Dear Editor,
Late January the PPP walked out of Parliament on the passing of a bill to establish a National Heritage Commission as tabled by the Leader of the Opposition. This is a baffling act as the PPP has over and over demonstrated its absolute cluelessness, indifference and hostility to the keen development of Cultural artistic products, with no indication that they even understood the concept of the powerful movement of Cultural Industries. Regardless of the precedents set in place by former Governments they have in most cases when forced to address the call of readiness, been found wanting, not really conscious of what should have been in place much less what is expected. Thus I thought that with no particular expertise and even a related philosophy to facilitate a learning process in this area, no doubt the PPP would have welcomed a National Heritage Commission which would be inclusive of a broader range of talents and kindred minds.
The above is not stated without a sound track record that demonstrates the ineffectiveness in this [as well as most other areas] particular area of governance. In coming into political power in 1992 the PPP allowed the Cinemas to die without lifting a finger, a tradition perished, persons went out of work and from then to now they have exhibited a lack of capacity to allow local broadcasting to evolve, which would have launched electronic media vocations in a country where jobs are difficult to find. The philosophy of Communism with its adherence only to the instinctive senses and the logic of the ideological monomaniac whose applied contradictions are based on no principles, and are cast above the opinions of his own ‘People’ rhetoric, resulting in shameless self serving indulgences. This is not an indictment that the over religious materialistic capitalist is any better, but rather, that the Artistic language with its idealisms, ageless instructive metaphors and intuitive landscapes are the only measurements that separate Man from the banal. It’s not quite understood in the context of the analytical materialistic imagery of state worship that the philosophy of communism expounded. This is the alien world of Culture which the PPP should be ready to hand over.
The example of the travesty of Minister Frank Anthony’s use of the Caribbean Press is a classic example similar to the Minister’s high handed distortion of the historical location and the non engagement with legitimate interest groups on the 1823 monument. On behalf of myself and some writers I approached Minister Anthony’s office on the 28, January 2013 to explore the mystery of the Caribbean Press I was told to write requesting the meeting, which I did the same day. I called the office on the 19, February more than two weeks later to enquire if or when the meeting was to commence. The Minister’s secretary told me that he had indicated nothing to her. The actions of the Minister must be construed to say that he was not answerable to any group of citizens though they may be directly related through their talents to the concerns of the Caribbean Press, and have a citizen’s right to engage this Minister or any Minister on the conduct of any public individual’s misuse of an institutional instrument established through public funds. We can only contend that those who envelope the Caribbean Press are contemptuous of those who do not fit their criteria. What is obvious is that we considered Jagdeo’s long list of abuses of authority in which the recent radio frequency exposure is but one, as a result of an impulsive and petulant mind, driven by the intoxication of narcissistic power, yet, this seems to be a cultivated political trait among quite a few in the executive pool of the PPP.
The administration seems grounded in facades rather than practical participation with persons and groups which will get things done but might offer no political propaganda benefits. Sunday, March 10 Stabroek News, the Minister of Culture declared that they were establishing an Institute of Creative Arts. No practical Culture Minister taking the Guyana context into serious thought would contemplate such a nondescript idea, since Creativity is not driven by cultivation but instead drives those who are its vessels. One would expect at least the following in the vein of cultural stimulation [A] The placement of Art teachers in all primary schools as well as music teachers [even visiting] in Secondary Schools, with an effective policy to stimulate our young creative minds. [B] A national policy for the payment to local artistes of royalties by the local electronic media beginning with NCN. None of this seems to be a part in the overall broadcasting debate anyhow. [C] Inputs to correspond with developments in the arts worldwide into the existing institutions like the Burrowes School of Art, the National Dance School, expand the mission statement of Castellani House and other initiatives that would serve to inspire by building visible platforms to incorporate creativity that evidently already exists. The Ministry does not have the expertise or the attitude as I have illustrated above to engage or initiate the processes that would fully empower creative citizens; the dialogue on Creative Industries is shied away from. How can one empower people one cannot even cordially discourse with as equals, how can the Ministry of Culture as it’s presently constituted ignite local Cultural Industries to present realistic benefits to justify the disbursements of the Lotto Fund. What constitutes an Institute of Creativity in the absence of the above? More than ever an alternative Institution is required, and the formation of a National Heritage Commission as proposed by the Leader of the Opposition is where the interest of the nation in the area of its Arts can be given honest and expert priority.
Yours faithfully
Barrington Braithwaite
