Mon | Jun 22, 2026

From Warmington to Kartel

Published:Thursday | March 17, 2011 | 12:00 AM
Keith Noel

Keith Noel, Contributor

THE DISCOURSE on the role of popular public figures has once again been reignited because of the recent behaviour of two sets of such persons in our society. One could hardly find two more disparate groups in society than members of the nation's Parliament on the one hand and dancehall artistes on the other.

But I have found the similarity in the public's responses to the behaviour of some of our political leaders and that of persons like Lady Saw and Vybz Kartel particularly interesting.

Many persons are unhappy with what they see as blatant and unapologetic lying and dissembling by those involved in the 'Dudus' enquiry. They constantly express disgust at what they see happening in a setting that they believe should bring out all that is noble and exemplary in our leaders. To make matters worse, at this very time, we are hit with the public behaviour of Mr Everald Warmington.

As a teacher, I sometimes encountered students who displayed the same traits in their behaviour as Mr Warmington does. It was marked by an insecurity that led to a crassness and a low self-esteem that resulted in a petulance and a need to hit out at others with insults (or physically). We worked hard to get these students to shed these traits - and most of them did, as they matured. Some teacher failed with the member of parliament.

But if the man in the street is uncomfortable with these displays, should we not find ways to do something about it? Should not leaders of civil society find ways to make the perpetrators uncomfortable?

Why do we accept the unacceptable, and shrug and say "its politics, you know"? I am not one for politician-bashing, and I strongly believe that quite a few of our politicians are decent persons trying to do their best. But I am not naïve and accept the adage that 'power corrupts'. I also know that they make wrong calls and sometimes 'leave alone' things that they know are wrong but that they feel are 'bigger than them'. But too many of our politicians too often behave in a manner that is reprehensible and are not brought to book, or even reprimanded.

We should all accept errors of judgement, foolish behaviour, and sometimes some minor wrongdoing in our leaders. After all, they are human! Caribbean people are not silly and a Clinton/Lewinsky-type scandal would never cause us to write off an entire presidency. Nor do we completely write off a prominent church leader who gets himself embroiled with the law by assisting a known fugitive to avoid police detection because he foolishly believed that this was the correct thing to do! But we are too often willing to excuse behaviour that is reprehensible.

And this includes our attitudes to leaders in other areas of the society.

Dancehall scene

So this brings us to our dancehall 'dons'. While I listen to Ms Marion Hall's lame excuses, I appreciate the fact that the Lady Saw image is becoming more complex as she tries to separate herself into two personas. This suggests that something is at work which is saying to her that the 'slack' persona must be kept under control. And this is all many of us ask. The 'raw' Lady Saw, I have always insisted (much to the chagrin of many of my friends), has a place in our dancehall scene, but it must be a controlled space, controlled by Lady Saw herself and by her colleagues and her fans.

But consider the speciousness, the utter irrationality of the Vybz Kartel position. It is his right not to accept Shinehead's admonition that "as entertainers we are put here to teach/not abuse the freedom of speech". It is also his right to approach his work as something to make money and nothing else. But he knows that his talent makes whatever arguments he puts forward so much more attractive and influential than the admonitions of parents, yet he keeps saying, "it is not my job to bring up anyone else's child" and justify, in this way, work which has the impact of corrupting the young.

Christians would tell you that this is the devil's own argument, so this makes him, literally, the devil's advocate. Should we treat him accordingly?

Keith Noel is a former educator. Send comments to columns@gleanerjm.com.