India in 2005, mostly Tamil Nadu, and I didn't see a single naked adult, nor anyone sitting atop any of the trains.

This is shoddy journalism. And yes, Preston, this piece is supposed to be journalism, even with that subtitle. It would be different, perhaps, if it was a letter to the editor or a blog post. But it's been written by a three-times-a-week columnist, who has to be held to high standards.

Hi Naina,
when was the last time you went to India? I grew up there, and unfortunately I don't share your sense of outrage as I have seen all the above mentioned stuff...so please save your sense of outrage till you have actually spent some time there and gotten down from your ivory tower in new jersey or wherever!

"Focusing on one aspect of a country doesn't automatically mean deliberate imbalance. The truth has many faces."

true, but most people dont' take kindly to it. what about americans going on about the french and not bathing (based on truth i guess). not sure the french appreciate that. what about americans who go on about the awful state of british teeth (i've seen it). not sure the brits like that. there are fewer excuses in the first world for smelly, dirty, unhygienic people with poor teeth, in my opinion.

appearances can be deceptive. i read an article by a british journalist complaining about the cramped, sweaty smell of a mumbai train and he insinuated that some of them hadn't bathed. well, maybe that's because the water supply is dicey and many of the people riding with him live in slums and the train is overcrowded. what excuse is there, then, for the well-dressed but smelly people i've had to endure on the not so crowded subways in the u.s. and the tube in london, especially during cold weather when a lot of them seem to bathe only every other day or every two days. what about all those outwardly nice looking homes on tree-lined streets that are absolutely filthy inside (just watch that tv show with those two cleaning women) inside? not even a slum person in india would have their house looking like that. dirt huts in india and africa may look poor from the outside but inside, the floors are swept clean. i've yet to see a dirty homeless person in the u.s. bathing in the river or trying to clean themselves. but in india poor people or rural people will try to clean themselves in rivers, ponds, lakes. so would it be ok for me to write a column based on my observations of people on subways in first world countries and of them on tv programs on cleaning houses and come to the conclusion that a lot of the "poorer hygiene" in first world countries is actually hidden behind fancy clothes and houses and perfumes? it wouldn't be a deliberate imbalance on my part, just one face of truth after all. (and this isn't so much to do with parson's article but just a general response)

Hey Gabe, have you read Naina's earlier piece on this columnists other article? She raises some great points.

http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/004276.html

when was the last time you went to India? I grew up there, and unfortunately I don't share your sense of outrage as I have seen all the above mentioned stuff...so please save your sense of outrage till you have actually spent some time there and gotten down from your ivory tower in new jersey or wherever!

I grew up in India for 21 years. And I definitely share naina's outrage. I have not seen people dying everyday on top of trains or naked people on streets. And no I did not grow up in an ivory tower in India.

Is it really OK? It sounds like the people on the roof are sold tickets too. And are deaths reported daily?

Well, it is certainly not OK, it is dangerous and stupid. There are plenty of warnings and sign boards put up by the authorities asking people not to do stupid things. But the trains are always overcrowded and carry 5-6 times their capacity (I think) during rush hours and you cant just leave the train if it is crowded and take the next one, because then you will have to wait for 3 hours. On an average about 15 people die daily in the Bombay suburban tracks. Many people die while crossing tracks as they are not fenced and not out of bounds and many people die because they simply fall off trains. People climb on windows and hang on with their fingers between the narrow ridge used to collect rainwater and let it flow from the front, between two compartments and sometimes almost on top . image. People hanging from doors sometimes with just one hand and a few toes on whatever tiny space is available at the doors can fall off if they lose their grip. Some times they are struck by the electric poles which are too close to the train and people are hanging too far out.
Having said all this, the local trains are very punctual, very frequent, very cheap and run almost 24 hrs ... from around 3:30 AM to 1:30 AM or so. It takes a huge disaster, natural or man made for the trains to come to grinding halt.

Also I think that this situation is totally unique to Bombay local trains and people from outside Bombay are usually in total 'shock and awe' when they witness this magnitude of humanity cramped in such a small place.

Amrita, I can't agree that people are grindingly poor in India because the British worked long and hard to suck the place dry, that's too reductionist. There are so many factors that contribute to poverty. And the British colonizing India doesn't excuse or explain people urinating on walls. From what I see in Kolkata every day, some of it is lack of available facilities, much of it is plain laziness, and yes, it's culturally acceptable.

fsowalla, what have you been reading? Here's something for you, and do try Macaulay's Minute on (Indian) Education of February 1835. BTW, lack of "available failities" is lack of funds for plumbing-- would you very sweetly spring for public toilets all over india? Then we can all start programs for teaching everybody to use them!

