SO the reports, though unofficial, are now in and from all indications Vybz Kartel — through his unsolicited lyrical efforts — has triggered a boost in the sales of the iconic footwear, Clarks. Clearly the pundits are seeking to interrogate the very essence of this phenomenon.

How could a simple ditty — (it does not rise to the lyrical complexity of a Rampin’ Shop) spark such a craze? How can this persuasive influence be employed to the benefit of the Jamaican society? What is interesting about what I will simply dub the Clarks/Kartel phenomenon is that we are now hearing reports that stores have been broken into and robbed of the famous footwear. This, some will argue, is clearly no fault of Kartel. There is nothing in the song which would suggest that anyone should go out and steal these shoes. Yet, according to Dr Hume Johnson, while she would not blame Kartel or his song for the robbery, the crass materialism that is now rampant in the society and perpetuated by many of our popular songs do help to create the kind of mentality which sees no problem with stealing a pair of Clarks in order “to feel and look like somebody”.

Yet we cannot (and she did not) put the blame squarely at the feet of the entertainers. After all, the entertainers, while sometimes exacerbating the condition through their utterances, are also reflective of our materialistic reality. As I pointed out on a radio programme on which both Dr Johnson and I appeared last Friday, our crisis of materialism is compounded by an absence of the requisite material. We are unable to satisfy the desires unleashed by the imperatives of commerce driving our economy. Michael Manley (during the seventies) would make constant appeals to us to “ban yu belly”. It was ridiculed at the time as being backward and inconsistent with our consumerist mindset. Now the chickens have come home to roost and Jamaica is suffering from the accumulated effects of living beyond our means. I know Bruce Golding would want to implore Jamaicans to live within their means, but to date his attempts to carry that message have not been energetic.

The fact is, however, that the change we require cannot be achieved by parliamentary diktat. Michael Manley could not achieve this desired state by himself and neither will Bruce Golding or any other leader. It will require thoughtful and sustained intervention from all sectors of the Jamaican society.

I agree with commentator Ian Boyne that the economic malaise which we currently face is symptomatic of a deeper and more troubling reality. It is more social than economic. In fact, trying to solve the economic issues without addressing some of the deeper social ills might well be akin to putting Band Aids on a cancer. And this is why the National Transformation Programme and the Values and Attitudes Campaign are so important and should not be hijacked or derailed by partisan political considerations.

Our inability to control our impulses will force others to regulate us. This is what our relationships with the IMF have always been about. Had we the discipline to impose some of the measures now being demanded of us from the IMF, our economy would have been in a much more stable condition.

The same applies to our artistes and our music industry. Our artistes are being excluded from a number of territories in the region because it is felt that we have not been regulating ourselves.

I am one who advocates that we should restrict the access of children to problematic entertainment and media content. Why do we need to have music on the buses? It doesn’t matter to me whether it is gospel or classical music, there should be no music or amplified sound on a public passenger vehicle. Silence is neutral and should be the default option on the buses. If I want to listen to music then I should put in my earphones and enjoy myself without disturbing my fellow passengers.

The Noise Abatement Act should be amended taking into account certain peculiarities of the Jamaican condition and then rigidly enforced. Events should be properly rated with the appropriate sanctions in place for those who contravene the provisions of their designation. For me, there is nothing wrong if I want to enjoy the performance of a risque act providing I am doing so in a space reserved for such endeavours which is out of the reach of impressionable children.

Some will say that this is being idealistic, children will find a way to get their hands on forbidden material. This was the argument proffered when the Broadcasting Commission instituted measures to restrict problematic content on the Jamaican airwaves. While there is certainly an element of truth in this observation, the fact that our efforts might not lead to perfect results is not an excuse for not trying. The fact that a thief might be able to break into my house even if I lock the door doesn’t suggest that I should leave my place wide open. If we restrict the options which our children have to problematic content, then we might be better able to monitor the fewer channels which might be available to them.

I have proposed to the Jamaica Reggae Industry Association (JARIA) that it institutes a rating system which would prospectively determine which songs are deemed fit for what purposes. An ‘adult’ rating, for example, would mean that a song should not be played on the radio or only at a certain time. The ratings would form the basis of the playlists (set of approved songs) which the radio stations would generate. This would prevent “selectors” from going on air with unaudited material. In such a system, the programmes manager would have to approve the songs on the music sheets which would be a subset of the official playlist. A presenter could not air a song that is not on the playlist. This would be an example of self-regulation on the part of the industry. Yet this does not in itself relieve the artistes of the responsibility of regulating themselves. Of course such an effort might have to be implemented with the blessing of a regulatory authority such as the Broadcasting Commission. This, however, could be a joint effort between JARIA and the Media Association of Jamaica). However, it would not be externally imposed on the industry.

Artistes and their managers need to be aware of the environment in which they operate. Digital technology has miniaturised the world. An artiste can no longer expect to be speaking to just a Jamaican audience. No one is asking anyone to jettison one’s beliefs because it is important for artistes to be true to themselves. However one will have to tackle the current crisis on a number of fronts. This will mean paying greater attention not just to the content but also to the form of the messaging. On another front, we might need to explain to outsiders that we are not who they think we are and that our utterances are not always what they construe them to be.

I, for one, hate Jamaica being labelled homophobic. I am repulsed at the myth (widely circulated in many territories) that gays are routinely killed in the Jamaican streets. This is slander. I think it is incumbent on our leaders to speak to this perception. It will require dialogue to foster greater levels of understanding. Of course, some will argue that statements coming from the highest levels of our political directorate might make such dialogue a very difficult proposition. Yet I think Jamaica and its music are suffering because this slander has gone unchallenged.

clyde.mckenzie@gmail.com