Of Hurricane Stories, ‘Wars’ in the Blogosphere and Technological ‘Know-How’

My most recent entry here has done more than I had anticipated it would, despite my apparent initial squeamishness about referencing/ critiquing the work of a fellow blogger. Without calling that person by name, as I still have not managed to learn how to do a link to her page and was duly warned off by her on this point, I was completely taken aback by the vicious trashing both of my post as well as my knowledge of the blog technology. You could imagine my surprise that I was invited to tea even in the eye of an impending storm and my initial resistance as I wanted to go home and prepare for Gustav.

Still, I graciously accepted the gesture, as I had been calling weeks before and had even mentioned on the blog that I had visited said blogger’s office, and still did not seem able to manage to secure a meeting. Hence, we drove in a queue, myself, the hostess and another guest, who I had incidentally offered to buy two loaves of bread for at the supermarket. She was preparing for Gustav but had to head off to work.

Ensconced in her arty living room, I was invited to choose between a selection of Caribbean Dreams teas and an ‘original’ black tea which I had previously indicated to her that I liked. In fact, we had had it several times before. So, I went with the familiar, as I have never especially enjoyed Caribbean Dreams, though my fellow guest noted that she bought it as a way of ‘supporting local manufacturers!’

Still, I could understand the sentiment even while I did not share the enthusiasm. We chatted politely for a while on a range of topics, ranging from among them the acquisition of FLOW cable, which both ladies seemed up in arms against. My hostess seemed keen on considering utilizing the services of one of its competitors. The suggestion came as a result of the other guest who I accompanied to our hostess’ home.

After tea, we spoke some more about politics, specifically the Democratic National Convention (DNC) in the United States (US) and the impending Presidential Elections in the Peoples’ National Party (PNP) here at home. I offered my views on the latter, indicating that there was a way in which I felt very conflicted about the leadership challenge, in part, because my love for Mrs. Simpson-Miller had less to do with the woman herself and more what she represented. This, notwithstanding that I was not completely satisfied that she did a very good job as PNP Party Leader in the last elections.

I suggested, as I have done several times in the past, that had Mrs. Simpson-Miller utilized the ‘team approach’ so evidently now in practise by her second campaign to be President of the PNP and had surrounded herself with talented young people there would be no need for this race now. Indeed, had she/ they included this particular demographic in a serious way in the last elections Mrs. Simpson Miller would be the Prime Minister and not the Leader of the Opposition at this time. But, I digress! After all, I had said to my hostess that I would not comment further (on this blog) on these matters, as I was somewhat conflicted on this issue, as noted earlier.

To return then to the earlier mentioned ‘tea meeting’, where I waited a short while after the other guest left before also leaving myself. The offer was made in one of the commentaries further to my last post that I might be able to get a ‘lesson’ regarding matters of how to post links and this kind of stuff in my blog. Still, I waited and nothing happened. So, I finally left and complimented the colour of the dress worn by my hostess as I had done earlier when I saw her in work clothes. There could be no denying the attractiveness of the bright colours of both outfits.

That being said, I was shocked to return home to read, in one of her earlier comments that day, that I had no understanding of attribution as well as the idea of ‘folk', elements of which I had used in my last post. I proceeded, therefore, to pen a response which would, hopefully, represent my understandings of these matters as well as point out the flaws of those charges. Needless to say, I was summarily dismissed and my thanks communicated in relation to her comments about one of my photos was later dismissed also, as further evidence of 'lack of understanding of the importance of attribution’.

I was duly informed that, the comments made had nothing to do with me and more with the photographer. Still, I persevered by highlighting that her comment in relation to my not posting the name of the photographer was incorrect. I hadearlier informed in one of my comments that the pictures were taken from the International Amateur Athletics Federation (IAAF) website: www.iaaf.org. This leads me to why I have recalled this unpleasant matter here.

Firstly, it is and was never my intent to cause injury and or insult to the learned scholarship of the blogger, whose views I consulted previously as well as in my last post, in part, in my look at the question of a review of the Olympics in Beijing. Indeed, it was never my intent to ‘joust’ on anyone’s behalf and to use her as a target for such unlikely practise.

A reading of the blog as well as the follow up comments might well have indicated that there was, possibly, a misreading or misunderstanding of my post and its motives as well as an adamant refusal to acknowledge the largely complimentary tone used to reference her work. Consequently, I find it interesting that these two charges were made against me in relation to my last post:
- I lack an understanding of the importance of ‘attribution’; and,
- That, that lack of understanding also is translated into a lack of understanding of the idea of ‘folk’.

Taken together, in the context of my last post, these issues are not only misleading but downright insulting. Not only do they seek to unseat the validity of my claims made in relation to telling the ‘full truth’ about the Olympic story but that, in doing so seek to cause further injury by suggesting that my post is merely (?) a repackaging of the views of others, notable among them a former teacher of mine. How absolutely outrageous, indeed!

This is both incorrect and conceptually disingenuous. Notwithstanding, as my erstwhile colleague has maintained, that she referenced said former teacher in her work, she goes further to make another remark about an ‘unreflexive use of the folk’ (in my post). To which extent, she claims there is no ‘valence’ for the arguments which I made as a result. After all, she began her attack from the premise that my remarks in relation to the tradition(s) of resistance and greatness which preceded Beijing 2008 were an academic romanticisation which constructs a, largely, ‘passive’ view of Jamaica’s recent Olympic exploits in China.

