My youngest sis and I were visiting with relatives and their friends in another city in Ontario some time ago. Shortly after we had had dinner, a few of them, of Jamaican parentage, announced that they would soon have to leave. One of them, who had remained reclined in the couch, replied, "No, I'm not Jamaican like that!" The entire room burst out laughing! No explanation of the "nyam an go weh" (eat and leave) kind was necessary. For, it is thought, by many Jamaicans, that that is a behaviour which characterizes many a Jamaican. It doesn't matter how long the length of time before the meal, as soon as the meal is finished, one can listen for the announcement of pending departure.
Of course, since that afternoon, sis and I use the phrase at every opportune moment to distance ourselves from things - and people - that would be thought to be undeniably Jamaican, but, at the same time, undesirably Jamaican. "I'm not Jamaican like that" is quite a catchy phrase that accomplishes so much at one go. It says, to me, at any rate, that the particular act/behaviour is widely-accepted as a distinctly (if not uniquely) Jamaican one. Also, that the speaker is Jamaican, or of Jamaican heritage, and that he/she is more than willing - would be happy to - associate with other types of Jamaican-esque acts/behaviour. And, for sure, it implies that it is necessary to make the distinction between "us" who would "never do such a thing" and "them" who "would do such a thing".
Does it sound like we're being selectively Jamaican? Yes. I hope so. In the same way that we as human beings hang our heads in shame, or simply shake our heads in bewilderment, when we hear of a grotesque act committed against another. Well, it's kinda like that. In Canada, once in a while the media carry a report about some Jamaican guy or another who has been charged with a criminal act, or a fraudulent act, or who has been involved in some kind of nefarious activity. I certainly and absolutely do not wish to be associated with that character! I am not Jamaican like that!
Given the emphasis on multiculturalism and inclusiveness and diversity, it is generally thought that Canadians are likely not to paint everyone of a particular group (race, nationality, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender etc.) with one brush. But, whether we like it or not, everybody has a prejudice of some kind. And, what is more, some have not taken the time to pinpoint/evaluate their own level of awareness with respect to diversity and inclusion and all that. That's an important step in the journey toward reducing some prejudices. But, they simply feel what they feel and that is that.
So, one might understand the need for the distinction to be made in certain quarters. True, so far, I've only used the phrase among family members and friends. It's used in a jovial, light-hearted way. Like, finishing a drumstick and then chewing the bone. It's not a bad thing, but, I just don't do it. Or, arriving late for an event. Again, many have heard the term, "Jamaica time." But, having lived with my father who would practically be out the door without waiting, I'm punctual. I've been thinking, though, how soon will I have to utter that phrase, in more public quarters, in an attempt to make a distinction; to clarify that, really, not all Jamaicans are like that?
Come to think of it, there was such an occasion where I had to make a distinction. (But, I think it was before I had learnt the phrase.) My colleagues and I were participating in a workshop and the presenter made reference to the intolerance of Jamaicans of homosexuals. I explained that (1) not all Jamaicans feel that way (given JFLAG and other supportive voices) and (2) I could not be seen as a part of any "gay-hating" crowd - in Jamaica, Canada or wherever. I have relatives who are homosexuals and they are relatives that I love. After that session, in other conversations, I reiterated that my Christian convictions and the Word of God points, not to condemning the sinner, but the sin. And no sin is "worse" than the other. I'm Christian. It is what it is. And, it is, mostly, about love.
People from other countries, I believe, would quite easily replace "Jamaican" for their own nationality. I was honoured to have been invited to the wedding of a friend of mine last month. But, she warned me, we'll be on Pakistani time. And, so we were! A start time of 7:00, ran into 8:30! Similarly, I - any one of us - could look on in disgust at inhumane behaviour and go, "I'm not human like that."
Of course, I've also used the phrase when the converse applies. That's when I gladly and readily associate with the triumphs and glory of the country; the people and things of which I can be proud. Even in the little things, too, like eating Millie or East Indian mangoes and having the juice run down the elbow.
It's the acknowledgment of good home-training (broughtupsy); the recognition of that indomitable and resilient spirit; the ability to "tek bad tings mek laugh". That is how I grew up in Jamaica and I took the best of my home training, and the best of how I was nurtured in Jamaica, by Jamaicans, to become a citizen of the world - as a former manager put it. So, I gladly associate with things "desirably Jamaican" and, post-haste decry and dissociate myself from things "undesirably Jamaican."
So, whenever the acts/behaviour are in sync with my own values and beliefs, demonstrated by a Jamaican, or one of Jamaican parentage, then, yes. If asked, I will say, "I am Jamaican like that."
