金融时报:印度遭遇“唐顿效应”

印度遭遇“唐顿效应”

英剧《唐顿庄园》中的一些情节正在印度上演：仆人们越来越想为自己工作、拥有自己的生活。主人们抱怨合格的长期住家式仆人越来越难雇到。旧式的身份鲜明的主仆关系在悄然发生着改变，印度人的生活方式和思维方式同样如此。那么其背后的经济原因是什么？社会影响怎样？印度女作家Ranjani Iyer Mohanty进行了解释。

测试中可能遇到的词汇和知识：

reminiscent [remɪ'nɪs(ə)nt] adj.怀旧的，回忆往事的；回忆录作者

magnanimously [mæg'næniməsli] adv.大度宽宏地

Dowager Countess 伯爵夫人，dowager意为贵族遗孀。在《唐顿庄园》里，由两届奥斯卡金像奖得主Maggie Smith扮演

Dalit[ˈdɑːlɪt] n.印度的贱民阶级。 随后提到的库马里·玛雅瓦提Kumari Mayawati是出身贱民家庭的印度女国会议员

caste [kɑːst] n.种姓

inverters and generators 逆变器和发电机，电力设备

refuse pick-up 垃圾收集

Cora Crawley 科拉·克劳利，格兰瑟姆伯爵Robert Crawley的美国妻子，老伯爵夫人Violet Crawley的儿媳

conspicuous [kən'spɪkjʊəs] adj.显著的；显而易见的

princely ['prɪnslɪ] adj.高贵的，王子的

India’s masters suffer the ‘Downton’ effect (762 words)

Ranjani Iyer Mohanty

On a recent overseas flight, I had the chance to see several episodes of the famed British television series Downton Abbey. As I watched pre-dinner drinks being served, I realised that the English 1910s master-servant relationship portrayed on the show is reminiscent of 1990s India. Both seemed to be eras when masters and servants still lived together peacefully – with masters magnanimously waiting to be served and servants grateful for the chance to do so.

In 1990s India, for a monthly salary of Rs2000 ($36) plus room and board, one could get a live-in maid who was basically on call 24/7. Like the Dowager Countess on Downton Abbey, the Indian maid too may well have asked, “What is a weekend?”

Today, however, the Indian domestic labour market is undergoing a quiet but noticeable change: the servants no longer want to serve. First, they would rather work part-time than live-in. Second, they are asking for more money. Third, even when offered four times what they were making in the 1990s, they soon want to leave.

The reason seems obvious. Due to the past 20 years of economic reform and growth in India, people who work as servants now have other opportunities. They can work at the multitude of offices, shopping malls, hair salons and restaurants that have sprung up across the country, even if just as cleaning staff. They can work a limited number of hours and therefore have a personal life. They can earn more money and afford better things for their families. And, most importantly, they can have a sense of professionalism and self-respect. Of course, the rise of Dalit politicians – led by Kumari Mayawati and arguing the rights of the “backward classes” – may also be supplying inspiration.

With India’s ancient caste system, there has always been a ready-made servant’s class just waiting to be used. Accustomed to unquestioning and long-lasting loyalty from their domestic help over the ages, many people (OK, the masters) now complain that servants don’t know their place any more. In fact, the trouble may be that servants are just beginning to realise what their place – or places – could be.

From their point of view, servants have heard of India’s tremendous growth, they have watched their masters’ increasing and often conspicuous wealth, and they have seen shiny new products advertised on TV. They too have dreams for their children, and these do not involve washing someone else’s dishes. And so, in most instances, they quietly leave the domestic labour market for greener pastures. But sometimes, the departure is violent: there are cases reported in the newspapers daily of live-in housekeepers who have killed their employers (usually elderly), stolen their money and run away.

We’re now in the middle of the transition. But while the servants may be ready for the change, the masters are not. We need them more than they need us.

India still does not have all the modern conveniences of the west or a reliable working infrastructure. Milk has to be boiled to ensure that it is safe to drink. Water has to be purified before it can be drunk. There is no formal refuse pick-up system. Electricity outages are common so inverters and generators need to be managed. Water supply is not consistent so water needs to be stored, pumps need to be turned on and sometimes water tankers called. And something is always in need of repair. On top of all that, of course, there are the factors of laziness and superiority. How nice – and princely – to be handed that drink without having to get out of your chair.

Some masters, though, sensing the winds of change, are increasing the salaries of their servants and helping them do things they could not manage by themselves – such as getting their children into good schools, providing them with healthcare and filling out forms to open their bank accounts and get identity cards.

At last, masters are trying to please the servants and their relationship is less top-down. Cora Crawley asks her mother-in-law: “Are we friends, then?” The Dowager Countess replies: “We are allies, my dear, which can be a good deal more effective.” In the same way, masters and servants work better together.

While Downton Abbey’s future lies in maintaining that old world for its audiences, ours lies in moving ahead. Not being able to find a full-time live-in servant is a sign of upward social mobility of the lower classes and therefore a good thing. Even if we have to get our own drink.

请根据你所读到的文章内容，完成以下自测题目：

1.What is the main topic of this article?

A. The master-servant relationship in India is less top-down.

B. Downton Abbey has brought about nostalgia about the 1910s.

C. India's labour market is experiencing noticeable rise in wages.

D. Live-in servants are hard to find these days.

答案(1)

2.What are the changes in Indian labour market?

A. Domestic servants are less willing to work as live-ins.

B. Wages are rising.

C. Fewer people are working as long-term servants.

D. All of above.

答案(2)

3.What do those changes in labour market imply?

A. Household servants enjoy a strong sense of professionalism.

B. India's poor infrastructure is a reason why servants want other jobs.

C. India's economic reform and growth are reshaping the society.

D. Servants-turned-labourers will lose good education and healthcare.

答案(3)

4.What does the writer think of the ‘Downton’ effect?

A. Downton Abbey is very popular and influential in India.

B. India’s ancient caste system is bad for its economy.

C. Masters and servants are more like allies rather than friends.

D. It's a sign of upward social mobility and should be welcomed.

答案(4)

* * *

(1) 答案：A.The master-servant relationship in India is less top-down.

解释：文章开头提到《庄园》里那种主仆身份鲜明的人际关系，是为了介绍印度正在发生变化的主仆关系，其经济原因以及社会影响。 显然整篇文章都是围绕它展开。

选择正确答案

(2) 答案：D.All of above.

解释：ABC三项都是文章中提到的，从三个侧面反映了印度劳动力市场的变化。 尽管包吃包住且工资还在上涨（offered four times what they were making in the 1990s），但住家的、长期服务的仆人还是越来越少。

(3) 答案：C.India's economic reform and growth are reshaping the society.

解释：与《唐顿》时期的英国和最近30年的中国类似，经济增长让人们择业的机会增多，工作流动性加大。 增长了见识的普通劳工越来越不愿长期待在一个岗位上，收入增加后也更追求sense of professionalism and self-respect。 而一些旧有的生活方式、思维方式不断遭遇冲击。你能想起《唐顿》里相关的情节吗？ B的意思是，印度的水电等基础设施落后，常常需要人工烧水或煮牛奶，这是主人们需要雇用仆人的动力。

(4) 答案：D.It's a sign of upward social mobility and should be welcomed.

解释：作者在最后一句说：很难找全职住家仆人，意味着社会下层的成员有了更大的向中上层流动的机会，这是件好事。 即使这意味着我们再有钱也（雇不到仆人）得自己拿喝的。