She goes even further to argue that, any associations with the history of Jamaica, founded in the type of black nationalism created out of a counter discursive grassroots ethos (?) was also to be questioned. After all, to the extent that these may be read as, what she claims is my ‘unreflexive use of [the term] folk’ marks my reading as, mostly, a claim. There were no heroes before Usain Bolt, in other words, and, certainly, whether there were, in fact, any such historical figures by which the trajectory of his genius is intersected these/ they are, fundamentally, figments of my own imagination.

I am guilty, in effect, of the elitism and latter day acknowledgement which I derided in the post. This I said sought to create Bolt and other select members of the Jamaican Olympic Team as products of a harmoniously nationalist society, albeit curiously. The ‘piece de resistance’? Any efforts to reject her claims must be viewed as ‘a torrent of words which can hardly be ploughed through, let alone understood.’ Read in this way, then, they are the mad rant of ill formed views with no actual ‘valence’ or connections to reality. Specious remarks if ever there were any!

Finally, in the most evident pandering to a populist, presumably, ‘true’ Jamaican identity/ lingua franca I was advised to: ‘tek whe [mi] self!’, as the bothersome bore I had obviously (?) now become, echoed in the annoyance presumably compressed in the Jamaican ‘Cho’ which preceded her ultimate (?) rebuke! Talk about a tirade!

Now, beyond the fact that I never proposed to see Usain Bolt as ‘folksy’, insofar as any point made in the post below, this reading of my entry is wrong on several levels. Firstly, it seeks to create a link between theorists of the ‘folk’ and what is claimed as ‘the unreflexive way’ that I, apparently, used it in the last blog and the implications of that for my look at the Jamaican Olympic team.

By discrediting ‘folk’ theorists as well as their seemingly besetting sin of ‘unreflexivity’, my post as well as the ‘claims’ made about the heroes therein are relegated to the terrain of ideal romantic yammerings not to be taken seriously and, certainly, without merit. Worse yet, my blog is the completely ‘delusional’ efforts at ‘jousting’; read in this case as ‘shadow boxing’ with straw people, as they say in academic circles. I have, effectively, created an argument of my own doing and am arguing it in relation to people/ critics who I have also constructed with the sole purpose of tearing them down with gleeful abandon.

A rereading of my post might suggest the viciousness of these claims, notwithstanding the absence of an apparent link to her page, as well as the baselessness of the charges made by my critic. Indeed, rereading my post might yet reveal that I took issue with the question of Jamaican media representations and their role in the construction of the Olympic narrative, in the larger context of what I find is a clear class bias in terms of how we ‘see’ in this society. This bias, I argued and continue to argue, further embeds the imbalanced traditions of power relationships in Jamaica caused, in part, by a type of racism founded in British Colonialism and before it African Slavery.

In consequence of which, I took issue with the question of a ‘politics from below’ (my own emphasis!) not so much because this was not the case, but that the acknowledgment is rather curious given the long history of greatness of people of African descent, specifically those from the social classes from which most of the Olympians come, in this and other societies with similar histories. To limit the contributions of so-called ‘ordinary Jamaicans’, then, as only worthy of praise at the Olympics is tantamount to a continuation of these same racist attitudes, if not to further oppress those who do not have similar opportunities to ‘excel’ in these same ways.

Do not get me wrong, I am impressed by and proud of the Jamaican Olympic team, like everyone else should be, I imagine. However, what I am doubtful of, is whether these praises by themselves achieve much in the way of forwarding an appropriate understanding of the history of struggle, resistance and achievement so poignantly encoded in Jennifer Bolt’s acknowledgement of ‘coarse cuisine’, or more appropriately, ‘peasant food’ in her son’s success at the Games. So that, whether we wish to see the ‘Gully Creeping’ exploits of the post ‘90s Rocking’ Usain Bolt as ‘folksy’ is hardly of consequence. Indeed, this was never my point at all.

Rather, it was my intention to say that, in the same way that Usain Bolt is descended from particular types of traditions, as does Shelly-Ann Fraser and Melaine Walker and others, and that there is a whole history, as yet unacknowledged, of which these talented, young Jamaicans are fundamentally part. To see this as only (?) indicative of a dichotomous tension between ‘uptown’ and ‘downtown’ is, largely, reductionist and misses certain key points about the complexities inherent in these enduring binaries.

To begin with, issues of class in Jamaica are founded, in many ways, through a performance of ideas about race and racial privilege even inasmuch as they are also about power. Race relations form the crux of the award of class privilege in Jamaica, whereby people of African descent, specifically those who seem to ‘act black’ are placed at the base of the society’s social and political hierarchies.

A brief look at what passes for ‘culture’ (read with the capital C) in Jamaica might yet prove this point; that is, in a context where many of the theorists about Jamaican art, culture and music, among others, are not members of the so-called ‘masses’. Note, I am not suggesting that they should be. Rather, that it is very curious how segregated those spheres are from each other in terms of the cultural composition of both groups. If could digress momentarily to make a related point.