Claudia
www.cyopro.com
www.twitter.com/cyopro
Showing posts with label Jamaican. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jamaican. Show all posts
Friday, 18 November 2011
Thursday, 18 March 2010
I have wings! (Cee Dubya)
A former co-worker gave me a postcard shortly before we part ways in 2004. On the cover is a cartoon depiction of a girl in a swing, reaching up, hair blowing in the wind. The caption reads: "She always knew she could fly..." On the inside: "...the question remained, "How high?""
Love that.
(Of course, I still have the card.)
I remembered all this the other day after we'd had quite an exciting Saturday morning - March 13, 2010. My little sis telephoned me and greeted me with stteo: "Congratulations! Your letter to the Editor is the Letter of the Day!!!" Well! I could hardly utter a coherent sentence. I had to tap each key, rather slowly, to type the URL. When I finally got to it, there it was: My letter - a thing of beauty.
We went over it again and then some. We analyzed why the Editor had made the "corrections"/amendments he had; why he had omitted a section of a paragraph as well as the very last line ("Maybe he is trying to protect you," she offered). I called Mommy and asked her to get a copy of The Gleaner with my letter of the day in it. She did. And they - she and Daddy - read it again.
My other sisters offered their congrats and support, too. Yes. It was, truly, one of the best days of my life.
For, you see, as I reminded my lil sis, it was encouraging to me as a suffocating writer. She has a sense of how daunted I feel under the weight of knowing that I am a writer but not writing what I should. It's like I mention in the title and sub-title of another blog: The Vital Air: When you're suffocating, all you can think about is breathing.
I am yet to write my book(s). I don't want to go to my grave with it (them) inside me.
I am yet to write the book with Daddy - worse yet.
So, it's been kinda like that. (See very first entry in this blog.) And then, one day, someone thought that what I had written was worth publishing - and worth the distinction, to boot!
My prayer was short: Oh God, thank you for my wings!
Below is a copy of my letter to the Editor of the Jamaican newspaper, The Gleaner. I used the email associated with my pen name, Cee Dubya.
Sidney Bristow was right. "There's no drug like adrenaline!"
********
The Editor, Sir:
When we appoint certain people to be "entrusted with the responsibility to lead the State's anti-corruption, law-enforcement and prosecutorial institutions" (a quote borrowed from another paper), what are the measures that we put in place to ensure that they are up to the mark, and keep up to the mark, in every way, as they carry out their duties?
Apart from periodic reports - which can say anything you want them to - what do we do to make sure that in every nook and cranny, things are being done in acceptable ways? Sure there are audits, but, again, don't you wonder sometimes how some things get 'overlooked'?
As so many have said, repeatedly, Jamaica has sunk into a rather horrific abyss. The taxpayers would welcome suitable persons in whom to repose their trust. However, when we appoint someone in Jamaica to a position of almost unrestrained power - doesn't matter who it is - we have to remember that that person is human. He or she, like anyone else, has to deal with personal demons. There may be psychological or emotional shortcomings which, as we know, are not usually indicated on a résumé or highlighted during an interview or even have been demonstrated in a 'less powerful' job. Being in a position where he or she doesn't have to answer to anyone, per se, is a pretty powerful one. As Lord Acton said in a letter to Bishop Mandel Creighton in 1887: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."
Hope is not a method
Does this mean that we leave these positions of almost unlimited power unfilled because each man/woman has his/her set of weaknesses? Do we throw our hands up, appoint someone who seems to fit the bill, and then hope for the best? Again, hope is not a method.
It's a different take on the whole thing, but, I submit that while we look around for these positions of power to be filled, for the best woman or man to be "entrusted with the responsibility to lead the State's anti-corruption, law-enforcement and prosecutorial institutions", we also institute some kind of mandatory psychological (and other relevant) evaluation to assure ourselves that the incumbent remains fit for the job - in every way! No set date, either. Between a year and 18 months, with no more notice than a day or two, the evaluation is done and the taxpayers get to hear the final result. No. This is not to evaluate them to determine sainthood. But, certainly, however it is crafted, it should help to determine whether power is going to the head, and possibly leading to some 'can't touch dis!' behaviour.
Real transparency
Consider the yet-to-be created Independent Commission of Investigations to be led by a commissioner - pretty powerful position. Generally, those are regarded as 'what I say, goes' positions. But, every public position is answerable to someone and, ultimately, the country's taxpayers. A palatable pronouncement is one thing. Behind the closed doors of the organisation, what is taking place and how? Intrusive? Lack of trust? Perhaps, but, we're talking about real, real transparency. Nothing to hinder the work, just enough to keep us assured.
