IT?IS?CLEAR that the many commentators on and pseudo-analysts of calypso are chronically lacking in knowledge of the rudiments of the art form. The distance they keep between themselves and actual practitioners, or those more informed, is frighteningly myopic.
And so when they spout their erroneous and erratic rhetoric on radio or spew their upchuck in the Press they are miles away from fact, reason or rhyme. I speak of the pedantic who present themselves to the public as calypso critics.
Truth be told, there will be the calypsonian fan who will die with his singing hero, or the supporter who will defend his favourite tent to death’s door, or his select cadre of singers across the calypso spectrum. Most of these will tell you they speak from the heart, or the gut; it is a strong feeling they have for those whom they choose to back or worship. Theirs is never a pretence at evaluation and critical judgement.
The pseudo-critics here and there – mostly there – wax heavily and deeply in their ignorance, fashioning some innominate school of thought that defies common sense, meaningful interpretation and resolution, and abstains from intellectual relevance to the subject matter.
At this time of the Crop Over Festival – the calypso judging season – all manner of myopes crawl out of the woodwork – from under the cane trash – to terrorize calypsonians and their tent managers and offer predictions that are neither supported by foresight nor the supernatural.
There is this compulsion by these wayward and uninformed commentators to declare with aplomb who will be or not in the semi-finals and finals of the Pic-O-De-Crop or Party as though they possess some right or foreknowledge to determine such. In nearly every case these prognosticators, buoyed only by what they perceive as flaws, have neither the talent nor moral right to rail at the performers they seek to pull apart.
They are not remotely near musical performance ability themselves, not being musicians, or songwriters or singers, or otherwise contributing to musicianship. They are themselves neither accomplished writers nor speakers, which they seek to hide by ranting and raving over other people’s shortcomings – imagined or not!
With these limitations they will certainly not make good judges. And let it be said, even when performers are disappointed that some of them did not impress enough, our calypso judges overall do a commendable job. Most are aware of the requirements of good song, although where some Party is going I know not – and I guess neither do some of the judges.
If we are going to make informed suggestions of who are likely to advance in this annual calypso competition of ours, outside the realm of fanatical support, we must be apprised of certain principles. A primary of these is composition.
This is the appeal of and adherence to a selected theme and its lyrics, which are explored and developed in a logical and understandable way.
Then there is the structure of the song: its poetic form and rhyming scheme. Important is that the melodic structure is not of an existing tune in its entirety, and if there is a trace in part there must be some justifiable cause. And crucial is that there is a marriage between the melody and lyrics.
Of course, lyrics will be better served with clarity: easily heard and understood; and it would help if the voice remains in tune and key. And what the performer wears could enhance or further develop his song, sometimes all that is needed instead of bulky props.
At the risk of offending those who cry creativity and progressiveness, we need to strike some rhythmical balance that conforms to accepted musical practice.
And last, but by no means least, calypso for us is about English expression, fused with Bajan dialect as it is. Songs must make sense: argue a point, beg a favour, tell a story. The foregoing are unlikely to be taken lightly in the judging of calypso.
• Ridley Greene is a Caribbean multi-award winning journalist. Email [email protected]
