A post I didn’t want to write

February 12, 2009


This whole “Rampin Shop” madness has been so utterly painful to witness, I can’t even find any joy in writing about it.  But here I am anyway. By the way, I haven’t sat down and listened to the song, and don’t plan to do so intentionally. It may be blasting all around, but I don’t take in any of it. I do have an amazing ability to block out noise; that’s why I don’t know the name of most songs, and can barely distinguish the voices of most DJ’s that I don’t particularly care for. The tune might sound familiar to me, but I don’t spend much time saving it in my memory bank. That’s just how I roll, ok?

So, on the one side of the ring, you have a respectable man who has done some respectable things, including running a completely inept governmental agency that is supposed to, among other things, confer respectability on the quality of the broadcast media.  On that score, he has failed miserably, but don’t tell him that right now; he has a lot on his mind. Among the other respectable things he has done is to be married for a long time to none other than the current director of the Center for Gender and Development at UWI.  Now this respectable man is posed with a serious problem because one brown-skinned woman who imagines herself as the unelected minister of education blows into and explodes in his peripheral vision demanding that he act on something that he apparently didn’t think he needed to act on at all.  Now, when you can’t tell the difference between feminist and conservative fundamentalism-derived perspectives in Jamaica, you know you have problems.  And den people start lik out ‘gainst the song. So you know this respectable man is being pushed to act. And act he does. And lots of people are glad he did, but for different reasons.

On the other side of the ring, we have a couple of dancehall artists who, though them not the brightest of the bunch, have managed to inscribe their names and voices into pretty much every household and head in Jamaica (except the ones that are up asses – no sound system or ipod installed up there yet…), whether you wanted to hear them or not. They have done all that every other dancehall artist before them have done, which is to up the ante. If di previous one did slack, yuh affi come even slacker; den di nex one affi tek di slackness to the tenth power. Who nuh w’aa dig out, w’aa stab out, and skin out an’ red out an’ what not. Nobody nuh w’aa lick out doh. Funny how that is. No problem, ah jus so it go inna dis ya place. The truth is, we know so little and feel so uncomfortable about sex and experience so little intimacy so infrequently that the only place we think we can find and express these longings is at the dancehall. Fine. Better there than nowhere at all I guess. And wha dem two a sing sweet everybody precisely because what they are saying is clearly not meant to be spoken in public quite in those ways outside of the actual participants in the daggerin’ and rampin’ business. And the songs are very, very popular you know. The test of its popularity? Even di likkle pickney dem know it by ‘eart. Well, di artists dem nuh too too happy bout di whole prekkeh.

In the middle are:

1. At least two generations of people who don’t know anything other than dancehall as musical entertainment; everything else is “ol’ time sinting”, and who really think that the dancehall artists – and the various supporting players of the industry – really represent the best talent and strategies for self-expression, and who so closely identify with the music form and its many dimensions and off-shoots, that to raise ANY questions about the quality of music, performance and the content of such is akin to declaring war against one’s family member.   So enamoured are they of the music that they come to see it as as the essence of their Jamaican-ness to be expressed whenever and however, that they gladly overlook – in fact, have difficulty identifying – the very aspects of the music that consciously denigrate them in order to teach them various lessons.  In fact, they think the parts of dancehall – increasingly small parts – that do celebrate creativity and self-respect are tired an’ n’aa seh nutt’n.  Hammering, chiseling, boring and jacking-up will probably be the next new thing in sexhall.

2. Media persons who really have no clue how to navigate a complicated mediascape in any ethical and informed way. They claim to make not judgments, but if something – say, an obnoxious song that they are asked to play over and over again – helps their popularity and their pockets, well, so be it. If govament nuh seh dem nuh fi do sup’m, den dat nuh mean seh dem kyan gwa’an an dweet? Anno nutt’n. So they just do what they feel like, and ask no questions, as long as they get paid.

The jurors watching and weighing in are a mixed bunch.  Mostly moralizing noisy puppets who are really fed up that the society is not the way it “should” be and really believe there ought to be a law against anything that they don’t like or that they think contributes to “moral decline” and lack of respect for Authority.  They neither see nor understand that there is a difference in the role of law and religion, respectively in a democratic society.   To them, religion is law, and the constitution should be carefully sifted for any instances where it contradicts this tenet.  If they had their druthers, we would all be saying grace at every meal and going to church from the day we are born till the day we die.   Indeed, this blog would probably be outlawed if some of them had their way.

