Tweet
Music or mayhem
EntertainmentMusic or mayhem
Busy Signal - File
Earlier this weekTHE STAR reported that a few entertainers have linked the enforcement of the Noise Abatement Act's 2:00 a.m. lock-off time for weekend events with a potential rise in crime.
It saddens me immensely in two possible scenarios where this correlation is possible. If what they are saying is that people who would otherwise be engaged in criminal activity during the wee hours of the morning are being turned loose from parties at 2:00 a.m. (and let's make no bones about it; we are talking about dancehall here, so anything can happen), it simply means that many of the people who follow dancehall are criminals.
I do not believe this.
Busy Signal - File
Earlier this weekTHE STAR reported that a few entertainers have linked the enforcement of the Noise Abatement Act's 2:00 a.m. lock-off time for weekend events with a potential rise in crime.
It saddens me immensely in two possible scenarios where this correlation is possible. If what they are saying is that people who would otherwise be engaged in criminal activity during the wee hours of the morning are being turned loose from parties at 2:00 a.m. (and let's make no bones about it; we are talking about dancehall here, so anything can happen), it simply means that many of the people who follow dancehall are criminals.
I do not believe this.
Troubled souls
If what they are saying is that the music soothes otherwise troubled souls it saddens me still, because it would mean that the songs are merely a distraction, empty party music that leaves little room for real contemplation of self and social conditions. How could it be that the music of the people and for the people be played to distract them from the realities of their lives night after night after night?
Their conditions will not have changed and the entertainers and promoters would be guilty of having them dancing away into deeper and deeper hardship.
If what they are saying is that the parties keep persons from communities with long-standing conflicts otherwise occupied I can see with that, although it does not change the fact that the people involved in the conflicts are responsible for sustaining them. If they are saying that there will be an economic fallout for promoters, those whom they employ, vendors and hustlers I cannot agree, because if people come out to party at a reasonable hour, then the money will flow just the same.
I know that I am in the minority on this one where those who really love dancehall are concerned, but the madness of all sorts of parties going on until daylight, the sound systems beating in the ears of people who want to sleep all night until the party-people turn up at 4:00 a.m. had to stop. What was suggested, though, that consideration be given to festival-type events (they are one night, but they are festivals nonetheless) is valid.
But in that consideration the music fraternity has to consider something as well. Just how many of those festival-style shows are padded with performers who do not contribute anything to the night and only serve to shorten the stage time available to those who the crowd came to see? How many promoters use 'young acts' to deliberately lengthen a show so that the bar gets busier for longer?
It is a very serious consideration.
The choice cannot be between music and mayhem. It cannot be 'let us party or we will come kick off your door'. When since did music become an excuse for murder, robbery, rape and shooting? When since?
Patrons get wild at a recent Passa Passa event. The weekly street dance usually ends way past the 2 a.m. lock-off time for entertainment events. - Nathaniel Stewart
If what they are saying is that the music soothes otherwise troubled souls it saddens me still, because it would mean that the songs are merely a distraction, empty party music that leaves little room for real contemplation of self and social conditions. How could it be that the music of the people and for the people be played to distract them from the realities of their lives night after night after night?
Their conditions will not have changed and the entertainers and promoters would be guilty of having them dancing away into deeper and deeper hardship.
If what they are saying is that the parties keep persons from communities with long-standing conflicts otherwise occupied I can see with that, although it does not change the fact that the people involved in the conflicts are responsible for sustaining them. If they are saying that there will be an economic fallout for promoters, those whom they employ, vendors and hustlers I cannot agree, because if people come out to party at a reasonable hour, then the money will flow just the same.
I know that I am in the minority on this one where those who really love dancehall are concerned, but the madness of all sorts of parties going on until daylight, the sound systems beating in the ears of people who want to sleep all night until the party-people turn up at 4:00 a.m. had to stop. What was suggested, though, that consideration be given to festival-type events (they are one night, but they are festivals nonetheless) is valid.
But in that consideration the music fraternity has to consider something as well. Just how many of those festival-style shows are padded with performers who do not contribute anything to the night and only serve to shorten the stage time available to those who the crowd came to see? How many promoters use 'young acts' to deliberately lengthen a show so that the bar gets busier for longer?
It is a very serious consideration.
The choice cannot be between music and mayhem. It cannot be 'let us party or we will come kick off your door'. When since did music become an excuse for murder, robbery, rape and shooting? When since?
Patrons get wild at a recent Passa Passa event. The weekly street dance usually ends way past the 2 a.m. lock-off time for entertainment events. - Nathaniel Stewart
