English 211 - satire

February 04, 2004

This is a society of silly, little people who are yet to learn certain basic and fundamental lessons. So here goes.

The medium of communication in this place is the English language that we "borrowed" (euphemism) or which was imposed on us by the imperialism of the British Empire. In the tradition of English language usage there are "figures of speech."

One of the foremost figures of speech is the "metaphor" - which involves the transferring of character, substance or nature from one thing to another, eg "the ship of State sails on..."

In this case the properties and nature of a ship are transferred to the apparatus that is known as the State, ie government, public service, judiciary, protective forces, etc. Remember Trini's calypso in which he intoned that "if Trinidad is a boat, he go sail on it, sink of float..."

Another good example of a metaphor would be if I were to say today: "Dey raining blows on Mr Rawlins' back..."

Another key figure of speech is "irony" in which a writer or speaker uses language with the aim to mean the exact opposite of what is actually expressed.

For example, if you are given a "bad drive" on the road, it is always more effective to express "admiration" for the guilty person's "high level of intelligence" rather than hurling obscenities at him or her.

Satire involves the skilful use of the imagery of metaphors combined with the cutting, bitter sarcasm of ironic prose or poetry to expose stupidity, folly, immorality and corruption, and force people in society to take stock of themselves, to take an in-depth, critical look at their lives and the systems under which they live with the result being that hopefully action will ensue to better the quality of human existence. Satire is the prime tool and catalyst of catharsis.

And if the use of satire is one of the great hallmarks of the English language tradition, then so too is it central to the African tradition of the "girot" and the African conception and convention of "masking," ie the girots embellished their art of story-telling and the passing on of cultural traits and rituals, at times "putting on various faces" to bring the poignant imagery home through "parody" - a laughing at oneselves, indeed a kind of bitter humour, and to virtually "terrorise" society into inculcating a sense of moral cleansing and social purification.

What we know today as calypso is an art form that represents intrinsically the most potent combination of both the satirist tradition of the English language and that of the African masked girots. If no one has advanced that view before, then I am doing so now in this column titled "English 211 - satire."

The power of calypso is derived from the combining and cross-fertilisation of these two potent traditions. It is serious business.

As song it has by necessity to inveigle the widest possible range of human emotions - from the wild abandon, pure joy and happiness associated with celebration to the nerve-racking, melancholic sorrow even to the point of the figurative and proverbial "ripping out of the heart and human insides" to be exposed and held up to critical scrutiny.

But how do we react to the art form that is no merely "art for art's sake" but art that is about purpose and seeks to find that balance between the bestiality and the reasonableness of the human condition?

And saying that brings to mind probably the greatest and most renowned satirist in the English language tradition: Jonathan Swift.

Swift, not surprisingly, was an Irishman whose work, like so many other Irish literary people, reflected the violent relationship that existed between Ireland and Britain and the religious fanaticism that underlined the rancour between the two extreme poles.

Swift in his works of satire such as Tale of a Tub and Gulliver's Travels scandalised and ridiculed the upper classes, much to the amusement of the lower classes and as a result his popularity grew.

But undoubtedly it was his letter of advice called "A Modest Proposal" that shocked the status-quo. It was described as an "...ironic piece of prose in which it is suggested that Ireland's overpopulation and dire economic conditions could be best alleviated if the babies of poor Irish parents were sold as edible delicacies to be eaten by the rich."

Now if someone like a Jonathan Swift were to pose such a satirical proposal to the citizens of T&T, what would be our response? Many may simply say, "let the jackass bray..." or that "that piece of writing is not writing."

Other people would immediately accuse the author of promoting "cannibalism" which is unnatural, triggering thereby prolong debate on the pros and cons of cannibalism.

Some would accuse the author of dividing the people into "haves" and "have-nots." The Prime Minister would be asked to resign for not ordering an immediate ban on the offensive literary piece.

People like the Downtown Owners and Merchants Association (DOMA) would consider the piece "reckless" and "endangering" to society. Some intellectuals and spiritual leaders would even go as far as to categorise such writing as "hate art" or "corbeau art."

And, lastly, many would call on the author to begin eating babies himself.

Not one single soul would have sought to discuss overpopulation and economic development strategies. Oh what a country of philistines, to quote Naipaul. The only issues that are tackled here are the non-issues.