There are a handful of sensible albeit selfish and silent ones, who nod and poo-poo the ridiculous rantings of the morality police, but who quietly indulge in their own self-righteous “cosmopolitan” broodings in their careful coiffed corners of the country, and who think that the “simpletons” really should just shut up and get back to work, if indeed they had a job.  Meanwhile, these quiet ones actually have some good ideas on occasion; they just think that if anybody wants to know what they think, they should be asked, petitioned, summoned or better yet, paid to offer an opinion.   They certainly don’t plan to volunteer to say anything too often; too busy looking about their business and turning up their noses at the fracas.

Then there are the few jurors who talk just to talk, and who don’t always quite know what to say, or whether there is anything worth saying at this point, but do think they should say something.  They always talking about “rule of law” and make suggestions all the time about things that the government should do.  You get the sense that they think this is a democracy where the powers-that-be actually read the newspaper and listen to the radio and are really interested in the wellbeing of most Jamaicans.  And so these well-meaning folks talk so much that it seems that there are more of them than there really are.   For their willingness to lend their two cents, however naive, nonsensical or longwinded they can be, at least they are participating with the best of intentions.

And then there are the freeloading jurors, who go right along with the crowd, who think the silent ones should speak up more, but who are not willing to say anything that they would be held accountable for.  So, they say nothing.  They don’t know what they really think because they don’t really try to think.  They do wonder a lot though.  “Ah so it go” and “wha’ fi do?” are their favourite sayings.  More likely is that they just take up space, nod a few times, go on their merry way, and deal with whatever comes at them, with not a clue that maybe if they spoke up and took a stand just once, however unpopular they imagine it to be, that maybe things would get better not worse.  But they can’t take that 50/50 chance, so they just stay silent and focus on putting one foot in front of the other, not trying to sigh too heavy just in case they draw attention to themselves.

So, based on this setup, no wonder we get this kind of thoughtless knee-jerk reaction from the Hopeton Dunn.  I am wondering what he and his wife talk about at night, since I can’t imagine that BOTH of them so completely missed the boat on the question of how to act in relation to the content of music being played on the airwaves.  I guess every time he felt that the lyrics could not get any worse, and then it does, so he just threw up his hands in the air, collected his paycheque and called it a day?  At this point, deciding what to play or not to play must be a nightmare.  But serves him right; had he not bought into the crap that “ghetto people” have a different and thus more reprehensible and scandalous set of values than “normal people” and thus should be valued differently, he would not have been swayed to think that some of the utterly uncreative, imbecilic and woman-hating stuff that passes for dancehall kulcha is really “representative” of what its listeners really want to hear.  He would have been able to offer an intelligent pro-active response to the question of the quality of the music without reducing himself to governmental puppet. He would have been able to use his role to challenge the DJ’s to dig deep into their creative selves and to produce more diverse expressions in dancehall that also come correct everytime. Right now though, he did what should have been done a long time ago, but for the wrong reasons, and under the wrong conditions.

What should Dunn have done?
For starters, the moment he took on this job he should have developed a policy that stated that sexually explicit material should only be aired in the wee hours of the night, and that this should cover television as well as radio. Instead, he let the “ah so dem stay…” lackadaisical attitude take over and now is acting in a hodge-podge and unprofessional fashion too late.

At the beginning of this debacle, he should have stated that he has been remiss in doing this part of his job and why.  He should have stated that while these particular songs have been in question, that they build on a rather auspicious history of slackness in popular culture, and that not all of it is bad, some of it is quite good, but some of it is frankly, disgusting.   But he really does have to explain how these songs can be so popular for such a long time and yet it is just now that he is paying attention. But I bet he doesn’t want us to ask that question.

How will he and the commission decide which category the music falls into?  And what is he going to do about all the other music that came before that might reasonably contend for the “slacka dan slack” medal?  And what about the music that is already recorded and played loudly in public, although not over public airwaves? And what about the public performances that are as much a part of the hype and popularity as anything else?  I noticed that the Gleaner has been quite generous in providing as many images as possible, to help the viewers understand what the debate is about. (Please, I don’t think you should mistake the plethora of images for lessons in how to dagger).  I picked a few that I found to be, um, compelling demonstrations:


I am wondering if spectators as well as participants are going to be censured in some way?  After all, can’t we dagger to just about any song these days?


What about assistants in daggerin’?


Would injuries sustained during daggerin’ be considered more serious than injuries doing other dances?


