Through the documentary McCollum consistently expresses his pollens on Diehard and aims to solve the enigma that this slum is claimed to have a strong sense of community, high employment rate, little crime and a model for sustainable living. Kevin Mucosa’s opinions in the opening scenes of the film reinforce the audience’s attitudes of poverty stricken, disease rife slums. He says “When I think of a slum, the thing I think of is misery. And for people to say they are intensely happy, I don buy that. These relatable personal opinions and camera shots of McCollum experiencing the extremes of the slum give him a persona of a genuinely interested and honest investigator. This positions the audience to respect him and adds an air of credibility which encourages the audience to accept the information as reliable and encourages them to accept the views being promoted by Kevin McCollum. Juxtaposition is shown through the editing of camera shots which displays the negative and positive aspects of Diehard.
Camera shots of littered lands, crowded and fragile makeshift housing and children playing in sewage, gives us a powerful image that further strengthens the attitudes and ideologies the western world has with poverty stricken societies. This persuades the audience to feel empathy and arrow towards this poor and euthanized community. However through the construction of taking a positive approach and emphasizing the qualities of the slum, the audience’s attitude is altered.
Silencing Is used as information such as the high death rates in slums, depression and struggle that many people In the slum experience regularly is not included. Not knowing this Information, positions the audience to perceive the slum as a more positive place, as the positive features are focused on stronger. Conversations are had with the people who live In Dorval, we gain Information of personal experiences wealth the slum. Convincing statistics are given through the narration of McCollum, such as the high 85% employment rate of Dorval.
Also through the visual shots of the communities utilizing space extremely well, the connections and Interaction between all the people In the slum and the long camera shots which emphasize the smiles, laughter and happiness had In the communal TTY, persuades us to change our Attlee we previously Ana AT ten slum. Film puts forward the view that underneath the unsanitary conditions, there are values overlooked that the western world can learn such as teamwork, social interaction, space management and the keys Tao happy life.
The construction processes used in ‘Slumming It’ were effective in conveying and persuading the audience of first world countries. Its purpose of exposing the audience to the knowledge of the true happiness and intelligent tools that can be learnt from poverty stricken societies was achieved. The documentary altered the audience’s attitude and ideologies that people living in slums are not depressed, unmotivated and uneducated people as the film persuaded us that they are very content in the way in which they live focusing their values in happiness and life qualities.
I chose this documentary as the ways in which other cultures live interests me. The knowledge of a identity other then my own and to learn the way in the way which they live and express their language to connect to the communities in which they live in, has altered my attitudes and ideologies not only towards the people living in slums like Diehard, but the western society and how much we lack qualities such as sustainable living and the happiness shared with social interaction in our own communities.