Earlier this year, I had the opportunity to visit the Liguannea Art and Photography Fair which featured a number of top local artists in their efforts to advertise their wares for all to see and, possibly, consume. What struck me as very curious was the high percentage of black figures which were featured either in photographs and or, artworks, like sketches, sculptures, et cetera. More interestingly, most of the well-heeled patrons seemed nothing at all like the subjects covered in the works featured. (But then, that could just be me!)

A friend asked one of the white, Jamaican photographers whether the subjects in the photographs were paid and what is the extent of their relationship to the subject matter? At which point, the photographer explained that, subjects are given a one time payment and sign a release for the use of the photographs. That the photos are used numerous times over as well as the fact that many of the subjects were minors and, therefore, below the age of consent seemed like a non-issue. Note, I say that even in the context of whether or not parents were fully aware of the implications of signing said release forms for the use of their children’s images in these ways.

Of greater concern, though, is the notion that, largely, white and privileged elites get to determine what is an appropriate subject matter for artistic consumption insofar as its relatedness to the question of black (under-aged) bodies, objectified into the world of art for the passive (?) consumption of those who look on. Failing to see the privation and challenges evident in the studies, the glorification of blackness in this regard as an appropriate (?) subject of non-black fascination serves the explicit purposes of glamourising pain and lack of opportunities, if not exploitation.

That none of those featured as subjects were even present at the fair to consume the works is also telling. By all appearances, there is no apparent connection (compassion?) with the politics of ‘art’ with the ‘life’ of those caught up in the photographers’ objectifying lenses. This makes a very profound point in relation to the concept of ‘visuality’ which I am implicitly interrogating here; that is, in relation to my earlier point about how the Jamaican media ‘see’.

One cannot escape the inherent power imbalances of Jamaica or any other society, unfortunate enough to have experienced the horrors of slavery. However, it must be considered especially strange (?) that the actors in the relationships established, in this instance, between media, their audience(s) and specific subject matters seem so segregated.

Whether people interact with each other beyond the realms of what is broadcast, published and or even aired is not really the point. Rather, the sense of entitlement that allows certain people to feel that they (alone) should be privileged (enough) to be commentators about specific subjects is more my immediate concern. As a result of which, how much of media are aimed at educating and informing their audiences in context? How much of the Jamaican media’s thesis of praise come out what it feels are ‘appropriate’ (?) contexts for praise and not others?

Why is it that, there seemed so much discomfort, recently, with the focus on some of the athletes in the Olympic coverage and to what extent does the audience have the right and or the power to question these ideas in their own locales? This was the aim of my last post. To bring into sharp relief the contradictions inherent in the hero-worship discourse of the Olympics in the larger context of a refusal to acknowledge the complexities of the histories which preceded, even propelled these athletes to greatness. The media are front and centre in this discussion.

Why is it then, that to discuss these issues make us so uncomfortable to the point where my post is trashed and I am basically ‘read’ the riot act for seeking to make Usain Bolt, specifically, but all the other athletes in the Jamaican team ‘folksy’? And, why is it that the notion of an uncritical, unreflexivity is so unceremoniously attributed to my questioning of these very premises?

The claims made against my last entry are not only unfounded and excessive in their attack/ rebuke but also create a smoke screen in terms of seeking to divert attention away from the more substantive point of the blog, which was intended to argue that Jamaican history was, in fact, the victor in Beijing 2008. And that, the achievements of the athletes, though important, come out and, therefore, embody a larger politics in regards to how we feel about ourselves as a people/ nation. I call this the ‘nationalist question’ – a poll for which I placed at the top of the last post. That there have been no answers so far might, itself, be very telling.

However, I choose to see this conversation for what it is – perhaps a little over the heads of those not as invested or as concerned. I did say, after all, that the post was decidedly academic and has implications for my own work in the area. Consequently, I am completely mindful of how such views may be perceived as well as that they may also be represented by others elsewhere, often without acknowledgement, in their limited, if not dishonest understanding of my post.

I end, therefore, by stating that this is neither a rant nor a ‘tracing match’, as per regular Jamaican parlance; that is, even while it is seeks to clarify the apparent misconceptions arising from my last post as well as makes additional point s in this entry. Further, it makes no claim about legitimacy beyond the fact that these are some initial views, though considered, on the subject of nationalism in the context of Jamaican popular culture in the wider context of sports. And that, where these claims acknowledge the scholarship of others, is intended to tease out my own views on the matter. In that regard, thanks for your indulgence!

…Until next time, be good!

PS: Still coming up the curve on the technological ‘know-how’ of blogs. When I have it all (?) figured out, I shall be certain to advertise same in a post at some future date!

PPS: Still figuring out how to do links to other pages!

PPPS: Reviewing all blogs to ensure that where possible all photos, etc. are acknowledged.

...Thanks for your patience!

Jamaica’s Olympics Exploits Reviewed: A National Pride ‘from Below’?

So the Olympics are over, but I did promise 'more later'. Hopefully, this amounts to that even as Hurricane Gustav literally threatens to rain on my parade. Thanks for the overwhelming support of the last entry...


