I'm sure I have your attention now. I managed to catch a decent chunk of 'Your Issues Live' with Michael Sharpe on TVJ, when they held the forum in Ocho Rios. The general focus of the forum was the challenges faced by local vendors in the tourist area. Everything came up- from the problems with their facilities, to the dominance of foreign store owners, to the complaints of harassment they face. But I won't take on all that now. I'm just interested in talking about the penis.
The vendors complained that police were confiscating their sculptures- specifically the superhumanly well endowed rasta pieces. One man spoke of his handiwork, 'Ready Freddy', that was taken away by police with no real reason being given. The citizens proceeded to make a comparison with the 11-foot tall 'Redemption Song' (or as I like to call it, the Emancipated Penis), the statue of the naked man and woman in Emancipation Park. Basically, they argued that nobody is confiscating the statue, so why are they being pressured?
Big wigs on hand defended the move of the police, sighting an Act passed way back in 1927 which outlaws 'obscene' public displays. And naturally, a 24 inch tall rastaman holding his 25 inch erect penis classifies as obscene. OK, so it's law... I can work with that. The big wigs also detested the sculptures as a mockery to the way we should be approaching tourism. In their words, Jamaica is marketed as a family destination and should be treated as such. Fine with me. However, I'm not the one sitting out in the sun all day and only making $500, so who am I to talk. The reality of the situation is, these vendors care little about how the country is marketed; all they really care about is how they can maximize on earnings. So if a 50 inch penis does the trick, so be it... at least that's how they see it...
My mother brings forth the argument that despite their ranting about the benefits of 'Ready Freddy' and the likes, many of the sculptures don't actually get sold. How many people actually put these things in their homes? "Over here is a Picasso piece, over there is some work by Christopher Gonzales, and that's Ready Freddy." She has a point. But I don't think the argument is necessarily that they get sold, but more so that they attract attention, which I suppose is the ultimate goal. M.P. for the area, Shahine Robinson, made a few statements at the forum, including the highly unconvincing remark that she personally has no trouble with the sculptures. But we all know that her answer is drenched with political bias. But ah well...
Me personally- doesn't bother me that much. The 'works of art' are extreme at best, but like I said earlier, I'm not the one struggling to make a buck, so I won't be quick to judge. Do the works speak to the mentality of our society? You be the judge. What I do believe, however, is the comparisons being made to 'Redemption Song' are ludicrous. I see nothing in the statue to spark debate about its appropriateness. In fact, I'll go on to say that complaints about the appropriateness of two public large nudes holds more water than complaints about the size of the man's penis. I mean really, it ain't that big... relatively speaking, of course. Once again, you be the judge...
4 comments:
U have a point there, Actually cant we sue the Govt agency resposible for the Nude Statues sighting the same obscure bill from 1927?
I think it is a rediculous Double standard that is goin to come bak and bite them, cause if you take away the chance for them to make a living Legally, u leave them with no choice but to do other wise. On top of that, what rubish! are they talking about family destination, what are the Super Club resorts about, Not eaven to mention Hedo. I must say respectfully that their rerasoning is poor "Horse Feacal Matter" and it burns me that they get away with this rubish. Mind you Harrasment is an issue, But I say you deal with it by police patrols, not by tyrancy.
I wish people would learn the art of compromise instead of being so quick to jump at throwing around power.
Although it would take a bit of money, why don't they consider relocating the vendors to a less visibly direct area, so hey can still sell their carvings, while not offending anyone that doesn't go looking for said "offence". It's a much better solution than taking away their income. However little, it keeps them from less legal activities.
Is jealous dem jealous - di big wig dem. Cause dem can neva hope to have anyting dat impressive and mighty. Hehe. And Adrian the size of the penis moved from 25 inches to 50 inches - which is it - just for...err..clarity...in mind?
Anyhow...
I agree with your above comment - humans should be able to compromise so that the few ppl trying to make ends meet legally can do so. It really shouldn't take so much brain power or meetings and committees (which I am sure is what is going to happen) to figure that out.
Plus who dem fooling..what dem tink Rent-a-dread is? Cultural tourism? Right. And Hedo is? And when Spring Break arrives...
My prob with the Emancipenis..err...Emancipation statue was never it's nudity. Having seen the rejected pieces (which were on island display in the NHT branches) I saw lots that were better, more thought provoking, more reminiscent of the fight and rise to freedom.
personally i think two nude statues simply standing there looking up is far less offensive than a rasta HOLDING a large ERECT penis. funny as it is to see, what exactly do you tell a child when he says, 'mommy, what's that?'. cannot be compared to the statues in the park, not by a long shot.
i think the big wigs have a point man. set some standards for the country. we can't just let everything go to pot soh. my only problem is they need to be consistent.
Post a Comment