Begs the Question

Beggars are as much a part of Mumbai as the Gateway of India. Over the last 10 years of actively roaming around the city, the no of cars have increased and so have the no of beggars. What has also changed is the kind of beggars in the city. The first kind of beggar that I encountered was the simple woebegone face kinds who would sit by the roadside and keep uttering monosyllables the year round. There was no strategy of any kind in place, and the adage beggars can’t be choosers used to get played out. Most of them seemed fatalistic.
As the economy evolved and liberalized, so did beggars. For one, I think even the beggar economy opened up. There were a lot many more beggars because there was a lot many more economic activity (and hence money to be handed out) and a lot many more people. The quality of begging also changed. Some beggars, in order to differentiate their pitch, started to exhibit their skills. So you had harmonium totting kids and adults causing disharmony in trains. Strategies also changed. Begging gravitated towards traffic signals a lot more. This was because there were a lot many more cars and also because other traditional begging posts were getting challenged. For example, on a Dadar street, a beggar had to fight for real estate with hawkers, dogs and passers by in general. There was also the concept of the hafta at play especially on ‘prime’ streets. The biggest loss to the beggar economy has been the whole security around religious places. The first people to get the boot around Siddhivinayak temple were the beggars. What might have affected the beggar’s ability to gauge prospective targets in cars would surely be the whole AC car and tinted glass movement. The construction of flyovers at major signals also means that the bulk of the population flies over the top of most beggars. The beggar hence remains under the flyover and below the poverty line.
In Mumbai, and with all other cities, people get extremely uncomfortable when a beggar is in front of them. Most people neither say a yes or no explicitly, thus wasting both the beggars’ time and causing discomfort to oneself. This has always perplexed me, with some hypothesis around why people do this. The presence of a beggar speaks directly to our guilt, our sense of well being (at the cost of so many homeless and foodless). We turn out eyes away, wishing that he disappear, at the same time conscious that he will never go away forever. The more charitable kinds, find an easier route. They actually handover loose change and wish him away. The way this is done is rather shameful. Try and recall the last time you were charitable. Did you look the beggar in the eye, have you ever done so? Think why not? For us the presence of the unfortunate in some ways reinforces our sense of well being and on the other hand also contributes to our sense of guilt. This might explain why people are more charitable outside temples than offices.