So, it's not just about who is watching the watchman. Deeper still, are we keeping track of whether he or she is embracing delusions of grandeur under the weight of the powerful position? Who questions him/her? Do media even bother? Listen, danger ahead when people in powerful positions become 'media darlings'. The media only become conduits of messages and clearly lose objectivity as they are essentially dictated to, as they dare not carry out 'investigative journalism' which might topple the status quo. And if the media do get wind that something has gone awry, again, do they bother, or do they just leave it be, because everything else seems to be working and 'no better nuh deh a John shop'?
Things like reports and audits do not necessarily capture, for example, the hell of a milieu to which employees are sometimes subjected, as they endure the psychological and emotional onslaughts borne out of the psychological and mental delusions from occupying an 'almighty' position.
I am, etc.,
VERY CONCERNED
********
Claudia
www.cyopro.com
www.twitter.com/cyopro
Love that.
(Of course, I still have the card.)
I remembered all this the other day after we'd had quite an exciting Saturday morning - March 13, 2010. My little sis telephoned me and greeted me with stteo: "Congratulations! Your letter to the Editor is the Letter of the Day!!!" Well! I could hardly utter a coherent sentence. I had to tap each key, rather slowly, to type the URL. When I finally got to it, there it was: My letter - a thing of beauty.
We went over it again and then some. We analyzed why the Editor had made the "corrections"/amendments he had; why he had omitted a section of a paragraph as well as the very last line ("Maybe he is trying to protect you," she offered). I called Mommy and asked her to get a copy of The Gleaner with my letter of the day in it. She did. And they - she and Daddy - read it again.
My other sisters offered their congrats and support, too. Yes. It was, truly, one of the best days of my life.
For, you see, as I reminded my lil sis, it was encouraging to me as a suffocating writer. She has a sense of how daunted I feel under the weight of knowing that I am a writer but not writing what I should. It's like I mention in the title and sub-title of another blog: The Vital Air: When you're suffocating, all you can think about is breathing.
I am yet to write my book(s). I don't want to go to my grave with it (them) inside me.
I am yet to write the book with Daddy - worse yet.
So, it's been kinda like that. (See very first entry in this blog.) And then, one day, someone thought that what I had written was worth publishing - and worth the distinction, to boot!
My prayer was short: Oh God, thank you for my wings!
Below is a copy of my letter to the Editor of the Jamaican newspaper, The Gleaner. I used the email associated with my pen name, Cee Dubya.
Sidney Bristow was right. "There's no drug like adrenaline!"
********
The Editor, Sir:
When we appoint certain people to be "entrusted with the responsibility to lead the State's anti-corruption, law-enforcement and prosecutorial institutions" (a quote borrowed from another paper), what are the measures that we put in place to ensure that they are up to the mark, and keep up to the mark, in every way, as they carry out their duties?
Apart from periodic reports - which can say anything you want them to - what do we do to make sure that in every nook and cranny, things are being done in acceptable ways? Sure there are audits, but, again, don't you wonder sometimes how some things get 'overlooked'?
As so many have said, repeatedly, Jamaica has sunk into a rather horrific abyss. The taxpayers would welcome suitable persons in whom to repose their trust. However, when we appoint someone in Jamaica to a position of almost unrestrained power - doesn't matter who it is - we have to remember that that person is human. He or she, like anyone else, has to deal with personal demons. There may be psychological or emotional shortcomings which, as we know, are not usually indicated on a résumé or highlighted during an interview or even have been demonstrated in a 'less powerful' job. Being in a position where he or she doesn't have to answer to anyone, per se, is a pretty powerful one. As Lord Acton said in a letter to Bishop Mandel Creighton in 1887: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."
Hope is not a method
Does this mean that we leave these positions of almost unlimited power unfilled because each man/woman has his/her set of weaknesses? Do we throw our hands up, appoint someone who seems to fit the bill, and then hope for the best? Again, hope is not a method.
It's a different take on the whole thing, but, I submit that while we look around for these positions of power to be filled, for the best woman or man to be "entrusted with the responsibility to lead the State's anti-corruption, law-enforcement and prosecutorial institutions", we also institute some kind of mandatory psychological (and other relevant) evaluation to assure ourselves that the incumbent remains fit for the job - in every way! No set date, either. Between a year and 18 months, with no more notice than a day or two, the evaluation is done and the taxpayers get to hear the final result. No. This is not to evaluate them to determine sainthood. But, certainly, however it is crafted, it should help to determine whether power is going to the head, and possibly leading to some 'can't touch dis!' behaviour.