And then there’s the issue of Carnival.   Are there going to be daggerin’ and rampin’ police about the place?

Well, none of these issues will be resolved by the PM constituting a commission of moralizing know-it-alls who have already staked out their turf on dancehall.  But I also don’t think the pro-dancehall folks have a nuanced enough analysis to offer reasonable approaches that don’t basically say “lef di DJ dem alone an’ top fight ‘gainst them!” Because everyone knows this is really a repackaged referendum on dancehall culture, right? Right?   But, it doesn’t have to be that way. The only thing I really expect is more circus, kass-kass and a stalemate. Until the next flare-up.

What I really want is more variety and creativity in how and where dancehall presents itself; that’s all I want really. Is that too much to ask? Until the next scandal. I’m done with this one for now.

P.S. Marcia Forbes [finally] stepped forward to offer a really useful and insightful analysis based on extensive research that she did. Given her role in shaping mass media practices in Jamaica, I sincerely hope that she tried to share this information with the commission before now.

P.P.S. And of course, Madame Cooper steps in, to translate for us as usual. While I wish she would do a bit more than translate dancehall lyrics, at least she sticks it to prissy Tyson, who’s probably not been in her own rampin’ shop in a long time. I couldn’t resist that remark, really I couldn’t. Outta orda, yes, but you were thinking it too…


26 Responses to “A post I didn’t want to write”

  1. bandi Says:

    thanks for weighing in… we, as a people, need to have this discussion…

    • longbench Says:

      Bandwagonist – I agree; I just wish it would happen before the prekkeh, and not during. But I also think that a different type of conversation is now possible, now that we know *some* of the outcomes of having really lackadaisical attitudes about these issues.

  2. According to Dante, “the hottest place in hell is reserved for those who should speak up, but remain silent”

    This has been the most lucid response to the issue and extends beyond dancehall culture to much of what has been happening over the past 30 years.

    As you stated, “when you can’t tell the difference between feminist and conservative fundamentalism-derived perspectives in Jamaica, you know you have problems”

    We’re not British and we’re not African–we’re a Creole culture that loves to celebrate life.

    How much is too little that it borders on repressive Victorian, fundamentalist guilt and how much is too much that does not honor sex as the most intimate and revered/intimate conversation between two consenting adults?

    • longbench Says:

      Geoffrey – Thanks for stopping by! I’ve been quite remiss in my blogging visits recently, so forgive me.

      I wholly agree with you that we love to celebrate ourselves and derive much of our sense of being from doing so. But there has been a serious disconnect among the folks who are producing culture these days; no form of enjoyment seems possible *without* invoking death, hatred and suffering. How did we come to this? How did this happen? Why aren’t we willing to admit that the language and posturing in these particular expressions are “creating” and not just “representing” reality? I know that I indulge in quite a bit of slack talk, but the conversations that I have with other adults are based in language that is full of multiple meanings, and where you have to know the referents in order to get what is being said. And most of all, everybody can identify with and even agree with what is being said, even though they might not have uttered it at all. But when the subtleties – the poetry – of language and communication is totally expunged and replaced with the kinds of metaphors that make me want to squirm and puke, I think that is way too much. Victorianism, where we shut down and occlude all referents to sexuality except as medical conditions, is repressive and what got us here in the first place. I want our playful, sensual, lyrical and honest-to-goodness love of life back, dammit! The BC cannot do that for us. Only we can do that part.

  3. […] Raw Politics…Jamaica Style! thinks that dancehall must rehabilitate its public image, while Long Bench believes that while the ban should have been enforced a long time ago, now it's being done […]

  4. Rob Kenner Says:

    Maybe you didn’t want to write this post, but i’m glad you did. In fact I hope you’ll consider writing more about the topic because your analysis is among the deepest that I’ve seen. But not for nothing, I encourage you to listen to “Rampin Shop” one of these days too. Count me among the pro-dancehall folks struggling to offer “a more nuanced anaylsis” than “top fight gainst them.” Dancehall is art, not poison, and as you say, it’s popular for a reason.