Re. 55, oh I totally agree - the problem is by no means an India-only situation. But from my experience, it is a much more frequent occurrence there (in broad daylight), with passersby not even registering disgust/anger. And let's forget about police issuing citations for indecent exposure ...

What Parsons wrote in his article is just the same things I hear from EVERYONE that I've known who has ever visited India. I work at a company where people travel around the world looking for products. They go to other 'third' world countries like Nigeria, Thailand, Vietnam, etc and yet the least favored country to visit is always India. They site the overcrowded streets, the lack of hygiene and shabby public facilities. It's gotten to the point where people are taking turns having to visit India while they will gladly go to any of the other countries on their itinerary, despite the inconveniences. It's extremely embarrassing. Could it be that we just tend to tolerate these things because we're Indian? I think we just rush to make excuses for it instead of dealing with it.

So writing that in Mumbai there are naked poor people forced to defecate out in the open among wandering livestock is beyond the pale? Last week in New York, I saw a middle-aged, obviously middle class white man peeing between two parked cars, not twenty yards from Park Avenue. He had pulled back his blue blazer to let it fly. I assumed that he had some medical condition that prevented him from waiting until he could find a proper toilet.

I also assume that if the citizens of Mumbai had the means, they would clothe themselves, and if the city's infrastructure were better, they would have a proper place to pee. This doesn't seem to be a holdover from the Raj but more obviously the fault of corrupt and useless government at all levels.

Preston, why doesn't it seem to you to be a holdover from what you call the Raj?

What Parsons wrote in his article is just the same things I hear from EVERYONE that I've known who has ever visited India. I work at a company where people travel around the world looking for products. They go to other 'third' world countries like Nigeria, Thailand, Vietnam, etc and yet the least favored country to visit is always India. They site the overcrowded streets, the lack of hygiene and shabby public facilities. It's gotten to the point where people are taking turns having to visit India while they will gladly go to any of the other countries on their itinerary, despite the inconveniences. It's extremely embarrassing. Could it be that we just tend to tolerate these things because we're Indian? I think we just rush to make excuses for it instead of dealing with it.

They go there with prejudices induced by Lonely planet guides which every westerner think is the bible for travelers. After reading it they try to find evidence to match what was written in the guidebook, not the other way around. People see what they are looking for. And this thing about least favored is wrong, because people talk bad about India even before visiting it, even before getting know. Surely, India has its problems, but then why go to India and stay in a 50 cent/night hotel and then complain about shabby rooms? Why don't they spend the same amount that they would spend in US ($35/night). For the same $35/night they get the same quality in India too, but no they won't do that. If they do that then they can't spin stories as to how disgusting it was.

Thanks for the links. I'm not debating Macaulay and his ilk's role here. My point is that poverty in India today is not only explained by British colonial policy. People were (and are) grindingly poor long before the British arrived.

As for pissing, what can I say? The government of West Bengal has installed over 328 sanitary marts in rural areas of 2004 (their data). They have also built public latrines in Kolkata. The money is there, don't let people tell you it's not. Various social sector departments in the government are in fact always looking for ways to spend their portions of the budget. In the slums, I've seen that people actually do a remarkable job of separating the latrine areas from where they live and eat (probably because they also live there)-- it's in the better off areas that one sees more public urination onto walls along sidewalks. Again, that's one of the realities on the streets here.

Hello - I just found this Website while I was doing some research for a business travel to Bombay next month. I have to admit that had a different impression of the city, because my associates tell me it is the most modern and most wealthy city in India. But I am wondering if it is not true? Do many people really use the restroom on the street? - should I have any vaccinations before I travel?

Surely, India has its problems, but then why go to India and stay in a 50 cent/night hotel and then complain about shabby rooms? Why don't they spend the same amount that they would spend in US ($35/night). For the same $35/night they get the same quality in India too, but no they won't do that. If they do that then they can't spin stories as to how disgusting it was.

Exactly. I stayed in a hotel in Hyderabad which was around ~$40/ day, it was far better than what you find anything in US for the same cost. In fact, the ~$110-150/ day hotels in Delhi, Hyderabad are absolutely fantastic. On several occasions, I have been with other Americans, they themselves wanted to move to cheaper ones because they thought that $35-40/ day were just fine.

Sure, India has huge problems. Foswalla and Preston, please read Kennedey (from Yale) and others, and compare the GDP of India before British colonization, during, and after. A country that had series of famines (Bengal and others) mostly by man made causes, is heavily populated, had all most all its natural resources diverted to distant lands to build war machine for His/ Her Majesty cannot be expected to be "sparkling clean and chic" like Singapore.

Also keep in context, the size of America and India (three times smaller), and population difference. If you crowd America to the same level, you will see shit all over, no kidding........just like Mardi Gras. Also, remember, Katrina showed that even the most powerful countries can be very vulnerable and indifferent to poor.