There is a line from Kamau Braithwaite’s poem Negus which reminds me of the exploits of Jamaica’s athletes who, recently, wowed the world with their outstanding achievements in Beijing ‘08. It reads: ‘…we who have known nothing…/ Good earth, God’s earth…’ It chronicles, inter alia, the painful histories of peoples of African descent who, now resident in the ‘New World’ have, in the words of Jamaica’s first National Hero Marcus Mosiah Garvey, ‘accomplished what [they] will[ed]’, despite the seemingly insurmountable odds which they, collectively, faced.

Kamau, who originally hails from the tiny Caribbean island of Barbados, was born Lawson Edward Braithwaite. He lived in Jamaica as well as other parts of the Caribbean and wrote his Ph.D. dissertation on issues related to one of his adopted countries – our beloved ‘JamRock’. Entitled: ‘The Development of Creole Society in Jamaica 1770-1820’, Braithwaite’s tremendous scholarship and value as both poet and Caribbean philosopher are phenomenal. They impact various areas of life in these isles washed by the Caribbean Sea and are instrumental to my reading of the Olympic discourse emanating from Beijing.

There is, however, another agenda here. This blog provides as space in which to work out some ideas in relation to the larger theme of a (trans-) national Jamaican identity which have become as a crucial part of the ‘Beijing experience’, as well as is present in some of the attendant analyses following since, even if not stated explicitly. In my previous post, for instance, I suggested same without necessarily saying so. I wish to do just that today, as well as add a critical rider – these views are, largely, preliminary and reflect, in many ways, my own considerations of the subject. They converge around similar issues in my ongoing academic work as well as my long term interests in the area. Like others before it, this entry is part of an emerging set of ideas about the ‘national’ across a range of disciplines in the popular domain, sports being one of them.

Braithwaite’s work, like those of other scholars including Nettleford and Carolyn Cooper, has helped us scratch the surface and, quite possibly, illuminate the first half (?) of the trajectory of the processes of decolonization and its twin sister nationalism in the Caribbean They have provided an appropriate (?) context through which we may be able to analyse Jamaica’s outstanding achievements and athletic prowess recently demonstrated in Beijing. These cumulative acts of national pride, focus and determination on the part of the Jamaican athletes, then, visually remind that, questions about (trans-) nationalism are not just an intellectual preoccupation which, in the words of Nicholas Laughlin, has become en vogue in recent times in Caribbean cultural and literary studies.

While, it is not my intent to comment fulsomely on the implications of that statement here, what I wish to do; however, is to add the second ‘chapter’ in my focus on Jamaica’s Olympic exploits by way of this entry. Such was promise made earlier on which I am now delivering in fulfillment of that ‘bond’. Indulge me, momentarily, to acknowledge what is, without question, a decidedly academic look at the Olympics, specifically regarding how representations of nationalism which have come out of that experience might be considered.

Indeed, following on my earlier post last week, Annie Paul mentioned in her most recent blog that, these Olympics embody a sort of ‘Patwa power’ in terms of Jamaica’s achievements in Beijing. According to her, the achievements of the young and very talented Jamaican team at the Games of the 29th Olympiad lead by ‘lightning Bolt’ are indicative, in many respects, of a ‘politics from below’ (my emphasis!). Jamaicans of otherwise little renown, as per the society’s class matrix that is, have excelled beyond measure. Showing, in the process, how the traditions of orality out of which most of them have originated are, fundamentally, valued and valuable, despite a traditional Jamaican class politics which would otherwise negate such achievements, locally.

While, I do not wish to address the implications of orality here, it is hard to disagree let alone find fault with Paul’s well reasoned analysis. Still, its substantive value, though important, does not immediately interests me; that is, insofar as she argues in favour an importance which we have always known but which has only now been acknowledged by some within the privileged Jamaican literati. Note, I am not suggesting that Paul is either guilty of this belated recognition nor that she is a member of such an elitist grouping.

Rather, I am contending, as does the famous Jamaican poet, scholar, actor and activist Miss Lou does, in her poem ‘Jamaica Oman’ that, Jamaican people have always embodied the celebratory convictions of character and the audacity of hope (a-la Barrack Obama), to dream big dreams like those witnessed in Beijing. Many were out conquering the world beyond Jamaica’s shores long before 2008. Among others, their quiet struggles have contributed, in part, to one of the more recent ‘wonders of the modern world’ – the Panama Canal during the first decade of the twentieth century.

The mass exodus to places like Englan’, as noted in the previous post below, decades later (1950s) and after that the United States (US) are other notable examples. Other ‘First World’ nations have received many benefits from Jamaica even at the said Olympic Games. Canadian and British Olympic champions Donovan Bailey and Linford Christie, respectively, are the product of outward Jamaican migration to the so-called ‘First World’, as are our scholars, scientists and performance artists, numbered among them even Miss Lou herself. That latter day acknowledgement has now been awarded does not diminish these unquestionable facts of our collective histories.

Miss Lou’s words mirror a similar admiration, notwithstanding that she classifies it under the gendered rubric of the traditionally perceived cunning of Jamaican womanhood:

Jamaica oman cunny, sah! (Jamaican women are cunning, eh!)
Is how dem jinal so? (How is it that they are so smart?)
Look how long dem liberated (Look how long they have been liberated)
An di man dem never know! (And the men did not know!)

