Foreign Policy Blogs

"Enjoy Poverty"

Enjoy Poverty is a disturbing 80 minute film that attempts to expose and lay bare the inherent viciousness of poverty’s status quo.  It draws parallels between the economics of poverty and the psychology of western consumption and aid.

It attempts to symbolize the perversity of our own societies, the dramas and the obscure fascination we have with death.  So long as it happens far away, we can remain comforted, but only just.

Dutch artist Renzo Martens, who spent two years filming the documentary in the Democratic Republic of Congo, calls it a work of art where he  instructs the people he meets to see their poverty as a natural resource like gold or copper.  His interaction with them is detached, his voice monotone, a white man strolling through a landscape and in an environment he could not possibly ever understand and nor does he pretend to.

But unlike some documentaries about poverty and war, Enjoy Poverty presents an even  stronger commentary about the western narrative on Africa’s suffering.   The starving child, the uprooted families, the war, the famine, all these conditions that we associate with Africa come to fore – and are bought and sold for our consumption.

A photo of starving child can net 50 USD.  A photo of a wedding is worth nothing.  As such, the economy of poverty and war is a reflection of not only how we view the world but also mirrors a disturbing trend in our own societies – at least that is what this film wants us to believe.

Taken as a whole, the film works to make us (the west) acknowledge the exploitation of poverty and in a sense, it delivers that message.  However, isolated in its individual parts, the message begins to unravel by making some unsubstantiated claims on donors.

It implies that Medicines Sans Frontieres is both there to help but also to exploit.  At one point, we see MSF leaving an area that still requires aid. On shore, the camera lens follows the MSF crew as it slowly drifts away on a barge.   Left behind are the women and children. But this scene, while shocking, is not really contextualized. An MSF official offers a court response; but with no follow-up and no investigation we are forced to view the departure as an injustice. For the committed individuals at MSF, the decontextualization will surely offend.

Martens wants the poor to profit from their poverty.  He views international aid organizations and journalists in the same light as corporations mining diamonds, gold and copper.   IDP tents are stamped with logos.  Food delivery bags are also branded in similar ways.

As he enters one village in central Congo he begins to mount a sign. He then primes a generator, pulls the cord, and up lights the words in brilliant blue hues ‘Enjoy Poverty.’  His hosts stare at the sign.

At night, the light bathes their faces, some perplexed, others questioning the man’s motivation.  Apart and detached from the spectacle, Martens looks on with a quiet demeanor.

“You can’t give them anything they don’t already have.  You shouldn’t give them anything they don’t have.  You should train them, empower them.  There are new opportunities, new markets, new products. The people in the forest…,” he concludes ” have no clue.”

Martens, entirely conscious of his dominant and pedantic role, becomes the consumer of suffering and thus attempts to personify the true face and motivation of the west.

To drive his skewed point home, Martens shows two well dressed aid workers taking photos of ragged refugees under tents stitched with UN logos.  Behind the camera, the aid workers smile apprehensively. The smiles are the expression of the status quo, a click of photo, a snap shot into a world where logos and do-gooders find themselves face to face with a reality they are not truly prepared to assume.

Granted, there is some truth to his message, but it leaves out some fundamentals.  Journalists and aid workers also bare witness to these events and while some may interpret their intentions as selfish, others  see it as vital and courageous.  Nonetheless,  the lives of those we film are invariably distant from the ones we lead and somewhere along the way, the sincerity of humanitarian acts intertwined with media, makes for a troubling scenario because its decor is draped with  the destroyed lives of so many people.  This is no stage.

In so doing, he wants us to to realize that we are all that individual behind the camera.  And more importantly, he wants us to realize that the person photographed is not just another damned face of Africa.

[kml_flashembed movie="http://www.youtube.com/v/qXkt9RECJK0" width="425" height="350" wmode="transparent" /]

     
    Add a comment

    Comments (8)

