Picong and Intellectual dishonesty

Let’s face it, one of the main attractions of political meetings is the political picong. Besides wanting to hear the issues debated, we go to hear the jokes and get a good laugh. It is probably almost as big a draw as the musical entertainment.

Allsop defines picong as “A spontaneous, verbal battle in rhymed song between two or more contending calypsonians, in which the wit and humorous impact of a contender’s improvisation determines his supremacy.”{{more}}

Replace “song” with “speech” and “calypsonians” with “politicians” and we have our definition. The most successful proponents of the art get the rhythm, intonation and word choice just right.

The imagery conjured up by a skilled practitioner of the art remains in one’s mind’s eye for a long time. Take for example Sir James Mitchell’s classic comparison of Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves to a barking dog running behind a car. Who can forget that?

Unfortunately for those who follow our recent political meetings, good picong is rare. Besides Sir James, only Sir Vincent Beache, Dr. Ralph Gonsalves, Louis Straker and Edwin Snagg can be relied on to provide us with the laugh-out-loud amusement that characterizes good picong.

When one is the target of picong, the thing to do is hit back with picong or keep silent. In the absence of this skill, what we have been noticing is a worrying trend where issues are twisted or taken out of context and presented in a way to achieve maximum response, usually negative, from the populace. These accusations, suggestions, call them what you may, are, by their very nature, not just jabs at the opponent, but have the potential to stir up deep-seated resentments among our people.

The most disturbing example this political season occurred last Saturday night at the Campden Park Playing Field at the rally to launch the New Democratic Party’s candidate for South Leeward. The NDP played a video clip from the film version of Alex Haley’s epic novel “Roots”. In the scene, the enslaved African, Kunta Kinte, is systematically whipped and ordered to say his name, until Kunta finally gives in and says, “My name is Toby” – the name the master had decided upon. A master’s imposition of a name on a slave signified the master’s determination to re-define the identity of the African, i.e. make him a slave.

According to the Master of Ceremonies who introduced the video clip at the meeting, the scene was being shown to explain what Prime Minister Dr. Ralph Gonsalves means when he repeats his latest mantra, “Arnhim, what’s my name?” What intellectual dishonesty! Kunta Kinte was not being forced to say the master’s name. He was being made to say the name the “master” had given him. But when a scene like this is flashed before one’s eyes, lasting just a few seconds, all that remains in one’s mind is the vision of a white man brutally whipping a black man and telling him something about saying a name.

What is the intention here? Is this another attempt to make race an issue in St. Vincent and the Grenadines politics? All previous attempts have failed, and failed miserably. But this attempt is particularly disturbing because of the emotive nature of slavery and the brutal methods it employed aimed at breaking the spirit of a people.

Why is the NDP attempting to evoke in us a primal response which is totally unjustified in this context? When Dr. Gonsalves made his unfortunate comment that the President of the United States would greet him but not Mr. Eustace if he met them in high day time, or the dead of night, he was thoughtlessly projecting his own familiarity with world leaders while playing down Mr. Eustace’s. This comment was interpreted by some to mean that Mr. Eustace was not visible because of his colour.

So was the video clip from “Roots” played to resuscitate the recognition/visibility debate? Let us be realistic. This is by and large a black country. Racial rancour has not scarred our landscape in the last thirty years or so. Why then, in the quest to gain power would a national political party that has the support of a significant percentage of our people want to introduce something as insidious as this – something that has torn apart Trinidad and Guyana and is still a major factor in the United States of America?

The good thing though, is that Vincentians are not stupid. We know our reality. Thus, it is unlikely that the slave whipping analogy will gain currency. Despite this, we should refrain from sinking to such depths. Let us instead find creative ways of addressing issues without abusing our people’s sensitivities and sensibilities.