By reading ‘oman’ (woman) in this case for Jamaican people I expand Miss Lou’s original meaning to also represent the imbalanced power relations established between the social and political classes in Jamaica. The Jamaican woman metaphorically becomes the larger and largely, disenfranchised (black) peoples of the society’s under-classes, specifically those who have been feminised and ‘othered’ in the alienating master narratives of patriarchal, anti-colonial, dominance outfitted with all the racialised heritage of Colonial Enlightenment nationalism. Consequently, identity politics in the Jamaican ‘nation-state’ operates with a fair amount of disdain towards the social and political pariahs not ‘naturally’ included in the arrogant definitions of statehood offered through slogans such as ‘Out of Many, One People’, as well as and to a lesser extent, the ubiquitous National Anthem.

Though welcomed, the collective nationalization of the Olympic team is curious and warrants critique in this wider context. Largely, invoked through the technology of media such actions represent, in the main, a chasm in the traditions of hegemony practised by the state. Black people in Jamaica, specifically those of working class, inner-city and the rural ‘peasant’ class origins do not (really) belong. They are not, necessarily, included in the definitions of official authority as sanctioned by the preponderance of ‘brown’ and non-black folk in the several areas of Jamaican politics. ‘Browness’, such as it is, becomes the metaphoric representation of a specific state of being which constructs the ‘nation’ as anything other than what it truly is – an African descended majority whose culture and customs differ significantly from the politics of officialdom. Paul is right, therefore, in making the connections between the Olympians ‘from below’ and Dancehall and Reggae musics even if there are (minor) distinctions between these.

Still, Paul does not go nearly as far in establishing the links between Jamaican folk culture and urban blight, which are, in part, responsible for the production of what she calls ‘pocket rocket[s]’ like Shelly-Ann Fraser and others. Acknowledgement must be duly given to the pioneering scholarship of theorists like Cooper, whose insistent refusal to bow in the face of constant criticisms and pressure have been vindicated, in many ways, by the ‘gold rush’ occasioned by the ‘Olympic fever’ which overtook us this past week. That Cooper and a (limited) number of others have argued in favour of a sort of ascendant (black) trans-nationalism which surpasses the fixed geographical boundaries of the ‘nation’ and which are rooted in Jamaican folk traditions; she has also cleared the way for Paul’s analysis.

Consequently, space has to be created in this conversation to acknowledge the extent to which the ‘folk’ as a counter discourse of grassroots Jamaican nationalism has been, fundamentally, disregarded and disrespected in the ongoing struggles for what Nettleford, in his use of M.G. Smith’s plural society model, calls ‘the battle for space’. The team of Jamaican athletes in Beijing not only displayed the power of the ‘the politics from below’ but also made two other similarly important statements. Jamaica continues to be a very racist society which refuses to acknowledge this blight on the nation’s history, by appearing to ‘apologise’ for the obvious material poverty of many of the athletes who represented us in Beijing, China.

That we focused mostly on the champions rather than the entire team further cements the point. Thus, it may be rightly argued that the only reason Fraser and Walker, especially, are heralded to prominence is because they are gold medalists. ‘Sensitive’ viewers can, therefore, tolerate to some extent the sights and sounds of real life struggles, if even momentarily, and proceed to preface their responses either with an apology/ embarrassment for themselves (the viewers, that is!) – the so-called ‘laughter of madness’ in theater which disguises the audiences’ dis-ease with certain aspects of the unfolding performance.

Alternatively, there is the feeling that the athletes may be ‘embarrassed’, almost as a way of explaining away (?) the privation and lack so starkly told in the contradictory discourse of championship occasioned by the focus of the Olympics in Beijing. Getting to the world stage and dominating it is part and parcel of having to compete, fight and struggle regularly in one’s daily existence. It might well be argued then, that it this particular (?) kind of viewer who is shamed rather than the athletes, who incidentally, have not (yet) seen the reports themselves as they have not yet landed in Jamaica since their departure for Beijing.

Presumably, already more accustomed (?) to the familiarity of their constantly challenging contexts all that is left for most of the Jamaica’s athletes featured is win gold medals, set records and create upsets on the world stage. The Jamaicans’ exploits in Beijing could hardly be considered a surprise, in this context, as the grim realities under which many have lived and continue to live are a necessary part of their success story turned inside out, at least from my vantage point. It is completely disingenuous for our local media to project, as a result, an image of the athletes that does not meaningfully correspond with a respectful awareness of this consciousness.

In fact, the media, themselves, contribute to this unhealthy state of affairs by refusing to help forward an appropriate understanding of the material culture of lack and privation which are instrumental to creating our (world) stars. Often no connection is made with the struggles of other Jamaicans in previous decades. As Channer notes in the Wall Street Journal, many have had to flee the harsh conditions of a contradictory ‘paradise’ which accords status and privilege only (?) insofar as one is felt to appropriately embody the high (emphasis added!) nationalist and elitist virtues/ ideals embedded in slogans like ‘Out of Many, One People’! The extent to which most of these athletes are, rightly, the children and products of the Jamaican under-classes foreground, then, the long history of struggle and the traditions of greatness from which they have descended.

Resistance is genetically encoded in our DNA. Not surprisingly, plots to overthrow slavery marked by such famous revolts like the ‘Christmas Rebellion’ of 1865 in the eastern parish of St. Thomas resulted in the execution of National Heroes, Sam Sharpe, a Baptist minister and the mulatoe politician George William Gordon a day after each other. Examples like these occupy a crucial space in shaping modern Jamaican history and are a key part of our tremendous athletic and other abilities. Any effort to suggest otherwise is to miss the singular importance of a collective national (?) resistance, deeply rooted in Jamaica’s conflicted history of race (class and gender) relations. This is indelibly marked by and onto our bodies, including those of our athletes.

That the Beijing performances so wowed the world, specifically during the period between August 15 and 24, potently testifies to our transcendent abilities to rise above material circumstances to the pinnacles of greatness. This is not a fluke, nor is it happenstance. No, there is real talent here – a talent that is, fundamentally, part of who we are. It makes us a strong, confident people who know how to win, laugh, cry and expect the best even when all else suggests otherwise; when to do the opposite of the ordinary and how to adamantly refuse to do nothing at all because the deck seems stacked against us.

Our courage in the face of great adversity and the burning desire that knows that regardless of outcomes we gave it our best is crucial to what makes us Jamaican. The slew of jokes which circulated across the Internet in the aftermath of Jennifer Bolt’s comments that she fed Usain on the good ole yam (and bananas), as well coco and the much vaunted cassava of recent vintage, a-la Agriculture Minister Dr. Christopher Tufton, masks a larger point. Not only is this the staple we had to eat, many times it was all that there was available. ‘We who have known nothing… [but the] Good earth, [that] God [gave us]…!’ were sustained even in the most challenging of times by Jamaica’s ‘coarse cuisine’. It nurtured our dreams simultaneously watered by a fair amount of tears, laughter, disappointments and joy! This is but part of the other half of the story which, controversial (?) Dancehall deejay Buju Banton reminds ‘has never been told!’

Thanks to Jennifer, Wellesley and Usain Bolt, we are a little nearer to setting the record straight!

PS: Pictures above courtesy of the International Amateur Athletics Federation (IAAF) website: www.iaaf.org.

Veronica Campbell-Brown of Jamaica reacts after winning the Women's 200M Final in Beijing, China;

Usain Bolt wrapped in Jamaica Flag after the finals of the Men's 200M in Beijing, China; and,

Asafa Powell anchors Jamaica to victory in the Men's 400M Relay Final.

“I Feel Like Mi Heart Gwine Burs’": Dominant Jamaican Athletes in Beijing!

I know this entry is late, but...!

On occasions like the absolutely amazing display of Jamaica’s phenomenal athletic prowess in Beijing, China on Saturday, August 16 and Sunday, August 17, 2008, I am reminded of that celebrated Jamaican poet Dr. the Hon. Louise Bennett-Coverly’s poem – Colonisation in Reverse. Among others, the popular Miss Lou poem extols the virtues of a colonial subject in classic revisionist mode, renegotiating the terms of the enervating relationship established between super power and satellite state.

Miss Lou’s poem underlines the trajectory of Jamaicans who go to Britain in droves in search of ‘greener pastures’, almost as a way of reversing the traditionally lopsided terms of the colonial relationship; in the process, simultaneously imbuing themselves, at least in Miss Lou’s universe, with the power to ‘tun history upside dung’. They subvert the oppressive embrace of an ambivalent ‘motherland’ (Britain) by insisting on purposefully acting outside the proverbial box. Their efforts are epigraphed in Miss Lou’s words:

Oonoo see how life funny, (Do you see how funny/ strange life is,)
Oonoo see de turnabout, (Do you see how it can turn around,)
Jamaica live fe box bread (Jamaicans have lived to exploit opportunities)
Outa English people mout’. (At the expense of the English.)

There is no room for hesitation or staying in the back.

Like the Jamaican exodus in the fifties, the Beijing bound athletes know only too well that there is no joy in pointless work, often unsuitable to their dignity. They, like Jane who sits and reads romance novels all day on Aunt Fan's couch in cool Englan', are much keener on standing atop the podium to receive all the accolades and glory that go with that on the world stage. Usain Bolt, Shelly-Ann Fraser, Sherone Simpson and Kerron Stewart prefer another kind of fulfillment – winning races; setting records and standing aloft in medal ceremonies, while the rest of the world watches their dominant display.

In similar fashion to Miss Lou’s rupturing of the imposed silence(s) of subalternity through the technology of poetry, the Jamaican athletes literally ‘tun history upside dung’ in Beijing with their speed at the weekend! They not only took gold in the men’s and women’s short sprints – a first ever for us and the first in twelve years for any other country, Bolt, Fraser, Stewart and Simpson also set two separate though linked records.

Usain Bolt astonishingly trots to the tape in an astounding 9.69 seconds, notwithstanding the chest thumping. Kerron Stewart and Sherone Simpson, both place second; in the process, rounding out the top three spots of the Women’s One Hundred Metres! ‘I Feel Like Mi Heart Gwine Burs’, indeed! What ah (h)excitement! To add insult to injury, the severely distressed Americans in their petition to have a rerun of the race and or a bronze medal are firmly dismissed by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the International Amateur Athletics Federation (IAAF).

Miss Lou’s ability to think, speak and act is a definite sign of hers and her country men and women’s empowerment in the face of the super power dominance of colonial Britain. Indeed, her victory, though largely intellectual is nonetheless occasioned by an important device – her consistent use of humour to overcome the paralyzing effects of (colonial) oppression.

The Jamaican athletes, on the other hand, use speed as their weapon to defeat their highly fancied rivals. The Jamaican Olympic exploits are comparable to Miss Lou’s ‘re-verse-ing’ of the oppressive discourse of Empire echoed in the actions of Miss Mattie, Jane as well as all the other un-named, though fundamentally present Jamaican characters in the poem. By shutting out the Americans from the medal podium the wily Jamaicans give new meaning to being ‘likkle but (wi) tallahwah!’ Definitely awesome!

On another note, it behooves me to add that, even as we celebrate and are justifiably excited for the Jamaican athletes, Asafa Powell’s crushing disappointment in the same Men’s One Hundred Metres event is as painful as it is real. Like the early Jamaicans settlers in Englan’ who brave cold weather and difficult work conditions some of which often does not suit their dignity, Asafa must be content, yet again, with criticisms that he is unable to translate all that talent into meaningful hardware on the world stage.

However, lest we forget, please recall that it was because of Asafa’s exploits in the international arena of record making which have, in part, created space in our imaginations for daring to dream the impossibility of setting world records as a standard. Had it not been for Asafa’s own refusal to give in to domination we might not have fielded so many confident, young Jamaicans in their unrelenting pursuits of excellence in Beijing as well as elsewhere.

I recall, for instance, that after his first world record run many athletes at the local high school championships, some of who are now in reserve on the Olympic Team and before that the World Championships, indicated that he was their inspiration. Even now, the twinned emotions of disappointment and joy so feelingly expressed in the One Hundred Metres on Saturday continue to light the path to a new dawn. Many are asking, as a result of Powell’s exploits, however dubious, what else is required to become the absolute best athlete there is.

No doubt about it, Asafa Powell is a trendsetter, if even of a different kind. His story surpasses Track and Fields Athletics and incorporates instead the passion, struggles, expectations and nascent ambitions of the early settlers in their ‘colonisation in reverse’ memorialized in poetry by Bennett-Coverely. Powell is the first arrivant in the epic struggle of colonial resistance; that is, should we choose to see the use of performance enhancing drugs (PED) in this way. Embodied in his pain are the seeds of self growth so urgently needed to purposefully throw off the limiting shackles of enslavement and colonialism once and for all.

The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) has aided the process by taking a decisive step in leveling the playing field in some way, it is now up to us to carry the baton all the way to victory. I am confident we will! Powell’s loss poignantly counterpoints Usain’s victory and underlines the twinned paradox of life in Jamrock. Damian ‘Junior Gong’ Marley reminds as a result that life here is gritty and problematic, which, in part, helps explain Miss Lou’s poetry insofar as the sentiments expressed therein become part of the push for a different take on colonial politics contemporarily.

Miss Lou’s ‘re-verse-ing’ of the terms of the colonial relationship act as a likely beginning point for discussion as well as understanding the power of Jamaica’s athletic genius and the vast potentials which reside in that largely untapped space. I am aware that Jamaican-American novelist and scholar Colin Channer has already given, through an analysis of Usain Bolt’s running style, a treatise on the theme of flight in Jamaican culture and its significance to our current Olympic exploits. It is not my intent to rehash this debate, necessarily. However, what I wish to highlight is that the texture of our celebrations must never loose sight of the historical dimensions, both on and off the field of play.

By making a comparison between Miss Lou’s ‘Colonisation in Reverse’ poem as well as her own attempts in that regard; that is, through the act of writing about this process in Jamaican language, I wish to underline the extent to which Jamaican athletes are conducting a similar campaign now in Beijing. In their dominant display at the weekend, the young Jamaican athletes many of who are trained and groomed locally, have eloquently displayed their refusal to be cowed by the politics of American/ super power dominance. Their rejection of the notion of sitting still and or bringing up the rear for other more established and resource rich countries is, therefore, especially commendable. This crop of Jamaicans prefer instead to run, and from the front to boot. Theirs is not a campaign about second fiddle. In fact, it is not a campaign about fiddling at all!…Jamaica has come of age!

Gone are the days when athletes were said to pay their own way to represent Jamaica in big meets. Hopefully, gone too is the lack of an appropriate ‘local programme’ to cater to the needs of those ‘stars’ who were not fortunate enough to gain scholarships to go overseas. Through the efforts of Glen Mills, Stephen Francis and others we have produced world record holders and Olympic champions right here at home. A clear indication, if ever there was one that there are good things going on in Jamaica. Like the ‘Lightning Bolt’, the colonized subject of the Jamaican imagination is uncontainable in its ebullience and energetic in its consummate display of world class abilities. Lead by the new generation of Jamaican athletes, especially those in Beijing China, most of who are in their early to mid twenties, we appear to have a different conceptualization of time and space. Our play ground has widened and we are taking it ‘to di worl’!