    • longbench Says:

      Rob: Thanks for stopping by. You know, I have avoided writing about dancehall for a long time. I used to love dancehall: Buju and Tiger are still high on my list. But I have not been able to deal with the way that those who want and honor dancehall have all but drowned out any real discussion about what we want dancehall to be. I claim it as my own, but I do not have to accept the debasement of humanity that often comes through the music. Dancehall is not just about representing reality; it creates reality. And if that is true, then we need to create more alternative ways of “doing” dancehall that does not allow it to become the territory of only those who are doing destructive things with it. I want children’s dancehall; I want dancehall that accompanies audio stories; I want dancehall every which way. But I don’t want to have to be fighting this same old fight. Maybe we need to refuse the debate about “dancehall as slackness” and instead just work on creating something new. The work will be the product of new analysis. Indeed, the new work is a new approach. But if we don’t do the work, we can’t really blame the chattering classes when dem ready fi lik out an’ bun fyah, right?


    Incredible! Totally incredible! One is at a complete and unmitigated loss to comprehend or fathom the level and degree of inaction, dormancy and stasis on the part of the Dunns, both of whom are vitally and strategically placed in Jamaican society, as a consequence of the positions they occupy or hold, —-Dr. Hopeton Dunn, Chairman,The Broadcasting Commission of Jamaica and Dr. Leith Dunn, Head of Gender and Development Studies, University of the West Indies, Mona —- to have significantly and appreciably impacted on the questionable, controversial and problematic lyrical content being espoused, promulgated and ventilated on the Jamaican air waves twenty four seven by various and sundry music genres, including the antagonistic and contentious DANCEHALL, with its manifestations of explicitly lewd, lascivious and libdinous dances.

    Granted, as the old proverb exhorts, ” it is always better to be late than never.” Nonetheless, what took Dr. Hopeton Dunn so long to make this decision? Why was such a decision excessively and inordinately delayed or late in coming, especially,since so many people were/are opposed to the negative lyrical contents being advanced by this genre of music, specifically, as it relates to children, and the fact, that such songs and lyrics are/were being ventilated constantly and superfluously, irrespective of the time of day? Why did the chairman of the Broadcast Commission had to be influenced by a high school principal, in Mrs. Esther Tyson? Also, how is Dr. Dunn intellectually informed regarding, supposedly, good content and bad content? Could the basis and relevance of such information determine is reluctancy and hesitancy to make decisions which are supposedly obvious to the general public?Is there an accountability problem regarding Dr. Dunn? Indeed,the duties, expectations, responsibilities,and obligations of his position are clearly and categorically stated.Hopefully, in the future Dr. Dunn will be much more pro-active regarding his duties, obligations, and responsibilities and the larger question of leadership.

    For purveyors and adherents/disciples of DANCEHALL music, CREATIVITY,couched within the context of socially redeeming values is the watchword that should/must inform this music genre,as opposed to violence, misogyny, degeneracy and depravity.Surely,DANCEHALL as a genre has definitely pushed the envelope lyrically, with respect to radio play at given times of the day, and ostensibly, must be constrained. Because, in essence, the content is specifically designed and tailored for an adult audience. And quite interestingly, self respecting societies, which apparently Jamaica is not interested in being do have boundaries and parameters that/which needs to be adhered to.I DO NOT MIND BEING CALLED A SOCIAL HYPOCRITE, and it is in this regard that one challenges the DANCEHALL culture to be CREATIVE!! If CREATIVITY exists within the Dancehall culture? Most definitely,and categorically yes, but it is being stifled and suffocated by degenerates promulgating nonsense for lyrics.Nuff respect!!

    • longbench Says:

      As always, right on the money EAR. We need to stop this “either or” kind of thinking, and recognize the “both and” of the reality of what dancehall is and does. By investing every bit of our heart and soul in dancehall as the music of Jamaica, we have also acquiesced to a kind of nationalist myopia which does not allow us to critique our own practices, even while defending them from “outsiders”, whether in farrin or upper st. andrew. Its time we took a different approach.

  6. […] Raw Politics…Jamaica Style! thinks that dancehall must rehabilitate its public image, while Long Bench believes that while the ban should have been enforced a long time ago, now it's being done […]

  7. owen Says:

    The people who listen dancehall determine what is good dancehall music. Listen the songs individually and make your judgement. Then ban the song, put in back your Beyonce CD and lets get back to the tourism, crime, violence and economic turmoil.

    • longbench Says:

      Owen: Yes, except music does not come only from an individual artist, and is not heard only as an individual listener. Music resonates in particular ways because of how the artist plays to its primary listening audience. If we didn’t glorify violence so much, the music wouldn’t be using violence to talk about sexuality, wouldn’t be focused on sex acts as a form of entertainment, thus feeding our hunger for violence and our craving for more of the same. Unfortunately, culture is just as important as all the other issues that we focus on; it too has been sadly neglected and left to the winds of chance.