Real transparency
Consider the yet-to-be created Independent Commission of Investigations to be led by a commissioner - pretty powerful position. Generally, those are regarded as 'what I say, goes' positions. But, every public position is answerable to someone and, ultimately, the country's taxpayers. A palatable pronouncement is one thing. Behind the closed doors of the organisation, what is taking place and how? Intrusive? Lack of trust? Perhaps, but, we're talking about real, real transparency. Nothing to hinder the work, just enough to keep us assured.
So, it's not just about who is watching the watchman. Deeper still, are we keeping track of whether he or she is embracing delusions of grandeur under the weight of the powerful position? Who questions him/her? Do media even bother? Listen, danger ahead when people in powerful positions become 'media darlings'. The media only become conduits of messages and clearly lose objectivity as they are essentially dictated to, as they dare not carry out 'investigative journalism' which might topple the status quo. And if the media do get wind that something has gone awry, again, do they bother, or do they just leave it be, because everything else seems to be working and 'no better nuh deh a John shop'?
Things like reports and audits do not necessarily capture, for example, the hell of a milieu to which employees are sometimes subjected, as they endure the psychological and emotional onslaughts borne out of the psychological and mental delusions from occupying an 'almighty' position.
I am, etc.,
VERY CONCERNED
********
Claudia
www.cyopro.com
www.twitter.com/cyopro
Monday, 8 February 2010
A private loss
About 12 years ago, the financial institution for which I worked held its annual Long Service Awards function and invited Professor Ralston “Rex” Nettleford to be the guest speaker.
I was hearing him for the first time, in person, and made some notes as he made his delivery. One of the statements that spoke to me was, “We must have a frame of reference upon which to plot the new things that are upon us.”
Even though he might have been referring to a Jamaican national and collective reflecting, situating and progressing, I took it personal. I bear the past in mind, and appreciate, even more, the value of the journey travelled; the accomplishments made and the wisdom and determination needed to go even farther. There’s more. I am also not required to use the standards of “others” to determine whether I am successful. Just one glance at my humble beginnings and I know that I am successful and have come this far by faith in God, ambition, education, hard work and persistence.
I imagine that in life, one is shaped by the people, places, things and ideas that one encounters, is exposed to and embraces. My parents raised us lovingly and with ‘broughtupsy’. Outside of the family circle, however, we must interact with the world. I am happy to have benefited from a wonderful encounter with Professor Nettleford, realizing that the world – certainly, Jamaica – will not be the same without him. So much better are we, though, because he was in it.
Much has been written about him since his passing. Seems there is a genuine effort to wax eloquent, in trying to do justice to Professor Nettleford as a excellent orator. There have been breaking news, editorials, personal experiences and, quite simply but no less eloquent, the quiet mourning and reflection of his personal assistant who "ran his life" for about 26 years: "Prof just gone like that."
I didn’t need to be a student in one of his classes to have learnt quite a bit from this man.
I shall miss him.
Claudia
www.cyopro.com
www.twitter.com/cyopro
I was hearing him for the first time, in person, and made some notes as he made his delivery. One of the statements that spoke to me was, “We must have a frame of reference upon which to plot the new things that are upon us.”
Even though he might have been referring to a Jamaican national and collective reflecting, situating and progressing, I took it personal. I bear the past in mind, and appreciate, even more, the value of the journey travelled; the accomplishments made and the wisdom and determination needed to go even farther. There’s more. I am also not required to use the standards of “others” to determine whether I am successful. Just one glance at my humble beginnings and I know that I am successful and have come this far by faith in God, ambition, education, hard work and persistence.
I imagine that in life, one is shaped by the people, places, things and ideas that one encounters, is exposed to and embraces. My parents raised us lovingly and with ‘broughtupsy’. Outside of the family circle, however, we must interact with the world. I am happy to have benefited from a wonderful encounter with Professor Nettleford, realizing that the world – certainly, Jamaica – will not be the same without him. So much better are we, though, because he was in it.
Much has been written about him since his passing. Seems there is a genuine effort to wax eloquent, in trying to do justice to Professor Nettleford as a excellent orator. There have been breaking news, editorials, personal experiences and, quite simply but no less eloquent, the quiet mourning and reflection of his personal assistant who "ran his life" for about 26 years: "Prof just gone like that."
I didn’t need to be a student in one of his classes to have learnt quite a bit from this man.
I shall miss him.
Claudia
www.cyopro.com
www.twitter.com/cyopro
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