    1. Felani Manu Wednesday - 11 / 11 / 2009 Reply
      This film is obviously based on the intent to jolt people into re-thinking the North-South divide and the effectiveness of the "aid industry" as we know it today. Predictably, it has met sharp reviews from critics accustomed to working within the boundaries of convention. In a sense, the film is no less radical than the many books written over the subject, ranging from Graham Hancocks "Lords of Poverty" to the more recent "Dead Aid" by Ms. Dambisa Moyo. All these works try to do is to question the decades-old establishment of organizations that came into being in order to alleviate poverty. Most have little to show for the millions they have spent, so that it now appears as if the perpetuation of poverty has become their greatest asset in the fight for funding. Renzo Martens invested in the scenes we see, and in his neon sign in the jungle. That party in the trailer was as cleverly staged as the UN photo-shoots. Time only will tell whether he is any different from those he accuses of exploiting the poor.
    2. Koen Thursday - 19 / 11 / 2009 Reply
      I´m completely blown away by this documentary. So incredibly in your face. The honesty... I can´t believe a person could be so straight forward in such harse conditions. This guy has done an incredible job that can´t have come cheap for him. Imagine being that guy, telling someone his miserable life won´t change, that it´s worthless hoping for that. Enjoy your poverty! To me this movie has been an eye opener. No documentary has ever touched me like this. Hate it or love it... just watch it. And then, well do something meaningless like writing a post on some internet site.
    3. ernie Sunday - 27 / 12 / 2009 Reply
      I came across this movie in TV, but the scene it just showed was the little boy discovered dead. I couldn't bear it... So here I go Koen doing something meaningless- sheding my tears and postin this one. Peace.
    4. yaco8 Friday - 05 / 11 / 2010 Reply
      I just came back from watching "Enjoy Poverty" at Copenhagen:Dox festival. People were mute at the end. It was .. shockingly excellent. But shocking in a weird revolving way, in a sophisticated, artistic, northern european ironic way which is so out of place in the reality of the DRC. I've struggled to put words onto it, but here they are: Renzo Martens is right, the situation is hopeless as it is today. A lot of people there do have courage, motivation and for sure a love of Africa and DRC. It takes courage and devotion to be part of MSF or to manage a refugee camp - the Unicef, UN or EU logos are a detail in the daily challenges for both the people and the aid workers. Even the Italian photographer or the Belgian palm oil manager have this sparkle of love in their eye for that country and its people. And they all feel equally hopeless at the situation even if in some way they are both trying to alleviate the problem and they are also part of the problem. The truth is: it is a structural problem. Today, we collectively allow poverty. We allow for companies to compete unsustainably. This is not the companies fault: business (and capitalism simply) operate in the framework it is given. And there is no global framework insuring that every human being along the production chain is given enough to meet its basic needs in the present and that his ability to meet his needs in the future are not impaired. With no such framework or common rule, companies naturally compete on production costs resulting in the inevitable unsustainable low wages and child malnutrition. Paying more - being "nice" - would simply put them out of business. Globalization allowed us to "externalize" the human (and environmental) cost - out of our sight, sort to day. Globalization thus requires a global government and global rules and global taxes and global investments in social infrastructure as it was once done at national levels in the west. Poverty will not be eradicated until the true human and environmental costs are factored in. And markets do not have a good track record of taking care of this either. Now for the media, well, they play the essential role to put these things on the agenda. I am sure it is frustrating for the reporter not only to sell his pictures or videos, but that in the end, not much of it actually makes it in our daily news. Why? I do wish our governments were courageous and visionary enough to put such global framework into place, but we are also selfish. Why should my coffee double in price from one day to the other? So why should a democratically elected government risk his political capital by supporting such agenda? So in the end, the vision of a poverty-free world, and the understanding of what that means needs to make its way in 51% of people's mind. The media or the companies or the governments will not change a thing, and the reporters and aid workers will continue "doing their best" with their meagre charity resources and ever-more-shocking pictures or documentaries to try to 'wake us up'. That is until we start caring. That is until we accept to live by the sustainability principles, including "eliminating our contribution to conditions that undermine people’s capacity to meet their basic human needs (for example, unsafe working conditions and not enough pay to live on)" (ref. http://www.thenaturalstep.org/~natural/the-system-conditions). We should not even have the choice about buying faire trade or ecological or not; ALL we consume must be fair trade and ecological, full stop. When enough of us realize that and want that, only then (democratically elected) governments will dare put the rules into place, and will companies be forced to comply to new rules and compete on other grounds - and despite what businesses say, that is easy for them to do as long as the same rule is applied to all. In the meantime, Renzo Martens is right, congolese may as well get used to poverty and enjoy it..
    5. Vira Monday - 20 / 06 / 2011 Reply
      I watched the video at Berlin Bienalle last year and left the exhibition for a long digestive break when the movie ended - no art piece has ever had this effect on me before. Reading and watching films about imperialism is very painful. On the one hand, one comes to realize all the evils of the problem. On the other hand, no one has yet produced a working solution to the problem. The dreams about global discourse ethics and universal emphathy have hardly improved in anything other than rhethorical sophistication since Kant wrote his "On Perpetual Peace" 300 years ago. Tolerance smells of superficiality and there is no such thing as international equality. I guess the restlesness of many viewers is in the question: what do we do now? We abandon violent rhethoric, we consume fairtrade, we moderate, we correct and fire imperialists, we spread awarness, we stop using "we" and objectifying the other, we fall into the abbyss of our ancestor's mistakes...

    Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. [...] post Miséria para quem precisa o autor cita o documentário Enjoy Poverty e mostra que a exploração da miséria não é feita só pelos fotógrafos que vêem de fora, mas [...]

    2. [...] – at least that is what this film wants us to believe. (if you want to read the whole article click [...]

    Add a comment