      The song is not banned per se, just banned from playing on the public airwaves.


    What’s up with Ernie Smith!!?


    Longbench, terms such as lewd and crude, most likely, will not be utilized to characterize the uptown crowd.Quite frankly, more sanitized and wholesome, adjectives, expressions, nomenclatures,etc. will be embraced by the uptown crowd. But in all honesty and fairness to Dancehall,the soca/calypso carnival songs,laced with extremely explicit lyrical and graphical sexual content,and the attendant raunchy behaviour in the form of dances, and social/sexual conduct by participants should also be subjected to the same standard as Dancehall.Nonetheless, this is the historical paradox of Jamaica,the ubiquitous and pervasive dualism, which constantly manifests itself as TWO JAMAICAS in all spheres of life, and in essence ridicules and mocks our national motto,OUT OF MANY ONE PEOPLE, both sneeringly and derisively.Nuff respect!!

    • longbench Says:

      I can handle a little raunch. But I’m going to call it the same thing no matter where I see it. We should all do that: let the uptown crowd wrinkle their noses all they want.

  10. duttybwoy Says:

    Longbench- I must agree that this is well thought out in-depth analysis of this whole banning music debate, glad you decided to write it.

    Dancehall artist put out a lot that the masses consume, they are not the brightest but they certainly are not fools. They have the sort of “dancehall intelligence” to dominate and influence the thoughts and behavior of a who generation and they are fully aware of this. My point is that they exert an enormous about of influence the populous worldview, from the language,clothes and even more importantly how we see ourselves as it relates to identity, politics, social issues and so forth.Not only that but every “ghetto yute” want to become a DJ because it is the fastest and most glamorous was to raise out of the slum.

    The passion in the dancehall culture is extensive and very deep.

    Let me admit here that I love dancehall music, but I strongly feel the need clean the thing up a little. If history is any indicator most of these hardcore DJs will not become truly international except for a few collaboration with American rappers or some R&B songtress, but other than that they I see no big career move. To become successful one has to make “radio friendly” music and that’s what most here will be forced to do now.Shaggy, Sean Paul, Bob Marley, Shabba Ranks (Shabba was “lewd” but still made it overseas because they tailored him for the north American market. He killed his career with the whole kill batty man business and Buju Banton killed his career internationally because of this “boom bye bye” argument.

    The point I am trying to make is that yes dancehall is under attack it has been for years promoting shotta/ gang/gun-pop of dis and pop off dat, wipe out yu madda, fadda and dog, sex-ina dis cyar back, twice a day,pon the wat-not, unda di tree,sledge hamma. My point?, they are not learning they are running a true “ramping shop” not a business so they will continue to attrack negative attention. The question is how do they expect to say all these things and people just accept it?, we have for a while.

    I don’t like to point out another person wrong to justify mine, hypocrisy everywhere and yes who should not it skate by. At the same time lets start somewhere, even though they are late and have been lazy.

    Lets keep talking about these things.

  11. ruthibelle Says:

    I’m happy you wrote this post. We need more blogs like this to keep people thinking… (although it’s an indictment on us when we need anybody or anything to get our minds working- what we think we get them for?)

    Philps’ comment “How much is too little that it borders on repressive Victorian, fundamentalist guilt and how much is too much that does not honor sex as the most intimate and revered/intimate conversation between two consenting adults?” is an excellent question, and I too would like an answer.

    • longbench Says:

      Thanks Ruthibelle! Nice to have you stop by! Yes, I think this is a question that we need to work on and explore more fully in as many ways as possible. No easy answer here.


    Longbench, interesting Gleaner editorial on the xenophobic and homophobic parliamentarian for South West St.Ann, Mr. Ernie Smith!!See,today’s Gleaner, Monday,Feb.16th.

  13. Stunner Says:

    I too recently posted about this. I think everything has its place, time and audience. Artistes, producers and broadcasters need to bear that in mind where certain lyrics and dances are concerned. I agree that some songs should be banned from public broadcast, as it offends and negatively impacts on the behaviour of certain sections of the listening society. The only thing I agree with in the dancehall artistes defense is that it should be applied right across the board, in all genres of music and dance.

