Two weeks ago, this column under the title, "Look what they have done with their songs" examined the influence of popular music and lyrics, especially in the dancehall genre, on the incitement to violence in our culture. It was of course a bit of parody on the well-known song, Look what they have done to my song, Ma, What surprised me was the mini-flood of letters by email: 22 in all, of which all but one were positive endorsements of the concern expressed in the column. I am, however, disappointed that so few of my correspondents are willing to send their comments directly to the newspaper's editor for publication. Those who tend to use derogatory commentary are, it seems, much more likely to seek publication in letters to the editor. Be that as it may, it is heartening to see that there is a remnant still concerned about the promotion of positive values. Through this medium, they may be assured that they are not alone. As the poet put it, they belong to the "fit, though few".

And speaking of positive values, it has now dawned on me that the word "vulgar" has all but disappeared from common parlance in Jamaica. Obviously, that word cannot be any longer in common use if there are no standards by which to judge whether it is valid. To such a pass has our popular culture now come, that it is irrelevant to describe what was previously unacceptable behaviour, as vulgar. Anything goes. Not many years ago, Professor Emeritus Rex Nettleford made a telling impression on the society when he declared "a bhutto in a Benz is still a bhutto". I doubt that more than a very few children under 16 even know what the word "bhutto" means. Perhaps very few above that age (an arbitrary cut-off), even care whether bhuttos now dominate our popular culture. Anything goes. When I was a youngster growing up in this country, there was a premium on what was termed "the finer things of life". In that context, it was easily possible to describe the opposite of that state as "vulgar".

What is vulgar now? I was taken by surprise by a relative of contemporary vintage saying her preference for a certain commentator is because he "does not use bad words" like some do. By golly, even I had forgotten that "bad words" was a term in vogue in the bygone days of my genteel relative's early upbringing. It did bring back to mind that there was a law on the statute books which allowed any citizen to bring action against another for public use of said bad words. Nowadays, it is the police who under the law, go after the society's revered and most popular entertainers for using filthy language in their public performances, hitherto with commonly acceptable impunity. And since anything goes, an observation such as this, denying comfort to said popular performers and their backers, is likely to be interpreted as an attack on the culture of "the people".

Well, speech is one thing, but direct incitement to violence against people of a different lifestyle from the majority is another. Similarly, incitement to violence against designated targets of popular performers in their lyrics is what I termed in the previous column cited, equivalent to treason. I repeat this on the reasoning that performers of great influence, like it or not, are models and exemplars for the young. When in their lyrics they call for the death of this or that target group, as has been the case here, they threaten the stability of the state.
For no democracy, free speech notwithstanding, is safe when a few of its exemplars call for wholesale and lawless murder of some of its citizens. There was a time when such behaviour would have been seen as a vulgar abuse of privilege. Now, we hardly make the connection with our world-beating murder rate.

It is all about the sliding values of our society. Nothing is good unless it is measured against something we regard as bad. "Vulgar" is not in vogue because its opposite is not readily apparent. The "finer things of life" are not a standard.
We do not easily define any more what is "finer". To suggest that we should aspire to finer things, is to be laughed at as old-fashioned. It is not that there is nowhere in the society where "finer" exists. It does in the valiant efforts such as the national festival competition. That is where we see that the products of our nation's culture need not be what is base and demeaning. That is where we still see performances and hear lyrics which do not describe women as whores and bitches, merely to be used as sexual fodder for sadistic men. That is where lyrics do not encourage young men to gather "a bungle of gal" for their unrestricted gratification, leading ultimately to neglect of fatherhood responsibilities.

But how do such "finer" products of our culture stack up against the "vulgar" but more widespread culture products dominating the entertainment scene today? The answer is clear. I call on you who belong to the remnant to let your voices be heard. Never mind they may seem like the dying gasps of a disappearing minority. There may be more of us out there than you think.

browngeof@hotmail.com

Admiral Lewin can be the voice of conscience and hope for JA

Kate Hudson casts off her girl-next-door image

Perez Hilton goes Gaga for Hollywood Halloween bash