Ian Boyne, Contributor
The thought of the 'Big Bad Warlord' running away like a scared cat from Babylon and finally being captured by them is the kind of thing that might provide some hilarious lyrics from now arch-enemy, Beenie Man.
The worst thing about the dancehall is not that "bad words" are used onstage and are a staple of dancehall sessions. Bad words are used in many middle class homes and in exclusive social clubs of the rich and powerful. They are also used by judges and policemen.
If we are going to enforce the law we have to be more rigorous than just pursuing dancehall violators. Perhaps Jerry D's point of a rating system for shows could be taken, so that people who go to these shows know the kind of vulgarity to which they will be exposed. But we don't have to have a formal rating system for you know that once certain artistes are on a stage show, you will get vulgarity, nastiness and crude behaviour. The people who go there expect to get that and want it.
Off the books
So, perhaps there should be a drive to get the bad words law off the books in the name of free speech or whatever. That law could be an ass. But, as long as it is on the books, a paper such as The Gleaner which upholds law and order, cannot be cavalier in any editorial about the enforcement of the law. If the Broadcasting Commission allowed cable operators to show movies ,on a daily basis, which contain profanity, why the zeal in persecuting our deejays who use profanity onstage?
Profanity is in almost every action and suspense movie and in many comedies. These are broadcast during the day when children can see them. Now, I am not using the argument that if we can't enforce a law in every instance it should not be enforced at all. I am simply raising the issue of consistency and of our seriousness in dealing with the matters of public taste.
The fact is that the decadence of the dancehall goes way beyond the use of bad words. But, let us make it clear that however we feel about the law, the fact is that the use of certain words is forbidden and therefore the police are in their right to arrest anyone who violates that. The blocking of roads and other forms of obstruction such as were carried out by people in St. Thomas over the Bounty Killer arrest is the kind of unruliness and anarchistic behaviour one expects from people who have no sense of ethics outside of the rumblings of their stomachs.
Arguing with logic, reason
The dancehall is one of those emotive issues which people on various sides have a difficulty arguing with logic and reason. The defenders of dancehall are the most guilty of this transgression. Their arguments are spurious, specious and puerile. They constantly set up strawmen and engage in much blindsiding.
One of their common arguments is that people who criticise the dancehall are class-prejudiced, bourgeois, snobbish people who are so colonialist in orientation that they despise everything black and indigenous. Critics of the dancehall, according to these defenders, think that once something is not Euro-American it is no good. They despise their own. These are the kinds of people, we are told, who would similarly have condemned Miss Lou and Bob Marley before they gained acceptance in polite society.
Yes, there are some people who criticise the dancehall who do reflect class and Euro-American biases. Yes, there are people with a colonialist mentality who do that. But it is better, in a debate, to deal with the arguments put forward by the opponent rather than engage in ad hominem attacks. I, as a critic of negative dancehall, for example, say that people such as Bounty Killer, Vybz Kartel, Baby Cham, Bling Dawg, Kiprich, Ninjaman, and others who promote violence in their lyrics do a disservice to poor, black people in the ghetto for, rather than using their power to attack the use of the gun, which has taken many lives in the ghetto, they glorify the gun and badmanism, which serve no constructive purpose.
Dancehall defenders come back and say that these fellows are only "reflecting reality". They are not pastors and, therefore, we can't expect them to be providing moral guidance. They are artistes putting up a mirror to the society. If we don't like what we see, we can't blame the messengers. But this is a canard.
The dancehall artistes who glorify the guns and criminal Dons are not merely reporting. There would be nothing wrong with that. These artistes are saying, for example, that if a man "disses" you, if he troubles your woman, if he insults your mother, etc., you must blow out his brains. The defenders of the dancehall know that what I am saying is true. They know of the outrageous criminality, which is promoted in some dancehall songs played at Passa Passa and other sessions of Stone Love, Black Chiney, Matterhorn, etc.
Some of the most despicable songs promoting the gun and badmanism are not heard by most in the society for you have to go to the hardcore sessions or live near to people who play that filth.
The dancehall defenders know what I am talking about. So when they talk nonsense about artistes merely "reflecting reality" and showing what exists, "which you middle class people are trying to hide from", they are engaging in dishonest apologetics. Let's a have an honest discussion to begin with. It would be good to have a debate where some of the most gross songs could be played and to see the faces of the dancehall defenders who would then have the task of explaining how those songs merely "reflect reality" rather than glorify criminality.
Not good for society
When you live in as violent a society as this, with so many communities in tension with one another; with such a history of political tribalism and political gunmanship, to school our children and youth in revenge, retaliation and reprisal cannot, objectively, be good for the society. How can anyone turn a blind eye to this or to seek to manufacture excuses for this kind of behaviour is totally beyond me.
Peace is a public and community good. Songs which encourage youth and youth to tek up this or that weapon to "mek some duppy" of someone who "disses" you is objectively evil.
Remember, you are not talking about revolutionary violence here. Sometimes the defenders make the asinine point that because the African National Congress (ANC) in South Africa used violence against the oppressors, or because the slaves used violence against the slave masters and that other wars of liberation have been fought-and Bob Marley used violent language against downpressors - then it is hypocrisy to hit gunhawk lyricists such as Ninjaman, Bounty Killer, Baby Cham and Vybz Kartel.
Even if I weren't a pacifist, I can't see the comparison between the use of violence to overthrow oppression and the glorification of violence just for the sake of the personal projection of power, for egotism, for gaining respect among peers, for establishing "stripes", for showing "who is the real bad man". This kind of anarchistic and narcissistic violence cannot be compared to artistes advocating revolutionary violence. That people who are academics could make this preposterous point is bewildering.
The big sponsors of dancehall events, those middle class and upper class people who decry violence in their luncheon and after-dinner speeches and on their uptown mansions, should do this for me. Have the messenger in your company, or one of the guards at your palatial residence get you some Stone Love, Black Chiney, Renaissance or some little corner sound system dance cassette with some "wicked" songs and spend 30 minutes listening to it. Make sure your heart is strong. Take some valium first and something for your stomach.
The big, blue-chip companies which sponsor certain events just because their only interest is money and their motivation is greed bear a part of the responsibility for the decadence in this society. Happily, there are some big corporate companies which have kept their sponsorship dollars from this mess and whose executives can go to their beds with a clean conscience and who can make speeches on values and attitudes without being seen as hypocrites.
Power through violence
Oh, yes, there are politicians who promote violence and who have come to power through violence. There are politicians who have had a vested interest in having guns in the hands of black ghetto youth. Politicians from the two political parties. And yes, Mr. and Ms. Dancehall defender, we should be equally forceful in condemning them. It is not, as far as I know, the dancehall artistes who are bringing in the guns. Politicians have brought in and distributed guns. This is unquestionable.
But, the fallacious reasoning of the dancehall defenders is that because politicians, business people and uptown people have committed atrocities, we should not bother to say anything about the atrocities below. I say condemn both. I agree with the dancehall defenders that you can't condemn one without the other. My problem with them is that they refuse to see that dancehall artistes who promote and glorify violence and gunmanship must be roundly and unequivocally condemned. Along with criminal politicians.
Also, the argument that Carnival is also slack and uptown turns a blind eye is not an excuse to turn a blind eye to the slackness and the denigration of women (sometimes by women) in the dancehall. I agree that uptown is just as nihilistic and morally bankrupt as downtown. Indeed, in the high-priced dancehall sessions it's the uptown people who are in the majority. Just watch 'Entertainment Report' on TVJ!
We have not touched on another debilitating and destructive influence of the dancehall - the promotion of the bling culture and the crude materialism. We ignore the influence of dancehall to our peril. Dancehall is not the only symptom of what is wrong in the society. But it is an important one and dancehall has far more influence on our youth than every institution in this society.
Ian Boyne is a veteran journalist. Email him at ianboyne1@yahoo.com.