Hardly surprising then is Bolt’s continued dancing even while the metal filled mouth of Shelly-Ann Fraser smiles back at us with broad abandon. There is no reticence here. The colonial dominance of the Britain and America are as much a target as anything else. There are records to be set, gold medals to win and upsets to happen. That cannot be done from a spectator position.

We will not soon forget Merlene Ottey’s many near misses at the Olympics and World Championships and the unpleasant moniker ‘Bronze Queen’ so unceremoniously hinged to her by her critics. As the ‘perennial bridesmaid’, Ottey bears the dubious distinction of being caught at the crossroads of a traditional post colonial dialectics of struggling to defy being overwhelmed by super power dominance, albeit unsuccessfully. Shelly-Ann Fraser and before her Veronica Campbell, on the other hand, are the modern day reincarnations, then, of Ms Lous’s vision of the overturning, if not outright rejection of the colonial politics of (super power) domination. Their victories, like Bolt’s and the two other Jamaican silver medalists in the Women’s One Hundred Metres in Beijing, China are emblematic in many ways of the overthrow of the might of the giant Goliath by the seeming inconsequential shepherd boy David, both of biblical renown.

Bob Marley tells of the ‘small axe[s]’ can fall a ‘big tree[s]’; in the process, reminding that where as size can be threatening, in the overall scheme of things it is really the size of one’s heart and the stomach for victory which matter more. Here, the big tree is, without question the ‘great Americans’, with their long sporting traditions often presumed by some to be of questionable excellence, which is toppled by the seeming inconsequence of small Jamaica at the weekend.

Like the Jamaican Miss Lou who is embodied in her work in many ways, specifically as colonial subject in her refusal to sit still and to be dominated by the tyrannical regime of colonial politics, our athletes are also victors in the international narrative of sporting excellence. They, like Miss Lou in her ‘re-verse-ing’ of the Standard (English) through the use of the Jamaican dialect have made us all proud to be called Jamaicans!

PS: Congratulations to Shericka Williams on winning silver in the Women's Four Hundred Metres!

PPS: Photographs courtesy of the Intenational Ammateur Athletics Federation Website: (www.iaaf.org).

1. Asafa Powell and Lindell Frater of Jamacia comfort each other after finishing outside the medal placement in the Finals of the Men's 100M in Beijing, China.

2. Shelly-Ann Fraser reacts after winning the Women's 100M Final in Beijing, China.

3. Shelly-Ann Fraser in full flight!

4. Usain Bolt celebrates winning the Men's 100M Finals in Beijing, China.



...More later!

Letters To The Editor

NB: At the recommendation of Longbench, one of my faithful readers, I was advised to send this letter to the local media. It came out of a discussion we had further to the post about "drug taking and the 'Olympic Express..." (see below!). The letter was not published

Long Bench feels that, among others, I should perhaps consider calling the radio stations and shape this discussion, publicly. Though understandable, I do not feel thus pushed. However, I did write to the editor to discover the reasons behind the non-publication of the letter, especially as it was sent before news came that a Jamaican athlete had tested positive for drugs at the recent National Trials. There was no response.

That said, I thought it only useful to return to this topic, given the recent announcement that American-based, Jamaican sprinter Julien Dunkley may have been the athlete who reportedly failed a drugs test. Dunkley was dropped from the Jamaican Olympic Team.

Your insights, as always, are welcome.


___________________________________________________________________________________

Dear Editor,

Notwithstanding his obvious lack of credibility, recent comments made by the disgraced Victor Conte about Jamaican/ Caribbean sprinters and the calibre of our drug testing facilities are still important. This is especially when considered in the context of recent BBC/ New York Times reports, which look at how athletes beat the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) testing systems and whether it is possible to prevent them from doing so.

Though obviously important, it is very disturbing that, we do not seem to have sufficiently addressed the matter beyond vociferous denials that our sportsmen and women are drug cheats. Remember, Marion Jones' very voluble and incessant protestations which eventually turned out to be false?

The ideology of sports as other than competition on a field is somehow not being adequately addressed in this discussion. This is especially in terms of the agendas of those who criticise. Jamaican sports theorists, analysts and onlookers need to get with the programme and determine for themselves what is really going on; not only on the field of play, but also in terms of how sports can play an important part in building / generating national pride.

How far and to what extent might we learn something of significance from our athletic prowess? What are the implications of drug-taking, if ever discovered, for this process? Those, among others, are the serious questions which need to be asked, in my view. It is not sufficient for Conte and others to point fingers and complain, and for us to simply say that.

We have to tell our own story and know, in a very real way, the implications of a doping scandal for our much loved sporting programme vis-à-vis the larger society. Indeed, to the extent that we seem so bent on only seeing fast times is, itself, very telling in this regard.

So, I am agreed with the righteous indignation, however, only up to a point. Let's just hope that sports' key stakeholders get this before it is too late!

I am, etc.,

PS: Pictures courtesy of the International Amateur Athletics Federation (IAAF) website: www.iaaf.org. They show:

Veronica Campbell-Brown of Jamaica beating Shelly-Ann Fraser, also of Jamaica and Kim Gaevert of Belgium in the Women's 100m, at the recent London Grand Prix; and,

Asafa Powell of Jamaica winning the Men's 100m in Monaco.