Waiting for a 'Sparrow'

July 28, 2004

The Mighty Sparrow of today is virtually irrelevant. His foremost value now is historical, and of course there is always the value of nostalgia cherished so much by the over-45s and over-50s. But what a powerful artist he was from 1956 to 1969.

For that 13 or so years the man ruled the roost. Everything about him then, the swagger, the general posture, the "bad-john" stance, the social awareness and militancy, the maroon Opel Kapitan, the "muff" (that's why I was so upset when the statue of him was devoid of this crest of hair), the laugh, the "oh-ya" refrain, everything about the man then as artist spelt that he was indeed the man of the moment, the consummate, relevant artist, hence there came this well-know adage: "If Sparrow say so, is so."

There was absolutely no credibility gap between this artist and his people. He was mimicked by everyone who wished to be deemed someone. He expressed the deep-felt sentiments of the streets as no one ever did before. He was a true-true product of the guts and bowels of the working masses, and children sang every word, every line of the calypsoes he sang.

And with the work that he chose and the style that he utilised, which seemed as natural to him as fresh air, he almost single-handedly freed up the calypso genre from the structural and lyrical pigeon-hole in which it had been buried for decades.

Sparrow singing songs, the traditionalists and purists insisted, but the masses of people could not be bothered.

Writing elsewhere, I have been known to have advanced the view that Sparrow's Jean and Dinah, (in which he intoned that "the Yankees gone and Sparrow take over" and that the prostitutes in town will now have to live "by the sweat of their brows" once the "glamour boys" were in control), was probably the best "manifesto" that the nationalist movement could have presented to the people then, since the sentiment expressed by Sparrow in the song fitted perfectly with the political slogan: "Massa day done!"

Sparrow, in that very intense anti-colonial, nationalist period when class and ethnic divisions were not yet hard, spoke in song on behalf of the entire nation.

Sparrow sounded fearless and bold, much like Eric Williams the conqueror who told the people in Woodford Square that the colonial masters, when confronted by him, "turned yellow and trembled in every limb" and that he was "morally and physically their superior."

Such "robber talk" drew thousands to the square and to the "messiah," just as the calypso Jean and Dinah drew thousands to Sparrow.

But that King Sparrow has long since been "dead," so to speak. It's time to leave him to rest, the sooner that another "Sparrow" can emerge.

The time is now for such an artist to arise, one who in all ways can best express the mood and the necessities of the present times.

It will not be easy or straightforward as previously. The nation has changed tremendously. Things are no longer as cut and dry.

People such as Valentino, Shadow and Stalin filled the breach in the 1970s and 1980s, Valentino and Stalin from the point of view of their heavy Third World-oriented political and social commentary and Shadow, specifically from his divergent philosophical vision.

After that, Rudder was the one who seemed to exhibit possibly the greatest potential to become that consummate, relevant artist as Sparrow was back then, if only he could develop the ability to paint pictures with the brevity of words so typical of artists who emerge out of the guts and bowels of the working masses and the "jamette" culture.

Rudder's approach was always one that reflected the verbosity of a more middle-class, intellectual type that "related" rather than "described" in song.

Unfortunately he has flattered to deceive and now has chosen to run away from the responsibility, having succumbed, it appears, to domestic demands.

But why is it so difficult for a consummate artist, relevant to these times of the 21st century, to emerge out of the world that T&T has now become?

There was not this sharp consciousness of the cleavages and different realities in our social existence long ago as that which is so evident today.

Moving out of colonialism was quite straightforward in terms of a unity of purpose, hence it was easy for an artist to absorb and express that oneness of purpose.

The post-colonial transformation in context of the political economy of globalisation has revealed a whole new set of realities. The very question of what is to be deemed "national" has been posed.

Ethnicity, which involves race, class, culture, geography, etc, colours the perspectives that are brought to bear on the national agenda. Can any one artist therefore speak on behalf of everybody who inhabits this twin-island State?

Is the consummate artist of today to be one that is an exponent of various forms, eg calypso, rap, reggae, jig, chutney, etc, satisfying that whole range of engagements? Or will he/she be the one that best creates a fusion that ties all the forms together to the satisfaction of all the parts that comprise the whole?

That is the challenge!

In the mean the jostle for pride of space continues; it is all part of the process of growing up.

We will surely engage each other in that process until the next Sparrow emerges. Singing what? Only time will tell.