How could it be a holdover from the British colonial project? India has had over a half-century of self-rule. At some point, India's problems are just India's problems. This is not to say that there are not pervasive structural problems, an overburdened and decrepit infrastructure, environmental degradation, the failed policies of external agents like the World Bank and the IMF, extreme government corruption and sleaze--all of which create a vicious trap for the poor, making it difficult to escape. But not all of India's cities face the scale of Mumbai's horrors. Plus, there are other major cities in the world with problems similar to Mumbai's, and which did not suffer under a colonial yoke, or just not in the same fairly recent way. The woes of the world's megacities are well known, well documented, and well studied (read anything by Mike Davis, for example).

I grant that India was placed at a severe disadvantage by colonialism, but the reality of life in Mumbai in 2007 results from more recent factors, not least of which is that the city has never really had a functioning government. Someone above mentioned Tamil Nadi as a counter-example. TN is one of India's best governed states. It provided for the victims of the tsunami better than the American state and federal governments did for the Katrina victims in New Orleans.

Some parts of India are doing well enough, all things considered. TN was the Madras Presidency for a good long time.

Preston, I generally agree with things you post here, but its kinda naive to think that the economic effects of two hundred years of colonialism can be overcome in about sixty. I don't have the time to go over it here, but the institutional legacies of colonialism still linger and actually have a very long lives in terms of affecting the incentives of political and economic actors. Such congealed/ossified institutions and their effects are very difficult to get rid of as institutional economists (Douglas North, Pranab Bardhan and actually Thorstein Veblen before all of them) have demonstrated.

As far as poor people are concerned, China has a fair amount of poverty too; but the international opinion on China is far different than that on India. It all depends on the way you market yourself.

It may have something to do with elevated skin melanin levels too.

They go there with prejudices induced by Lonely planet guides which every westerner think is the bible for travelers. After reading it they try to find evidence to match what was written in the guidebook, not the other way around. People see what they are looking for. And this thing about least favored is wrong, because people talk bad about India even before visiting it, even before getting know. Surely, India has its problems, but then why go to India and stay in a 50 cent/night hotel and then complain about shabby rooms? Why don't they spend the same amount that they would spend in US ($35/night). For the same $35/night they get the same quality in India too, but no they won't do that. If they do that then they can't spin stories as to how disgusting it was.

Why do you assume that they aren't staying at the finest hotels? The company does put them in the better hotels. However, they do have to visit factories and vendors to look for goods and it's everything they see outside that they talk about. Men urinating or defecating on the streets is not a complaint that they make about Bangkok or Ho Chi Minh City.

My co-workers are also people who come from all walks of life. Some of them from poor backgrounds and all races/ethnicities. They're hardly ignorant and I doubt they all simply read the Lonely Planet books to get a view of how the world is supposed to be.

Oh and by the way, there's a reason most of Chicago's alleys smell like urine. I mean, granted, we're "flyover country", and so therefore might as well be in Mumbai to readers of the LA Times, but I still think that's relevant. Anyone shocked, SHOCKED by public urination clearly hasn't spent much time in any big, non-automobile dependent city anywhere in the world.

Well here it is, Preston. The British did not build a plethora of public loos in India before 1947. They did however build public loos in Britain during the same period. In addition they left the country in a shambles, with a ruined economy and out of date industrial facilities (they stopped capital investment into manufacturing and other sectors as soon as they realized they would have to leave-- years before Independence), so public toilets, which had gone wanting for centuries weren't top of the list of necessary remedies. You must be aware that the infrastructure after Broitish withdrawal did not allow plumbing in any part of any Indian city to work 24/7, let alone share water supplies to support a network of public facilities. The infrastructure had to be rebuilt on tax rupees, and prioritized under multiple demands and stressors . As you note, the complexities of restructuring megacities are collosal, and sixty years is not very long, considering the damage the British Occupation did. Repairs to plumbing and the fabric of civilization will no doubt accelerate, just not in time for writers like Dana Parsons to have nothing to report. Bags no newspaper here will want to publish your story about the guy p[eeing between cars on Park.

fsowalla, enjoy Macaulay! He's so totally outrageous. You know the rich people won't share their facilities, and nobody installs public loos in Alipore, as everyone's supposed to go in the houses' servants' quarters or such, or not be there at all, as if the streets were private or people were to just hold it in. But you are saying that loos have been built and are being properly used. The money is thwre now, boosted with IT generated tax revenues, but it wasn't before. Re British, Victorian London had pretty poor people and lousy public facilities too, only their lot improved as Indian people's got worse. The societal and mental scramble the British left behind was another impediment-- World Bank and WTO policies carrying that tradition forward I grant you -- but it's impossible that
people were as grindingly poor before the British occupation, if only because almost all Indians became poorer under the British, and those who were poorest to start with obviously had the least effective defenses against seizures, extortions, and other aggressive means of deprivation. don't forget, traditions of indigenous craftsmanship were systematically undermined-- and what else was there in a pre-industrail society, other than subsistence farming?