    • longbench Says:

      Stunner: I will come check out your blog soon. I agree that if there is going to be such filtering, then there needs to be a clear and consistent policy with guidelines that we can all see and quibble with, if necessary. That’s part of operating in a democratic society; none of this cloak and dagger stuff that the BC is going on with. Artists AND politicians are subject to questioning and accountability as well. After reading Marcia Forbes’ piece today, I am even more attuned to the politics of language, and to the possibility that we need to pay more attention to what WE produce and circulate, precisely because of how Jamaicans relate to the content and expressions of homegrown material.

  14. “But when the subtleties – the poetry – of language and communication is totally expunged and replaced with the kinds of metaphors that make me want to squirm and puke, I think that is way too much.”

    Subtlety and playfulness are parts of this discussion.

    If children are shouting in the house, we say “Use your inside voice.” Implicit in that is the recognition of the “outside” voice.

    This is just to say look at the difference between Sparrow’s “Saltfish” or “Marley’s “Stir it up” and “Rampin'”

    There is a crudeness in the latter and without getting into a discussion of high and low culture, the former representing our highest cultural aspirations–how we see and project ourselves in the world, Daggerin shows a lack of distinction between “inside” and “outside” or private and public behaviors.

  15. owen Says:

    My comment was for the people at the commission that are responsible for “filtering” what is available for public play. I’m sure that somebody there listens to the songs and that there are written rules that radio stations follow. So banning is the appropriate action to talk. The cultural Dancehall witch hunt isn’t necessary.

    Dancehall as a form of art that changes over time, is very temporal and cannot or is hard to creatively manage. A song called “I’m a rainbow too” could never be released in this day and age, nor “kinky reggae”, nor “I shot the sherif”. I cannot (because I’m not old enough to) imagine what sort of controversy Bob Marley got into in his day. Whether through his weed smoking, football playing, burning or looting.

    Creative Control over other people’s medium of expression/moral compass/mind set is pretty difficult. It would be like telling people not to smoke. You would need some sorta movement, a generational change or proof that Jamaica would be much better off with a “controlled”/lyrically coy version of Dancehall.

  16. longbench Says:

    Owen: As I see it, the problem with dancehall and its image is an internal one. If there had been more variety in terms of the creative expressions of dancehall artists that were being cultivated and made available BY dancehall artists, then the banning of this one song is not a significant issue. Its because “mainstream” dancehall thrives on duttyness and a’asiness that this banning business feels like a crisis.

    From the mainstream media point of view, the “solution” is about banning, and filtering and what have you.

    However, the best solution really lies with those who claim they love and support dancehall. THEY need to demand as well as produce MORE and DIFFERENT varieties of dancehall. That’s right – demonstrate that creativity that is supposedly under duress right now!

    If dancehall artists/producers etc. want to follow the model of the Jamaican economy, which puts all its creative/economic eggs in a single product – tourism – then dancehall IS going to get sheg by this resolute, single-minded focus on slackness. We are well past the slackness vs. culture thing at this point. As far as I am concerned, its time for dancehall to grow the fuck up!


    Is Dancehall so one dimensionally bankrupt and exhausted,that the only type of lyrics that can be penned by its writers and assorted purveyors, is the degenerate, depraved, perverted, mysogynistic and violence ridden expressions, which is, in essence the commodification of filth? Have Dancehall artistes become so slavish in their writings re the excessive utilization of offensive, obnoxious, detestable, foul and reprehensible expression ad nauseaum that their purported creatitivity have decayed and atrophied? Hopefully not! Surely,transcending the promulgation and commodification of filth re the writing of lyrics in contravention to the conventional or customary diet of slackness should not be a difficult, or onerous task.Since many of these Dancehall writers exhibit a certain swagger and braggadociously contend or assert that they are artistically creative. Indeed, there are copious topics and themes in Jamaica that/which can be addressed or treated lyrically via
    Dancehall.Ostensibly,if one is really CREATIVE, Jamaica, in essence, can be considered a reservoir.This writer is eagerly anticipating the slew of creative work that will be emanating from the Dancehall experience in the short to medium term.Certainly, the gauntlett has been thrown down with respect to creativity by various and sundry Jamaicans.To all Dancehall massive(s),LET US GET UP, DUST OURSELVES OFF AND GET CREATIVE! Undoubtedly,a new improved and sanitized packaging of DANCEHALL is still extremely marketable and lucrative.

  18. […] that being said,  I like LONGBENCH have labored heavily to not blog on the in this space on the Daggering Ban imposed by the […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: