Dear Editor,
It is quite interesting to note that one of the aims of Carifesta, as outlined in the conference of Caribbean creative artists where it was invented in Georgetown in 1970, was that every four years when the Festival was held an anthology of Caribbean writing should be published. Of course, that aim has not been realised (Carifesta has not been held every four years either). I can refer to only four anthologies that managed to honour that pledge since 1972.
The first was compiled in 1971 in time for the first Carifesta – that was the collection New Writing from the Caribbean edited by AJ Seymour. Then there were two Carifesta publications when it was held in Jamaica in 1976 – A Time and A Season, an anthology of Caribbean plays edited by Errol Hill; and Carifesta Forum, edited by John Hearne. The fourth was Carifesta X Anthology which collected work from across the region. It was edited by Petamber Persaud with a Foreword by Frank Anthony and an Introduction by Al Creighton, published and released during the festival in Georgetown in 2008. It is worthy of note that Guyana produced what so many other Carifestas failed to do.
I just thought I would mention that, since Ruel Johnson has insisted in a number of letters in the press that this last anthology was promised by Minister Anthony but never delivered. I also take the opportunity to correct other declarations made by Mr Johnson because they refer to the Guyana Prize and the University of Guyana and were repeated in his most recent letters. He complains that he “voluntarily conducted workshops on poetry and short fiction” but neither the Guyana Prize nor the University of Guyana took up his offer to conduct follow-up sessions – “I have long indicated my willingness to collaborate with the University of Guyana to voluntarily conduct these, but so far I have received no indication that there is any interest on the part of the university or the Guyana Prize Committee itself to move forward.”
Mr Johnson was invited, and willingly conducted, two workshops for the Guyana Prize in January, 2013. In addition to those sessions there were five others in fiction, drama, poetry and creative non-fiction conducted by prominent writers from overseas as well as another locally based writer between November 2012 and May 2013. The last of these was in collaboration with the University of Cambridge and the UWI. Then, in collaboration with the University of Guyana and the National School of Drama, there was a full summer course in playwriting that started in June, 2013. In no way can all those activities be seen as showing “no indication” of “any interest … to move forward.” That was a series of nine writers workshops. Perhaps Mr Johnson does not recognise workshops unless he is conducting them, but there were other persons who are also capable. There will be other sessions in the immediate future, and he will be asked again to participate.
Mr Johnson also complains that he got no response “privately or publicly” when he queried “the absence of official Guyana Prize certificates for the winners of the last awards (boycotted by the entire cabinet including Dr Anthony).” These certificates were originally done as a part of the Prize’s 20th anniversary, and other prizewinners did enquire about them after the ceremony last year. But it did not appear that Mr Johnson was truly interested in an explanation, since he made bold statements in letters to the editor providing his own convictions as to why no certificates were issued. He required no response; he told the public that it was because the government was refusing to recognise him as a winner.
He articulated this sense of victimhood in many other ways, including his claim that the Awards Ceremony was “boycotted” by the cabinet. In the entire history of the Prize, there have been really very few occasions when ministers of government have attended this ceremony in large numbers, so they must have been “boycotting” in all those other years as well. What is more, during his address at the Awards Ceremony, President Donald Ramotar did explain that Minister Anthony and the Director of Culture Dr Rose were both away on official duty at the Caricom Reparations Committee Meeting in St Vincent and the Grenadines. They went at very short notice. My information is that Vincentian Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves, on his visit to Guyana just a week before, persuaded Guyana to send high-level representation to the meeting. Were we to continue on Mr Johnson’s theory, we would observe that the Leader of the Opposition was absent, and sent his regrets. Should we not speculate then, that he, too, joined the boycott?
Continuing this same theory of a conspiracy against him, Mr Johnson also declared that the state media totally ignored the Guyana Prize because of his presence in it. While it is true that press coverage in the Chronicle has been disappointing, that goes not only for the state owned paper, but for them all. The enthusiasm of the press, both state and private, government and independent, has been lukewarm for years, showing greater interest in the several beauty contests, politics and controversy that they have always found more newsworthy than literature. Yet it is not true that the Chronicle carried nothing. There were features by Michelle Gonzalves and Petamber Persaud.
I am able to correct another impression given by Mr Johnson concerning participation in Carifesta because I was the head of a delegation in the national contingent. I was also responsible for the group from the National School of Drama who went privately and had to be accredited as part of the national contingent. Mr Johnson did not fairly represent what the official Guyana delegation did on his behalf. He also went privately just like the drama students, but they all had to be formally accredited as part of the Guyana contingent as a result of which they were issued with passes for unrestricted entry into all Carifesta venues and for official participation. Mr Johnson was also given a place in the Guyana literary exhibition booths to exhibit and sell his work.
I offer these corrections because this persistent politicising of the Guyana Prize brings into disrepute what should be celebrated as the achievements of Guyanese literature. It diminishes it and is disappointing. The very fact that Ruel Johnson, despite his insistent attacks on both the government and the Prize itself, was declared a winner, should be clear evidence that the Prize is not embroiled in the politics with which Johnson is determined to associate it.
Yours faithfully,
Al Creighton