Paulina, one should always get vaccinated, even in Texas.

Sadly, I must do other stuff but wait for tech support on the phone the rest of this afternoon...

Kush, rather than compare India and the US, let's compare cities with equivalent populations in both countries (not perfect, but better than using Mardi Gras -- would be slightly more accurate to compare that to, perhaps, Ganesh Chaturthy or Durga Puja). Can these differences be explained solely by the British legacy? The yoke of colonialism can't across the board explain the individual decisions taken by politicians, or for that matter, the average citizen in matters as large as public spending or as small as urinating on the street.

"Re. 55, oh I totally agree - the problem is by no means an India-only situation. But from my experience, it is a much more frequent occurrence there (in broad daylight), with passersby not even registering disgust/anger. And let's forget about police issuing citations for indecent exposure ..."

go gator, i'm not making excuses for those in india who have access to amenities and who indulge in this sort of behavior or making excuses for poor governance in india. whether in the u.s. or india, there are poor people who are much cleaner and wealthier people who are not. i just think there are fewer excuses for a reasonably well off first world person to be urinating in the street or have a filthy house or not bathe for two days and then ride the subway or for there to be really filthy homeless people when there are so many amenities and social services available to them that are not available even to some middle class neighborhoods in india.

people write that westerners are shocked when they go to a poor country like india and see the dirt, filth, poverty outside of five-star hotels etc. i am more shocked that 95 percent of the people at my fancy five-star college gym in the u.s. have zero personal hygiene, no respect for others, sweat all over the equipment and do not wipe it as required to, allowing the sweat/gunk to dry and the next unsuspecting person uses it or doesn't even care enough to wipe it before using it (when all these amenities are available and signs are there telling them to do so). i am shocked by a female friend's stories of the fancy bathroom in her corporate building, where well-paid, well-dressed women have zero hygiene and leave the toilet in a disgraceful state for the next person. all this may be out in the open and shocking in india, but it's hidden and just as shocking here in its own way, especially in more seemingly upscale surroundings. as katrina shows, it doesn't take much for filth to accumulate and people to fight over bathrooms when order and law and things and amenities break down. the veneer of "civilization" and "civility" is very thin.

Why do you assume that they aren't staying at the finest hotels? The company does put them in the better hotels. However, they do have to visit factories and vendors to look for goods and it's everything they see outside that they talk about. Men urinating or defecating on the streets is not a complaint that they make about Bangkok or Ho Chi Minh City.

My co-workers are also people who come from all walks of life. Some of them from poor backgrounds and all races/ethnicities. They're hardly ignorant and I doubt they all simply read the Lonely Planet books to get a view of how the world is supposed to be.

I am not assuming, you are. You are assuming everyone who visits India are sent by the company. Go to www.travelblog.org and go to lonelyplanet(and similar guidebooks), read blogs about Bangkok or Ho chi Minh City(and India and the other "third world"). India is not the only country they talk bad about or good about.

And as far as Lonelyplanet, it is the highest selling travel guidebook in the world. So don't tell me people don't read it before they travel to the "third world". It is the bible for backpackers and travelers.

And importantly, I never said "all" or "any" westerners are ignorant, as a matter fact i never said anything about ignorance. And I also said India has its problems. I said people go with prejudices and they see what they look for. And they look for what travel guidebooks tells them. Till there is a travel guidebook fair and balanced you will be having these type of articles.

Can these differences be explained solely by the British legacy?

No, not at all.

Sure, India has a significant share of failed policies, and corrupt politicians are in legions post 1947. But they do not come out of vacuum. A country that is cash-strapped, and is handed over broken infrastructure is a perfect breeding ground. It makes itself a prime place for misuse of limited funds, and rampant corruption.

A country that had series of famines (pre-47), could (not) barely grow enough food to feed its people, was simmering with religious strife, mess due to partition, empty coffers the time British left in 1947 - remember, all this with British muck-ups - should be not be expected to be avant garde, and with designer toilets every 10 steps in few decades later. The immediate problem in India was to even grow even grains to feed not making toilets in 1940s-50s-60s-70s, periodic wars with Pakistan and China.

It did not have Marshall (or Marshall like) Plan that guided the recovery of Germany, and Japan. Keep the size in mind, and populations, when talking about India or China.

As late as 1991, India was on the brink of loan default because they hardly had foreign reserves. India was on a brink of bankruptcy.

Regarding toilets, and public urinations, for most part, they are hardly clean public toilets in India - the key word is <