Alozade
Tanya Batson, Staff Reporter
ONE OF the first 'sayings' we learn is 'sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never harm me'. Of course, this little saying is usually sung by a child wearing a tear-stained face resulting from having just been broadsided by some word-wielding bully. Thus, from early on, we know that words can cause harm. The truth is, the "sticks and stones" saying is one of the first great lies we tell children. It is right up there with stories of the 'ratta' who comes for your tooth when you throw it on the roof (and I know he never came).
Indeed words are powerful things and the Bible tells you so. It was there from the beginning. Additionally, we greatly celebrate those who have been able to use words to create art and to give meaning to, explain or reflect life. If you have ever been forced to read a book by Dickens, Shakespeare or Naipaul, then you have been introduced to the power of words. Even if the words of these great writers failed to move you, the simple fact that you were forced to read them means that they affected your life.
It must also be noted that people forgive those wonderfully talented with words for many of their bad traits through life. For example, although Rudyard Kipling was quite a racist (and some would say the same about Naipaul) we still read him. Additionally, when people think about Bob Marley, they think about the quality of his lyrics not that he was a womanising philanderer. After all, what is that compared to Redemption Song.
Thus, to deny the power of words is to deny the power of songs, poetry and other forms of literature. The tricky part is that like all other great forces, words can also be used for evil as well as good. Unfortunately, when words are used as weapons they often hurt much more than mere 'sticks and stones'. Unlike visible weapons which cut from without, words get under the skin, without leaving a mark. Once they are in the warm furtive imagination, they fester and rot.
It is our use of words (language) which supposedly separates us from the beasts even though this separation grows thinner as we become more civilised. Therefore, there is no such thing as 'only words', regardless of what that song says. Because of this, some words have been judged and deemed unfit for human consumption. These words are considered bad, profane, obscene, or expletives.
The debate on the use of profane language has recently skyrocketed on the local front. Several deejays, including Bounty Killer, Lady Saw and Alozade have found themselves facing the business end of the law because their performances included profanity. Nonetheless, people continue to be attracted to language that has been deemed profane.
Over the last two decades, popular music has shifted from making titillating suggestions to being outright lewd. This state was possibly epitomised in the success of Two Live Crew, who 'me-so-hornied' their way to fame and glory with the power of the ability to curse in public. Eminem has also benefited from his willingness to cuss, as have many rappers before him. However, regardless of how many writhing, screaming masses of youngsters who 'rail-up' at the sound of a well torn cloth, profanity remains unaccepted by the mainstream.
The power of curse words comes in their subversive nature, because they have been banned. Experts argue that curse words have such an effect because their use goes against the status quo. It is therefore not surprising that the music which Carolyn Cooper describes as a form which is 'unmediated by a middleclass, scribal sensibility' would reflect the Jamaican masses tendency to 'rip several kinds of fabric' to show discontent.
The number of songs which can be found of both local and foreign origin which use profanity are innumerable, especially when one focuses on hip-hop, dancehall and rock.
What must also be noticed is that all these forms were created almost in rejection of the status quo. Thus the number of expletives which populate these genres should surprise no one. Of course, as critics would be quick to point out, many persons simply use the words for shock value to get a 'forward'. Additionally, those using profanity simply as 'style' should possibly also realise that when it becomes passe the subversive power is lost.
In his performance at the recent Calabash International Literary Festival, Saul Williams explained that when he uses the word 'motherf---ker' he means it. He states that what he means by it is anyone who desecrates the feminine. Most people who yell the 'm' word more than likely do not mean that.
These words also find their way into celebrated art, but seem to find a more fruitful ground in popular art. That they are often used, and many of them have been around since time immemorial, does not change their unacceptability. While some words get drawn into the mainstream, others remain at large. Thus while both 'Ods blood and the ever popular 'f' word were around during the 16th century, 'Ods blood has lost all effect while the 'f' word (as the fact that I can only use the first letter proves) is still deemed unacceptable. Other words that had shared space with the 'f' word are 'prick' and 'c--t'. While 'prick' has gained some amount of acceptability, 'c--t' has not.
Programmes such as 'The Vagina Monologues' by Eve Ensler have tried to embrace the 'c' word. This is in an attempt to rob it of its power, in the same manner than 'nig-er' is used by African Americans, but only among each other, of course, which indicates that the 'n' word has not lost any power.
What is also apparent is that mainstream art forms, such as poetry, do not come under attack for using profanity. This may be because poets are deemed to have the license to curse. Nonetheless, it is apparent that the audiences at poetry gatherings react with the same hoot and howl of delight at adroit curse word usage as those in the dancehall.
One way or the other, it would appear that using a 'bad word' continues to delight, whatever the manner in which you use it, as long as you colour it entertainment.
